adherents in Schisme deuiding themselues from their lawfull Pastours were no true Church ergo English Catholicks liuing in perfect obedience to the Vicar of Christ cannot be truely a Church which in effect is as doughty an argument as this The soule and boâ—y seperated can make no true maâ—â—ergo if they be coÌ„icyâ—ed they cannot make a true man for as the coniunction of the soule with the body giues life to the body so the life of the Church consisteth in obedience to true lawfull Pastours to whom English Catholicks being still subordmate they did and do most perfectly fulfill the definition of a Church giuen by S. Cyprian which therefore maketh nothing against but for vs that it is rather against M. Doctour himselfe may be euinced out of an argument of his chap. 12. num 4. where hauing cited the sayd authority of S. Cyprian that the Church is the people vnited to the Bishop he argueth thus seeing there cannot be a people vnited to the Bishop without a Bishop it follâ—weth that there cannot be a Church without Bishops Now according to the cleare sence of S. Cyprians words namely that a people which is in disobedience schisme against their lawfull Bishops cannot be a true Church I may vse the very same forme of argument thus Whosoeuer are not in schisme with any lawfull Bishop do fulfill the definition of a Church giuen by S. Cyprian but those who haue no Bishop are not in schisme with any lawfull Bishop ergo those who haue no Bishop do fulfill the definition of a Church giuen by S. Cyprian This argument is directly against M. Doctour yet is more truely deduced out of S. Cyprians words then what he did â—â—ferie I know the Church must alwayes for other respects haue Bishops and therefore what I haue here sayd is onely ad hominem to M. Doctours manner of disputing and onely if we respect S. Cyprians words according to the true meaning purpose and occasion as by him they were vttered 7 That his application of S. Cyprians definition is iniurious to English Catholicks is manâ—fest by euery word of the Saint who affirmeth that they who are not vnited to the Bishop in that sense in which he speaketh are not in the Church that they haue not peace with the Priests of God that they are in secret communion with schismâ—ticks that they are opposite to that Catholicke Church which is one and not rent nor deuedâ—dâ— which gentle Epithetons or rather most â—oâ—le aspertions to cast vpon the most â—eâ—lo is Catholicks of England who for their vnion with the Sea Apostolicke constancy in profession of their Faith ioyfâ—ll suffering losse of goods liberty and life haue bene a spectâ—cle grations in the sight of God and his Angels and admirâ—ble to the eyes of men to apply I say such Epithetons to those glorious Confessours Martyrs our English Catholicks cannot be done without great iniury and yet by M. Doctour the sayd definition of S. Cyprian is to them more then once applyed And truely I should not be able to wonder enough how a learned man could lay the foundation of so strange a doctrine vpon a ground so weake so much mistaken for the true vnderstaÌ„ding wherof was required no greater I bour then looking on the booke nor deeper learning then vnderstanding latine vnlesse I did consider that such a doctrine could haue but such a foundation But I will vrge this point no further Onely M. Doctour may gather froÌ„ what hath bene said that the true explicatioÌ„ reasoÌ„ of those wordes in S. Cyprian alleadged by him in his 12 chap. num 4 vnde seire debes EpiscopuÌ„ in Ecclesia esse et Ecclesiam in Episcopo where vpon thou must know that the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop which words wee also euen now cited is not that which M. Doctour giueth because the Church cannot be without a Bishop nor a Bishop without a Church but that supposing a Church haue a true Bishop they must not be deuided one from another and therfore S. Cyprian immediatly after the said wordes addeth Qui cum Episcopo non est in Ealesia non est He that is not with the Bishop is not in the Church And yet I hope English Catholicks while they waÌ„ted a Bishop were in the Church other wise they had not bene capable of falcation But by this we may see how groundedly M. Doctour doth speake and still confirmeth what I sayd of the iâ—â—ury done to English Catholicks by applying to them the definition of S. Cyprian 8 The second point wich I vndertooke to make good namely that England may be a particular Church without a Bishop is easily prooued For the Pope in defect of particular Bishops is the particular Bishop Ordinary Diocesan of such Churches as Philosophers doe teach that almighty God the supreme and vmucâ—sall cause of all effects concurreth not only as immediate but also as a Particular Agent or Cause to the producing of effects when second particular causes doe faile For seeing the Pope hath plenitudinem potestatis fulnesse eminency of power he may and is to performe whatsoeuer belongeth to inferiour Pastours when necessity so requireth which is a doctrine so receaued by all Canomsts and deuines that I suppose M. Doctour will not gaâ—nesay it Seing then EnglaÌ„d for many yeares was destitute of Bishops the Pope himselfe was our particular Bishop and to say that while we wanted 〈◊〉 Bishop we were a flocke without a Pastour an Army without a Generall a ship without a Pylot c. as M. Doctour avoucheth seemeth iniurious to the Vicar of Christ as if he wanted either power or good will to be our particular Bishop and Pastour And indeed to singular hath bene the care of Popes ouer our distressed EnglaÌ„d that in fact they euer shewed themselues to be our particular Bishops and may truly say to our Church as Almighty God said to his elected people Quid est quod debui vltrà facere vineae meae non feci Isa 5. v. 4 what ought I to haue done to my vinyard more then I haue done We erected Seminaries we sent learned Priests both Secular and Regular we indued them with aâ—ple faculties as iudges we composed difrerences as maisters we resolued doubts as Fathers wee wrote letters of Comfor of Exhortation of Admonition as Bishops we prounded all spirituall helpes requisite for the times in nothing belonging â—o particular Pastours we haue bene wâ—nting Quid debuimus vltra facâ—â—e et non fecimus what more could we haue done then we haue performed for the good of our beloued English Catholicks The Church of S. Ihon Lateran or the particular Diocesses of Rome is I trow a paâ—ticular Chuâ—ch a perfect oâ—e yet it hath noe other Bishop for Ordinary besids the Pope Leo the 9. Famous for sanctity and miâ—â—cles being before his Popedoâ— Bâ—shop of Tul for his affection to that Church did still remaine particular
were auerted froÌ„ the Sacrifices of God as S. Thomas auoucheth S. Thom. 2.2 q. 184. â—7 8 Religion to be the most perfect of all Sacrifices an Holocaust 7 This treacise cannot â—e pleasing to the Holy Sea Apostolick froÌ„ whence it had bin good maÌ„ners for vs to learne what is by Christs iâ—stitution necessary for Gods Church ingeneral expedieÌ„t in particular coÌ„cerning our hauing a Bishop in EnglaÌ„d But to tel euery maÌ„ womaÌ„ in a laÌ„guage vnderstood only by those who ought to obey and which could not serue for information of those who were to be our Vmpiers that it is a deuine commandement to haue a Bishop in England is but to lead men into temptation of disobedience in case his Holinesse should euer put in prctaise the contrary and of condemning the iudgments and facts of so many learned and holy Popes who for diuers yeares deemed it nether necessary nor expedient togrant vs a Bishop 8 The greater and better part of English Catholicks wil be nothing well contented with this booke wherein they are plainely enough taxed of want of Charity and Obedience in not being so vnited subordinate to my Lord of Calcedon as it seemes M. Doctour thinkes they should They are also in effect coÌ„demned of mortal sinne by refusing so longe time a Bishop against the law of God for being occasioÌ„ on their partes that our country wanted the Sacrament of Confirmation which according to M. Doctour is so necessary in time of persecution that neither any country Chap 14â— â— nor any one of the country for feare of persecutioÌ„ can oppose against the comming in of a Bispop though thereby only the Sacrament of confirmation should be wanting auouching moreouer al those who haue not had the Sactament of Confirmation not to be perfect Christians which is a saying by him more then once repeated but how true it is I hope the reader wil be able to iudge by what shal be said in the folloâ—wing questions as also how litle probability his other reasons carry for euincing the necessity of a Bishop in England 9 Neither can my Lord of Chalcedon much like this booke wherein the reader will finde some passages by me noted whereby my Lord his Ordmariship is quite demolished and other authority by him pretended either extenuated or made odious dreadfull to Catholicks 10 It cannot be pleasing to Almighty God to treate of holy things vpon particular designe and humane respects For I know not how deuotion is lessened euen towards sacred things when they are commended by exaggeration and for some priuate end as in this treatise M. Doctour doth extoll Episcopall dignity aboue Religious state vrge the necessity of Confirmation prayse the Secular Clergy and enforce the obligation of hauing a Bishop much more then according to true deuinity he could and more then I feare he would haue done if all mortall men were as free from emulation as the Saints in heauen And as he hath written of the Hierarchie so perhaps we shall in tyâ—e see some printed treatise of the Saâ—rament of Confirmation and the generall ambiguous speaches of some antient Fathers or the particular opinions of some few deuines misapplyed for the necessity of that Sacrament or in proofe that it cannot be administred but by a Bishop or some such like subject busines 11 As for the manner helâ— by M Doctour in proouing his Tenets I feare it will not correspond to that opinion which hath bene conceiued of his learning and in truth excepting those points which all Catholicks beleeue there is no one thing in his whole booke which will put a man to study for the answere 12 Against all good Logicke and as it may seeme against prâ—dence he prooueth his conclusion by principlâ—s more harsh and incredible then the conclusion it selfe For example to prooue the necessity of a Biâ—hop in Engâ—and he serueth himselfe of these straÌ„ge vntoward propositioÌ„s That it is de iure diuiâ—â— a deuine Law for euery such pâ—rticular Church as England is to haue a Bâ—â—hop That without a Bishop England cannot be a paâ—ticular Church That vnlesse euery â—â—rticular Church haue is Bishop or Bishops the whole and Vniuersall Câ—urch should not as Christ hath instituted be a Hierarchie coÌ„posed of diuers particular Churches That without a Bishop we cannot haue Confirmation which whosoeuer wants is not as M. Doctour sayth a perfect Christian All which principles are worse then the conclusion and are by vs demonstrated to haue no ground at all 13 He still doth not aright compare Religious with Secular Priests alwayes reduplicating Religious as Religious but neuer â—ecular as Secular For example he saith that Religious as Religious haue not authority to preach gouerne the Church or the like but neuer telleth vs whether Secular as Secular can do it as certainly they cannot till authority be granted theÌ„ which being graÌ„ted also to Religious they may performe the same actions no lesse then Seculars as in due place shal be declared In other points likewise he speaketh not so distinctly as a schollar would expect 14 But the thing at which I most woÌ„der in a maÌ„ of his learning is that those Fathers schoole Deuines which he produceth for witnesses of his doctrine are indeed against himselfe Sâ—â— quest â— 3 â— as the reader wil see in his allegatioÌ„ of S. Cyprian S. ClemeÌ„t Sotus BaÌ„nes etâ— 15 Lastly I desire the reader to be still carefully obseruing throughout his whole treatise that whereas he maketh profession to abstaine from the mayne question betwixt my Lord of Chalcedon and others and further affirmeth in his fiftenth chapter num 10. that my Lord can challenge no Bishopricke no not so much as the poorest parish in England And whereas likewise my Lord of Chlacedon by his Breife of Delegation was to haue no power in England or Scotland till his arriuall in those Kingdomes and then onely ouer Catholicks and as long as his Holinesse should thinke good all which are manifest arguments that he is not Ordinary as other Bishops in Catholicke countries are who although they should neuer set foote in their owne Diocesses yet they haue true Ordinary power ouer both Catholickes and Hereticks within such diocesses and are Ordinaries both personarum et loci of persons and place both in fore interno externâ— and that not onely ad bene placitum but permanently as alwayes in the Church of God some Ecclesiasticall princes must be Notwithstanding I say all this yet the arguments by which M. Doctour would prooue the necessty of a Bishop in England either prooâ—e nothing at all or else more then he himselfe inâ—endeth or my Lord of Chalcedon challâ—geth namely that he must haue authority â—lso ouer heretickes that he may lay claime to some or all the Diocesses in England as well as to that of Chalcedon that he must not be onely ad beneplacetum c. and â—o M. Doctour must be forced either to arswere his
owne arguments or else both contradict himselfe taxe his Holinesse as hauing not yet sufficiently prouided for the Churches of England and Scotland because the Institution of Christ the practise of the Church the decrees of Canons the sayings of ancieÌ„t Fathers the doctrine of all Catholicks concerning the necessity of hauing some Bishops in Gods Church coÌ„cerne Ordinary Pastors Prelats in the proper sence about mentioned not Delegates in an extraordinary manner And therefore as I said M. Doctour must defend himselfe against his owne argumeÌ„ts But least I may seeme to wrong so learned a maÌ„ I desire the reader not to giue me credit till in the following seuerall Questions he finde by particulars the truth of what I haue deliuered in generall THE SECOND QVESTION Whether without a Bishop here can be a particular Church 1 M. Doctor in diuers parts of his treatise doth teach that without a Bishop there can be no particular Church in his 14. chapter where he endeauoureth to prooue that a particular courtry may not refuse Bishops by reason of persecution one of his maine argumeÌ„ts is nuÌ„ 9. because without a Bishop there can be no particular Church thence deduceth that Catholicks of England al the while they had no Bishop were no particular Church shall no longer be a particular Church then they shall haue a Bishop but shal be a flocke with out a Pastour â—â—army without a General a ship without a Pylot a speritualkingdoÌ„ without asperitualking a family without a Goodman of the house 2 This assertion he prooueth out of S. Cyprian who sayth Cypr. epâ—â— 69. ad 〈◊〉 that the Church is Sacerdoâ—i plebs adunata et Pastori suo grex 〈◊〉 arâ—us the Churches the people vritâ—d to the Preâ—â—â— Bishop and the flocke adhering â—â—to its Pâ—â—â—our In the sime place M Doâ—toâ—â— a lioy 〈◊〉 this reason that as the â—hâ—le Church hath me supreâ—me Bishop to gouerne it so â—â—â—ry particular Church must haue its Bishop 〈◊〉 Bishops else it should not he a particular Church and so the whole and vnâ—â—â— saâ—â— Church should not as Christ hath instituted he a Hierarchie composed of diuers particular Churches 3. Three thing I will endeauour to performe First that the alleadged wordes of S. Cyprian vpon which M. Doctour doth so maynely and extreamely often insist make nothing against vs but rather are for vs against himselfe and with all that his application of them may seeme iniurious to English Catholickes Secondly I will de nonstrate that England without a Bishop may hath bene a particular Church and that the contrary assertion must both wrong the Sea Apostolicke and can subsist vpon no better ground then by hereticks is wont to be obiected against the sayd holy Sea Thirdly I will shew that although we should freely grant what M. Doctour assumeth that without a Bishop we cannot be a â—â—rticular Church â—et it could not proue hiâ—â—â—ent 〈◊〉 particular country may not rosuse Bishâ—ps by reason of persecution 4 For the first it might be answered in a word that S. â—â—prâ—m doth not define the Church to be the people vnited and the flocke adbering to a particular Priest and Pastour but onely inâ—iffiâ—itely to the Priest and Pastour which is verified as long as we haue for our Bishop Pastour the Pope of Rome Besides S. CypriaÌ„ speaks of Ordinary Pastors with power ouer both places persons Catholicks hereâ—icksâ—permanently and not onely ad bâ—neplacitum therefore by a Delegate 〈◊〉 Cyprians definition is not fulfdd but still we must acknowledg the Pope for our immediate and particular Ordinary 5 But for the â—â—â—e vnderstanding of S. Cyprians meaning we are to know that the foresayd epistle was written to one Florinus or Florentius surnamed Pupianus who as Pamelius obserueth in his notes vpon that epistle was a NouatiaÌ„ heretick and with too much credulity and temerity had giuen credit to certayne faâ—sly reported crimes against S. CypriaÌ„ for which he esteemed that the Saint ought to haue beene forsâ—ken by the people of his Diocesse as if he had not beene true Bishop Against this false seditious imputation S. Cyprian prooueth not that a Church wanting a Bishop is no particular Church but that a Church haâ—iâ—g its true and lawfull Bishop as S. Câ—prian was yet deuiding it selfe and falling in schisme with him is indeed â—oe Church at all but a schismaticall congiegatioÌ„ That this is so S. Cyprians owne words demnostrate for hauing alleadged out of Scripture Nos credimus Ioan. 6. et cognouimus quia tu es filius Dei vini addeth Loquitur â—llic Petrus supra quem adificatafuit Ecclesia Ecclesia nomine doceÌ„s et ofterdes quia et si contumax ac superba obedire nolemiuÌ„ multâ—udo discedat EcclesiatameÌ„ à Christo non recedit et illi simt Ecclesia plâ—bs â—acerdoti adunata et Pastori sui grex adhaerens vnde scire debes Episcopum in Ecclesia esse EcclesiaÌ„ in Episcopo si qui cum Episcopo non sit in Ecclesia non esse frustra sibi blandiri eos qui pacem cum Sacordotibus Dei non habentes obrepunt latemer apud quosdam communicaâ—e se credunt quando Ecclesia quae Catholica vna est scissa non sit nequo diuisa sed sit vrique connexa et cohareâ—tium sibi inudeem Sacerdotum glutino copulaâ—a We beleâ—ue and know Ioan. 6. that thou art the sonnâ— of the liung God These words are spoken by Peter vpon whom the Church was builded teaching vs in behalfe of the Church that although the stubborne and proude multitude of disobedient persons do go away yet the Church doth not depart from Christ and they are the Church the people vaited to the Priest and the flocke adhering to its Pastour Wherefore thou must know that the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop and that if any be not with the Bishop he is not in the Church marke and they do in vaine flatter themselues who hauing not peace with the Priests of God creepe in and beleeue that secretly they are in Communion with some where as the Church which is Catholicke and one cannot be rent nor deuided but must be conioyned and vnited with the tye of priests succeeding one to another 6 Behould S. Cyprian neuer thinking of the necessity that euery particular Church hath of a Bishop if it neane to be a particular Church but affirming that theirue Church doth not depart from Christ that he who is not with the bishop is not in the Church that in vaine they flater theÌ„selues who haue not peace with the true priests of God but are in secret communion with some schismaticall or hereticall factions whereas the Church which is Catholick and one can not be rent nor deuided And what is all this to prooue that no particular Church can be such without a Bishop no more then if one should say King Henry the 8. and his
in eaâ—ry particular Church as to haue one Supreame head of the whole Catholicke Church When Gregory Clement Paule and other Popes stood in deliberation whether it were expedient to haue a Bishop in England as for many yeares it was by them iudged inconuement might they as well haue doubted of the necessity or â—onueniency of hauing any Pope of Rome for the gouernement of the whole Catholick Church to say that a particular Bishop hâ—th not power to gouerne the whole Catholicke Church ergo the Bishop of the whole Catholicke Church cannot goâ—erne a particular one is as good as to say the feete cannot guide the head eâ—go the head cannot guide the feete His assertion or inference vpoÌ„ his ownâ— pâ—emisses that vnlesse euery particular Church haue a Bishop the Vniuersall Church should not as Christ hath instituted be a Hierarchie composed of diuert particular Churches if it be vnderstood of particular Churches indeterminately that is the whole Church cannot be a Hierarchie vnles some particular Churches haue Bishops it is very true but sâ—rueth nothing at all to his purpose of proouing that England must haue a Bishop because although England or some other particular country want Bishops other Churches and countries may haue them and so the Vniuersâ—ll Church shall still be a Hierarchie composed of diuers particular Churcher But if he vnderstand as his wâ—res euery particular Church and his whole drife seeme to demonstrate that vnlesse euery particular determinate Church haue a Bishop the whole and Vuiuersall Church should not as Christ â—ath instituted be a Hierarchie composed of diuers particular Churches I must needs say his doctrine is clearely subject to a deeper Censure then I am willing to expresse For what Catholick dare aâ—onch that because England for the space of threescore yeares wanted a Bishop the Vniuersall Church all that time was not as Christ hath institutea a Hierarchie composed of diuers particular Churches yea if my Lord of Chuâ—â—edon be not properly Ordinary both of England and Scotland M. Doctour must consequently affirme that the Vniuersall Church at this day is not as Christ hath instituted a Hierarchâ—â— composed of diuers particular Churches O to now great inconueniences is a man subject if once he vndertake the defence of a very hard cause THE THIRD QVESTION Whether by the deuine Law euery particular Church must haue it Bishop 1 TO prooue that a particular Country â—â—y not refuse Bishops by reason of persecution M. Doctour in his 14. chapter alleadgeth that it is de luâ—e diuino of the diuine Law to haue a Bishop in euery particular Church And for proofe theoeof citeth Soâ—us affirming Sot lib. 10. deâ—â—uâ—â—â—et iure q. 1. a. 4. posâ— sâ—â— undâ—â— conclusionâ— it to be de iure diuino of the deuine Law quòd in genere singulis Ecclsiâ—s secundum Ecclesiasticum diuisionem sut aâ—plicentur Episcopi That in generall to euery particular Church according to the Ecclesiasticall deuision proper Bishops are to be applyed And Bannes teaching Baâ—â—es 2.2 q. 1. a 10. Coclu 6. ad vâ—â— that Bishops cannot by the Pope be remoâ—uea from the whole Church or a great or not able part of it Hauing cited these two learned authours he argueth thus By the deuine Law there must be particular Bishops in the Church but there is no more reason why the particular Church of France for I speake especially of great particular Churches which are not able parts of the whole Church should be gouerned by a Bishop or Bishops rather then the Church of Spaine or the Church of Spaine rather then the Church of England or Flanders ergo France Spaire England Flanders and all other particular Churches of extent must be gouerned by Bishops 2 These be the best grounds that M. Doctour in the said chapter bringeth for proofe that it is de iure deuino a command of God to haue a Bishop in England I wil adde such other arguments as can be afforded from his 13. chapter wherein although he affirme but that which al Catholicks do grant speaking in general that cueÌ„ in time of persecutioÌ„ the whol Church may not be gouerned without some Bishops yet because some of the proofes brought for the said verity may perhaps seeme pertinent to this present question Suar. tom 4. in 3. p. d. 25. I will not dissemble them Suareâ—â— saith he concludeth that the Church cannot change this kinde of gouernment by Bishops Then he alleadgeth examples of the African Church When Hunericus began his raigne he offered to the Catholicks of Carthage to chuse in that Church a Bishop which ornament sayth Victor Carthage had wanted for 24. Victor Vticenâ—â—t lib. 2. perseq vad inâ—â—â—o yeares but yet vpon this condition that the Arrtans at Constantinople might enioy the free vse of their Churches otherwise saith Hunericus not onely the Bishop that shal be ordained in carthage with his Cleargy but also all other Bishops of the African prouinces with their Cleargie shal be sent to the Mooâ—es The which when Victor Primate of Africke and others heard they refused his courtesie with so cruell a condition and says â—iâ—ita est interposius his condâ—tionibus periculosis haec Ecclesia Episcopum noâ— delectatur habere Gubernat eam Christus qui semper dignatur guberuare If it be so with these perilous conditions the Church of Carthage is not dilighted to haue a Bishop But the people so cryed out for a Bishop that they could not be appeased without one 3 A second argument M. Doctour â—raweth from another example of Huneticus his cruelty and of the African Catholicks zeale to their Bishops and Pastoâ—rs Victor Vâ—â—censis lib 2. Hunericus his cruelty Victor Vâ—â—censis descriâ—â—th rather by teares then words saying Quibus autem prosequar flumâ—â—bus â—â—â—â—ryâ—aâ—um quando â—â—pâ—sâ—opâ—s Presbâ—â—eros Dâ—â—conoâ— eâ—alia â—â—â—lsiae membra id est quatuor willia D. cccc Lxvi ad exilium eremi dastiâ—auâ—â— in quibus â—rant podagrici quamplurims aly per aetatem anâ—oâ—uâ—n lumine â—emporali priuaâ—â— c. But with what fâ—â—ds of teares shall I proosecute 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rs his crucltâ— woen he sent Best ops Priests Deacous and other members of the Church â—â—to â—â—â—ashmeÌ„t in the wilaernesse amongst whom were â—â—my troubled with the gout others by age â—â—â—nd and dâ—priueâ— of sight c. Behould Huâ—â—â—cus his cruâ—â—ty Now let vs behould the zeale of the Catholicks of these countries for their Bishops and Priests They complantned pâ—â—â—ufâ—ly that they were deprined of their Pastours saâ—ing or rather crying Victor lib. 2. peâ—ses Vad. Quibus nos miseros relinquiâ—ts dum pergites ad coronas qui â—os baptizatuâ—â— sunt parunlos fonâ—â—bus aqua perernis qui nobis paenâ—tentiae munus collaturi sunt et reconciliationis induigentâ—s obstrictos peccatorum vinculis solâ—tuâ—i quiâ— vobis dictum est quaecunque solueritis super terram erunt solâ—â—a et on cales Qui nos soleÌ„ntbus or ationâ—bus sepulturi sunt mortentes quibus diâ—â—ni
Sacrifictâ—â—â—tuâ—â—xhibedus estâ— Vobiscum et not â—â—eebat pergere siliceret vs tali modo filios a patribus nulla necessit at separaret To whom do you leane vs maser able wretches whilst you goe to receaue your crownes Who shall giue vs the Sacrament of pennance and loose vs tyed with the bords of sinnes by the Indulgence of reconciliaâ—â—on For to you it was said whatsoeuer you shall loose vpoÌ„ earth it shal be loosed in heaneÌ„ Who shall bury vs with solemne prayers when we shall dy to whom the rite of the acuâ—â—â— sacrifice is to be exhibited We might haue gonne with you that so no necessâ—tâ— might separate the children from their Fathers After this example M. Doctour sayth thus Wherefore aâ— for otheâ— poynts of our Fayth we must dye rather then deny them so we must dye rather then aâ—â—y the Hierarchy of the Church it being a poynt of Fayth 4 His third example is out of Orosius relating how the Aâ—ian Tyrant Trâ—samundus commanced that the African Bishops should not ordayne any more Bishops in the place of those that dyed Orosius 〈…〉 â— 10 The Bishops considering that without Bishops their churches could not long subsist but would fall without any other persecuâ—â—on or violence vsed against them resolued to call a Councell And in that Councell all the Bishops with one consâ—â—t decreed notwithstanding the Tyrants Edict to the contrary to ordaine Bishops Cogitantes aut regis iâ— acundâ—am siqua forsan existeret mitigandam quo facilius ordinatâ—â—â—suis plebibus vâ—uerent aut si persecutionis violentia nasceretur coranaâ—dos etiaâ— sides confessione quos dignos inuentebant promotione c. Thinking that the Kings wrath if any perchance should be would be mitigated or that they who were found worthy of promotion would be crowned with confessioâ— of their ministerie And good reason had they so to doe For as sayth Baronius Quaenam shes de Ecclesiâ—s â—astoribus destitutis vlterius reliqua esse poterat Baron An. Daâ— 504. conuulsis earum fundameÌ„tis ipâ—is quibus initibantur Episcopis What hope could there remayne for the Churches when their foundations to wit the Bishops to which they leaned and on which they depended were ruined and pulled vp Thus farre out of M. Doctour whose words I hane related at large that the reader might see all the force of these examples and out of the narrations themselues gather the answeres to them 5 In this question certaine it is that de â—ure diuino the Church must be goueâ—ned by Bishops that is in the whole Church of God there must be some Bishops but to affirme as M. Doctour doth that it is de iure diuino to haue a particular Bishop in the particular Church of England nâ—â—â—nely that there is such a precept but moreouer that hoe persecuioÌ„ can excuse the obligation therof or giue sufficieÌ„t cause of dispensation all which he must prooue if he will speake home is a paradox to speake sparingly without any shew of probability and which may seeme to taxe those Popes as ignorant of the deuine Law who for so many yeares esteemed it neither necessary nor expedient to send a Bishop into England neither when he was sent did they euer disputeâ— whether it was necessary â—ure diuino but all the deliberation was quid expediret what was expedient yea M. Doctour must finally answere his owne arguments which either prooue nothing at all or else prooue that his Holinesse is obliged to give vs an Ordinary for his reasons and examples are for such which is more then M. Doctour himselfe will â—uouch 6 And truly I cannot inâ—agine what way one should go about to prooue that vpon noe cause whatsoeuer the Pope can make himselfe particular Bishop of some particular Church especially for a tyme and gouerne it by his Delegates endued with sufficient power and still prouided that the sayd particular Church within or without it selfe haue meanes to be furnished with sufficient Priests and necessary Sacraments and helps 7 But although we should grant that as M. Doctour affirmeth a great or notable part of the church could not iuâ—re diuino be gourned without a Bishop yet that would be far from proouing that England as things now stand must needes haue a Bishop For if our country be considered not materially but formally as Deuines expresse themselues that is not the extent of land or multitude of people but the number of Catholickes which only can make a true church we shall find it to be more then far from a great or notable part of the Catholick church spred ouer the whole world And God grant that I might not with truth affirme the whole number of Catholicks in EnglaÌ„d ScotlaÌ„d also to be much lesse theÌ„ the nuÌ„ber of people in some one citty in this Kingdom Sure I am that my Lord of Chaloâ—don or some other in his behalfe in a certine writing called a Paralâ—â— sect 4. saith that all the Catholicks would scarce make one of diuers Bishopricks in England Now to affirme that one Dicocesse or citty or indeede not so much as one Diocesse or citty is a great or notable part of that Church which reacheth as far as the rising and setting of the sunne and that it must therefore iure diuino haue a Bishop so as no cause can excuse the want of one is a thing that I will not say noe deuine but euen noe man in his right Iudgment can affirme But by this we may see into what absurdities partiality may lead men though other wayes learned 8 Enough hath bene said to disprooue M. Doctours Tenet in this present question yet nothing will more disaduâ—â—age his assertion then when the reader shall by my answers clearely peÌ„rceiue his owne arguments either to go beside the matter or to prooue against himselfe 9 His first was taken out of Sotus affirming it to be deiure diuiâ—e of the dideuine lawe quôd in genere singulis c. that in generâ—l to euery paâ—ticular Church according to the Ecclesiasticall diuision proper Bishops are to be applyed This authority is eyther against M. Doctour or nothing against vs. For ether we suppose that the antient diuision of diocesses remaine â—ot in England and Scotland and then according to M. Doctours vnderstanding of Sotus euery Diocesse in England and Scotland must â—ure diuino haue a particular Bishop which is absurd could neuer be the true meaning of so learned a man as Sotus was Or els we suppose that al Ecclesiastical deuision of Diocesseâ— in England hath ceased and then there is not by the deuine law due to England any Bishop according to this authority of Soto who only saith it is deiure diuino of deuine law that to euery particular Church proper Bishops are to be applyed according to the Ecclesiasticall deuision and therefore where there is no such diuision the wordes of Sotus haue noâ— place so that Deuine as he is alledged by M. Doctour is aginst himselfe 10 If the Reader
aske me what indeed is the true meaning of Sotus I answere his meaning is not that the Pope is obliged iure diuÌ„ino by deuine precept to institute this or that particular Diocesse or to giue particular Bishops to euery such particular Diocesse instituted but only that when the Pope doth confirme and consecrate a Bishop and giues him charg of some particular Diocesse in such eases he doth a particular action which in generall was instituted and commanded by our Sauiour Christ who ordained in generall that in the whole Church there should alwaies be some Bishops which in effect is noe more theÌ„ we grant but cometh far short of what M. Doctor inteÌ„deth That this is the true meaning of Sotus is plaine by his onwe words For hauing taught what M. Doctour cyted out of him he proues it in this maÌ„nter Dum Dei minister id quod ipsâ— instituit ipsius iussu dâ—spensat actio est de iure diuino censenda cum autem Pupa Episcopum confirmat et consecrat alicuique attribuit Ecclesiae id exequitur quod Christus in genere instituit quodque facere iussit ergo id iuris diuini censenduÌ„ est WheÌ„ the minister of God by his command performeth that which he instituted such an action is to be esteemed of deâ—ine law But when the Pope doth confirme and coâ—secrate a Bishop â—â—d applies him to some Church he eâ—â—ecâ—â—etâ— that which Christ in generall Mâ—rke did institute which he coÌ„maÌ„dâ—d him to â—o theâ—fore suâ—â— an actioÌ„ ought to be said to be of the deuine lawe Can aâ—y thing be more deâ—re or more direct to shew that according to Sot ' the InstitutioÌ„ precept of Christ was only in gineral which is plainly for vs against M. Doctour Yet to take away all doubt Sotus bringeth this example Sacrament 〈◊〉 absilutio c. sacrameÌ„tal absolutio the like although they be immâ—dâ—aâ—ly peâ—formed by the minesters of the Chuâ—ch neuerthelesse they are to be esteemed aâ— of deuine law beâ—â—â—se Christ did â—astitute them and comâ—aâ—dâ—ed them to be so done and dispeâ—sed in his â—â—me â—â—â—vere a â—â—â—nesse by these words to â—aser our of Soâ—us that euery one hauing authority to administer sacraments were therefore by deuiâ—e law and precept bound to do it but all that could be rightly deduced according to Sotus would be that in case he did administer such sacraments such an action should be said to be de â—ure diuinâ— of the deuine law â—s a thing in generall not of humane but deuine enstitution Mariage in generall was instituted and commanded by God in the newe law by Christs institution it is a Sacraâ—â—â—t and therefore when ChristiaÌ„s marry they performe an actioÌ„ in geâ—erall commanded and instituted to be a â—â—crameÌ„â— shall we therefore out of Sotus inter that euery Christian or communite is bound to marry M. Doctonr I suppose knowes well enough why Sotus did so much vrge this manner of speach that the confirmation consecration and appling of Bishops to particular Churches is of deuine instiâ—ution The cause was more stroÌ„gly against his antagonist Catharinus to inforce the residence of Bishops to be a Deuyne and not only an Ecclesiasticall precept which precept neuertheles as Sotus himself affirmeth indeede none caÌ„deny doth not oblige in altâ—ms place therfore although Sotê° should affirm that ther were a deuine precept to apply Bishops to euery particular determinate Church yet that precept being affiâ—matiâ—â— as Deuines speak it would not bind in al occasioÌ„s as Sotê° teacheth coÌ„cerning the resideÌ„ce of Bishops Finally by this ocasion M. Dâ—â—â—er I doubt not wil be more circoÌ„spect in â—â—adging authours least he doth wrong his oâ—ne reputation the authors then deiues the reader and most of all the truth For Sotus doth not speak only of such particular Churches as are great or notable parts of the whole Church as M Doctour doth but of particular Diocesses to say that it is de â—ure â—iuâ—â— a deuine commaund that euery Diocesse haue a particular Bishop and in such maÌ„ner as for noe cause whatsoeuer it can be otherwaâ—es is a proposition farre from Sotus his thoughts which neither M. Doctour nor any other â—â—ill or can defend 11 The second authour alleadged by M. Doctour is Bannes saying that Bishops â—â—nâ—aâ— by the Pope be remooued from the whole Church or a great or not able part thereof I wonder M. Doctour would alleadge this learned deame to prooue that â—â—â—s de iure deuino to haue a Bishop in England the coutrary whereof is clearely deduced from this very authority of the same authour who hauing taught that Bishops haue all their authority immediately from the Pope frameth this obiection against himselfe That if the Bishops haue their authority immediately from the Pope it were in his power to remooue all Bishops from their Churches and so the Catholick Church should be without Bishops To this obiection BaÌ„nes answers Quòd licet Summus Pontifex posset prosâ—â— arbetrâ—tu vnum aut alterum Episcopum amouere nec in locum corum ali quem designâ—re non tamè admittenduÌ„ est quod in tota Ecclesia aut in magna eius parte taÌ„temere sua potestate abutaâ—ur Although the Pope might as he should thinke good remooue one 〈◊〉 two Bishops and designe none in their place yet it is not to be admitted that he can so rashly abuse his power in the whole Church or in a great part thereof By the only reading of Bannes his words which M. Doâ—â—our ought to baue alleadged at large not by halfes as much as might seeme for his purpose the reader will quickly perceiue that it is not de iure diuino a commandement of God that euery particular Church haue a Bishop seeing according to this Authour the Pope may leaue some Churches without Bishops Now I would aske M. Doctour whether such Churches should cease to be particular Churches and whatsoeuer he answereth will either be against his other Principle that without a Bishop there can be noâ— particular church of else if he say that they should not remaine particular Churches he must consider that then aâ—cording to Bannes it is not de iure diuiâ—o a deuire laâ— that euery Church should be a particulâ—r Church because as we haue seene Bannes teacheth that without breach of â—eâ—â—e law the Pope may leaue some churches without Bishops Besides the 〈◊〉 will see that Bannes onely speaketh of remoouing Bishops from the whole Church or from a great part of it and thence he would deduce a contrâ—rio sensu that seeing the flocke of Christ in England is farre from being a great part of the Catholick church and lesse then some one Dioâ—â—sse from which Bannes granted the Pope may remooue a Bishop yea he teacheth that all Bishops may be remooued from more Diocesses then one he would I say out of his owne assertion deduce that the Pope may not onely deny a Bishop to England but also if the thinke good remooue one already granted Moreouer the Reader caÌ„not forget how M. Doctour alleadged first Sotus as teaching that iure diuino by deuiâ—â— Precept euery particular Church must
blasphemous Arians who denâ—â—â—our deare Sauiours Deuinity in sonâ—â—iefest Catholicke citty haue free vse their abhominable churches and thâ— otherwise not onely the Bishop that shâ— ordayned in EnglaÌ„d with the whole tholicke Cleargy of that country but aâ— all Bishops of some other large Cathoâ—e Prouynces with their Cleargy shalbâ—nt to forrayne barbarous countries anâ—â—is you must doe and not be appeased 〈◊〉 though your Superiour and the Superâ—â—ur of the Bishop himselfe to wit your and his lawfull Primate togeather with ther Bishops should be of another mind and should vtterly dislike the hauing oâ— Bishop vpoÌ„ such conditions for so did â—he people of Carthage against the iudgâ—â—ent of Victor their Primate and of the â—ther African Bishops Were not this a vey pious exhortation teaching men with the same breath to desire a Bishop and disobey Bishops And yet M. Doctour in effect sayth so while very pathetically he beggs of English catholicks an imitation of the Carthaginian peoples fact 22 His second example maketh nothing to our present purpose For it telleth vs onely that the catholicks lamented and who would not haue so done when their Bishops Priests Deacons other Catholicks to the number of foure thousand nine hundred sixâ—â—e six which number why did M. Doctour omit to translate into English hauing translated the words immediately both precedent and subsequent were sent into banishment But what is all this Can we not haue Priests be baptized absolued from our sinnes buryed enioy the comfort of the holy Masse without Bishops and yet as we haue seene want of the sayd helps was that which caused such lamentations amoÌ„g those good Catholicks who at one time were depriued not onely of Bishops but also of their Preists and Deacons This example being so farre from the purpose I meruaile he would coople with it a certayne wherefore saying wherefore as for other poynts of fayth we must dye so we must dye rather then deny the Hier aroby of the church Which consisteth principally of Bishops To dye for the defence of the Hierarchie of the church is indeed sufficient cause of martyrdome but I neither vnderstand how that truth is aptly deduced from the sayd example nor can any body beleeue that he were a martyr who should dye for defence of the necessity of a Bishop in Englard or for defence of some particuler pretence of authority which a Bishop in England might make although perhapps M. Doctour might not thinke it impossible but that his booke being in English â—ome vnlearned person might take all these for one and so thinke himselfe a happy man and a martyr by defending and dying for whatsoeuer authority a particular Bishop might pretend I deleeue M. Doctour himselfe would be loath to die for such causes 23 To his third example of Trasamundus commanding noe Bishops to be ordayned in place of those that dyed that so without further persecution the churches might faâ—le I haue answered already and now will onely note M. Doctours translation of a word for his purpose Cogitantes â—uâ—â—regis iracundiam mitig andam aut coronandos etiam sidei confessione quos dignos inueniebant promotione Thinking that cyther the Kings wrath would be mitigated or that they who were found worthy of promotion should also be crowned by the câ—fession of their fayth this M. Doctour translateth with the confession of their ministery that so some might thinke it a point of martyrdome to confesse the practise of some particular Bishops pretended authority otherwise I see not why he should change fayth into ministery THE FOVRTH QVESTION whether a country although the persecution should be eâ—creased by occasion of hauing a Bishop could refuse one if it were only for the sacrament of Confirmation 1 FIRST we protest that by Gods holy assistance we doe euer will reuerence the sacrament of Confirmation noe lesse then others who nowe vpon particular designes doe so much vrge the necessity thereof And further I declate that for my particular I am ready to followe any mâ—st seuere opinions of whatsoeuer approoued Catholick Deuine when that Sacrament may conueniently be had and am persawded that in such case the neglect of so great a benefit cannot be pleasing to almighty God But to put vpon mens consciences so strict an obligation notwithstanding whatsoeuer persecution to be raised by the very occasion of enioying that Sacrament is more then can be warranted by scripture or any tradition or definition of the Church or by any Decree of any Pope or for ought I know by the testimony of any one sinâ—le Catholick Deuine whose works are come to publick view or can be prooued by any good Theologicall argument And besides this to affirme that not withstanding whatsoeuer persecution we must not only receiue that Sacrament but must haue it only from a Bishop and from a Bishop of England or bâ—longiâ—g to that Kingdome all which points M. Doctour must prooue before he prooue his intent is a thing which noe Author Thomist Scotist or Nominalist not Doctour Secular or Regular euer taught or caÌ„ enter into the deliberate thought of any reasonable Deuine much lesse is it a doctrine to be broached vpoÌ„ so weake mistaken or ill applied grounds as I hope todemoÌ„strat M. Doctours reason to be 2 True it is the Sacrament of Confirmation was instituted for giuing of grace to professe our Faith and S Thomas teacheth that by it a man receiueth augmentation S. Tho. 3. p. q. 65. a â—â—n corp and groweth which yet cannot be so vnderstood as if this Sacrament were the only meanes to attaine such spirituall groweth Tanner Tom. 4. disp 4 q 4. dub 2. n. 43. profâ—ssio fideâ— debita suo quidem tempore est necessaria sed ad quaÌ„ eliaÌ„ ord naria gratiae aâ—xilia suâ—â—iciut For the cofâ—ssio of our paith the ordinary beâ—ps of grace are suâ—â—câ—e it S. Tho. 3. p. q. 72. a. 2. ad 1. because by other Sacraments ordinary helps of almighty God we may receaue the effect of that same grace which is giuen in confirmation euery one according to the measure of grace communicated by God and secoÌ„ded with the cooperation of mans free-will as the Apostles in Pentecost in an extraordinary measure receaued the holy Ghost without the Sacrament of Confirmation rem Sacramenti sine sacarmento faith S. Thomas the grace of the Sacrament without the sacrament and the like he teacheth of those Christians of whom S. Peter Act. 11. Saieth Cùm caepissem loqui cecidit Spiritus Sanctus super cos sicut et in nos in principio when I had begun to speake the Holy Gost descended vpon them as it did vpon vs in the beginning 3 There is great difference betwixt corporall and spirituall growth Corporal growth is by augmentation or extention of Quantity and although one should neuer so much increase in health strength good colour and the like yet because these are within the compasse of the Predicament of Quality different toto genere
A MODEST BRIEFE DISCVSSION OF SOME POINTS TAVGHT BY M. DOCTOVR KELLISON IN HIS TREATISE OF THE ECCLESIASTICALL HIERARCHY BY NICHOLAS SMYTH In a Religious State a man liues more purely fals more rarely rises more speedily walks more circumspectly dies more confidently and is rewarded more aboundantly S. Bern. Hom. Sim. est regn Cael. c. Printed at ROVAN Anno. M.DC.XXX TO MY WORTHY FRIEND Mr. A. M. SrR your letter contained a request which I must needs say was to my tast bitter-sweet It could not but be pleasing as proceeding froÌ„ your selfe and yet the quality of it to my disposition could not but seeme bitter Your dem und was that I should giue a briefe Censure in generall and make some obseruations vpon such particular passages as might seeme to need explication in M. Doctour Kellison his Treatise of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy You know the naturall antipathy of my complexion with such businesses as may haue any face of Controuersy besids the want of many helpes requisite for such an employment Neuerthelesse I haue submitted my iudgement and will to your Commaund do heere present you with such notes as I haue gathered professing not to haue set downe all that occurred to my mind and to say the truth I was willing to beleeue the best for my owne ease to omit the examine of some passages which yet I might suspect would haue giuen iust aduantage I doubt not but some more diligent and exact pen will supply my defects The method I hold is to reduce all to certaine heades or Questions out of which may easily be drawne answere to the particulars for it had bene a tedious busines to answere M. Doctour line for line Yet to the end the Reader may know where to finde the answere of euery particular my seauenth Question is imployed in a suruey of M. Doctours booke chapter by chapter pointing in what Question of mine euery chapter and number of his is answered If this my labour doe not satisfy your expectation yet I doubt not but my endeauour wil be the more grateful in that for your sake I haue done my best And so you will remaine the more assured that without any exception I am wholy Your humble seruant in Christ Iesus Nicholas Smyth AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER BE pleased gentle Reader to know that the Authour of this Discussion while he liued was wholy against the publishing thereof But he being departed to a better life the lay gentleman a worthy and vertuous Catholick at whose request it was written and whome the Authour by reason of distance could not satisfy by word of mouth finding M. Doctour Kellisons Treatise to be much dispersed among all sorts of persons many of which are not able of themselues to iudge of some points therein contained as they deserue caused it as thou seest to be printed for the right information common good of Catholicks in England A TABLE OF THE QVESTIONS CONTEINED IN THIS DISCVSSION QVESTION 1. What Iudgement may be framed of M. Doctour his Treatise in generall pag. 1. Question 2. Whether without a Bishop there can be a particular Church pag. 11. Question 3. Whether by the deuine Law euery particular Church must haue a Bishop pag. 31. Question 4. Whether a Countrey although the persecution should be increased by occasion of hauing a Bishop could refuse one if it were onely for the Sacrament of Confirmation pag. 62. Question 5. Concerning M. Doctours coÌ„parison betweene Bishops Inferiour Pastours and Religious men pag. 92. Question 6. Whether Religious as Religious be of the Hierarchy of the Church pag. 163. Question 7. Whether by the precedent Questions we haue sufficiently answered M. Doctours Treatise for such Points as either deserued confutation or required explication pag. 181. THE FIRST QVESTION What iudgment may be framed of M. Doctour his treatise in generall 1. MY meaning is not to set downe what CeÌ„sure others euen Secular Priests to my certaine knowledg giue of M. Doctour his booke because my desire is to giue noe offence My owne opinion with dâ—e submission to better iudgment may be reduced to the ensuing considerations 2 It may iustly seeme strange why M. Doctour should at this very time write against Caluin concerning an argument in these daies not particularly spoken of and already most learnedly copiously and eloquently handled by diuers both in Latine and vulgar languages especially seeing men do not in M. Dâ—â—tour bâ—oke discouer any thiâ— sâ—â—g 〈◊〉 â—o◠〈◊〉 or manner and althoâ—gh here â—ere something more the â—oâ—diâ—â—â—ry yet the â—ooke coâ—ld not be puâ— into the hâ—ds of any herâ—ticle for his conuâ—â—sion vâ—lesse 〈◊〉 would haue him scâ—nâ—dized by sorâ—iâ—es of more vnâ—â—erfull disseâ—tion then â—â—â—â—ed thâ—â—e is And as for Câ—tholickes they hâ—ue no neede to be confirmeâ— in the beliefe of the Ecclesiâ—â—â—icâ—l Hierarchy Wherfore it is easy to fâ—ll vpon the trâ—e motâ—â—e of his writing that if he had vttered what he meâ—nt he should haue chaged the title and insteed of Against Caluin put Against some other PersoÌ„s whoÌ„ he thought good not to name 3 And whatsoeuer he speaketh of Charity in his Epistle and through his booke yet he could haue giuen no greater blowe against that vertue then by being the first to print a treatise in the English tongue which euery vnlearned person might vnderstand and to which he could not but expect answere whereby it would be almost impossible some office should not either be giuen or taken with returne of new answeres replies Charity more and more indamaged 4 This treatise hath renewed that no lesse improfitable then odious comparisoÌ„ betwixt the perfectioÌ„ of Secular Pastours and that of Religious men wheras it were to be wished that men should rather be carefull to perfect themselues in their seuerall callings then waxe curious in coÌ„paring them with others 5 If Regulars printed any booke it was in latin vpon a necessary occasion for their owne defence concerning one particular point the coÌ„trary of â—ll which circumstaÌ„ces concuâ—re in M. Doctour his treatise It is not M. Doctour beleeue me the way to maintaine charity is not to labour in writing of bookes in the English tongue with dedicatory epistles full of verball exhortation to charity but the true way requires no more painâ—s then only to let Religious men alone with those priuiledges of which for so many yeares they haue had peaceabâ—e possâ—ssâ—â—â— and in practise whereof they haue faithfully lâ—boured many of them in swâ—â—t of their bâ—oud by gâ—oâ—ious Mâ—â—tyrdome 6 It would also much auâ—uâ— towards the conseruation of charity if all Superiours PresideÌ„ts of Seminaries were effectâ—â—â—lly â—arefull that their subiects speake of Religious meÌ„ with due respect Charity Heli â—hough for his owne persoâ— 1. Reg. 1. a man of commâ—ndable life yet he was not free frâ— blame in not correcting his ChildreÌ„ otheâ—wise then in a cold remisse maÌ„ner as if he had bene halfe consenting to their misdemeanour whereby men
Ordinary thereof Baron Tom. 11. ann Dai. 1049. Leon. 9. ann â— n. 6. Adeò fuit saith Baroâ—ius suae Tullensis Ecclesia amator vt licet Romanus Pontifex creatus esset tamen titulum priorem non reliquerit volueritque dum vixiâ— dici etiam Tullensis Episcopus I demand whether the Church of Tull was not a particular Church or rather whether it was not a Fauourite Church singularly graced by hauing him for particular Bishop who was Pastour of the whole world If Leo onely for deuotion to that particular Church thought he did it no wrong in leauing it without any Ordinary beside himselfe with what shaddow of probâ—bâ—â—ty can any man say that England when of necessity it was destitute of Bishops could not be a particular Church and haue for immeâ—â—te partilâ—r Bishop the Successonâ— of Leo the 9. Vrbaâ—e the 8 whome I beseech God â—ong to preserue for the common good of his vniuersall Church and particular comfort of our afflicted Catholicks 10 Loreto and Recanati in Italy and the like may be said of other plâ—ces but I willingly name that most saded house wherein the eternall Word was made flesh and dwelled in vs are two distincte Diocesses vnder one Bishop and my Lord Bishop once styled himselfe Ordinary both of England and Scotland beside the Church of Chalcedon ergo euery particular Church need not haue it owne particular distinct Bishop much more may the Pope be particular Bishop of more theÌ„ one Church In the Church of God there are many places persons exempt from the iurisdiction of al Bishops beside the Pope neither did any maÌ„ euer dreame that for that câ—use they ceased to be particular Churches Rather such exaÌ„ptions were accouÌ„ted fauours such immeâ—iat subiectioÌ„ to the Pope a great honourâ—til now M. Doctour tels the world that the Church of Saiui Iohn Lateâ—an of Tull of all exempted places persoÌ„s neither haue bene nor shal be particular Churches till they be taken from the Popes particular chardge and put in the hands of some other Bishop that in coâ—setence they are oblâ—ged to endure whatsoeuer presecution for the enioying such a Bishop 12 I thinke M. Doctour wil not say if a Bishop vpon iust causes should take the particular care of some one parish gouerne it by his delegates or Chaplines himselfe remayning the only Ordinary Pastour of it that it should therefore ceâ—se to be a particular parish or if a King to grace some city or Prouince of his Kingdom should make himselfe the particular gouernour of such a prouince or city that therefore they should not be particular cityes or prouinces and the like may be sayd of a Generall of an army in respect of some particular Regiment with what reason then can we say that the Pope who is Bishop of the whole Church may not also be particular Bishop of some one country and that country still remaine a particular Church Truly I cannot imagin vpon what ground any man can frame such a conceit except vpon this inference The Pope is vniuersall Bishop of the vniuersal Church ergo he cannot be particular Bishop of a particular Church because vniuersal and particular are termes incompatible and repugnant to be in one and the same person or subiect To which argument I will vouchsafe noe other answere then that it seemeth the very same forme of disputing which hereticks vulgarly vse against Catholicks as vttering contradictories and non-sence while we ioyne together Ecclesia Catholica Romana the vniuersall Roman Church because forsooth a Church Vniuersal and Particular are contradictory tearmes 13 But let vs suppose that which caÌ„ neuer be proued or rather the coÌ„trary wherof is most manifest let vs I say suppose that the Pope cannot be a particular Bishop of a particular church I aske whether for the existeÌ„ce of a particular church it be not sufficieÌ„t that it be gouernd by such as froÌ„ his Holines receiue Delegated power for al occasions that may require iurisdictioÌ„ If he affirme that such a particular Church may be then I inferre that a Bishop is not necessary for the making a particular Church because whatsoeuer iurisdictioÌ„ any Bishop hath the like may be grated to others not Bishops If he deny that Delegate authority is sufficient to make a particular Church then he must shew me how England by hauing a Bishop is yet become a particular Church if so it be that the sayd Bishop be onely Delegate and not Ordinary of place of all sortes of persons both Catholickes and hereticks not onely ad beneplacitum c. as Scriptures Fathers and Canons speake of Bishops which power my Lord of Chalcedon doth not challenge and M. Doctour professeth to abstayne from that whole controuersie and so he must eyther answere his owne argument or else confesse that as yet we are no particular Church 14 My last taske was to shew that although we shoulâ— freely yeild our selues to be no particular Church without a Bishop yet it were not sufficient to prooue that a Bishop could not be refused by reason of persecution This is easily done by requiring of M. Doctour that which of his owne accord he should first of all haue performed namely seeing he will needs haue a particular Church to be only that which hath a particular Bishop he ought to bring some precept of God or the Church obligeing vs to be a particular Church in his sense and why it is not sufficient for vs to be members of the Catholicke Church in obedieÌ„ce to our Supreame Pastour the Vicar of Christ as our constant Confessours and glorious Martyrs before we had a Bishop liued in sâ—nctity and dyed for iustice in profession of the Catholicke fayth 15 Neyther were this sufficientâ— though it be more then euer he wil be able to performe vnlesse he could further prooue that such a precept were vndispensable or did binde with whatsoeuer inconuenience because there are many deuine precepts for example Vowes materiall Integrity of Confession Residence of Bishops c. which do not binde alwayes nor in all cases or are not by the Vicar of Christ dispensable and vntill he haue prooued this his imaginary precept not to be of such a kinde he is as neere as he was For certainâ—ly if any cause may yeild a lawfull excuse or require dispensation a iust feaâ—e of loosing goods liberty and life which case M. Doctour directly supposeth in his assertioÌ„ may yeild a most reasonable excuse oâ— cause of dispensation and for the transgressour plead not guilty 16 The reason which M Doctour added that as the whole Church hath one Supreame Bishop to gouerne it so euery particular Church also must haue us Bishop or Bishops else it should not be a particular Church and so tâ—e whole and Vniuersall Church should no as Christ hath instituted be a Hierarchie composeâ— of diuers particular Churches deâ—erâ—eâ—n no answere For who dare say that there is as much necessity or obligation to haue a Bishop
must iure diuino haue an Ordinarie because by the deuine law beside the Supreme Pastour there must be in the Church of God other Ordinaries And this be saide concerning such arguments as M. Doctour hath in his 14 chapter Let vs now examine those of his 13. chapter 17 What he alleadgeth out of Suarez to prooue that the gouernment of the Church by Bishops speaking in generall cannot be altered by the Church is most true Only I wish M. Doctour had not so abruptly broken of Suarez his discourse who being to prooue that in a Monarchy there must be not only one supreme but also other inferiour as it were Princes of the Church saith thus the minor is declared both because a monarchy must haue somthing admixt of Aristocracy because there must be in the Church many Princes vnder one the first Thus he cyteth Suarez against all Grammar not giuing any word answering to both which therefore I must do and tell the reader that in Suarez there followe immediatly these words tum etiaÌ„ quia in rep Christana erat hoc maximè necessarium nam est amplissima vniuersalissima eius regimen est spirituale internum quod non fit exactè â—â—si per proprios Pastores Principes Ecclesiae also because in the Christian commoÌ„ wâ—lth this to haue some other Bishops beside the supreme Pastour was most necessarie because it is most large most vniuersall the gouernment of it is spirituall and internall which is not exactly pâ—rformed but by proper Pastours Princes of the Church If M. Doctour had not omitted this reâ—sâ— Imcane the amplitude and vniuersality of Christes Church the reader might haue seene that what Suarez affirmed with all Deuines of the necessity to haue some Bishops in the Church in generall could not be verified of the catholick Church in England which is neither amplissima nor vniuersalissima mostlarge nor most vneuersall neither doth the want of a Bishop in EnglaÌ„d infer that the Church shall not be a perfect Monarchie gouerned by one supreme Pastour other inferiour Ecclesiasticall Princes in some parts of it For England is not the whole world You see theÌ„ that I had reason to wish Suarez had bene by M. Doctour cited not by halfes for he being entirely cited makes for vs against him 18 His examples drawne from the African church may be answered all at once if we consider First that examples prooue little vnlesse we were sure that all circumstances concurre alike and as those of Africke could best iudge what was fit for that Church so English men can best tell how things stand in England and what is most expedient for that Church Secondly it is cleere their case was farre different from ours in England For the African Bishops and people had open meetings yea the Bishops celebrated Councels The Catholcks were many publicke or rather the whole face of the country was catholicke They had their knowne Primate and other Bishops and lastly which I desire the reader still to obserue if there had not bene Bishops in Africke their Church would haue wholy fâ—yled because for ordayning of Priests they had noe such meanes as England by the mercifull goodnesse of God and singular care of Popes haue had and still enioy with such education for Cleargy men as God grant we may retayne the like if England be catholicke For other helps also there was not betwixt Africke and Rome that entercourse which wee now enioy 19 And by this last obseruation is answered a demand of M. Doctour in his 14. chap. num 2. Why the Popes and Bishops in the Primatiue Church were so diligent in consecrating Bishops yeâ— and making Popes euen in the middest of the greatest persecutions but that they thought it was iuris diuini that euery church should haue its Bishop The true reason was because in those times euery country needed his owne Bishop for ordayning of Priests and the like without which their churches could not subsist least of all could the vniuersall Catholicke Church subsist without a head the Pope and I wonder at M. Doctour his yea and making Popes in his foresaid demaund as if it were more strange that Popes then that particular Bishops should be ordayned in time of persecution 20 All this that I haue said of the different case betwixt Africke and England is cleere out of the history and wordes alleadged by M. Doctour himselfe which I cyted in the beginning of this question and in particular of this last mayne difference you shall fiâ—de in Baronius Anno â—04 these wordes Eo consilio ista preceperat Trasamundus vt absque exerto ad persequendum gladio ipsae Orthodoxorum Eccelsiae aliquo temporis spatio orbatae vniuersae Pastoribus sponte concidereat To that end Trasamundus had commanded those thinges namely that no more Bishops should be ordayned in the place of those that dyed to the end that without dint of sword the Catholicke Churches being all for some space of tyme destitute of Pastours might of themselues fall And for this reason Baronius sayd what hope could there remayne for the churches when their foundations to wit the Bishops were taken away And this I hope will satisfie the iudicious reader that the three examples drawne from the African Church prooue nothing for our case in England yet by way of supererogation I will touch euery one of them apart 21 Concerning the first of the peoples crying on t for a Bishop for the Church of Certhage which Hunericus offered them but vpon condition that the Arians of Constantinople might enioy the free vse of their Churches otherwise not onely the Bishop that should be ordayned in Carthage with his cleargy but also all other Bishops of the Africanâ— prouinces with their cleargy should be sent to the Moores I aske M. Doctour whether in good earnest he thinke it necessary or lawfull rather to admit such conditioÌ„s then â—o lec a particular Diocesse as Carthâ—ge was be without a Bishops I doe not beleeue but he will grant that it is not lawfull at least Victor Primate of all Africke with other Bishops was of opinion that vpon such conditions a Bishop wos not to be desireâ— Interpositâ—s his Conditionibus c. say they with such conditions as these the church of Carthage is not willing to haue a Bishop And therefore the people who with such a resolution cryed for a Bishop did either hope that the threatned conditions would not take effect or else their zeale is more to be admired then imitated Wherefore when M. Doctour out of his zeale also to haue a Bishop num 7. turnes his speach to Catholicks in England desiring them to imitate this zeale of the Carthaginians for a Bishop to imprint it in their hearts although it must be with characters of their owne blood doth in effect say O my deere câ—â—atrymen you Catholicks of EnglaÌ„d be sure to cry for a Bishop although it were vpon condition 〈◊〉 the
from the Predicament of Quantity a man notwithstanding whatsoeuer improouement in the foresaid Qualityes might still remaine but a dwarfe vnlesse he increased also in Quantity But our souse is a spirit the groâ—th of it â—onsisteth in â—usâ—â—fying grace which is of the same nature and offence by whatsoeueâ— sacrament or meritorious worke â—t be giuen and therfore is not ryed to one meanes but may and is afforded by diuâ—rs as neither the actuall helps or motions of graâ—e are necâ—ssarily to boâ—â—d to one sacrament that they cannot likewise be giuen for and by the receiuing of other 4 S. Thomas saith S. Tho. 2.2 q. 18 4 a. 3. ad 3. If we compare the voluntary perfection of following the Enangelicall Counsells for the remoouing of all impediments of the acts of charity which is the perfection of Religious state with that other necessary perfection of keepng the commandements remouing only those impediments whereby we forfet the grace of God and charity to which perfection all Christians are obliged it is as if we should compare a man of perfect growth with a child I demand of M. Doctour whether hence it follow that all must be Religious meÌ„ least otherwise they be like children without perfect growth as M. Doctour avoucheth the necessity of confirmation least otherwise we be without perfect growth stil like to children And that this example and demand is not wholy impertinent I must craue leaue giuing God all the glory to say that a Religious state considering the secure meanes it hath of vncessant enâ—re as in grace by continuall merit of good workes and frequent receiuing of other sacraments doth strengthen a man not to fâ—â—le in persecution noe lesse then the only receiuing of Confirmation commonly may be thought to strengthen people lining amoung continuall dangers distraction in the world alwaies supposed that the same sacrament be not by such Religious men culpably omitted and yet he were to blame who for this reason of greater growth would be as forward as M. Doctour in imposing I know not what obligatioÌ„s notwithstanding whatsoeuer persecution 5 Baptisme the most necessary of all sacraments may be supplyed by death vndergonne for the profession of our faith when the sacrament it selfe cannot be had Persecution is the neerest participation of martyrdome and may well be tearmed a lingring death or martyrdome therefore we may confide in the goodnesse of our God for whose sake we suffer that lie will not forsake vs for want of that sacrament which we cannot haue without increase of our many afflictions and will effect that the same pressure be ioyntly a wound and a cure in vertue of his sweete prouidence who facit cum tentatione prouentum out of miseries drawes increase of merit especially we being still in such disposition and humble subiectioÌ„ to his Deuine will that if we were once a certained of his greater glory and good of soules by hauing a Bishop in England onely for the Sacrament of Confirmation which is our present question we would rather hazard goods liberty and life as by his grace for other matters we freely doe then not performe therein his most blessed will 6 The times haue bene when our persecution was most bitter and yet would to God we now could behould the zeale feruour charity and constancy which in those daies without the sacrament of CoÌ„firmation Catholicks shewed I hold it noe rashnesse to affirme that since EnglaÌ„ds enioying a Bishop more harme hath befallen Catholicks in generall by disagreement and frequent breach of charity then they haue receaued commodity by the onely sacrament of Confirmation administred to a few and that more haue bene in danger to fall by these dissentions then for want of the sayd sacrament 7 Yet put câ—se that some perhaps haue or hereafter might fall for want of confirmation the whole body of Catholicks is not obliged to vndergoe a generall persecution for auâ—yding the particular damage of a few whose fal is voluntary to be ascribed only to theÌ„selues because they make not vse of other meanes and sacraments which may be had in England and through their owne negligence and liberty of life do not cooperate with that particular grace and assistance of Almighty God which hitherto his goodnesse hath in aboundance offered to English Catholicks without the sacrament of confirmation M. Doctour knowes that when the danger and occasion of sinne is eyther not proximum imminent and such as morally will not be auoided or else not of any determinate time person or place but obely in generall that such a state or function morally speaking wil be occasion of sinne although euery particular occasion may be either auoided or ouercome he knowes I say that both a coÌ„monwealth may tollerate such a state either for attaining some greater good or auoiding some notable inconuenience and also particular meÌ„ may without sinne embrace such a course of life for example of a souldiâ—r or the like Much more then the danger of falling for want of Confirmation being neither proximum not of any determinat person time place or occasion or which may not either be auoided or ouercome by other meanes Catholicks are not obliged for auoiding of such remote and vncertaine voluntary dangers of a few to to cast themselues vpon present certavne and greate inconueniences Nay if I should affirme that more might be in danger to fall by encrease of persecution voluntarily drawne vpon themselues then for want of Confirmation and that therefore catholicks could not in conscience admit a Bishop only for Confirmation supposing as our present supposition is that the persecution should be encreased by that occasion how would M. Doctour demonstrate that my coniecture and argument were not as good or better then his For wee know that in persecution some haue fallen but we cannot knowe that their fall was for want of Confirmation But I will not imitate M. Doctour in multiplying precepts vpon vncertainties nor forestall the decrees of Superiours by denouÌ„cing aforehand what in conscience they must do vnlesse they will breake a deuine precept 8 Well but suppose Confirmation were as necessary as he will haue it must we therefore of necessity haue a Bishop It is strange M. Doctour neuer obiected to himselfe that Confirmation by particular commission from the Pope may be administred by a Priest S. Tho. 3. p. q. 72. a. 11. which he knowes to be the doctrine of S. Thomas common among Deuines in somuch as a learned moderne writer teacheth that the coÌ„trary is lesse or not at all probable Tanner â—oin 4 diss 4. q. 4. dul 3. asseâ—â— 3. adding that the sayd common doctrine hath bene practised not onely by Grâ—gory the Greate our Apostle but often by other Popes also that at this present it is practised in the indyes that some Abbots by particular Priuiledge may conferre the sard Sacrament as the Congregation of Cardinals haue declared vpon the 7 session of the Councell of
Trent that the same doctrine is declayed in the Councell of Florence decreto vnionts I haue bene credibly informed that the Abbot of Monte Cassino of the holy order of S. Bennet hath authority to confirme and Petrus Arcudius in a learned volume written of the agreement betwixt the Latine Pelr. Arcudius de concordia Ecclesâ—e Ocâ—idemalis Oâ—â—etalis in sâ—ptâ—m Sacramen or iâ— administration 〈◊〉 â— 2 cap. and Greeke Church in the administration of the seauen Sacraments witnesseth that in the hearing of diuers other of the Greeke Colledge in Rome he was told by a graue Father of the Society of Iesus by name Petrus Fonseca who came to Rome the yeare 1593. that some principal meÌ„ of the sayd Order had authority to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation and further the same Father certainely auouched that himselfe was wont to administer the said SacrameÌ„t in Brasile where there was kept the Popes Graunt of such authority Also the same Arcudius writes that others relate how Adrian the 6 a very learned and pious Pope the yeare 1521. vpon the 25. of Aprill graunted for the Indies and countrie destitute of Bishops that Priests Minorites might confirme and that an Authenticall of the Graunt is kept at Seuill in the conuent of glorious S. Francis his Order Moreouer Arcudius alleadgeth ancieÌ„nt Greeke Fathers to prooue that euen before the schisme it was the practise of the Greeke Church to haue confirmation administred by Priests with particular commission to that effect And to take away all scruple Ita Suarez coninck Henriquez quos citat sâ—quitur Pauâ—us â—atâ—â—â— lib. 5. trâ—ctâ—t 3. cap. â— a. 1 some great Deuines doe teach that although such commission ought not to be graÌ„ted without iust cause yet it is of force and valid howsoeuer it be graunted because it is not properly a dispensaâ—ion in the lawe of Christ but rather a commission of power according to Christs insticution which is that the Extraordinary Minister of Confirmation should be a Priest by coÌ„mission from the supreame Pastour of Gods Church If M. Doct. hold against the common doctrine of Deuines and practise of most learned and holy Popes who haue committed the Sacrament of confirmation to Priests then he must vndertake a new and hard taske and prooue that euen for that slender probability which his opinion hath if it hath any Catholicks must rather suffer increase of persecution then not make all sure by hauing a Bishop for coÌ„firmation which is a thing he will neuer be able to prooue espcially seeing Popes content themselues with the said doctrine euen in countries where Bishops might be emoyed with lesse danger then in England 9 Yet although we should grant that Catholicks were bound to receiue the Sacrament of Confirmation and to receiue it from a Bishop it followes not that it must be had from a Bishop subiect at least to all those penall lawes which are enacted against English Catholicks and Priests For matters might be so disposed as some Bishop from abroad and onely taking England â—s it were by the way might coÌ„firme more in three moneths then my Lord of Chalcedon in seauen yeares according to the proportion kept since the tymes waxed more hard especially if such a Bishop did administer Confirmation to children according to the common practise of the Church in auntient times and of the Easterne Church at this day and as some relate of some countrey neerer vs where children two or three yeares old are wont to be confirmed See Layman lib. 5. tract 3. cap. 6. n. 1. which practise may seeme very fit for our countrey both because Confirmation cannot often and easily be had and also that by this meanes children during the time of innocency when they are sure to receiue the grace of the Sacrament might be armed against the dangers of future persecution But in this if any difficulty appeare his Holinesse would vouchsafe to ordaine what might be most expedient for the particular case of England and by this meanes within some compasse of yeares most Catholicks liuing would finde themselues to haue the Sacrament of Confirmation 10 Further if we did yeild to M. Doctour that for some sort of persecution though very great we ought not to want the Sacrament of confirmation yet when the persecution is of such nature that it hindereth the Bishop from administring that very Sacrament for which he comes except but to a fewe no man can with reason say that such a persecution doth not excuse from obligation of receuing that Sacrament from a Bishop That our persecution is of this quality experience tels vs. 11 Moueroner we must still remember the nuÌ„ber of Catholickes in England which I haue touched in the precedent question and that of those Catholicks all the clergy haue had Confirmation abroad as likewise diuers of the layety either in Seminaries or otherwise in theâ—r trauels those who are in England being so secret and dispersed as they are diuers of them could scarcely haue that Sacrament although a Bishop should be still in England all which considered we shall finde that the nuÌ„ber of those who want and can receiue the foresaid Sacrament is not so great as at first sight may seeme therefore still the difficulty on M. Doctors side is greater to prooue that for such a nuÌ„ber it is necessary to haue a Bishop for ConfirmatioÌ„ although by that meanes the persecutioÌ„ should be increased against all 12 Finally though we should grant all and more then with reason can be desired yet M. Doctour will not haue prooued his intent till first he effect an impossibility namely that this his opinion which he is the first to put in print is so euident and certaine that the contray is voide of probability For till then Catholicks are sure they may with a safe consience keepe their goods liberties and liues for some more necessary and better warranted oâ—casion by conforming their practise to the coÌ„trary of that which M. Doctour teacheth especially seeing he himselfe in his 14. chap. n. 3. doth but fearefully deliuer this doctrine saying I am of opinion which I humbly sâ—bmit to authority that a particulâ—r Church cannot except any long time against hauing a Bishop for feare of persecution And n 8. he only sayth I thinke neyther any Country nor any one of the Country for feare of persecutioÌ„ can oppose against the comming in of a Bishop though thereby only the sacrament of Confirmation should be wanting We see according to his owne confession it is but his opinion and thinking which I hope he will not not binde all other to followe although it were in deede probable as I haue demonstrated it not to be 13 And I should wish M. Doctour to be of my mind if it were but least otherwise he might seeme to dissent in iudgment from my Lord of Chalcedon himselfe who vpon occasion of speach about some authority nothing touching Confirmation which his Lordship pretended said plainely that
vnlesse he did compasse those pretences he would leaue all which my Lord a man of so great learning and zeale would neuer haue vttered if he had conceiued the very receiuing of Confirmation to be of so great necessity that for it alone all Catholicks are obliged to endure increase of persecution for if the matter be so that sacrament alone were likewise a verie sufficient cause of my Lords stay in England although other pretences should not sucseede especially it being a certaine doctrine of Deuâ—nes that Bishops haue greater obligation to administer Confirmation then people to receue it Moreouer seeing my Lord hath stiled himselfe Ordinary of Scotland doubtlesse he would extend his charity to that kingdome if he were of M. Doct. opinion coÌ„cerning the necessity of Confirmation in a countrey groaning vnder a heauy persecution as at this present the Catholicks of Scotland do and therfore stand in greater neede of that Sacrament Neither do I thinke M. Doctour will condemne of deadly sinne the Catholicks of Scotland for not seeking to haue a Bishop to administer that Sacrament or my Lord of Chalcedon for not going to administer it But now let vs see what M. Doctour in his 14. chapter where he handleth this point doth bring in proofe of his doctrine 14 His first argument is because without confirmation we cannot be perfect Christians seeing according to S. Thomas by confirmation we receiue our perfect growth To this I haue already answered now onely wish the reader to be mindfull that according to S. Thomas confirmation and consequently the effect thereof for example perfect growth and whatsoeuer else may be had without a Bishop and so if M. Doctour will sticke to S. Thomas his opinion must go downe 15 Then he alleadgeth S. Clement Epist 4. saying thus Omnibus ergo festinandum est sine morarenasci Deo demum consignari ab Episcopo id est septiformem gratiam Spiritus Sancti percipere quia incertus est vniuscuiusque exitus vitae Quum autem regeneratus fuerit per aquam postmodum septiformis spiritus gratia ab Episcopo confirmatus quia aliter perfectus esse Christianus nequaquam poterit c. 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 seuenfold grace of the Holy Ghost because the end of euery ones life is vncertaine But when he shal be regenerated by water and afterwards confirmed by the Bishop with the seuenfold grace of the Spirit because otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian c. To this authority I answere 16 First M. Doctour should not haue grounded so hard a doctrine vpon an Epistle which I suppose he knoweth not to be so authenticall as to settle thereon a doctrinall point as he may see by Bellarmine in his booke de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Secondly I may answere out of Estius in that very place which M. Doctour cyted out of him for the necessity of confirmation in time of persecution and it seemeth not faire dealing to bring Estius as farre as he seemeth for his purpose and not so much as take notice or confute what in the same authour in the same place and to the same purpose he finds against him Estius therefore obserueth that the Fathers when they say that without Confirmation faithfull people are not perfectly or fully Christians doe generally allude to the name of Christ which signifieth Annoynted therefore they deny that they are fully Christians who haue not receiued Episcopall Vnction namely hauing reference to the word Christians as S. Augustinel 17. ciuit cap. 4. sayth that all who are annoynted with Chrisme may rightly be called Christi Christs By this is clearâ— on what sense the words of Clement cyted by M. Doctour are to be vnderstood Thus farre Estius whom M. Doctour highly commends for a learned and holy man the reader may see how directly he doth not onely answere M. Doctours argument but also saith that it is cleare in what sense the words of S. Clement are to be vnderstood It seemes a hard case when M. Doctour is forced to alleadge Estius as his chiefe Authour for the necessity of Confirmation as afterwards we shall see who in the very same place destroyeth a maine groâ—d brought by M. Doctour for the necessity of the same Sacrament Thirdly there occurreth an answere clearely deduced out of S. Clements owne words and I doubt not but will fully satisfye the learned reader The common practise of the antient Church was and is yet in the Easterne Church and at Rome when conuerted lewes or Turkes arâ— solemnely baptized together with Baptisme to giue the Sacrament of Confirmation and so whosoeuer in those times was not confirmed wanted also Baptisme hence S. Clement might well say that he that was not baptized and confirmed was not a perfect Christian But this is farre from proouing that without confirmation as separated from Baptisme we cannot be perfectly Christians This sense is manifest if we ponder S. Clements words for hauing sayd All must make haste to be regenerated to God and then to be consigned by the Bishop he sayth not afterwards But when he shal be confirmed by the Bishop because otherwise he cannot be a perfect christian but still ioyneth it with baptisme and sayth But when he shal be regenerated by water and afterwards confirmed by the Bishop because otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian stil as I said repeating together both those sacraments because they were wont to be administred at one time and whosoeuer had or wanted one infallibly had or wanted both of them in that manner it was all one to say one was not confirmed as to say he was not baptized Besides S. Clements discourse All must make hast to be regenerated to God and then to be consigned by the Bishop because the end of euery ones life as vncertaine makes it cleare that his speach is of Baptisme For howesoeuer necessary Confirmation be yet certainely it is not of so great hast as S. Clement vrgeth yea it is cheâ—fly for those who are to liue haue occasion to professe there faith as S. Thomas alledgeth out of Pope Melchiades S. Tho. 3. p. q. 72. a. 8. 〈◊〉 4. therefore it had bene an vnfit reason of S. Clement to hasten men to confirmation because the end of euery ones life is vncertaine for as I said the lesse certainety we haue of life and more vicinity to death the lesse necessity we haue of Confirmation but for Baptisme his reason of the vncertainty of mans last end is very fit and vrgent therefore it is cleare S. Clements speach is refered to the sacrament of Baptisme My fourth answere is that S. Clement is not faithfully alledged by M. Doctour For S. Clement after he had said When he shal be regenerated by water and afterward Confirmed by the Bishop with the seuenfold grace of the Spirits because otherwise he
my Lord in that particular challenged an authority not due he might in some occasion practise a Right granted as due Finally if such Authority be not practizable why should it be pretended especially with so great feare and offence of many worthy Catholicks Rather the very pretending it will put men in feare that something else is intended beside a bare power neuer to be practised But as I sayd my meaning is not to meddle with my Lords Authority further theÌ„ is necessary for Discussion of some propositions deliuered by M. Doctour concerning that point 14 Num. 11. He endeauours to prooue that Religious neede not feare least my L. Bishop incroach vpon their Priuiledges and that although there be some difference betwixt him and them concerning approbation yet they neede not feare their other Priuiledges as if their other Priuiledges were more priuiledged then this or had power to hinder men from making whatsoeuer clayme against them Rather by what hath bene attempted in one we may coniecture what may befall the other Num. 12. He sayth there are no other lawes against a Bishop then are already enacted and in force against Priests and Religious What the lay gentlemen who are skilfull in the moderne and antient lawes of England iudge of the particular danger to which they might be hable if they should accept my Lord as Ordinary M. Doctour will finde in their sayd letter That which more properly belongs to me is that although there were in this the same reason of a Bishop and Priests yet the necessity of hauing Priests and a Bishop is not alike Without the one we cannot haue remission of our sinnes the holy Sacrifice of the Masse the blessed Sacrament of the Aultar c. Without the other we may haue all things euen the Sacrament of Confirmation for as for ordaining Priests in England it is neither needfull nor for any thing I know practised by my Lord of Chalcedon 15 And thus hauing set downe some few of those many things which might haue bene obserued in M. Doctours Treatise I will make an end if first I haue sincerly told the reader what was my wish when I vndertooke this Discussion and what at this present my harty desire is I hope in God for euer shall be My wish at the first was That rather then I should vtter any thing in diminution of Charity in disparagement of sacred Episcopall Dignity in preiudice of the common good of Catholicks Almighty God would forbid my penne to cast inke and if that were not enough benumbe my right hand as it happened to the Emperour Valens while he was penning a Decree to banish that holy Monk and Bishop S. Basil the Great out of his Church My present desire is that howsoeuer Regulars may by some be esteemed to oppose for their own ends the hauing a Bishop in englaÌ„d or some authority by him chaleÌ„ged yet in testimony of the contrary I who acknowledg my selfe of all others the most imperfect am not so insensible of the good of soules but that I would most willingly spend my bloud for the purchasing of times sutable with the enioying of a Catholick Bishop in England endued with as much Authority as any particular Bishop in the whole Church of God And vpon this happy condition I cordially wish that the last moment of writing these lines might prooue the longest tearme of my life FINIS Faults escaped in the printing Page Line Fault Correction 22 6 Diocesses Diocesse 44 1 he doth wronge he wronge 64 1 reason reasons 95 24 meanes measure ibid 25 measure meanes 110 1 sayd truely said this truly 123 15 as man a man 131 17 Relious Religious 151 Add in the margent ouer against the word S. Hierome this Note Ep. 22. de Custod virg ad Eustoch  Â