aboue his character And this opinion would answere to the fact of Saint Gregorie vpoÌ„ which the contrarie opinioÌ„ much relieth that S. Gregorie onely permitted certaine Priests who before had presumed it Greg. l. 3. ep 9 ad Ianuarium dist 90 cap peruenit to anoint the baptized in the forhead but not with the vnction proper to Confirmation nor with the forme of words which the Bishop vseth Others answere otherwise 25. And to the Councells of Florence and Trent which say that the ordinarie Minister of Confirmation is the Bishop as though the extraordinarie minister might be the Priest They answere that these two Councells define that at least the Bishop is the Ordinarie Minister because it was disputed whether by commission and as an extraordinarie Minister the Priest might confirme And whereas the Councell of Florence sayeth that It is read that sometimes by the dispensation of the Sea Apostolike a simple Priest hath confirmed they answere the Councell defineth not that this indeed hath euer beene done but that it is read soe Thus they 26. But for all this S. Thomas his opinion is most probable being now especiallie most common though not most secure And this opinion would alledge for it the fact of S. Gregorie and the twoe councells alledged And to the Fathers it would answere that they meane onely that the Bishop is the onely Ordinarie Minister of Confirmation yet that the Priest may by commission from the Pope confirme and they would say that the Priests Character of it selfe is sufficient to confirme so that the Pope commit this to him not that the Pope giueth him any power of Order for that this Priests owne Character is sufficient so that this condition be also put to wit that the Pope commit him and if he attempt to confirme without this commission he shall not validlie confirme because he wanteth a condition necessarie But although this be a probable peraduenture the more probable opinion as being the more common yet the first opinion is houlden of all as vndoubted and so is most secure 27. And so we haue more reason to demande a Bishop then a Priest committed by the Pope for that it is most certaine that he can confirme and by Confirmation giue vs strength against persecution and make vs perfect Christians And therefore M. Doctour vseth to say that without a Bishop we cannot be a particular Church nor haue Confirmation because the Bishop is the Ordinarie and most assured Minister and therefore this hereafter I will suppose 28. M. Nicholas n. 13. affimerth that M. Doctour doth not a right coÌ„pare Religious with Secular Priests But to this he is fullie answered in the sixt question n. 1. Where he is tould that if we take the Regular as Regular according to that state and qualitie onely he is not as soe taken of the Hierarchie though as Regular he be aboue the laitie and an eminent member of the Church but the Secular Priest as a Secular Priest considered in that state of a Priest is of the Hierarchie But more of this in that place shal be saied 29. M. Nicholas numer 14. saieth the thing which I most wonder in a man of learning is that those Fathers and Schooles diuines which be produceth for witnesses of his doctrine are in deed against himselfe as the Reader will see in his allegation of S. Cyprian S. Clement Sotus Bannes c. And I admire M. Nicholas for many things as for his conning carriage of things wilfull mistakings false impositions c. But most of all I wonder at his audacitie and that he hath the face to vtter the aforesaied words so considentlie Noe doubt the Reader cannot but thinke he affirming it so boldely that M. Doctour hath not alledged well these Fathers and Doctours but let him suspend his Iudgement vntill he come to the 2. question in M. Nicholas n. 2.9.10.11.17 Where he shall finde it so cleare and plaine that those Fathers and Doctours are for M. Doctour and against M. Nicholas that when he hath read the places alledged he will haue cause neuer to credit M. Nicholas in this kinde vpon his word albeit he make neuer so great or solemne protestations 30. Lastlie M. Nicholas n. 15. accuseth againe M. Doctour for derogating to my Lord of Chalcedons Ordinariship but to this he is alreadie answered and may haue a fuller answere hereafter 31. Thus in a cursorie manner I haue runne ouer M. Nicholas his first question not staying any long time about it partely because the matter by him proposed did not require any longer discourse partely because in his first question he seemeth principally to bragge onely what he will doe as in his seuenth and last questioÌ„ he boasteth of what he hath done But I hauing in the fiue middle questions answered him fullie to all and hauing shewed that he hath not beene able to disproue any one of M. Doctours assertions nor to answere to any one of his arguments it will plainelie appeare that in his firstquestion he breaketh promise and in his last boasteth of more then he hath performed THE SECOND QVESTION VVhether without a Bishop there can be a particular Church MAISTER NICHOLAS MAISTER Doctour in diuers partes of his Treatise doth teach that without a Bishop there can be no particular Church And in his 14. Chapter where he endeanoureth to proue that a particular Countrie may not refuse a Bishop by reason of persecution one of his maine arguments is n. 9. because without a Bishop there can be no particular Church n. 1. REPLIE M. Nicholas Smith mistaketh M. D. Kellisons arguments 1. TRVE it is that M. Doctour Kellison in diuers places of his Treatise doth teach that without a Bishop there can be no particular Church But as concerning that which M. Nichulas addeth that one of his maine arguments chap. 14. numer 9. is be cause without a Bishop theâ—â— cannot be a particular Church I denie that this is one of M. Doctours maine arguments to proue that a particular Countrie may not refuse a Bishop by reason of persecution For that in that 14. Chapter numer 4. M. Doctour hauing affirmed that as England cannot except against the comming in of Priestes by reason of persecution so England cannot except against the comming in of a Bishop for feare of persecution He addeth And my reasons are twoe The first is that which I haue often alledged because the gouernement of Bishops is instituted by Christ and hath beene in practise in the greatest persecution as wee haue seene in the former Chapter My secondreason is because the commoditie which a prouince reapeth by a Bishop is so greate and the want of him is such a losse that wee should rather hazard persecution as the AsricaÌ„ Catholiks did theÌ„ to be depriued of a Bishop And in this his secoÌ„d maine reason he includeth 1. the necessitie of a Bishop to make a perfect Christian 2. the vtilitie or necessitie of Confirmation 3. that without a Bishop
his cogitation preferre thee before him self and againe vvhilest thou seest that he hath vvhat thou hast not thou mayst in cogitation ranke thy selfe after him that vvhat is vvritten moy be fulfilled Superiores sibi inuicem arbitrantes Eche counting others better then them selues So the same father a litle after sayth Philip. 2. hat S. Paule euen after his conuersion vvheÌ„ in sanctitie and perfection he vvas peraduenture inferiour to none yet considering vvhat the rest of the Apostles by Christe his grace then vvere and vvhat he by his sinne and hatred of Christians had been counted him selfe Apostolorum minimum the least of all the Apostles 1. Cor. â—â— and S. Peter not regarding his ovvne perfection admireth S. Paules vvisdome and learning shevved in his Epistles 2. Petr. 3. This hath beene the practise of Christe and his Mother as I sayd before in vvhich all the Sanctes of God haue imitated them And if vve practise the same mutuall consideratioÌ„ and comparison of our defectes vvith others perfections this mutuall consideration vvould cause mutuall loue and mutuall loue vvould cause mutuall prayse and mutuall prayse vvould cause mutuall humilitie for that the more vve prayse another the lesse vve esteened our selues and mutuall humilitie vvould take avvye all contention for that into humble mens consideration it neuer entreth vvhich is or should be greater and contention taken avvay a peace vvould fellovv Luc. 9. And indeed novv that the Regulars in England are all allmost Priests and haue the same authoritie that Priests haue the secular Priest hath inste cause to loue the Regular and in him his ovvne state and order and the Regular Priest hath good reason to respect the secular Priest Priesthood being the richest pearle of his crovvne and the fayrest flovver of his garland and not to think that he is dispraysed vvhen the Priest is commended The secular Priests vvho labour in the shippe of Peter vvilbe conteÌ„t to beckeÌ„ to their fellovve fishermen that are in another shippe that is in another state Luc 5. to come and helpe theÌ„ And the Regulars vvill vvith all charitie and respect also yeeld their helping â—arde The secular Priests hauing louinglie inuited them and the cheefe Pastour hauing sent them to that end And seing the haruest is great Gers de statu Curatorum confid 15. and the vvorke men fevve the secular Priests vvill as Gerson sayth they must benignelie and louinglie receiue them so that sayth Gerson they doe not de tract from the Pastours or seeke to bring them in contempt vvith their parishioners If both secular and Regular Priests vvould but looke backe to former freindlie offices vvhich haue passed betvvixt them it vvould be sufficient to make them renevv former freindship The tyme hath been vvhen the Clergie of England inuited the Iesuites to be partakers vvith theÌ„ of their merit and labours in the mission Our most learned and zelous Cardinal of most pious memorie the first founder of the English Seminarie to vvit of Dovvay and of the mission of Priests in to England in this tyme of Schisme vvriteth thus in his Apologie for the Priests chap. 6. Cum itaque nos ante aduerteremus paucis ab hinc mensibus cerneremus Anglorum nonnullos a superioribus Societatis Iesu ad Indos amandatos c. vvhen therfore vve perceiued and fevv monethes since did see that some English men by the Superiours of the Societie of Iesus vvere sent to the Indians vve demanded of them the Superiours that they vvho vvere of this nation should rather be reserued for the profit of their countrie then of externe nations to vvhich petition after mature deliberation had of that matter vvith great affection of charitie they yeelded The like D. Worthington President also of Dovvay College relateth in his Catalogue of our late English Martyrs Doctour Pitse also in his booke of the famous vvriters of England In Edmundo Campiano Conformablie to Cardinal Allen sayth Videntes autem sacerdotes nostri multam esse messem c. Our Priests seing that the Harnest vvas greate and Worke men fevv did earnestlie request the Fathers of the Societie of Iesus that they vvould adioine them selues as cooperatours and vvould send if not earlie in the morning at least at the third sixt or ninth hower of the day some of theirs to labour in the vineyeard of our lord And vvith vvhat charitie and respect the Priests receiued the first Jesuites extolled their order conducted them from place to place for their more safetie and to bring them acquainted vvhere they vvere not knovvn some yet liuing can tell and that trulie Religious and learned Iesuite Father Campion acknovvledgeth no lesse in an Epistle to his Generall saing Presbyteri nostrates ipsi doctrina sanctimonia prestantes tantam opinionem nostri ordinis excitarunt vt venerationem quam nobis exhibent Catholici non nisi timâ—dè commemorandam existimeÌ„ Our Priests they them selues excelling in learning and sanctitie haue raysed such an opinion of our order that I think the veneration which the Catholiques giue vs is not to be spoken of but fearefullie And vvill the Jesuites novv de tract from the good name of them vvho haue so much extolled their order and giuen â—t the first name and credit it had in England noe it can not be imagined And vvill the Jesuites seeke novv to supplante those vvho first planted them in England noe they vvill not and if heretofore any vvould hereaster they vvill not Nor vvill the secular Priests seeke novv to exclude Iesuites from the mission vvhom they haue louinglie inuited knovving that Turpius eijcitur quam non admittitur hospes T is better to deny a guest no doubt Admittance then admitted turne him out Rather both orders reflecting vppon these former friendlie offices vvill endeauour to renevv the former friendship The tyme also vvas vvhen the secular Priests shevved courtesies to the Benedictins and vvere so farre from hindering their vnion or mission into England that they helped to set forvvard both and had the Clergie opposed their mission as some others did and not rather furthered theÌ„ in their sute vvee should not haue had perchaunce at this Day a Benedictine in England This the Benedictins haue heretofore acknovvledged and must therfore haue respecte to the Clergie And if they reflect vpon the many good offices the Clergie hath done them and if the Clergie like vvise looke backe to the forner loue and old freindship vvhich bath been betvvixt them it vvill I hope renevv old friendship and take a vvaye all iarres and diuisions The tyme also vvas vvhen the Franciscans obteyned their mission of Clement the eight at the instance of Cardinall Allen vvhich notvvithstaÌ„ding the Pope had before refused at the instance of Cardinall Caietan as some yet aliue doe affirme vvho liued in Rome at that tyme. And the Reuerend Father F. Francis Nugent intending a mission of English Capucins vvrote to M. Birchet then Archpriest about the yeare 1611.
worse thought of and farre much the worse for it Of this I could say more but I was loath to haue sayed thus much had not M. Nicholas vrged me vnto it To whom therefore I say Qui alterum incusat probi ipsum se intueri oportet he that accuseth another of any fault must looke that himselfe be free from it else in condemning another he condemneth himselfe 11. And would to God the Superiours of other Colledges would teach their subiectes to thinke and speake well of the Bishop and Clergie and other Seminaries I know M. Doctour would be as forward as the most forward to teach and charge his to loue and respect Regulars which mutuall correspondence if there were a peace would not onely follow but also would be conserued and this mutuall peace would be pleasing to God honorable and comfortable to both parties but as S. Gal. 5. Paule saieth If you bite and eate one another by detracting from one another take heed you be not consumed of one another 12. I wonder that M. Nicholas num 7. should say that M. Doctours booke should not be pleasing to the Sea Apostolike it prouing the Catholike Romaine doctrine against Heretiks commending the Hierarchie which the CouÌ„cel of Trent defineth to be of the diuine Institution Cont. Trid. Sess 6. c 22 Can. 3 and to consist of Bishops Priests and other Ministers defending the mission of our most Reuerend Bishop sent to England from the Sea Apostolik with that authoritie ouer England which other Bishops haue ouer their Dioceses and highlie coÌ„mendeth also by the same Sea Apostolik rather M. Nicholas might feare a checke if the Sea Apostolike were rightlie informed seing that he in his Discussion speaketh so coldly of the Sacrament of Confirmation because be would not haue a Bishop and so openly that is by a booke in printe glaunceth at the Bishops person impugneth his mission as not conuenient for these tymes as though he would controlle the chiefe Pastour and knew better then he and his Counsell what times are most sutable for a Bishop Neither can M. Doctours booke whatsoeuer M. Nicholas sayeth n. 8. be vngratefull to our English Catholiks much lesse to the greater and better parte Whome euerie where he commendeth for their zeale and constancie in defending God his cause with hazard of their liberties landes and liues and doth not taxe them of want of obedience or charitie as he saieth in not being vnited to my Lord of Chalcedon for that he knoweth that the most of them are linked to him in loue respect and obedience and if some of them be not so much vnited to him as were to be wished it is rather to be imputed to some regulars who are their Guides and Directours then to them And how the Catholiks are not condemned of sinne for refusing a Bishop as M. Nicholas also saieth shall appeare hereafter in my reply to the third questioÌ„ But whome M. Nicholas meaneth by the better and greater part of Catholiks I know not I had thought when wee talke of matters of faith the Church and her Hierarchie the greater and better parte had beene the Bishop and his Clergie together with those that adhere vnto him as to their lawfull pastour and they as M. Nicholas knoweth are well pleased with M. Doctours booke as the rest also would haue beene had not M. Nicholas and his misinformed them of the contentes 14. Let M. Nicholas reflect vpon himselfe for if he and some others had not terrified them with vaine shaddowes and made them to feare where was no cause of feare they would haue beene as zealous for a Bishop as the most zealous knowing that by the presence of a Bishop God would be glorified our little Church of EnglaÌ„d graced the weake Catholiks in tyme of persecution strengthned and all comforted 15. But I did not thinke that M. Nicholas could Exeodem orefrigidum efflare calidum Out of the same mouth breath could and hoate had I not seene that in diuers places of his Discussion he chargeth M. Doctour as to partialie addicted to the Bishop and Clergie yet in this his first questioÌ„ n. 9. accuseth him as an enemie to his Ordinarieship To which he may easilie be answered that M. Doctour onely saieth in his 15. Chapter n. 10. that the Bishop of Chalcedon hath onelie a generall spirituall IurisdictioÌ„ ouer the Clergie and lay Catholiks in spirituall matters and hath no Title giuen him to any particular Bishopricke in EnglaÌ„d so caÌ„not chaleÌ„ge to himselfe any particular Bishoprick no more then the Priests by their faculties which they haue to preach and minister Sacraments all ouer England can chalenge any particular parish Church Which he sayed to shew that our Protestant Bishops haue no iust occasion to except against our Catholik Bishop Yet who can doubt but that as the Pope hath giuen him that power and authoritie ouer England which other Bishops haue ouer their Dioceses soe he can Ex plenitudine potestatis by fulnesse of power with this generall authoritie make him Ordinarie of England by an extraordinarie manner as at first he was stiled But whether he be De facto Ordinarie or no because M. Doctour in his Hierarchie neuer determined it nether will I. Yet I haue seene certaine writings in which some haue learnedlie disputed for his ordinariship on which he standeth not so much as on the power of an ordinarie which he thinketh sufficient to demaund approbation 16. M. Nicholas as he is verie forwards in that kinde againe chargeth M. Doctour saying that it cannot be pleasing to God to treate of holy things vpon particular designes And so still maketh himselfe iudge of M. Doctours intentions But let him looke into his owne conscience and see whether he cannot there discouer a particular designe in opposing the hauing of a Bishop in our Countrie M. Doctour hath protested before God in his Epistle dedicatorie and other partes of his Hierarchie that he entended onelie that the Bishop should be honoured and all orders in their ranke respected and I haue alreadie in my preface to the Reader layed opeÌ„ his intentioÌ„ And therefore M. Doctour knowing his owne good intention hopeth that he pleased God in writing his Hierarchie for so good an end as to commend all orders in their kind and thereby to induce them all to peace with one another 17. Let M. Nicholas take heed of his Discussion full false dealings wrong imputations wilfull mistakings gibes and tauntes to disgrace M. Doctour as in theire places shal be shewed farsed with many oppositions against a Bishop sent and commended by the chiefe Vicar of Christ derogating to the holy Sacrament of Confirmation whose necessitie he slighteth whose perfection he denyeth in denying that it maketh vs perfect Christians S. Cle. Ep. 4. S. Vr. banus ep decrâ—t opposite to the ancient fathers who as I haue shewed in my Reply to the 4. questioÌ„ n. 15. attribute that perfection vnto it And
Epistles Franciscus Turrianus a Iesuite also hath vndertaken in a booke which for those Epistles he wrote most learnedlie against the Magdeburgian Centurians who haue not hitherto made any answere to it nether shall they euer be able to answere sufficientlie And so M. Nicholas against all these as well as against M. Doctour who alledge this place to proue Confirmation a SacrameÌ„t might haue saied that they should not haue grounded the veritie of a Sacrament so much impugned by heretikes vpon an Epistle which as is to be supposed they knew not to be so Authenticall as to settle thereon a doctrinall point yea a matter of faith Did not they know as well as M. Nicholas how Authenticall Saint Clements workes were 13. But sayeth M. Nicholas Bellarmine in his booke de Scriptoribus Eccles Sayeth that the Epistles of S. Clement are not Authenticall And I graunt that Bellarmine sayeth that the Epistles of S. Clement which now are extant want not a soâ—uple Lib. de Script Eccles in Clement by reason that there are many thinges inserted as that two Epistles were written to Saint Lames who was dead before But sayeth Bellarmine perchaunce they were written to S. Simcon and other thinges there are sayeth he which peraduenture were inserted and are not in the Vatican booke But yet he reiecteth not this Epistle and therefore as we haue seene hee and many others do cite this Epistle and in the Canon law S. ClemeÌ„ts Epistles and other his workes Dist 40 c In illis 16 q. 1. capit Cunctis are alledged and Turrianus Gualterus and many others doe defend these workes and Catholike writers alledge them against heretikes whom M. Nicholas must take heed least he fauour in so slighting the authoritie of these Epistles 14. If this answere in which he denyeth S. Clements Epistles to be of authoritie please not M. Nicholas hath another n. 16. Which he taketh out of Estius whom he sayeth M. Doctour cited for the necessitie of Confirmation but did not cite his explication of Fathers how they say that one is not a perfect Christian without Confirmation which sayeth M. Nicholas is no faire dealing But why was it no sayre dealing for M. Doctour to cite Estius for the necessitie of Confirmation Suppose in the other point he had beene against M. Doctour do not Diuines commonlie alledge a father or Diuine for the pointe wherein he fauoureth them And are they bound to alledge him in another matter wherein hee seemes to be against them And so if Estius had beene against M. Doctour and had sayed that without Confirmation a man might be a perfect Christian he might yet haue cited him for the necessitie of Confirmation without citing him for the point of a perfect Christian Else how could Maister Nicholas cite Estius for this point seing that in another point he holdeth against M. Nicholas that a Priest not consecrated Bishop cannot confirme by any commission of the Pope as we see aboue q. 1. n. But Estius his doctrine of a perfect Christian is not against M. Doctour and so was not by him left out for that cause but ether because he is not so cleare in that point as others or because M Doctour had cited S clement whose words were plaine But let vs heare Estius these be his words in English It must be obserued that the Fathers in such sentences where they say that men cannot be perfect Christians vnlesse they be confirmed doe allude to the name of Christ which signifieth anointed VVhereupon they dency that they are fullie Christians who as yet haue not receiued Episcopall vnction making force in the word Christian Estius in 4. dist 7. § 9. Which his manner of explication may verie well fauour the explication aboue giuen by which it was sayed that although a man may perchaunce by other meanes get as much grace as confirmation giueth yet he is not a perfect Christian because he hath not the Sacrament of perfection which is the Episcopall Vnction 15. But our aduersarie fearing perhappes not to be fortunate enough in these two answeres addeth a third p. 8 1. He telleth vs that the ancient practise was to giue together with Baptisme the Sacrament of Confirmation and that therefore S. Clement his meaning is onely this that they who haue not both these Sacraments for one was not giuen without the other are not perfect Christians and sayeth he I doubt not but that this will fullie satisfie the learned Reader 16. But this answere argueth onelie the hard shiftes to which M. Nicholas is put for else what diuine yea Catechumen who knoweth his Catechisme would haue giuen such an answere For who knoweth not that it is one thing to be a Christian another thing to be a perfect ChristiaÌ„ and how that goeth before this commeth after that Baptisme onelie maketh a Christian Confirmation a perfect Christian and he that wanteth both is no Christian at all And therefore S. Clement could not haue saied of him that wanteth both that he is no perfect Christian but rather he should haue sayed that he is noe Christian at all For that a perfect Christian supposeth a Christian and he that wanteth baptisme is no Christian and so cannot be called an imperfect Christian he being no Christianistiall at all 17. Wherefore S. Clement to shew that he speaketh not of both SacrameÌ„ts when he sayeth that one cannot be a perfect Christian distinguisheth the effectes of both these two Sacraments and therefore sayeth all must make haste to be regenerated without delay behould the effect of Baptisme regeneration And then at length that is after Baptisme to be consigned of the Bishop that is to receiue the seuenfould grace of the holie Ghost See the effect of Confirmation to wit seuenfould grace And then he addeth And when he shal be regenerated by water See the effect of Baptisme regeneration and after wardes as is mentioned confirmed of a Bishop by the seuenfould grace of the spirit see the effect of Confirmation quia alià s perfectus esse Christianus nequaâ—uam potest for otherwise that is vnlesse he be Consigned and confirmed he cannot be a perfect Christian Where otherwise hath a reference onelie to Confirmation of which he spoke last for if it had reference to both Sacraments as M. Nicholas sayed S. Clement should haue sayed he can be no Christian at all because he that is not baptized is not at all a Christian and so cannot be called an imperfect Christian 18. And to confront M. Nicholas the more for I see by experience Bol. l. 1. de CoÌ„firm c 3. he will not he Satisfied with alitle let vs heare Cardinall Bellarmine He after he had cited those words of S. Clement All must make haste without delay to be regenerated and then to be consigned of the Bishop and receiue the seuenfould grace of the holie Ghost addeth Et infra causam reddit Clemens quia non potest aliquis fine eo Sacramento esse perfectus Christianus
and after he Clemēt giueth the reasō because without that Sacrament Confirmatiō one cannot be a perfect Christian Where the Reader must note that Cardinall Bellasmine sayeth not as M. Nicholas doth that without both Sacraments but without that Sacrament to wit of Confirmation one cannot be a perfect Christian And so without Confirmation according to S. Clement one cānot be a perfect Christian 19. But as they who haue neuer a good answere are forced to vse many whereas one good answere alwayes satisfieth so M. Nicholas knowing belike that none of his answers will abide the touchstone nor stand the examination bringeth many answeres not so much to satisfie vs as to presse vs with the multitude He therefore hath in store for vs a fourth answere and what is that He sayeth pag. 83. that S. Clement is not faithfullie alledged by M. Doctour And why because he alledgeth not all his words but ends at these words before alledged otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian And what needed M. Doctour alledge anie more words seing he had alledged those that proued what he intended to wit that without confirmation one cannot be a perfect Christian And truely M. Doctour alledged more of S. Clements words then Cardinall Bellarmine in the place aboue cited did and yet Bellarmine who saw those words that follow as well as M. Nicholas without alledging them feared not to say Et infra causam reddit Clemens quia non potest aliquis sine co Sacramento esse perfectus Christianus and after he S. Clement yeeldeth the reason because one cannot without that Sacrament be a perfect Christian 20. But what are these words which M. Doctour left out Let vs heare them from M. Nicholas his owne mouth My 4. answere is that S. Clemēt is not faithfullie alledged by M. Doctour for S. Clement after he had sayed VVhen he shal be regenerated and by water afterward confirmed by the Bishop with the seuenfould grace of the spirit because otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian where M. Doctour ends with an c. immediatelie addeth words wherein the verie point in question consisteth saying si non necessitate sed incuriâ sic aut voluntate remanserit If be shall remaine so not by necessitie but by carelessenesse or voluntarilie But first here I might if I were is foreward in carping at leauing out word though not to the purpose as M. Nicholas is obserue the like fault in him euen in this place in which he taxeth Maister Doctour for that he omitteth those words nec sedem habere inter perfectos nor haue place amongst the perfect which are the immediate words that go before those which M. Nicholas sayeth M. Doctour lift out to wit If he shall remaine so not of necessitie And M. Doctour hath indeed cause to thinke M. Nicholas left them out of purpose for that as wee shall see they made against him and for M. Doctour 21. Yet let vs heare how M. Nicholas argueth out of these words which not onely M Doctour but also Bellarmin left out as also others aboue cited do S. Clement sayeth he pag. 83. sayeth that he who after Baptisme is not Confirmed cannot be a perfect Christian if he want it out of carelessenesse not out of necessitie ergo sayeth he the Catholikes of England who want it out of necessitie may be perfect Christians without it but what necessitie is there now or hath there bene since the Pope sent our two last most Reuerend Bishops to want Confirmation For we haue thankes be to God a Bishop willing to giue that Sacrament and there is no speciall law against him and neuer any as yet hath bene persecuted for hauing taken it Confirmation at least the persecution is not so great but that thousandes haue taken it And these words which M Doctour left out as they are some what obscure so they are as much against M. Nicholas as M. Doctour 22. For first he sayeth out of Estius that when S. Clement or other Fathers saye that a man cannot be a perfect Christian without Confirmation they say so because till he haue it he hath not the perfect vnction of which wee are called Christians that is anointed And then will I adde these words in which M. Nicholas sayeth the point of the controuersie consisteth if not by necessitie but by carelessenesse or voluntarilie he shall remaine so ergo if not by carelessesse but out of necessitie he want Confirmation he may he a perfect Christian that is perfectlie anointed without it which were to say he may be perfectlie anointed without perfect vnction and so haue it without hauing it 23. Secondlie his third answere to S. Clements words pag. 81. as aboue we haue seene was that the ancient practise was to giue baptisme and Confirmation together and that therefore when S. Clement sayeth that otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian he meaneth that vnlesse he haue both Sacraments that is Baptisme and Confirmation he cannot be a perfect Christian and then will I come M. Nicholas with those words following if he shall remaine so not by necessitie but by carelessenesse or voluntarilie Ergo if by necessitie he want both Baptisme and Confirmation he may be a perfect Christian and yet without Baptisme he is no Christian at all and consequentlie no perfect Christian Wherefore vnlesse we will make S. Clement absurdlie contradict himselfe and make all Diuines allmost absurd who alledge as Suarez also alledgeth these last words Suarez Supra which M. Doctour omitted as not necessarie to his purpose we must say that S. Clement meaneth not to say as M. Nicholas inferreth that if of necessitie one want Confirmation he may be a perfect Christian without it for that were to contradict himselfe he hauing sayed before that vnlesse one be consigned he cannot be a perfect Christian And so whether he want Confirmation voluntarilie or of necessitie he cannot be a perfect Christian Sacramentallie as aboue is sayed as whether voluntarilie or by necessitie he want Baptisme he is no Christian Wherefore the sense of these words must not be that which M. Nicholas gathereth but some other and as it is verie probable it is this sense following which is gathered out of the words which M Nicholas left out which are those nor haue place amongst the perfect if he remaine so not by necessitie c. 24. This then is the sense of S Clements words All therefore must make haste without delay to be regenerated to God and then to be consigned by the Bishop that is to receiue the seuenfould grace of the holy Ghost because the end of euerie ones life is vncertaine which he may say because Baptisme and Confirmation then were giuen together and so Baptisme at least was not to be delayed least one should dye without Baptisme and when he shal be regenerated by water and afterward confirmed by the Bishop with the seuenfould grace of the spirit as is memorated for otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian
had not receiued the holie Ghost by consignation of a Bishop but onely sheweth what manner a man he was Thus he answereth the Rhemists And M. Nicholas ioyneth with him in his answere to Maister Doctour saying Onely Eusebius out of Cornelius in an Epistle to Fabianus recounteth that he fell persecutionis tempore metu debilitatus nimia vitae cupiditate adductus in tyme of persecution weakened with feare and moued with too much desire of life And presentlie after sayeth Maister Nicholas It may be well that he fell for want of Confirmation Yet as Fulke sayed so he saieth I deny that Eusebius sayeth so But I had rather giue credit to the Rhemists then to M. Nicholas I hauing especiallie found him tripping so often and their one affirmation ought to be taken before tenne negations or denialls of M. Nicholas Estins also hauing sayed that the Apostles vse to giue Confirmation so soone after batisme as might conuenientlie be Estius in 4. d. 7 § 18. sayeth Quorum alacritatem studium in conferendo hoc Samentum imitari conuenit omnes Episcopos maximè quod huius subsidij neglectu fiat vt persecutionis tempore multi deficiant aut labantur sicut teste Cornelio Papa Nouato accidit Whose alacritie and studiè in giuing this Sacrament it is conuenient that all Bishops should imitate especiallie because by neglect of this helpe it comes to passe in time of persecution that many doe fayle or falle as witnesse Pope Cornelius it happened to Nouatus Behould another authour of greater credit then Maister Nicholas as being a Classicall Authour hauing bene many yeares professour of diuinitie in the famous Vniuersitie of Doway affirmeth also with M. Doctour and against M. Nicholas that Nouatus fell in tyme of persecution for want of Confirmation Bzouius also in his first tome speaking of Nouatus or Nouatianus saieth thus of him morbo tandem clapsus neque caetera quibus post Baptismum secundum Ecclesiae Canonem imbui oportucrat acquisiuit neque Domini sigillo ab Episcopo obsignatus quamobrem neque Spiritum sanctum ex sacro Chrismate adeptus persecutionis metu debilitatus nimia vitae cupiditate adductus se presbyterum esse negauit At lenght hauing escaped his sicknesse he neither got the rest with which according to the Ecclesiasticall Canon he should haue beene imbued or furnished nor was he signed with our Lords seale Wherefore neither hauing by the sacred Chrisme gotten the holie Ghost he in time of persecution being weakened with feare to witt because by Confirmation he had not gotteÌ„ the holie Ghost and moued with too much desire of life he denyed himselfe to be a priest Bzeuius to 1. l. 3 Eccl hist Anno. Christi 254. Corn. Papa an 1. Colu â—49 And after Bzouius relateth how at the request of the Deacons he refused to helpe them that were in danger and necessitie but in a Choler want from them and afterward fell into Schisme in ambitiouslie aspiring to be Pope And why all this but because he had not by Confirmation receiued the holy Ghost Baius lib. 2. Instit c. 631. l. 2. de Conf. c. 63. nam ideo Nouatum ad haeresim procliuiorem fuisse sensit Cornelius Papa quoniam signaculo Chrismatis confirmatus non esset Eusebio teste l. 6. hi c. 33. For Cornelius Pope thought that Nouatus was more proue to heresie because he was not confirmed by the seale of Chrisme Inc 8 Art ve 17. in fine as Eusebius witnesseth libr. 6. Histor cap. 33. Lorinus a Iesuite sayeth that Nouatus was possessed by the derull because he receiued not the Sacrament yea reiected it With these Catholike Authours M. Doctour thought it more honour toioyne then with Fulke the heretike as M. Nicholas in this doth 38. Now whereas M. Nicholas sayeth that he hath answered to M. Doctours coniecture so he calleth it that in time of persecution Confirmation is necessarie for a countrie because if one fall not others will I graunt that he hath endeauoured in the beginning of this question numero 6. and 7. but could neuer yet performe that he hath endeauoured He sayeth numero 6. that the tymes of persecution in our Countrie haue beene most bitter and yet would to God wee could behould the zeale feruour Charitie and constancie which in these dayes Catholikes without Confirmation shewed But why speaketh hee in this manner Doth he thinke a countrie in persecution may doe better without Confirmation then with it or that it helpeth nothing Why then did Christ institute it to the end that in persecution we might with an vndaunted courage professe our faith before the persecutour And sayeth hee I hould it noe rashnesse to saye that since Englands enioying a Bishop more harme hath hefalne Catholik's in generall See how Passion transporteth Maister Nicholas And by whose fault is it that since we had a Bishop more harme hath befalne Catholikes in generall Is it the presence of a Bishop that bringeth such harme Why then did Christ and the holie Ghost appoint Bishops to gouerne the Churche Act. 20. Other Countries in tyme of persecution haue euer receiued greate benefits much comfort and encouragement by their Bishops Why then should we onely receiue a generall harme by hauing a learned Bishop a man of exemplar life and a bishop sent by lawfull and highest authoritie I will not say who are the cause but I referre that to all indifferent mennes iudgements and euen to Maister Nicholas his calmer disposition and better consideration If euerie one had receiued and obeyed him as they ought to haue done Saint Peters successour sending him and if they who found themselues grieued had proposed their grieuances and difficulties vnto Superiours in all quiet modestie and without clamours and had patientie expected their decision and determination there had not arisen such scandall as there did 39. But to come to the matter Ca 14 n. 7. Maister Doctour sayed that although euen in tyme of persecution a man may haue sufficient grace without Confirmation to stand to his faith and Religion as may appeare by them who neither confirmed nor Baptized with water haue endured martyrdome for their faith and so haue bene baptized in their owne blood and as may be seene in our English Catholikes who though many of them were not confirmed shed their blood to seale and signe their faith Yet because Confirmation is the ordinarie meanes instituted to giue force and courage in tyme of persecution to neglect it in such a tyme when euerie man may feare his owne infirmitie is a mortall sinne and if it be neglected for a generall persecution in which as aboue many thousands in particular may commodiouslie receiue it if one fall not as Maister Doctour sayeth Estius in 4. dist 7. § 18. Ca. 14. n. 8. others probablie will as Nouatus did And so a countrie in such a persecution is obliged to receiue a Bishop least it shew it selfe cruell to so many
much portionably the power of consecrating which the Priest hath surpasseth the power of absoluing ordayning and confirming And this Suarez graunteth so doth Valentia who sayth Suarezlib 1. c. 17 nu 2. Valen. 2. 2. disp 10. q. 2. De statu epist PuÌ„cto 1. That if in inferiour Prelates We consider the degree of holy order then speaking absolutelie there is some thing more worthie and more perfect in them then in religious as they are religions and net also initiated with holy orders Where by the way I note that he vseth M. Doctours reduplication as religious which so much offendeth M. Nicholas and this no man can deny This holy order of Priesthood in which is grounded this power requireth as S. Thomas saith of a Priest greater sanctitie then the regulars state requireth of him and for that cause also saith S. Thomas the same acte of sinne in a Priest by reason of his holy order is greater then in a Religious man not Priest The state of 2 Priest is so high aÌ„d holy that many S. Th. 2.2 q. 184. a. 8. in Corp. Baro. anno Chris. 378. in fine Hier. ep ad Helio though religious haue seared to vnder goe it as S. Antonie S. Benedict and S. Francis yea S. Hierome though a great saincte Religious and learned did so at lengh permitte himselfe to be ordained Priest that as Baronius obserueth he neuer receiued any Title or charge of any Church saying That it is not an easie thing to stand in Paules place and to holde the degree of Peter And therefore wisheth That it may be farre from him to speake ill of Priests who succeeding to the Apostles doe consecrate the body of Christe and Iudge vs before the later daye and by whom we are made Christians 47. For these and the like reasons there wante not as Suarez out of Antoninus and Augustinus de Ancona relateth who affirme that a simple Priest is in an higher state then a Regular not Priest Suar. l. 1. c. 17. n. 2 Anto. 3. P. in prolog §. 4. S. Aug. de An. con l. de Potest ecâ—l q. 26. a. 1. And although S. Thomas as we haue seen Caietan and others are of opinion that simple Priests are not in a state of perfection because Priests if we except the vow of chastitie are by their ordination bound to noe workes of superegation or Counselles but onlie to keepe the commandements though by reason of their sacred order more sanctitie be required of them then of other Christians and if they sinne their sinne if other circumstances be alike is greater then the like sinne in others yet for the reasons alleaged the state of a Priest by Reason of his eminent and sacred functioÌ„s exceedeth in that respect the state of all Religious not Priests whatsouer 48. L. 1. cir c. 17. n. 4. in sine Suarez concludeth this point in these words Quapropter censeo Sacerdotes ex vi sui ordinis habere statum altioreÌ„ sanctiorem qui ab eis nonnulla perfectionis opera requirit ratione cuius obligationis merito dici possunt esse aliquo modo saltem inchoatiueÌ„ in statu perfectionis Wherefore I thinke that Priests by vertue of their order haue a state higher and holyer which requireth of them certaine workes of perfection by reason of which obligation they worthily may be sayd to be in some manner in a state of perfection at least inchoatiue that is imperfectlie and in a certaine beginning And a litle before he saith that the diuersitie of opinions in this thing is rather in the manner of speaking then in the thing it selfe as indeede it seemeth to bee For if we vnderstand by a state of perfection a state which is immoueable as the Priests is by reason of the Carracter and which is ordained to high and excellent functions and which therefore requireth saÌ„ctitie of the Priest and maketh his sinnes the greater then the state of a simple Priest is higher then any regulars state is but if we vnderstand by a state of perfection a state that is bound to workes of superogatioÌ„ such as are the workes of the thre Counselles pouertie chastitie and obedieÌ„ce then the Priests state is not in that seÌ„se a perfect state of perfection because chastitite excepted he is not bound to the Counsailes and workes of supererogation which are instrumentes by which perfection is attained But yet as not with standing that the Bishop is not obliged to such workes of supererogatioÌ„ for neither is he bound to pouertie nor to obedience to any but the Pope and yet by S Thomas and all mens opinioÌ„ is in an higher State of perfection then the Regular by reason that his state is so immoueable that he cannot leaue his Church without licence of the Pope and he is by his state obliged to more eminent functions and greater charitie which is to die for his sheepe so the Priest because his state is immoueable by his caracter and is ordained to higher functions as the consecrating of Christes body offering of the dreadfull and vnbloudie sacrifice absoluing from sinne if he haue coÌ„pleate IurisdictioÌ„ may seeme to be in an higher state then a Regular not Priest 49. Now as concerning Pastours inferiour to Bishops who are not onlie Priests but also haue charge of soules it seemeth more probable that they are in a state of perfection higher and perfecter then the state of a Regular not Pastour GarsoÌ„ trae de statu perfect alpha 67. l. v. â— p. 〈…〉 12. q. 28 29. 〈…〉 in 4 l. â— â— q. 7. Suaraz c. 17. n. 5. And this is affirmed by Gerson Henricus de Gandauo and Maior whom Suarez in the same chapter alleageth and thus they proue their opinion because they by their office are bound to workes verie perfect to wit to minister Sacraments to preach and to gouerne soules which is the arte of artes and to take care and charge of them to perfect illuminate and purge them and to yeeld when the occasion is offered their liues for them To which actions Regulars not Pastours are not ordained or obliged This the aforesayd and ours confirme because the disciples whom Christe sent two and two to preache were in a state of perfection next to the Apostles but Pastours succeed to them as Bishops doe to the Apostles Ergo they are in a state of perfection and next to the state of Bishops And for this to wit that inferiour Pastours succeed to the disciples Suarez citeth S. Clements first Epistle against which more is obiected then against the 4. Epistle alleaged by M. Doctour These arguments may seeme much to vrge for a state of perfection in inferiour Pastours 50. Yet S. Thomas whose authoritie is great not onlie in the Schoole S. Th. 2 2. q. 184. a. 7. but also in the Church affirmeth that Curates are not in a state of perfection because to a state is required immobilitie which is not in a Curate or
inferiour Pastour because he hath no vow to tye him to that state but may leaue it if he will goe to Religion without the Bishops licence S. Th. sup 19 q. 2. cap. due sunt yea against his will as S. Thomas prooueth out of Pope Vrban wheras the Religious by reason of his vowe cannot forsake his state of life To this Suarez answereth that if S. Thomas require a proper vowe to make a state then the Bishops state should not bee a perfect state because when he is made Bishop he maketh no vowe But if by a vow he meane a pact Suar l. 〈…〉 17. supra conuenant or mutual promise betwixt him and his Church such a promise or pact is to be found in the Pastour as well as in the Bishop 51. Caietan sayth Suarez answereth that the inferiour Pastour hath not a diuine commandement to stick to his Pastourslip nor any humane precept because none can be alleaged To whom Suarez replyeth that nether the Bishop by any diuine law is tyed to his Bishopricke though Vasquez in this coÌ„tradicteth him as aboue we haue seene only by the Ecclesiasticall lawe he is wedded to his Bishopricke and by this lawe the inferiour Pastour also is wedded to his Pastourship It is true that the inferiour Pastour may enter into Religion without the Popes or Bishops leaue as S. Vrban affirmeth in the place alleaged yet 19. q. 2. cap. dua snnt Suar. l. 1. c. 17. n. 9. as Suarez assureth vs that is no signe that he is not in a state with obligation sufficient to stick to it but onlie that his obligation is not absolute but includeth this coÌ„dition to wit so that he ascend not to an higher or securer state For so also a religious man professed in a laxer religion Cap. sand ca. licet de regular Cap. admonet de renunciat ca. hath a state yet he may leaue it to enter into a stricter Religion as the canons doe teach vs. But vnlesse the Archdeacon or inferiour Pastour enter into Religion he cannot leaue his office or Pastorship without licence of the Pope or Bishop as may appeare by diuers textes of the canon lawe And this sayth Suarez S. Thomas supposeth when he sayth that an Archdeacon or Curate may leaue his Church by the licence of the Bishop insinuating that otherwise he cannot It is true that the Bishop hath a greater obligatioÌ„ to stick to his Bishoppricke because he caÌ„not forsake it without dispensation or leaue from the Pope Si quis veroÌ„ ca. Episcopus de loco 17. q. 1. the inferiour Pastour may leaue his Pastorship with licence of the Bishop but the reason of this may bee because the Bishop hath noe Superiour but the Pope to liceÌ„ce him the inferiour Pastour hath the Bishop who may dispense with him To which may be added that the Pope hiÌ„selfe who hath the highest state in the Church may renouÌ„ce it and yet because he cannot do this without great and vrgent cause he is in a state of perfection Wherefore because the Curate or Archdeacon cannot leaue their charges without licence of the Bishop their state is morallie immoueable because that which we can not doe without dispensation of the Superiour is counted to vs morallie impossible And so the state of an inferiour Pastour is morallie immoueable and vnchaungeable and so in that respect wanteth nothing required to a state And that their state is an higher and perfecter state it may be proued because Pastours euen inferiour to the Bishop are in a state of perfection to be exercised and coÌ„munscated to others the regular is in a state of acquiring or tending to perfection and so the Pastours state though in an inferiour manner is as the Bishops state is to wit a state of Illuminators the regulars is of those that are illuminated the Pastours state is of perfectors the regulars state is of those that are perfected that state is of masters this of Schollers that of Agentes this of patients And so that the perfecter state this the lesse perfect 52. For as S. Anstine sayth the Agent in that respect is more noble then the patient and therefore the soule or spirit is more noble then the bodye Aug. l. 12. de gen ad lie c. 16. S. Th. 22. q. 84. a. 6. in â—â—g Sed centra Dionys l. de Lecies Hier. c. 5. S. Th. 2.2 q. 185 art 8. Isidorl 2. de dimnis officijs c. 7. that being the Agent this the patient And we see that the Sunnes office in illuminating is more noble then the ayres condition in being illuminated the fiers in heating then the waters in being heated the maisters in teaching then the Schollers in being taught And as S. Thomas out of S. Denis sayth that Pontisiâ—um ordo consummatiuns est perfectiuns sacerdolum autem illuminatiuns the order of Bishops is consummatiue and perfectiue the order of Priests illuminatiue so the order of inferiour Pastours is illuminatiue and perfectiue and as hee sayth that the state of a Regular is compared to the Episcopal state as discipline to Magisterie and as a disposition to perfection so the same may be sayd of inferiour Pastours in their degree for that they are in state not of Schollers but of maisters and perfecters hence it is that S. Isidore sayth Sacerdotibus ficut Episcopis dispensatio my steriorum Dei commissa est praesunt enim Ecclesiae in confectione diuina corporis sanguinis consortes cuÌ„ Episcopo sunt similiter in doctrina PopuloraÌ„ in officio praedicationis To Priests as to Bishops the dispensation of the mysteries of God is committed for that they be are rule in the Church and in the diuine consecration of the body and bloud of Christe they are consores with the Bishop like wise in teaching of tâ—e people and in the office of preaching And the Councell of Trent sayth That to all to whom the care of soules is committed it is commanded by the diuine commandement to know their sheepe to offer for them the sacrifice and to feed them by preaching of the word of God administration of sacraments and by example of good workes 53. But Suarez obiecteth against inferiour Pastours out of S. Thomas S. Th. 2. 2. q 184. ar 6. ad 2. that Archdeacons and inferiour Pastour haue but vnder-administrations vnder the Bishop and are to the Bishop as Bayliues are to the Prince And Caietan cited by Suarez sayth the Pastoral office a. 2. 20. and obligation to yeeld ones life for the sheepe pertaineth principally to Bishops and onlie secuÌ„darilie and ministeriallie to inferiour Pastours and that Curates and vnder Pastours doe vndertake the care of soules as Ministers and Officiales of the Bishops who are the principal agentes and so are not in a state but Ministers and Officiales of the Bishops who onelie are in state of perfection to be exercised on others But Suarez answereth verie well that Curates are
not instruments ' Officialles or delegates of the Bishops but are trulie Pastours comprehended vnder the name of Proprius Sacerdos to whom euerie Christian of sufficient age is bound to confesse once a yeare Cap. omnit vtrius que â—exus de poenit remis And although the Bishop hath greater and more ample authoritie then the inferiour Pastors haue yet they are not Officialles nor ministers nor in instrumental causes in respect of the Bishop but true and ordinarie Pastours though both they and the Bishop also be ministers and instrumentall causes in respect of Christe Supra n. 28. And although saith Suarez the Bishop be in an higher state yet that hindereth not but that Curats also be in a state though inferiour for so though all religious orders be in states of perfection yet one is a perfecter state then another Out of all this which for the most parte is grounded in Suarez it seemeth verie probable that inferiour Pastours haue not onlie an higher and perfecter office which S. Thomas insinuateth saying that they rather haue an office pertaining to perfectioÌ„ then a state of perfectioÌ„ but also an higher state of perfection their state being of perfection to be exercised S. Th. 2.2 q. 184. a. 6. ad 3. not to be acquired as the Regulars state is and being ordained to higher actions and functions and they making a pacte and conuenant with their Church as Bishops doe which in a Bishop as Suarez confesseth causeth an immobilitie 54. Wherefore Suarez at length concludeth l. 1. c. 2. n. 5. that the state of Inferiour Pastours and Regulas doe exceed and are exceeded of one another in diuerse respects for sayth hee if wee demaund which state is more profitable to ones selfe lesse daungerous and more sure then the Religious state in this respect taketh the precedence but if you demaund which state contineth n. 6. Mains Dei obsequium greater seruice of God perfectiora opera ex genete she requirit and requireth more perfect operations of their kind then sayth hee the state of these inferiour Pastours is in it selfe and of it selfe perfecter then the state of a Religious man And in this sorte speculatiuelie It may be grauÌ„ted that the Pastoral state is perfecter then the Regular state S. Th. in c. 5. Mat. and this S. Thomas vpon S. Matthew seemeth to fauour as Suarez confesseth 55. And so wheras M. Nicholas nu 14. proueth that a Regular state is perfecter then the state of an inferiour Pastour because 2 Pastour may enter into Religion without dispensation his argument proueth onely that a Regulars state is more sure for ones owne saluation S. Th. 2.2 q 184.7 arg sed cütra and so may be elected and vowed but not that it is an higher or perfecter state I graunt that S. Thomas Proueth that a Religious state is inferiour to the state of a Bishop because a Religious man may become a Bishop and his argument is good Because a Religious man cannot accept of a Bishops office because it is more sure as is manifest and therefore if he may accept of it it must be because it is a perfecter state But an inferiour Pastour may vndertake the state of a Regular not because it is more perfect as Azorius Regular confesseth but because in it he may more surelie saue his owne soule which he may preferre before the soule of others Azar to 1. l. 11. ca. 24. charitie first tendring ones owne saluation and so although the inferiour Pastour doth thus descend in state yet he doth not properlie Retrocedere nor Retrospicere goe backe or looke backe because he thus auaunceth his owne saluatioÌ„ And so it is a good argument A regular may be a Bishop ergo a Bishops state is perfecter but is not a good argument an Inferiour Pastour may be a Religious man ergo a Religious man hath a perfecter state but only ergo a Religious man hath a more secure state 56. But in a controuersie so much disputed and wherin to giue senteÌ„ce may prouoke the one partie or the other I will leaue the Iudgement thereof to the Iudicious Reader who by what is said for inferiour Pastours will peraduenture Iudge it more probable that inferiour Pastours should worthilie be preferred in state of perfection And as M. Nicholas Pag. 103. Num. 7. referreth his reader to Platus a Regular concerning the Regular state so will I and with lesse exception referre him to one Philippe de Harueing a Regular and learned Abbot concerning the Clergie and all Pastours euen inferiour 57. This man was Abbot of a Monasterie called Bona Spes Good Hope and he wrote aboue fowre hundred and fiftie yeares agoe His workes were printed in Doway in the yeare M. D C. X X. and approued by Doctour Colvenerius Chauncelour of the Vniuersitie and Censor of Bookes in that Vniuersitie He in his worke De Dignitate Scientia Iustieia Continentia Clericorum commendeth highlie Regulars amongst whom he was verie eminent yet in euery chapter almost he preferreth the Clergie I will for breuities sake cite only a fewe passages In his 17. Chapter he sayth as M. Nicholas will not saye Nostrum est nouissimum locum eligere nec ad altiora volatu praesumptuoso nos ipsos erigere It is our parte that is the part of Religious to cboose the last place and not by a presumptuous flight to eleuate our selues to higher thing In his 17. Epistle he sayth that from all the bounds and limits of the earth all aÌ„tiquitie did euer extoll the Clericall order and euer gaue it amongst the other orders the principall ranke and degree and though by the diuine disposition a soldier or Rustique doe excellin sanctitie yet the Clergie man in excellencie of Ecclesiastical dignitie and although the Clergie man as we doe sometimes decline to wordlie things and To the weake and poore elements yet their order declineth not in authoritie In his 84. chapter he sayth that the Blessed S. Benedict sounded many Monasteries and instructed and informed many monks by the good and holsome documents he left to posteritie and is not read to haue been Priest yet wanted not perfectioÌ„ of a monke nor did he think it any disparagement to his monasticall institute that his monkes should not coÌ„tend to excell others in holy orders but in holy manners considering that the promotion to orders maketh not a monke but abiection and vilifying of ones selfe labour silence discipline rest Religion And in his 99. chapter Habeant sibi matorem monachi sanctitatem relinquentes Clericis maiorem humiliter dignitatem Let monkes keepe to themselues greater sanctitie leauing humblie to Clergie men greater dignitie And in his 98. and 97. Chapters Pag. 462. he sayth that S. Hierome did therefore inuite Heliod Paulinus and Rusticus to be moÌ„kes not because he thought more baselie of the Clergie but because he esteemed their state as more worthie so not so secur and therefore sayth
hee S. Hierome wished it might be farre froÌ„ hiÌ„ to speake euillie of Priests who succeeding to the Apostolicall degree doe consecrate with their owne wouth the body of Christ by whom we are Christians who hauing in their custodie the Keyes of heauen doe Iudge vs in a maÌ„ner before the daye of Iudgement As if he should haue saied eos quoruÌ„ gradus tanta est in Ecclesia dignitatis quorum of siciuÌ„ tantae est sanctitatis non audeo inseriores monachis iudicare quamuis eos vidcaÌ„ in or whibus habitare c. those whose degree is of such dignitie in the Churche whose office is of so great sanctitie I dare not iudge inferiour to monkes although I see they dwelle in Cities But other is sayth S. Hierom the cause of a monke other is the canse of Clarkes Clarckes do seed the sheep I am feede That is to saie vs who are fedde noe cause vrgeth to be are the molestations of the popular tumult which to tolerate the Clarcke is compelled by Pastoral necessitie yet is not he therefore esteemed inferiour Yea soe much more worthier the Clarcke is iudged then a monke by how much the Pastour is worthier then the sheepe But how much more worthier mace the Clarck obteineth by so much it is more necess rie that he be of holier life least if the greater dignâ—â—e want the greater sanctitie the Clarcke way take the greater detriment by his greager dignitie But because it is rare to stand with an vndeclining sanâ—â—â—ie and to auoyd that mortal sinne I doe not Counsaile thee thus he maketh S. Hieron to speake to ascend to an higher place least thon stand not and sind a greater ruine It is not sayth he casie to stand in the place of Paule nor to hold the degree of pecter pag. 453. Aug. op 76 ad Aurel. And in his hundreth chapter alleaging that sentence out of S. Austine Nimis dosendum si ad tam ruinosam superbiam monachos surrigamus c. cum aliquande etiam bonus monachus vix bonum clericum faciat it is much to be lamented if we eleuate monkes to such ruinous pride and think Clarkes in whose number we are worthy so great a contumelie wheras sometimes also a good Monke scarselie maketh a good Clark This Authour Philip de Haruing addeth That s. Austine hereby doth openly shewe that not onlie an euil Monke ought tolbe remoued from clericall office but a good MoÌ„ke is scarselie worthie to be promoted to it And a little before these words he sayth S. Austine saw MoÌ„kes who being wearie of their quietesse and sileÌ„ce ad not shewing in their life monasticall humilitie impudeÌ„tly desired ecclesiasticall honours not considering behold this Abbots humilitie aÌ„d the reuereÌ„d conceite he had of the Clergie what is the differeÌ„ce betwixt the footestole soe he stilled his owne Regular state aÌ„d the Chaire to wit the Clarkes state wheras in that state a maÌ„ sitteth more securelie in this more dangerously This humilitie this Abbot learned of s. Hierome how in his Epistle to Heliodorus sayth Mihi ante preshyterum sedere non licet illa si peccauero licet tradere me Sathanae in interitum carnis It is not lawfull for the to sit before the Priest for him it is lawfull if I sinne in deliuer me vp to Sathan to the destruction of the flesh This humilitie and reuerent conceite of Priests and Bishops if M. Nicholas also had learned he would neuer haue endeauoured so to detract from the Bishops honour as we see he hath done 57. Out of this which I haue sayd of the state and dignitie of Bishops and Inferiour Pastours which I hope will not offend it being all or the most parte taken out of Regular Authours may be gathered in how high and perfect a state or calling not of perfection to be acquired but to be exercised and communicated to others the Priests of our Seminaries and Religious houses are who are sent in an Apostolicall mission into England to conuert Heretikes to reclaime Schismatiques to gouerne and comfort Catholiques to illuminate perfect and purge the people by preaching catechising administring the Sacraments and by offering the dreadfull sacrifice of the masse who are to shewe the people the wayes to good life vertue and perfection not only by wholsome connsailes and exhorrations but also by good examples who are to labour day and night on horse backe on foote and to expose their libertie yea liues for the gaining gouerning and comforting of soules 58. This office and calling is the greatest as being the calling of the Apostles who were sent by their master Christe to trauerse the world for the gaining of soules this was the calling and office of our Lord and master Christe Iesus who was incarnate and became man liued and conuersed with vs preached wrought miracles gaue examples of all vertue and perfection and at last suffered a cruel death on the infamous Crosse for the redeeming and gaining of soules This is the greatest calling aÌ„d office in this life For there is no greater calling after that of Christe then an Apostolicall calling snch as this is And the reason is because there is no greater perfection then charitie Ioa. 15. and there is no greater charitie theÌ„ to expose once life for the sauing of soules 59. And let not any meruell that I call this an Apostolicall calling because in this all Pastours and especially they who are sent in mission to conuert soules doe succeed and imitate the Apostles and as the mission of other preachers to other countries as first of Fugatius and Damianus then of S Austme and his companions to our countrie and of S. Denys to France S. Palladias to Scotland S. Ronisace to Germanie is worthily called Apostolicall they all being sent by the Se 2 Apostolique of Rome which euer sent preachers to forraine Countries so they who now are sent in mission to England with intention only to gaine soules are sent by Apostolicall mission because froÌ„ the same sea and authoritie And in this as our Seminarie Priests doe excelle all other Priests soe our Religious doe excelle all other Religious what soeuer who are not sent in such an Apostolicall mission but liue quietlie in their Celles endeuour their owne saluation and perfection but are not sent in mission as our English Regulars are to conuerte and to saue the soules of others 60. The question may bee whether as these haue the highest calling in the Church of God soe they haue also a state And this is not soe certaine as that To astate of perfectioÌ„ as we haue seene twothings are required The first that it be ordained to acts of perfection The second that it be immoueable by vowe oathe promsse pacte or conuenant The state of Seminarie Priests wanteth not the first as euen now I shewed only there may seeme to be wanting in them an immobilitie which is required to a state as S. Thomas hath deliuered 2.2.9 134. a. 4. but if
so comprehendeth both that order only will make a man of the Hierarchie as it importeth distinction in order and iurisdiction onely will make him of the Hierarchie as it implyeth distinction in power of iurisdiction and if he haue both then by both titles he is of the Hierarchie To his other demaund n. 4. he is also answered in the Hierarchie chap. 5. n. 18. and 21. for if the fowre lesser orders be of the institutition of the Church as some Authours cited by M. Doctour affirme then they who are vnder Subdeacons are of the Hierarchie in regard of order by the Churches lawe and institution and not by the diuine lawe and institution but if they be of the diuine institution then these Ministers who are vnder Subdeacons are of the Hierarchie in regard of order by the diuine institutiō And seing that Regulars who are neither Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons nor Accolytes c. haue neither order nor iurisdiction ouer the Church as other Ministers of the Hierarchie haue they cannot as Regulars be of the Hierarchie And therfore if an Abbot had only primam Tonsuram the first Tonsure which is no order although he haue iurisdiction ouer his Monkes Yet he should not be of the Hierarchie of the Church because he hath neither order nor Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction but only Regular And so an Abbot as Abbot though he haue ordinarie power in his Religious order is not so much of the Hierarchie as a Bishop delegated because an Abbot not Bishop Priest c. is not of the Hierarchie at all but the delegated Bishop hath both order and iurisdiction and so by both wayes is of the Hierarchie And therfore S. Denys as we haue seene excludeth all Regulars from the Hierarchie and yet some of them had iurisdiction ouer other Monkes VVherefore Regulars must not take this in euill parte for I giue them as much as S. Denys and learned Regulars giue them and would giue them alfo this dignitie to be of the gouerning and perfecting Hierarchie if ether Christe or his Church had giuen it vnto them M. NICHOLAS That Religious Superiours as such bee of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie S. Bernard cited by M. Doctour chap. 1. n. 17. doth expressely teache c. n. 5. THE REPLY S. Bernard is explicated I answere that S. Bernard must be so explicated S. Bernard l. 3. de consid c. 4. as that he doe not contradict S. Denys from vvhom as Mr Nicholas in this trulie sayth q. 6. n. 1. vve have the best and allmost onlie Treatises of the Hierarchie Certaine it is that S. Denys and his Translatours and Interpreters doe giue not place to Regulars amongest vvhom some vvere Abbots in the Hierarchie but doe place them vnder the Clergie and Hierarchie and only about the laitie and therfore perchance S. Bernard putteth Abbots amongest them that are of the Hierarchie not because they are properlie of the Hierarchie but because they are eminent mēbers in the Churche and haue some resemblance by reason of their high ranke in their Religious orders with those that are of the Hierarchie And if I would take hold of euerie thing as M. Nicholas vseth to doe I could confirme this because S. Bernard in that place placeth Abbots after Priests S. Ber. l. 3. de consid c. 4. Or else S. Bernard rekeneth Abbots amongest them that are of the Hierarchie because in his tyme most of thē were Priests many had Episcopall authoritie in some things Bel. to 1. l. 1. de concil c. 15. and many were perchance then as according to Bellarmine they are now admitted by priuiledge or custome to haue their voice in generall Councels and so by the Ecclesiasticall lawe were of the Hierarchie as we shall hereafter in the end of this question declare 31. Now wheras M. Nicholas in the same place sayth that he hath reason to complaine of M. Doctours dealing in alleaging S. Bernard as if he had sayd that the Hierarchie of the Church is perturbed vvhen Abbots are subtracted from the Bishops iurisdiction vvheras S. Bernard in the verie same place vvhich M. Doctour cites doth in expresse vvords approue the exemption of Abbots from Bishops and only disliketh exemption procured out of a spirit of disobedience pride and ambition wheras I say he sayth he hath reason to complaine on M. Doctour it will proue that M. Doctour hath reason to complaine on him in making him say more then he doth for doth not S. Bernard say as much as M. Doctour imputeth to him Doth he not complaine in that chapter that the order of the Hierarchie was then perturbed by exemptions hath he not these complayning words Subtrahuntur Abbates Episcopis Episcopi Archiepiscopis Archiepiscopi Patriarchis sen Primatibus Bona ne species hac mirum si excusari queatvel opus Sic fac titando probatis vos habere plenitudinem potestatis sed iustitiae forte non ita Facit is hoc quia potestis sed virum debeatis quaestio est Honorum ac dignitatum gradus ordines quibusque suos seruare positi estis non inuidere Abbots are subtracted from Bishops Bishops from Archbishops Arch-Bishops frō Patriarches or Primates And these words only M. Doctour alleaged But S. Bernard as we haue seen goeth on further Bona ne species hac Is this a good shovve forsoothe if euē the vvorke it selfe can be excused by so doing You he speaketh to Pope Eugenius proue that you haue the fulnes of povver but perchance not so of iustice you doe this because you can but vvhether you should there is a question Wherfore If S. Bernard in speaking thus much against exemptiōs to wit which haue no lawfull cause doth not deny but that the Pope hath power and iust cause to exempte Abbots and Monasteries from the iurisdiction of the Bishop much lesse can M. Nicholas inferre against M. Doctour who sayd not so much as he that he is against all exemptions but as S. Bernard for all those words doth allow of exemptions when there is iust cause as when a Monasterie from the beginning hath been exempte so might M. Doctour and so he doth M. NICHOLAS Mauclerus also vvhom M. Doctour in his 10. chapter n. 23. stileth a learned Doctour of Sorbon compareth Superiours in Religion to the Principalities secular Pastours inferiours to Bishops to Archangels and Priests not Curates to Angelles n. 5. THE REPLY Mauclerus meaneth only that Superiours in Religion haue some similitude vvith Principalities 32. M. Nicholas now would place Superiours of Religion not only in the Hierarchie but in one of the highst rankes also for that he sayth Mauclerus compareth them to Principalities And I also honour them not only for their Religious state but also for their dignitie in Religion But if S. Denys as we haue seene excludeth all Regulars amongest whō were Abbots from the Hierarchie and placeth them vnder the Clergie and Hierarchie and aboue the laytie they cā not be of the Hierarchie vnles they be