of totall restitution of the Catholique fayth when Almighty God shall please the Sea Apostolique dealeth most prudently sending men hither with so much power as is necessary and expedient for Catholiques at this tyme reseruing the fullnesse of Ordinary Episcopall power till the full restitution of Catholike Religion in this Kingdome For so Catholiques are well assured that his Lordship is not Ordinary howsoeuer the Deuine cry nothing but Pastour and lawfull Pastour at euery word But men giue him the hearing only they cannot but woūnder that he should so brauely carry out the matter as if there were no Declaration or order to the contrary when he cannot but know that my Lord Bishop hath had more orders thē one to that purpose Nay that my Lord Bishop hath acknowledged the receipt of them else where though heere he do not and hath promised to cease from further stirring though we do not yet see the performance of it vnlesse it be that his Lordship indeed forbeare but that his Officers wil not be obedient to him in that wherin they may soone do his Lordship much wrong For their faults wil be imputed to him Now because this Deuine sayth Episcopall power hath beene euer obserued in the Church in all times of persecution whatsoeuer inferring thereupon that here now in England there ought to be a Bishop I would wish him to consider whether euen in the primitiue Church the persecution were like ours in some respects for though it were more bloudy◠and the tormēts more various and cruel yet it was but by fits and generally the Christians had their Cripts placed vnder ground and howses dedicated to that vse wherein they had a publike kind of exercise of their faith euen by publike allowance and Priests and Clergy men were distinguished by their habit tonsure or shauing of their crowne as it is vsed now generally in the Catholique Church But our case is farre different for heere we haue much ado to heare Masse in a corner as priuate as may be without discouery how much lesse might we haue those other things which belong to the Authority of an Ordinary But of this againe in another place These things considered since none of these spiritual cōmodities which this Deuine speaketh off are necessarily cōnected with the Authority of Ordinary neither are so necessary but that a man may be a good Christian and Catholique without them they cannot be the true motiue of pursuing the matter with such violence and heate to the greater scandall and harme of the Catholique cause then all the Authority my Lord Bishop would haue or this Deuine haue for him wil do good and therefore men are induced to thinke that the true motiue is Ambition desire of Rule interest in the fortunes of Lay men disposing of Legacies in maius bonum as would be pretended iudgemēt of controuersies betweene party party without their consents and by little and little to draw into practise a vexation by the seuerall tribunals vpon Catholiques This I will not say but surely there be great presumptions for it for if their reasons were good they would carry things with more tēper they would with a litle more patience endure to heare men propound their reasons to the cōtrary they would quietly expect the determination of the Sea Apostolique and obey it when it commeth besids that in their very discourses they cānot but bewray somwhat of their minds concerning Legacies monyes for pious vses But I will say no more of it but passe to another Section SECT IIII. That the Temporall daungers are not meerly pretended THE Deuine in his 4. Section laboureth by many reasons to proue that the tēporall Daungers are but pretended which is but euen the same that he said in the former Section in other words For though he sayth in the title that their motiues were worldly yet in his discourse he sayth that those were not their true motiues but their passionatenesse to Regulars and so he sayth heere yet I must yield to follow him though he saith but the same things ouer againe His first reason to proue the daungers to be only pretended is because they neuer mentioned those daungers till approbation was moued to Regulars which was about Easter 1627. whereas Episcopal Authority had beene restored since the yeare 1623. I answere first that wheras he sayth that Episcopall Authority was restored I see not how that can be said to be restored which neuer was for when was there euer a Bishop of Chalcedon in Englād with power of Ordinary in England before this mans predecessour Secondly Catholiques did little dreame at first of any such Authority as my Lord Bishop challengeth For the forraine title of Chalcedon gaue thē some assurance that he was not to be a Bishop like as in former Catholique tymes And though they heard somtymes of the word Ordinary amōg some of my Lords Clergy yet they made no great matter of it not knowing any great ground Notwithstanding they were desirous to know what Authority the Bishop had and for that cause vsed all the meanes they could to see his Letters or Faculties but they could not get a sight of them which made them begin to suspect somwhat and so they began to be a litle more carefull then before especially hearing of diuers things done by my Lord of Chalcedons officers as Excommunicating of some and threatning others as also comming to see the Letters Patents wherby his Lordship did create his Archdeacons true and lawfull Rulers and Ecclesiasticall Superiours of the Laity which when they saw they began to cōsult among themselues what was fit to be done And all this was before that euer my Lord of Chalcedon moued any thing about Approbation of Regulars And without question they would haue done what they did for their owne security though the matter of Approbation had neuer beene moued to Regulars It may be when they saw the flame breake out so strōg against Regulars who were otherwise exempt by challenging of a thing which could not belon◠but to a proper Ordinary in his Diocesse it might quickē them make them go about what they were doing with a little more speed and therupon they drew certaine points concerning my Lord of Chalcedons Authority in which they were desirous to be resolued and all of them concerning themselues and such as they had heard many of my Lord of Chalcedons Officers and friends speake of as things that were like to be put in practise But because it was not fit for thē to go vpon vncertaine reports they were desirous to know of my Lord of Chalcedon himselfe what his Lordship did conceiue to belong vnto him so that this Deuine is cleane out of his way in making the matter of approbatiō of Regulars the cause of the Laymens stirring His second reason to proue the daungers to be pretended only is because no man hath beene in daunger since the restitution of Episcopall Authority For answer to
in it selfe still without chāge whatsoeuer the others be Is not their change meerely accidentall to his Authority For he is still Bishop of Chalcedon hath the same commission If then that would be against that law now it is What temerity is it then in Catholiks to aduertise my Lord of Chalcedon what danger he bringeth vpon himselfe others by erecting this new Tribunal which they may truly call Innouation as being a thing without President in our nation and contrary to our ancient Laws therfore no restitution of Ordinary Episcopall iurisdiction as the Deuine would haue it though suppose it were truly and properly restitutiō of Ordinary Episcopall iurisdiction and consequently not against the ancient Lawes yet would it be against the moderne which threaten so many so great dangers that a man may very wel without note of temerity declare them vse what means they can to auoyd them I could heer note how some friends of this Deuine I meane some of the Appellants in Clement the VIII his time vrged these ancient lawes against the Authority of the Archpriest then appointed by that Pope though that were no externall iurisdictiō nor ouer the Laity how much more then may they be vrged against my Lord Bishop of Chalcedons which he pretēds But I say no more of it 3. The 3. poynt of Temerity wherwith this Deuine chargeth Catholikes is in that they censure the sea Apostolique as he sayth and 2. most wise Popes by saying that if these their dangers togeather with their long sufferinges present state of miseries had ben considered abroade they presume no such Authority woulde haue beene imposed vpon them as if sayth he the sea Apostolique had not considered the daungers which might come to Lay Catholiques by Episcopall Authority And then he asketh why they did not giue the Sea Apostolique to vnderstand these daungers all that tyme that the Clergy stood suing for a Bishop the Iesuits opposing it Or all the tyme that the Bishop hath been heer wherein as the Deuine sayth he hath euer professed himselfe Ordinary Whervpon he cōcludeth that it is not the reare of daunger to themselues but their passionatenesse to Regulars who stood in daunger of Approbation that moueth thē to this This is the Deuines discourse and a very good and likely one it is forsooth because the Catholiques say that if their daungers had beene considered to vse the Deuines words abroad they presume they should not haue had such Authority imposed vpon them Therfore they cēsure the sea Apostolike This man is so much in giuing iudgment and censuring that all that any man else sayth seemeth to him to be censuring What is there heere any way condemning the Sea Apostolique Nay rather do not Catholiques in this shew the great confidence they haue of the loue and tendernes that the Sea Apostolicke beareth towards them Which induceth them to thinke that if their case had been fully made knowne it would no way do a thing so preiudiciall vnto them where it is to be noted that besides the Deuines ordinary liberty of terming thinges as he listeth to cōceiue thē wresting words to a worse sense heer he corrupteth the text the better to ground his accusation of Temerity For in those copies that I haue seen of this Letter there was not the word Considered but the word Vnderstood which is no way subiect to exception But notwithstanding suppose the Deuines copy had the word Considered which yet a man may doubt of none else hauing so it may very well carry the same sense Which supposed what Temerity or what Censure is it to say if the Pope did vnderstand our case c. May not the Pope be ignorāt of many particular laws or Statutes of a Kingdome so remote in place and so different in manners and language and especially in this tyme of Protestancy as this Kingdome is He being a man and hauing none but humane meanes to know thinges he cannot know our affaire by himselfe but by information of others and it seemeth they haue beene such men as were more carefull to prosecute their owne ends then seeke our good and therefore would make no more knowne of our case then might stand with their pretences now that we come to speake for our selues to make knowne our owne case for saying that if it had beene so vnderstood abroad we are calumniated as if we did temerariously cēsure the Sea Apostolique What dealing is this But because this Deuine doth thus grieuously accuse Catholiques for Temerity in censuring the Sea Apostolique I would willingly aske him a question in his eare whether he do know a man in the world that hath been often heard to say before there was a Bishop that the Pope was bound vnder paine of mortall sinne to let the English Clergy haue a Bishop and consequently it euidently followeth that in the same Deuines iudgment in not granting one he did sinne mortally If he do not know such a man I can tel him who he is and vouch for my selfe one of the Clergy it selfe and a man of chiefe Authority vnder my Lord Bishop and of great credit with him for his forwardnes and zeale in the cause Now whether this be not censuring let any man iudge For what greater censure can there be then to condemne the chiefe Pastour of Gods Church of a mortal sinne And of a mortall sinne nor so much in matter of fact which might depend of information and so be somewhat excusable but in matter of Iudgment or error in a Doctrinal poynt which cannot be excused as whether the law of God require the hauing a Bishop or not heere in England at this tyme Which the Pope denieth this De 〈…〉 affirmeth and not only affirmeth but condemneth the Pope of a mortall 〈…〉 e for not being of his mind These 〈…〉 tlemen vsed a modest worde 〈…〉 they vsed also a conditionall 〈…〉 anner of speaking which were sufficient to mollify the word suppose it had beene a little harsh They impute no crime they shew assurance of loue and tendernesse and of great wisdome and maturity in counsel and yet this is censuring And wheras he accuseth Catholiques also for Censuring two most wise Popes of doing what they vnderstood not I might answere him likewise that he condemneth all the Popes that went before these two for the space of three-score yeares to wit Ten most graue and wise Popes who for many and very waighty reasons would neuer be drawen to haue a Bishop heere as tymes stood And the two last yelded to the hauing of a Bishop not out of any Scruple of conscience or feare of transgressing the Deuine precept but out of other motiues Nay it is most like that they would haue held the same course that so many of their Predecessours did holde but that they were persuaded by some that the tymes were altered so that it might better be now then heertofore which can be no fault of the
this reason I remit this Deuine to a great friend of my Lord Bishops who is wont to alledge his fauour to my Lord Bishop for a reason of the Kings displeasure towards him I might for answer also alledge the Proclamations much and continual searching for him which hath brought so great vexation vpon Catholiques and vpon many Priests taken by his occasion but that I list not much to medle in such a matter as this Only this I may tell the Deuine that my Lord Bishop himselfe as I haue beene credibly informed tooke notice and exceptiō to the speachs of some Catholiques of worth who spake feelingly of what they suffered by his occasion and wished he would for auoyding their trouble withdraw himselfe which sheweth that Catholiques find the contrary of what this Deuine would make them beleeue His 3. reason is because there can be no greater daunger iustly pretended against one Bishop then against so many Priests they being forbidden by the moderne lawes and he being not forbidden by either moderne or anciēt lawes Wherto I answer that as I haue shewed before the daunger is far greater For Episcopall Authority is so much more forbidden as it is greater Authority deriued from the sea of Rome and a double Authority For besides the iurisdiction of forum internum which Priests haue the Bishop would haue another of forum externum which is much more against the moderne lawes then the former Besides that I haue shewed before that the Authority which my Lord Bishop of Chalcedon challengeth is truly against our ancient Lawes The 4. reason is because there is no Law ancient or moderne against Catholique Episcopall Authority for the ancient lawes forbid an extraordinary Tribunall as that of Legates and ordayne only for Catholique tymes when there were true Episcopall tribunals which they would not haue disturbed by extraordinary Tribunals and so are rather in fauour of vsuall Episcopal Authority as the Bishop of Chalcedons is then any way against it that they are only against a new Tribunall such as a Catholique Episcopall tribunall is not For this reason I answere it is the same with the former and hath beene oft repeated the often repetition of the same discouering the want of matter the Deuine hath The substance of the argument I answered fully before in the answere to the 2. poynt of Temerity where I shewed this Tribunall which he pretendeth to be new and to be by many degrees more neere a Legatiue then an Episcopall Tribunall though indeed neither and so not onely extraordinary but most extraordinary Heere therfore I wil onely speake of that which the Deuine decideth so plainly of my Lord of Chalcedons Tribunall in saying the auncient lawes are rather in fauour of vsuall Episcopall Authority such as my Lord Bishop of Chalcedons is wherin I cānot but note how this Deuine is a little more free in auouching my Lord Bishops Tribunall or power in foro externo then I belieue my Lord Bishop himselfe or some of his more wary Officers are when they write or speake to men of vnderstanding For though my Lord Bishops words in his owne Letter did seeme very plaine in this point as that he was delegated by his Holynes to an vniuersality of causes belonging to Ordinaries and that he was made a Iudge in prima instantia yet afterwards in a certayne Letter to a Lady which hath beene seene vnder his owne hand his Lordship sayth that concerning the new Tribunall which some say he hath erected it is a meere fiction inuented without ground for he neuer thought of erecting such a Tribunall and that his Authority ouer them is meerly spirituall as the wordes of his Breue are in Spirituale bonum Catholicorum to wit to administer to them that Sacramēt which they cannot haue but by a Bishop c. And in conformity hereof there being a meeting appointed by some of the Clergy and some of the Layty and Conference held concerning this Letter of my Lords to the Lady those of the sayd Clergy that were there and were lyke to know most of my Lord Bishops mynd acknowledged and conformably themselues sayd that my Lord Bishop neuer intended any such Tribunall And it went so far as that the Lay Gentlemen drew a certayne Letter to the same effect in explication of his Lordships first Letter in which he sayd his meaning was mistakē which his Lordship might please to write to the Laity expressing as much to thē as he had done to the Lady which though it were no more then he had already written and was confessed by his owne officers yet he would not write it for what reason I know not Nay this Deuine himselfe in mayntayning this Tribunall seemeth a little contrary to himselfe For in his first section and 3. point of Passion he complayneth of the Gentlemen for stretching as he sayth my Lord Bishops words vpon the Tēter hooks in that they vnderstood his Lordships words of an Episcopall Tribunall or power in foro externo Whereas sayth he the Bishop speaketh onely of such Authority as Ordinaries haue or can hane in their Diocesse and which was sufficient to exact of Regulars that they should aske his approbation And a little after Where sayth he in all the Bishops Letter is there one word of temporall Authority or of Authority ouer temporall fortunes or such as haue beene altered or directed by our Temporall Princes What word then of the Bishops enforced them to make this sense None surely but their owne passiō which made them make this forced sense this forced inference These are the Deuines owne words which I do not see well how he can reconcile with his words in this place Wherfore though I will not take vpon me to teach such a Deuine yet I may say he should haue beene better aduised and agreed better vpon his tale both with himselfe and with others of his owne sayde before he had fallen to write and so perhaps he might haue saued himselfe all this needlesse labour of writing and me the labour of answearing for neyther he nor any else can well tel what Authority they would haue for my Lord Bishop onely Authority they would haue for him and for themselues But what or how they cannot tell For fayne they would haue his Lordship to haue Authority of Ordinary for without that they cannot so well compasse their ends nor with it neyther I may truly say And yet they find such mayne obstacles on the other syde making it not only difficult but euen impossible that they are fayne for shame sake to deny all such pretences And thence it is that sometymes they say one thing sometymes another Sometymes that he is Ordinary sometymes that he hath faculties only for the spirituall good of Catholickes c. And they are so nice and wary when they speake with people that vnderstand things or may make any vse of their words that one cannot tell well what they say and yet they are more free
that put men vpon a greater necessity of reply As for that which he sayth that they seemed desirous he should declare himselfe Ordinary it is playne they desyred it not but the cleane contrary But whatsoeuer it was that he pretended they desyred to know it The fifth reason is That the Bishop euer since his comming auouched himselfe Ordinary and till the matter of approbation of Regulars his Ordinaryship was not questioned nor daunger pretended whereof he sayth they cannot deny but they had some priuity I answere that heere againe the Deuine forgetteth himselfe for he was angry before with Catholiques for vnderstanding the Bishops owne words in his Letter so plainly of his Ordinaryship and yet he would haue them take notice of ordinary vncertayne reports It is true therefore that they heard sometymes speaches as if he were Ordinary but they made not much account of them for his predecessour was sometymes sayd to be Ordinary also and yet he neuer pretended any Authority ouer them that they could heare But when they heard of many things which his Lordships Officers did and of peremptory and Authoritatiue Letters which they writ with the Iudicatiue manner of proceeding of some Rurall Deanes and saw the very Patents or Letters of institution of Archdeacons playnely signifying the same then they beganne to looke about them and to enquire a litle more of that Ordinaryshippe what it meant and whether my Lord of Chalcedon tooke himself to haue the same power which Bishops had heretofore in Catholique tymes and so sent to his Lordship to know it from himselfe so that all this while they had no priuity of it nor after till his Lordship published it by his Letter The 6. reason They gaue this Letter to be sent to Rome and as some say saith he long before they sent it to the Bishop and desired the Bishop that it might be knowne abroad Now to what end was it sent to Rome and desired to be sent abroad if it were made only for the state I answere that the Deuine with his as some say is egregiously mistaken in saying the Letter was sent to Rome before it was sent to the Bishop for there be others that know better then all his some sayes if there be any besides himself which auerre the contrary Now for the demaund why it was sent to Rome and desired to be sent abroad if it were onely made for the State I demaund againe where he findeth that it was made onely for the state If he meane that the chiefe reason of writing it was to declare the dangers inconueniences which might fall vpon them from the state by acknowledgment and admittance of his Lordships pretended Authority it is true but that is not all one as to say that it was made onely for the state For it was made principally for his Lordship for those of whome his power and the enlarging and diminishing therof doth depend to see that considering the daungers and inconueniences both his Lordship might please to desist from such pretensions others forbeare to graunt such power as was so daungerous and so peiudiciall to Catholiques Now what inconsequence was there in this to desire his Lordship to make it knowne abroad or fearing with themselues for they expressed no such feare to him that he would not they sent it by some other meanes What a doughty reason then is this to proue the Catholiques cause to be pretended and feigned The 7. reason When Father Campian came in and made publique chalenge of disputation in print and proclamations were made agaynst him what Catholique did publiquely disauowe him or his Authority or faculties My answere to this is that I see not what there is to answere for what likenes can there be imagined in this argument saue onely the publiquenesse of Father Campians challenge of disputation and the publiquenesse of my Lord Bishops clayme of Authority Which if it be sufficient then I will make the Deuines argument a little better for him by asking why Catholikes do not disauow al Letters or Breues of the Sea Apostolike nay al bookes written of Controuersies in defence of the Catholique Fayth for these are publique Now I assure my selfe there is no Deuine in the world so dull but can easily find a great deale of difference betweene these two last and my Lord Bishops Letter though one be much more like the instance of Father Campians challenge But because the Deuine perhaps will not be willing to find a difference I will do it for him It was not Father Campians doing nor meaning to publish any such challenge but made two Copies of his writing one to haue about himselfe in case he should be taken suddenly before he should haue time to do any thing of what he came for and another in a freinds hand with order to publish it when he should be taken if by chaunce as it was most like his aduersaries should suppresse that which he should haue about him But his friend not obseruing this order goeth and publisheth it of himself So the publishing was not his doing Besides it was a particular acte which concerned himselfe only without relation to Catholiques no matter of Authority or iurisdiction eyther in foro externo or interno but a necessary defence of the Catholique fayth at that tyme no exercise so much as of Priestly function but a thing which any Layman for the thing it self might do What need then of disauowing his Authority or Faculties for that matter Now my Lord Bishops Letter was intended to be publique as being written to Catholiques so that they could not but know of it hauing also for the matter particuler relation to them the subiect of the Letter an authority of an outward Court or Tribunall not necessary at this time nor conuenient for the defence or propagation of the Catholique faith but offensiue to the State dangerous to Catholiques as being contrary to the auncient and moderne lawes grieuous in regard of many inconueniences which it bringeth with it and the very knowledge much more admittance wherof bringeth daunger What then doth this Deuine talke of disauowing Authority facultyes such as Fa. Campian had as if any mā denied them to my Lord Bishop No no man denieth or disauoweth thē or any thing else of my Lord Bishops but only they desire not to be pressed to the admittance of that Authority of Ordinary which without any furtherance or any the least necessity of their spirituall good may bring many temporall daūgers vpon thē put them into more straites then they haue beene this time of persecution Which truly is but a very ordinary and reasonable request There is no affinity therefore betweene my Lord Bishops claime of Authority and F. Campians challenge of Disputation The eight reason It is more notorious that there are many hundred of Priests then one Bishop and more seuere lawes against any priuity or participatiō with them then for the Bishop and yet these
men sayth he make no publique disauow of Priests Authority nor account theÌ„selues vnsafe for hauing beene so long silent I answere that the reason is idle Suppose there were as many thousands of Priests as there are hundreds nay if there were as many Bishop as there are Priests if they had not the power of Ordinary what were that to our purpose the question being of an Ordinary with power in foro externo Now for the daunger of a Priest or Bishop whether greater is impertinent as long as the one is necessary the other not Besides that such Bishoply Authority with the daungers and incoÌ„ueniences proper to it selfe bringeth with it the dauÌ„gers of Priestly Authority The Deuine could not but know thus much of himselfe and yet he must put downe this reason to make number The ninth reason None but these 3. and some few of their adherents apprehend this daunger of being silent touching the Bishops Authority yet many haue more to loose then they a Noble man tould them by publique Letter that Timebant vbi non erat timor I answere for the number and worth of the Persons that apprehend this daunger there is enough sayd before the thing is so well knowne that surely this Deuine would not haue ventured his credit by speaking so apparent an vntruth but that he concealed his name For the Noble mans saying I answere it with the wisemans saying sapiens timet declinat à malo stultus transilit confidit The wiseman feareth and auoydeth euill the foole leapeth ouer and consideth The 10. reason The Monkes made clayme of a farre greater Authority and farre more daungerous to the Laity and in a more publique maÌ„ner by many printed copyes and yet these men do not go about to disauowe the same publiquely I answere that till my Lord Bishops Letter no man heard of any such matter from the Benedictines or any else Therefore if there were any daunger in their clayme we may plainly thanke my Lord Bishops Letter as the cause thereof Secondly the same Letter wherby the Catholiques desired to be excused from my Lord of Chalcedons Ordinaryship is sufficient against that or any other booke that shal clayme such Authority as things stand heere in England and therefore there needeth no other disclayming Now for their claime I do not see that for the present they exact any such matter of subiection from Catholiques but only say they keepe a kind of possession of their ancient right against the tyme shal serue for it and that if they would stand vpon it they might better do it then my Lord of Chalcedon Now what offence or daunger is this to Catholiques And for the publiquenesse the book is printed indeed but no way directed to Catholiques but to their owne Religious But this Deuine that in this place thinketh much that meÌ„ do not disauow this Booke I presume was priuy to another Paper deliuered vp at Rome wherein it was sayd that the Layty were much offended at such a vast claime how do these hang together But that was for the purpose in that place this it seemeth in this and he perhaps thought the same man should neuer come to see both the papers But as close as that and such like papers are carried by this Deuine his friends they come to light one way or other little to their credit that care so little for truth in what they say The last reason is deliuered by the Deuine in these words Lastly what needed they to haue inceÌ„sed the state against the Bishop therefore these pretences are ad excusandas excusationes in peccatiâ— whereas the true cause was to help some Regulars to banish Episcopall power out of England This is the Deuines ConclusioÌ„ Whereto I answere that for a conclusion I did expect a concluding reason but it is so farre from concluding that I see no shew of reason For how doth the asking of this question what they needed to incense the State against the Bishop proue that the cause of writing their letter was pretended The Deuine might haue made this a motiue which might haue moued them not to write their Letter to the Bishop in that manner but to make it an argument to proue that their pretence was faygned I see not with what Logick it can stand But now for the matter it is a strange thing that a Deuine should haue no more scruple then to charge meÌ„ of knowne vertue and wisedome with incensing the State against the Bishop Were it not more time for him to study his cases examine well his ConscieÌ„ce then to stand censuring men so deeply and so iniuriously What do they say tending this way That the erecting of a new tribunall will moue the State to a more exact search c For this I haue answered before and shewed that this is sayd to the cleane contrary end to wit to decline the Search and Persecution which his Lordships clayme would bring vpon himself and others and by their saying to appease that which his Lordships doing would incense Which if it seeme preiudiciall vnto him is wholy besydes their meaning and he may thâ—nke himselfe for it For they in this do but defend themselues cum moderamine inculpatae tutclae Therefore to answere this Deuines applied place of Scripture of excuses in sinnes I may now aske him in behalfe of these Gentlemen and all others whose letter it was Quis ex vobis arguet 〈◊〉 de peccato St malè locutus sum testimonium perhibe de malo Si autem benè quid â—ecaedis Who of you will accuse me of sinne If I haue spoken ill beare witnesse of the ill but if well why dost thou strike me And for the last word of all that the true cause was to help some Regulars to banish Episcopall power out of England being but a bitter gal belike of a distempred stomack to end withall and deseruing rather pitty then answere I let it alone wishing this Deuine the same measure of Charity which he desireth of Authority both for his owne good and the quiet of others boing more his friend therein then himselfe AN ADVERTISEMENT GOod Reader This Treatise was written two yeares ago wheÌ„ the forsayd Iudgment of this Deuine began to go vp downe but that other Bookes coÌ„ming then out and ministring other occasion of Discourse the Author thought better to let it alone as he would haue done wholy but that now of late the same Letter of the Catholiques being a new published with A Declaration to the same effect some of the other side began to repeate their former vngrounded Discourses For rectifying whereof and stating the Question aright the Author hath thought fit now to publish the same FINIS Initio Aug. 1627. Anno 1627. Nauar. apud Tol. lib. â— c. â—0 〈…〉
passion I might aske this Deuine what temper he was in when be called this graue substantiall humble Letter no answere but a publique defy of the Bishops Authority What is there in the whole Letter that hath euen a shadow of defiance Doth not the whole manner phrase import as much respect and humility as such matter can possibly affoard Can defyance stand with humility and respect Why then should this Deuine call it a defye What Law giueth him this liberty Let him looke home a litle and see whether he be not liable in what he accuseth others I leaue it to himself to cōsider for I wil not so take vpon me to play the Iudge And heer is an end of the 1. Section of passion I pray God there be an end of that passion on the Deuines part SECT 2. That the lay Catholiques Letter is free from Temerity THE first point of Temerity alleadged by this Deuine is because they being Lay and priuate men do take vpon them to iudge publiquely and to condemne their Pastor which is as much as by fact to iustify euen far to surpasse the Oath of Supremacy which giueth power to the Prince to iudge of Ecclesiasticall persons and heere priuate and Lay men take the same vpon them in saying the Bishop assumeth Authority ouer Lay Catholiques which he interpreteth vsurping and so bringeth a place out of S. Ambrose to shew that Lay-men euen Emperors must not Iudge Heere you see the Deuine waxeth warme in his Iudgment seat but let him be carefull he do not condemne men without cause For his Diuinity may teach him that that is a dangerous thing Well let vs see where is this grieuous crime worse then the Oath of supremacy For priuate men to iudge a Bishop it is true it is a heynous matter but yet by this Deuines leaue far short of taking such an Oath which is the denyall of a mans fayth And therfore this I suppose was but to shew a little of his Rhetorike But for all that he must not let his Rhetorike go before his Diuinity Let vs thē see wherin do they iudg because they say he assumeth this Authority which saith this Deuine is as much as to vsurpe Authority But if his Charity had stretched so far he might haue found out a more benigne interpretation considering with himselfe the difficulty of finding a fit word for this place For the question being of his Lordships Authority they could not vse any such word as might importe that in their iudgments his Lordship had it For that were in a sort to acknowledge it contrary to the purpose of their Letter besides they had no ground but his Lordships owne word to thinke that he had it In which case they might say that he assumeth it as well as to say his Lordship sayth he hath it for that would imply that they did not build vpō his Lordships word which would haue been as ill taken and to say he did take it vpon him would haue beene worse taken as being neerer to vsurpation Thirdly they could not presume him to haue the Authority For though he were Ordinary he must shew his Letters of his Cōsecration or Confirmation as the Canons require Or if perchance his Lordship should pretend difficulties that he durst not bring in such things that he may as wel be belieued as Priests that come in heere without written testimonies yet there might some meanes or other be found out and vsed to giue men some probability of assurance But much more being a Delegate as it is certaine he is For both Canon and ciuill lawes require that a man in that case shew his Authority in writing For it is an axiome that Iurisdictio delegata non praes 〈…〉 ur sed probatur Now if they cannot presume such Authority his Lordship may well be sayd to assume it This supposed it is not certayne that he hath any Authority ouer them and consequently whether he be a Pastour or no an vncertain Pastour in this case is as if he were no Pastor How then do they iudge their Pastor Besides what iudging is this to say he taketh such Authority vpon him They do not say that he hath it or hath it not but suppose they thinke he hath it not the worst that any man can make of it is to say they do not belieue he hath it Is this then such a cryme as to be compared with the Oath of Supremacy especially since they had many reasons to induce them not to belieue it Is it not great temerity then in our Deuine thus rashly to condemne honest well meaning men of such a crime without cause 2. The second poynt of temerity is to teach their Pastor what Authority he must not haue in saying that all things are so setled as innouation might breed daunger being contrary to diuers ancient and moderne lawes since the erecting of a Tribunall distinct or contrary to our lawes is Treason or Premunire at least if they haue any priuity or participation c. Heere the Deuine asketh whether it be the part of lay men to tell a Bishop he must haue no Authority contrary to a setled course of state for matters of Episcopall iurisdiction and he asketh whether this be not to tell him that he must not haue authority to preach cōfirm reconcile c. And whether innouation in religion is not as dangerous with a great deale more of that kind But then he sayth withall that those ancient lawes of a new Tribunall are not vnderstood of a Catholique Episcopall tribunall but of a Legatiue and that therefore the chalenging of this tribunall is no innouatiō but a restitution of ancient Episcopall iurisdiction c. To all which I answere that first this Deuine taketh it for granted that my Lord Bishop is our Pastor certayne and absolute but of that I say nothing til anon so I let him vse his owne lāguage in that But I must tell him heere he taketh to much liberty to call the humble aduise of lay Catholiques or declaration of their owne ease Teaching which is nothing but to make them odious as if they tooke vpon them with Authority to teach his Lordship whereas in the very beginning they humbly craue leaue to declare their minds and so continue throughout the whole letter This is not good dealing for any honest man much lesse a Deuine for it cānot come from a good meaning But we must beare with a hundred such things as these at this Deuins hand Secondly wheras he inferreth à paritate Rationis that the Bishop must not preach confirme reconcile c. because these are against the setled course of state he is mistaken The reason is not a like for these are neyther against our ancient lawes neither do or can hinder the ordinary Courts of Iustice heer withall these things are more necessary for sauing of soules for establishment and preseruation of Catholique Religiō thē a Bishops court
THE ATTESTATION OF THE Most Excellent and Most Illustrious Lord DON CARLOS COLOMA Embassadour Extraordinary for Spayne OF THE DECLARATION made vnto him by the Lay Catholikes of England Concerning the Authority challenged ouer them by the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon WITH THE ANSWERE OF A CAtholike Lay Gentleman to the Iudgment of a Deuine vpon the Letter of the Lay Catholikes to the sayd Lord Bishop of Chalcedon Superiorum permissu M. DC XXXI The Approbation of the famous Preacher and Deuine and most ancient amongst the Doctours of Diuinity of Sorbone now liuing SEing the ground of this whole Controuersy among the English Catholiks is therin placed that the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon seemes to challeng more vnto himselfe then is graunted by the faculties giuen him by the Sea Apostolike from whence it comes that out of the diuerse opinions iudgemeÌ„ts which are with heat framed by many there arise debats in this present tyme both daÌ„gerous and hurtfull To the appeasing quieting whereof no remedy seemes more to the purpose then to make fully knowne to all the true sense and feeling of the Catholikes that his Holynes doe more clearely lay open his mind concerning the faculties graunted to the sayd Right Reuerend Lord Bishop To both which this present Declaration of the English Catholikes is most necessary therfore I iudge it worthy to be published in print that it may be perused of all Dated at Tornay the 29. of April 1631. Iohn Boucher Sorbone Doctour in Diuinity Chanon and Archdeacon in Tornay and Censor of Bookes THE DECLARATION OF THE Lay Catholikes of England concerning the Authority challenged ouer them by the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of CHALCEDON WEE Lay Catholickes of the realme of England haue vnderstood from sundry parts of the Christian world that a foule aspersion is cast vpon our honour reputation for that we are iudged to frame a lesse reuereÌ„d conceit of Episcopal Authothority and iurisdiction and not to render it that Obediecne which may be thought fit The only cause of this is taken from thence that we refuse to submit our selues to that power Authority which the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon hath long since pretended as due vnto his place and to the which as we are assured vpon strong motiues he still layeth clayme taking it as graunted him from the Sea Apostolike This pretended Authority of his hath byn maintayned by sundry Treatises as well written as printed which warrant his Ordinariship and assure him of as much power as is granted to other Ordinaries in what Catholike Diocesse soeuer and warne vs that the same Obedience is to be performed towards him on our part Moreouer we are told that hitherto we were not a Church as long as we wanted a particular Bishop but a flocke without a Pastor an Army without a Generall a Ship without a Pilot a spirituall kingdome without a spirituall king a family without the good maÌ„ of the house in a word no true or perfect Christians And although as soone as we had returned an answere to a Letter sent vs from my Lord Bishop presently diuers scandalous wrytings which his Lordship neuer sought to suppresse nor seemed to dislike of were spread abroad and we therin traduced with no small disparagement to our reputation and preiudice to our cause especially in the opinion of the vnlearned yet we chose rather to forgoe our proper and priuate interest then by standing out with vehemency for our owne right eyther affoard vnto others a subiect of scandall or giue way to the daunger of an ensuing Schisme Wherfore in silence we left the decyding of this matter to those who by their Highest power in the Church of God were as well his Lordships as our Superiours But seeing there haue not wanted many both at home and abroad who in a matter nothing belonging to them and who could not so much as pretend any Authority ouer vs haue notwithstanding vsurped the freedome of giuing iudgment in our cause with great domage to our fame and honour which we endeare aboue our liues we haue thought good to declare and auouch entierly and faithfully before God and man these ensuing points First we sincerely belieâ—e professe that Episcopall Authority in the Catholick Church was ordained by God and as it beseemeth good Catholickes we honour it with all reuerence and daily beg with our best wishes that the diuyne Goodnes will once be pleased to send a tyme in which that authority which is truly giuen and which we account full necessary in the Catholick Church may safely be established amongst vs and we without increase of persecution acknowledge it and as humbly submit our selues vnto it as they do who liue in couÌ„tries not liable to lawes enacted against Religion of which kind very many and those seuere and capitall be heere with vs in force Which fauour if we could but obteyne of his diuine Maiesty truly we should esteeme our selues thrice-happy Furthermore we declare openly that for as much as belongeth to the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon we honour and reuerence him in all duty take him to be a true Catholick Bishop sent hither by the sea Apostolick to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation as we thinke to gouerne that part of the Clergy which is coÌ„mitted to his charge but not to be our Ordinary either after an ordinary or extraordinary maÌ„ner because we in no case belieue that any such thing hath bin hitherto declared by the sea Apostolicke seeing that the tymes into which we are fallen do no wayes permit vs to obey such Authority without endangering the losse of our goods such a losse as cannot be recouered Neither do we only thinke that the Sea Apostolick hath not as yet bestowed any such office power or authority vpon the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon but moreouer we rest assured that it is not the intentioÌ„ of his Holines to grant it him herafter vntil those times returne which may promise that this power will rather serue to support Religion then to ouerthrow it and vntill it may be lawfull for vs to imbrace it freely without so many so great difficulties and dangers which as things now stand is altogeather impossible for sundry and weighty Reasons alledged by vs in the Letter aformeÌ„tioned in the beginning of this coÌ„trouersy to my Lord Bishop of Chalcedon which for that the Reader should not peradueÌ„ture light on or we be inforced often to repeate the same thing we thought good to set downe in this place a Copy thereof togeather with a certayne Declaration made and presented to my Lord de Chasteau-neuf his Excellency at that tyme the most Christian Kings Embassadour Extraordinary in EnglaÌ„d before whome many Catholicks some of chiefe dignity esteeme amongst vs acknowledged the same for their owne So as the iudicious and vnpartiall Reader will easily perceaue the state of our cause which was the thing
we aymed at by adioyning this Declaration In the meane tyme seeing for diuers respects we haue not the freedom to present our selues in person huÌ„bly to lay downe our owne Cause before his Holines we beseech those Catholiks who are lyke to fynd freer accesse vnto him and who shall light vpon these wrytings to be intercessours for vs vnto his Holines that he will vouchsafe to expresse his mind and giue sentence of this controuersy which we now haue with the Right Reuerend Lord Bishop of Chalcedon to the end all occasions of further scandall dissention may be entierly cut off quyte remoued as we hope they will if his Holynes will be pleased to giue it in such a manner as his resolution may be publickely diuulged and openly made knowne to all For if it be only expressed in priuate ech party may eyther affirme or deny what they thinke good so that the strife begun will rather take increase by that meanes then be any whit extinguished as experience hath cleerly taught vs hitherto Moreouer we most earnestly crauâ— that in our behalfe they will humbly beseech his Holines not to resolue of any thing in this busines wherby our Kingâ— most Excellent Maiestyes indignation may be prouoked against vs or we brought yet further into his displeasure Lastly we intreat them not to censure or condemne these our proceedings with disparagment to our honour esteeme seeing we haue alwaies yet byn ready as the whole world may witnesse to lay downe with all humility our very liues fortunes whensoeuer a iust cause for the defence of our faith shall require it REASONS GIVEN to Monsieur de Chasteau-neuf Embassadour Extraordinary of the most Christian King to shew that the Authority of a Catholike Ordinary heere in England is incompatible with this tyme place FIrst we professe in the sight of God that from our harts we reuerence Episcopal Authority as knowing it to be Gods institution and that we vnfaynedly wish the times were such as we might submit our selues theruÌ„to whatsoeuer hath byn sayd of vs to the contrary is very slanderous In the next place we do with al reuerence and humility declare that according to the lawes and state of this Kingdome as now they are we conceaue that the authority and iurisdiction of an Ordinary is not only inconuenient and vnusefull but impossible to be executed so dangerous to be obeyed nay euen acknowledged as that we cannot be obliged thereunto And we do verily belieue that vpon many and weighty reasons whatsoeuer hath byn affirmed to the contrary that his Holynes hath had no intention to oblige vs vnto it nor will after information how things stand heere There are heere many Statutes of the Kingdome in force which make it highly penall in some cases with losse of goods liberty and in others of life to acknowledge any other Authority or Iudicature then such as by the same statuts are authorized which though we are obliged not to regard when there is question of any doctrine of fayth yet when a man shall run hazard of vtter ruine for admitting and acknowledging of externall iurisdiction and authority which importeth not faith but practise of things not necessary but according to tyme and place we conceaue that we cannot be obliged to imbrace it If it be sayd that it is Capitall for a man to receaue a Catholique Priest into his house and that yet many receaue them with all the hazard and that therefore we might aswell receaue an Ordinary into our houses acknowledging his Authority The answere will make it appeare that the obiection proueth nothing agaynst vs. For first it is certayne that euen for the reason of being so Capitall and that there are so many lamentable examples among vs not only of friends who haue discouered and betraied other friends for receauing Priests eyther for interest licentiousnesse of lyfe reuenge frailty or for some other passion but of Seruants who haue betrayed their Maysters Nephews Vncles Grandchildren children their Parents Daughters their very Mothers yea and euen Priests themselues sometymes who haue fallen and betrayed Catholikes we neyther are nor can by any humane authority be obliged to take Priests into our houses Many of vs indeed do it out of deuotion and zeale for the comfort of our soules by celebrating Masse and receauing the most necessary and daily Sacraments and many of vs also do it not But howsoeuer we thinke it a very ill consequence to inferre that therefore a man is or may be obliged with the hazard of his estate of lyfe to acknowledge or submit to the Authority of an Ordinary for the practise of some thinges without which we yet finde by experience and Gods grace we haue alwayes subsisted in these sad tymes because forsooth out of voluntary deuotion zeale many of vs are conteÌ„t to run the highest hazards in receauing of Priests for the so necessary and dayly exercise of our Religion through want whereof we also find by experience of Saxony Denmark and many other countries in Germany Religion hath in effect wholy fayled Besides a Priest who is a Person of our owne election being first authorized as fit and capable by the Sea Apostolicke may haue entrance into our houses and exercise his function in a much more priuate and safe manner then it is possible for an Ordinary to doe especially when he will carry himselfe as Ordinary For in that case besides seruants there must be alwayes Officers parties and witnesses who do not all and euer vow so much as discretion or yet to continue constant in the Catholicke fayth And for our parts the dangers being such as they are it will be impossible to secure vs in this poynt where sometymes it happeneth that an vndiscreet word vttered euen without ill meaning may turne to our losse of goods and life Besides if we could abstract from the danger of offending the State it is to be considered that our Mariages and Testaments and the lyke are made lyable heere to those Ecclesiasticall Courts and Tribunals which are setled by the lawes of this Kingdome and are executed by certayne Chancellours and Commissaries for that purpose who may often oblige and sentence vs in the affirmatiue whereas a Catholike Ordinary or Iudge would perhaps do it in the negatiue and so we should be tossed betweene two â—ockes Agayne if a Catholicke Ordinary should pâ—onounce any seÌ„tence at which the party might be grieued which must needs occurre somtimes his final remedy would be an appeale to Rome which yet it would be Capitall for him to make besides the charge of prosecuting such a suite and the impossibility for the most part of vs so much as to send or write to a place so distant and so contradicted by the State heere for the bringing of such a suite to an end And to shew both the inconueniences and impossibilities of executing the power of a Catholicke Ordinary in such a