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 frō 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 [Page]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 wilbe 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 cō ­parison betweene Bishops, Inferiour Pa­stours, and Religious men. pag. 92.
  • Question 6. Whether Religious, as Religi­ous, [Page]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 Cē ­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 d [...]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 [Page 2]men do not in M. D [...]tour b [...]oke dis­couer any thi [...], s [...]g [...], [...]o [...] [...], or manner, and altho [...]gh here [...]ere some­thing more the [...]o [...]di [...]ry, yet the [...]ooke co [...]ld not be pu [...] into the h [...]ds of any he­r [...]ticle for his conu [...]sion, v [...]lesse [...] would haue him sc [...]n [...]dized, by sor [...]i [...]es of more vn [...]erfull disse [...]tion, then [...]ed th [...]e is. And as for C [...]tholickes, they h [...]ue no neede to be confirme [...] in the be­liefe of the Ecclesi [...]ic [...]l Hierarchy: Wher­fore it is easy to f [...]ll vpon the tr [...]e mot [...]e of his writing, that if he had vttered what he me [...]nt he should haue chaged the title, and insteed of (Against Caluin) put A­gainst some other Persōs, whō 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, [Page 3]Charity more, and more indamaged.

4 This treatise hath renewed, that no lesse improfitable, then odious comparisō, betwixt the perfectiō 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 cō ­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 cōtrary of [...]ll which circumstāces concu [...]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 pain [...]s, then only to let Religious men alone, with those priuiledges, of which for so many yeares they haue had peaceab [...]e poss [...]ss [...], and in practise whereof they haue faith­fully l [...]boured, & many of them in sw [...]t of their b [...]oud, by g [...]o [...]ious M [...]tyrdome.

6 It would also much au [...]u [...] towards the conseruation of charity, if all Superi­ours, [Page 4]& Presidēts of Seminaries, were effe­ct [...]lly [...]arefull, that their subiects speake of Religious mē with due respect, & Cha­rity. Heli [...]hough for his owne perso [...],1. Reg. 1. a man of comm [...]ndable life, yet he was not free fr [...] blame, in not correcting his Chil­drē, othe [...]wise then in a cold remisse māner as if he had bene halfe consenting to their misdemeanour, whereby men were auer­ted frō the Sacrifices of God; as S. Thomas auoucheth,S. Thom. 2.2. q. 184. [...]7.8. Religion to be the most perfect of all Sacrifices, an Holocaust.

7 This treacise cannot [...]e pleasing to the Holy Sea Apostolick, frō whence it had bin good māners for vs to learne, what is by Christs i [...]stitution necessary for Gods Church ingeneral, & expediēt in particular cōcerning our hauing a Bishop in Englād. But to tel euery mā, & womā, in a lāguage 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 [Page 5]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 wilbe 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 cōdemned of mortal sinne, by refusing so longe time a Bishop, against the law of God, & for being occasiō, 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: 14 [...]. [...]. nor any one of the country, for feare of persecutiō, 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 wilbe able to iudge by what shalbe said in the follo [...]wing questions, as also how litle probability his [Page 6]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 ty [...]e see some printed treatise of the Sa­ [...]rament of Confirmation, and the gene­rall [Page 7]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 hel [...] 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 pr [...]dence, he proo­ueth his conclusion by principl [...]s more harsh, and incredible, then the conclusion it selfe. For example, to prooue the ne­cessity of a Bi [...]hop in Eng [...]and he serueth himselfe of these strāge, & vntoward pro­positiōs: That it is de iure diui [...], a deuine Law for euery such p [...]rticular Church, as England is, to haue a B [...]hop: That with­out a Bishop England cannot be a pa [...]ti­cular Church: That vnlesse euery [...]rticu­lar Church haue is Bishop, or Bishops, the whole, and Vniuersall C [...]urch should not [Page 8](as Christ hath instituted) be a Hierarchie cōposed 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 [...]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 thē, which being grā ­ted also to Religious, they may performe the same actions no lesse then Seculars, as in due place shalbe declared. In other points likewise, he speaketh, not so distin­ctly as a schollar would expect.

14 But the thing at which I most wōder, in a mā of his learning, is that those Fathers, & schoole Deuines, which he produceth for witnesses of his doctrine, are indeed against himselfe,S [...] quest. [...].3. [...]. as the reader wil see in his allega­tiō of S. Cyprian, S. Clemēt, Sotus, Bānes et [...].

[Page 9] 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 & extern [...], 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 [Page 10]would prooue the necessty of a Bi­shop in England, either proo [...]e nothing at all, or else more then he himselfe in [...]en­deth, or my Lord of Chalcedon chall [...]geth (namely that he must haue authority [...]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 [...]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 anciēt Fathers, the doctrine of all Catholicks concerning the necessity of hauing some Bishops in Gods Church, cōcerne 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 argumēts. But least I may seeme to wrong so learned a mā, I desire the reader not to giue me cre­dit till in the following seuerall Questions, he finde by particulars, the truth of what [Page 11]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 argumēts is nū. 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 shalbe a flocke with out a Pastour, [...] ­army without a General, a ship without a Py­lot, a speritualkingdō without asperitualking, a family without a Goodman of the house.

2 This assertion he prooueth out of S. Cyprian, who sayth:Cypr. ep [...]. 69. ad [...]. that the Church is Sacerdo [...]i plebs adunata, et Pastori suo grex [...] ar [...]us, the Churches the people vrit [...]d to [Page 12]the Pre [...] (Bishop) and the flocke adhe­ring [...]to its P [...]our. In the sime place M Do [...]to [...] a lioy [...] this reason, that as the [...]h [...]le Church hath me supre [...]me Bi­shop to gouerne it, so [...]ry particular Church must haue its Bishop [...] Bishops else it should not he a particular Church, and so the whole, and vn [...] sa [...] 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 [Page 13]a [...]rticular Church) [...]et it could not proue hi [...] [...]ent, [...] particular country may not rosuse Bish [...]ps by reason of persecution.

4 For the first, it might be answered in a word, that S. [...]pr [...]m doth not define the Church to be the people vnited, and the flocke adbering to a particular Priest, and Pastour, but onely in [...]iffi [...]itely to the Priest, and Pastour, which is verified, as long as we haue for our Bishop, & Pastour the Pope of Rome Besides, S. Cypriā speaks of Ordinary Pastors with power ouer both places, & persons, Catholicks, & here [...]icks [...]per­manently, and not onely ad b [...]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 [...]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 Nouatiā heretick, and with too much credulity, and teme­rity, had giuen credit to certayne fa [...]sly re­ported crimes against S. Cypriā, for which he esteemed that the Saint ought to haue [Page 14]beene fors [...]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 ha [...]i [...]g its true, and lawfull Bishop, as S. C [...]prian was, yet de­uiding it selfe, and falling in schisme with him, is indeed [...]oe Church at all, but a schismaticall congiegatiō. 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 [...]llic Petrus supra quem adificatafuit Ecclesia; Ecclesia nomine docēs et ofterdes, quia et si contumax ac superba obedire nolemiū mult [...]udo dis­cedat, Ecclesiatamē à Christo non recedit, et illi simt Ecclesia pl [...]bs [...]acerdoti adunata, et Pastori sui grex adhaerens: vnde scire de­bes Episcopum in Ecclesia esse, & Ecclesiā 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 communica [...]e se credunt, quando Ecclesia, quae Catholica vna est scissa non sit, nequo diuisa, sed sit vrique connexa, et cohare [...] ­tium [Page 15]sibi inudeem Sacerdotum glutino co­pula [...]a. We bele [...]ue, and know, Ioan. 6. that thou art the sonn [...] 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 [Page 16]the Church; that in vaine they flater thēselues, 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 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 bo [...]y seperated can make no true ma [...]ergo if they be cōicy [...]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 [Page 17]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 foll [...]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 [...] ­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, [Page 18]purpose, and occasion, as by him they were vttered.

7 That his application of S. Cyprians definition is iniurious to English Catho­licks, is man [...]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 schism [...]ticks; that they are opposite to that Catholicke Church which is one and not rent, nor deued [...]d [...], which gentle E­pithetons, or rather most [...]o [...]le aspertions, to cast vpon the most [...]e [...]lo is Catholicks of England, who for their vnion with the Sea Apostolicke, constancy in profes­sion of their Faith, ioyf [...]ll suffering losse of goods, liberty, and life, haue bene a spect [...]cle, grations in the sight of God, and his Angels, and admir [...]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 [Page 19]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 vnderstāding 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 frō what hath bene said that the true explicatiō & reasō of those wordes in S. Cyprian alleadged by him in his 12 chap. num. 4 vnde seire debes Episcopū 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 [Page 20]Church: And yet, I hope, English Catho­licks, while they wāted 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 i [...]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 v­muc [...]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 ga [...]ne­say [Page 21]it. Seing then Englād 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 Englād, 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 a [...]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 [...]o particular Pastours, we haue bene w [...]n­ting, [Page 22] Quid debuimus vltra fac [...]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 pa [...]ticular Chu [...]ch, & a perfect o [...]e: yet it hath noe other Bishop for Ordinary, besids the Pope. Leo the 9. Famous for sanctity, and mi [...]cles, being before his Popedo [...] B [...]shop of Tul, for his affection to that Church did still remaine particu­lar Ordinary thereof.Baron Tom. 11. ann. Dai. 1049. Leon. 9. ann. [...]. n. 6. Adeò fuit (saith Ba­ro [...]ius) suae Tullensis Ecclesia amator, vt licet Romanus Pontifex creatus esset, tamen titulum priorem non reliquerit, voluerit­que, dum vixi [...], 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 prob [...]b [...]ty, can any man say, that England, when of necessity it was de­stitute [Page 23]of Bishops, could not be a particu­lar Church, and haue for imme [...]te parti­l [...]r Bishop, the Successon [...] of Leo the 9. Vrba [...]e the 8? whome I beseech God [...]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 pl [...]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 thē 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 mā euer dreame, that for that c [...]use, they ceased to be particular Chur­ches: Rather, such exāptions were accoūted fauours, & such imme [...]iat subiectiō to the Pope, a great honour [...]til now M. Doctour [Page 24]tels the world, that the Church of Saiui Iohn Late [...]an, of Tull, of all exempted places, & persōs, neither haue bene, nor shalbe particular Churches, till they be taken from the Popes particular chardge, and put in the hands of some other Bishop; & that in co [...]setence they are obl [...]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 ce [...]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 [Page 25]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 cā ne­uer be proued, or rather the cōtrary 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 existēce of a particular church: it be not sufficiēt, that it be gouernd by such, as frō his Holines receiue Delegated power, for al occasions, that may require iurisdictiō. If he affirme that such a particular Church [Page 26]may be, then I inferre, that a Bishop is not necessary for the making a particular Church; because whatsoeuer iurisdictiō 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 shoul [...] 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 [Page 27]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 obediēce to our Supreame Pastour, the Vicar of Christ, as our constant Confessours, and glorious Martyrs, before we had a Bishop, liued in s [...]nctity, and dyed for iustice in profes­sion of the Catholicke fayth.

15 Neyther were this sufficient [...], (though it be more then euer he wilbe 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 certain [...]ly, if any [Page 28]cause may yeild a lawfull excuse, or re­quire dispensation, a iust fea [...]e of loosing goods, liberty, and life (which case M. Doctour directly supposeth in his assertiō) may yeild a most reasonable excuse, o [...] 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 t [...]e whole▪ and Vniuersall Church should no: (as Christ hath institu­ted) be a Hierarchie, compose [...] of diuers particular Churches de [...]er [...]e [...]n no answere. For who dare say, that there is as much necessity, or obligation, to haue a Bi­shop, in ea [...]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 [...]onueniency, of hauing any Pope of Rome, for the gouernement [Page 29]of the whole Catholick Church? to say, that a particular Bishop h [...]th not power to gouerne the whole Catholicke Church: ergo, the Bishop of the whole Catholicke Church cannot go [...]erne a particular one, is as good, as to say; the feete cannot guide the head: e [...]go, the head cannot guide the feete. His assertion, or inference vpō his own [...] p [...]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 s [...]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 Vniuers [...]ll Church shall still be a Hierarchie composed of diuers particular Churcher. But if he vnderstand (as his w [...]res (euery particular Church) and his whole drife seeme to demonstrate) that, vnlesse euery particular determinate [Page 30]Church haue a Bishop, the whole and V­uiuersall Church should not (as Christ [...]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 a [...]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 Chu [...]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 Hie­rarch [...] 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 [...]y not refuse Bishops by reason of persecution, M. Doctour in his 14. chapter alleadgeth, that it is de lu [...]e diuino, of the diuine Law, to haue a Bishop in euery particular Church: And for proofe theoeof, citeth So [...]us, affir­ming,Sot. lib. 10. de [...]u [...]et iu­re q. 1. a. 4. pos [...] s [...] und [...] conclusion [...]. it to be de iure diuino of the deuine Law, quòd in genere singulis Ecclsi [...]s secun­dum Ecclesiasticum diuisionem sut a [...]pli­centur Episcopi. That in generall to euery particular Church according to the Eccle­siasticall deuision proper Bishops are to be ap­plyed. And Bannes teaching,Ba [...]es 2.2. q. 1. a 10. Co­clu. 6. ad v [...]. that Bishops cannot by the Pope be remo [...]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 [Page 32]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 cuē in time of persecutiō, 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. Suare [...], 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 [Page 33]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 Vti­cen [...]t lib. 2. perseq. vad. in [...]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 shalbe ordai­ned in carthage with his Cleargy, but also all other Bishops of the African prouinces with their Cleargie, shalbe sent to the Moo [...]es. The which when Victor Primate of Africke, and others heard, they refused his courtesie with so cruell a condition, and says: [...]i [...]ita est, interposius his cond [...]tioni­bus periculosis, haec Ecclesia. Episcopum no [...] 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 [...]raweth from another example of Hune­ticus his cruelty, and of the African Ca­tholicks zeale to their Bishops, and Pa­sto [...]rs.Victor V [...] ­censis lib 2. Hunericus his cruelty Victor V [...] ­censis descri [...]th rather by teares, then [Page 34]words saying: Quibus autem prosequar flu­m [...]bus [...]ry [...]a [...]um, quando [...]p [...]s [...]op [...]s, Presb [...]eros, D [...]cono [...] e [...]alia [...]lsiae mem­bra, id est quatuor willia D.cccc Lxvi. ad exilium eremi dasti [...]au [...], in quibus [...] ­rant podagrici quamplurims, aly per aetatem an [...]o [...]u [...]n lumine [...]emporali priua [...] &c. But with what f [...]ds of teares shall I proosecute [...]rs his cruclt [...]. woen he sent Best ops Priests, Deacous, and other members of the Church [...]to [...]ashmēt in the wilaernesse amongst whom were [...]my troubled with the gout, others by age, [...]nd, and d [...]priue [...] of sight &c. Behould Hu [...]cus his cru [...]ty. Now let vs behould the zeale of the Ca­tholicks of these countries for their Bishops, and Priests. They complantned p [...]uf [...]ly that they were deprined of their Pastours, sa [...]ing or rather crying,Victor lib. 2. pe [...]ses. Vad.Quibus nos miseros relin­qui [...]ts, dum pergites ad coronas? qui [...]os baptizatu [...] sunt parunlos fon [...]bus aqua perernis? qui nobis paen [...]tentiae munus colla­turi sunt, et reconciliationis induigent [...]s, obstrictos peccatorum vinculis sol [...]tu [...]i? qui [...] vobis dictum est, quaecunque solueritis super terram, erunt sol [...]a et on cales. Qui nos so­lēntbus or ation [...]bus sepulturi sunt mortentes quibus di [...]ni Sacrifict [...]tu [...] [...]xhibedus est [...] [Page 35]Vobiscum et not [...]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 reconcilia [...]on? For to you it was said whatsoeuer you shall loose vpō earth, it shalbe loosed in heanē. Who shall bury vs with solemne prayers, when we shall dy to whom the rite of the acu [...] sacrifice is to be exhibited? We might haue gonne with you, that so no necess [...]t [...] might separate the children from their Fathers. After this example M. Doctour sayth thus: Wherefore a [...] for othe [...] poynts of our Fayth we must dye rather then deny them, so we must dye rather then a [...]y the Hierar­chy of the Church, it being a poynt of Fayth.

4 His third example is out of Orosius relating, how the A [...]ian Tyrant Tr [...]sa­mundus commanced that the African Bi­shops should not ordayne any more Bishops in the place of those that dyed. Orosius [...]. [...].10. The Bishops considering that without Bishops▪ their churches could not long subsist, but would fall without any other persecu [...]on, or violence vsed against them, resolued to call a Coun­cell. [Page 36]And in that Councell all the Bishops with one cons [...]t decreed, notwithstanding the Tyrants Edict to the contrary, to or­daine Bishops. Cogitantes aut regis i [...] acun­d [...]am, siqua forsan existeret mitigandam, quo facilius ordinat [...] [...]suis plebibus v [...]ue­rent, aut si persecutionis violentia nascere­tur, corana [...]dos etia [...] 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 confessio [...] of their ministerie, And good reason had they so to doe: For, as sayth Baronius: Quaenam shes de Ecclesi [...]s [...]astoribus destitutis vlte­rius reliqua esse poterat, Baron. An. Da [...]. 504. conuulsis earum fundamētis ip [...]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 [Page 37] de [...]ure diuino the Church must be go­ue [...]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, & n [...]nely, that there is such a pre­cept, but moreouer, that hoe persecuiō can excuse the obligation therof, or giue suffi­ciēt 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 dispute [...], whether it was necessary [...]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 [...]uouch.

6 And truly I cannot in [...]agine, what [Page 38]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 iu [...]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 Englād, & Scot­lād also to be much lesse thē the nūber of [Page 39]people in some one citty in this Kingdom. Sure I am, that my Lord of Chalo [...]don, or some other in his behalfe, in a certine wri­ting called a Paral [...] 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 disadu [...]age his assertion, then when the reader shall by my answers clearely pērceiue, 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 diui [...]e of the di­deuine [Page 40]lawe, quôd in genere singulis &c. that in gener [...]l, to euery pa [...]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 [...]ot in England, and Scotland, and then according to M. Doctours vnderstan­ding of Sotus, euery Diocesse in England, and Scotland, must [...]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 Diocesse [...] 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 no [...] 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: [Page 41]his meaning is not, that the Pope is obliged iure diūino, 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 thē we grant, but com­eth far short of what M. Doctor intēdeth. 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 mānter: Dum Dei minister, id quod ips [...] instituit, ipsius iussu d [...]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 censendū est. Whē the minister of God, by his command performeth that which he institu­ted such an action is to be esteemed of de­ [...]ine [Page 42]law. But when the Pope doth confirme, and co [...]secrate a Bishop, [...]d applies him to some Church he e [...]ec [...]et [...] that which Christ in generall (M [...]rke) did institute & which he cōmād [...]d him to [...]o the [...]fore su [...] an actiō ought to be said to be of the deuine lawe Can a [...]y thing be more de [...]re, or more direct to shew that according to Sot' the Institu­tiō & 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. sacramētal absolutio, & the like, although they be imm [...]d [...]a [...]ly pe [...]formed by the minesters of the Chu [...]ch, neuerthelesse they are to be esteemed a [...] of deuine law be­ [...]se Christ did [...]astitute them, and com­ [...]a [...]d [...]ed them, to be so done, and dispe [...]sed in his [...]me. [...]vere a [...]nesse by these words to [...]aser our of So [...]us that euery one hauing authority to administer sacra­ments, were therefore by deui [...]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 [...]ure diuin [...] of the deuine law. [...]s a thing, in generall, not of humane, but [Page 43] deuine enstitution. Mariage, in generall, was instituted, and commanded by God, & in the newe law, by Christs, institution, it is a Sacra [...]t, and therefore when Christiās marry they performe an actiō, in ge [...]erall commanded, and instituted to be a [...]cramē [...]: 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 insti [...]ution. The cause was, more strōgly 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 cādeny, doth not oblige in alt [...]ms, & place; & ther­fore although Sotꝰ should affirm that ther were a deuine precept, to apply Bishops to euery particular determinate Church, yet that precept being affi [...]mati [...] (as De­uines speak) it would not bind in al occasi­ōs, as Sotꝰ teacheth cōcerning the residēce of Bishops. Finally by this ocasion, M. D [...] ­ [...]er I doubt not, wil be more circōspect in [Page 44] [...]adging authours least he doth wrong his o [...]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 [...]ure [...]iu [...] a deuine commaund, that euery Diocesse haue a particular Bi­shop, and in such māner, as for noe cause whatsoeuer it can be otherwa [...]es, is a pro­position farre from Sotus his thoughts, & which neither M. Doctour, nor any other [...]ill, or can defend.

11 The second authour alleadged by M. Doctour is Bannes saying: that Bi­shops [...]n [...]a [...] 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 [...]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 [Page 45]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 Bānes answers, Quòd licet Summus Pontifex posset pros [...] arbetr [...]tu, vnum aut alterum Episcopum a­mouere, nec in locum corum ali quem design [...] ­re, non tamè admittendū est. quod in tota Ec­clesia, aut in magna eius parte, tātemere sua potestate abuta [...]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. Do­ [...]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 [Page 46]a Bishop there can be no [...] particular church, of else if he say, that they should not re­maine particular Churches, he must con­sider that then a [...]cording to Bannes, it is not de iure diui [...]o, a deuire la [...], that eue­ry Church should be a particul [...]r Church, because, as we haue seene. Bannes teach­eth, that without breach of [...]e [...]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 contr [...]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 Dio [...]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 cā ­not forget, how M. Doctour alleadged first Sotus▪ as teaching that iure diuino▪ by deui [...] Precept, euery particular Church [Page 47]must haue it Bishop: and afterwardes, to the s [...]me purpose, he [...]i [...]ed Bannes, who y [...] express [...] affirmeth the contrary, and teacheth that the Pope may le [...]ue some par­ticular Chu [...]ches without Bishops. How do these two things cohere? It passeth my vnderstāding that two authours should be rightly alle [...]ged as teaching that very po [...], wherein they are cōtrary. Cōtrary, I say, as Sotus is vnderstood by M. Doctours for [...]ccording to his true meaning, he is nothing [...]g [...]inst Bannes, for as much as concernes out present purpose, as I haue she wed ou [...] of their owne words. And thus, I hope, to haue made good that Bānes allea [...]ged by M. Doctour▪ is indeed maine­ly ag [...]y [...]st him. And this is soe much the more strange, because Sotus, and Bannes were allea [...]ged, as teaching some singular matter in his fauour, who both, vpon exa­mi [...]e are found to be his aduersaryes.

12. The reasō that M. Doctour did inser [...] frō the sayd authorities, maketh for him, iust as they did. It was this. By the de­uine law there must be particular Bishop [...] in the Church; but there is noe more rea­son why the Church of France, for exāple, should be gouerned by a Bishop, then the [Page 48]church of England; ergo, England, and all other particular churches of extent, must be gouerned by Bishops. Truely I cannot but wonder, that a learned man should vse such a forme of argument, which he cannot but know doth fayle in a thou­sand instances. For example, some meate is absolutely necessary for the mainetenāce of man, but there is no more reason, why egs, or fish should be necessary to the main­tenance of man rather, then other parti­cular meates: ergo, eggs, fish, and all other particular meates are necessary for the mainetenance of man. Or, to bring an ex­ample neerer the purpose. It is of the law of God, and nature, that some men do marry for the preseruing of mankinde; but (if we precisely respect the law of nature) there is noe more reason, why one person, village, or citty should be obliged, rather then another: ergo, euery particular per­son, village, and citty is obliged to marry. To these instances M. Doct. must answere by distinguishing the minor proposition. If we compare one particular meate, to ano­ther paricular determinate meate, then the minor is true, that there is no more reason of one, then another, and so neither one, [Page 49]nor other determinately is necessary: But if we compare one particular meate, with other particular meates, taken in generall or indeterminately, then there is more rea­son why one particular meate is not so ne­cessary as others taken indeterminatly, be­cause in that indeterminate sence▪ they sig­nify all particular meats in generall, which no doubt are more necessary for the main­tenance of man, then any one determi­nate meate. Or to say all in one word, some meate is necessary, but not this or that in particular. And so we may easily an­swere M. Doctours argument by the like destruction, that iure diuino, Bishops are necessary in some parts of the church inde­terminately, but not determinately in this, or that part of the church, And this were sufficient to answere that sophisme. Yet, that the reader may see how weake an ar­gument it is, his Minor proposition might be easily denyed, although we should cō ­pare one particular church with another particular church determinately taken: for there may reasons occurre of persecution, or the like, to make the case of one church different from that of another. And as for England in particular (beside the knowne [Page 50]reason of persecution, different from o­ther countries (which we also suppose should be encreased by the comming of a Bishop, for of that case M. Doctour speakes) ioyned neuerthelesse with the paternal care of Christs Vicar, whereby in so long tyme of persecution, we were abundantly pro­uided of all meanes for our soules good, e­uen according to M. Doctour his owne as­sumpt, there is a different reason of Englād, which, as it signifieth a particular true church, is neyther a great, nor not able part of the whole church, nor to vse M. Do­ctours owne words, a church of extent.

13 I desire to knowe of M. Doctour, whether this forme of argument be good. Religious institute in generall is of the de­uine institution, and the Supreame Pastour of Gods church, by his office, is obliged on his part, to procure, that in the Catho­licke church, so sacred an institution be maintayned; but there is noe more reason why it should be maintayned in France, or Spayne, then in England: ergo, the Pope is obliged to mainteyne the being of reli­gious institute in England. When M. Doct. shall tell me what be thinketh of this man­ner of argument, I will then let him know [Page 51]what good vse I shalbe able to make of his answere, whatsoeuer it be.

14 Lastly, here also I must craue leaue to shew, that M. Doctor his māner of argument is rather against himselfe, and may be thus retorted, especiall if we take what he himselfe seemeth to confesse, & in it selfe is most euident, to wit, [...]h [...]t it is not de iure di [...]ino, to haue a Bishop in euery particular litle Church, or Diocesse, but at most, in such Churches, as are great, & of extent. It is nor de iure diuino, that there be a particula [...] Bishop in euery Diocesse of England; but (if we respect the de­uine law) there is no more reason of o [...]e Diocesse, then of another: ergo, all the Diocesses of England may be without a Bishop: which is directly against that, which M. Doctour by his said argumēt in­tended to proue. Moreouer in the same manner one might go foreward, and say: There is noe more reason why all the Di­ocesses of England may be gouerned with­out a Bishop, then those of France, nor of France more then of Spaine, and so of all other particular Churches: ergo, all parti­cular churches of the whole world may be gouernd with out Bishops. A thing both [Page 52]false in it selfe, and directly contrary to what M Doctour intendeth. Neuertheles it is the very same manner of disputing which he himselfe vseth, and so his owne arguments ouerthrow their owe grounds and distroie themselues.

15 And here I would be glad to knowe, wherther his arguments doe not prooue, that Scotlād must also haue it par­ticular Bishop. Sure I am, that if they prooue any thing, they must prooue that; and so M. Doctour both tels my Lord of Chalcedon, that he cannot be Bishop of Scotland (which being a Country of ex­tent must haue its particular Bishop) and lets his holynesse know, that he hath not satisfied the deuine lawe till he place a Bi­shop in Scotland. But I think M. Doctour will not proceed so far; yet by this he may see how his arguments outreach his owne intention, and so while they prooue too much, they effect nothing.

16 Neither need I againe put M. Doctour in mynd, that if he prooue any thing, his argument prooues that England, and Scotland also must iure diuino haue an Ordinarie, because by the deuine law beside the Supreme Pastour, there must be [Page 53]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 etiā quia in rep Christana erat hoc maximè necessarium, nam est amplissi­ma, & vniuersalissima, & eius regimen est spirituale, & internum, quod non fit exactè [...]si per proprios Pastores, & Principes Ec­clesiae: [Page 54]& also because in the Christian commō w [...]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 p [...]rformed, but by proper Pastours, & Princes of the Church. If M. Doctour, had not omitted this re [...]s [...], 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 Englād 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 thē, 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 [Page 55]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 f [...]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.

[Page 56] 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, ye [...] 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 fi [...]de in Baronius Anno [...]04. these wordes. Eo consilio ista prece­perat [Page 57]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 ont 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 A­frican [...] [Page 58]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 conditiōs, then [...]o lec a particular Diocesse (as Carth [...]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 desire [...]: Interposit [...]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 c [...]atrymen, you Catholicks of Englād, be sure to cry for a Bishop, although it [Page 59]were vpon condition, [...] the blasphe­mous Arians, who den [...]our deare Sa­uiours Deuinity, in son [...]iefest Catho­licke citty, haue free vse their abhomi­nable churches, and th [...] otherwise not onely the Bishop that sh [...] ordayned in Englād with the whole tholicke Clear­gy of that country, but a [...] all Bishops of some other large Catho [...]e Prouynces, with their Cleargy, shalb [...]nt to forrayne barbarous countries: an [...] [...]is you must doe, and not be appeased [...] though your Superiour, and the Super [...]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 o [...] Bishop, vpō such conditions; for so did [...]he people of Carthage, against the iudg [...]ent of Victor their Primate, and of the [...]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 [Page 58] [...] [Page 59] [...] [Page 60]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 six [...]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 amōg 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 [Page 61]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, [...]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 fa [...]le, I haue answered already, and now will onely note M. Doctours translation of a word, for his purpose. Co­gitantes, [...]u [...]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 [Page 62]promotion, should also be crowned by the c [...] ­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 e [...]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 m [...]st seuere opinions of what­soeuer approoued Catholick Deuine, when that Sacrament may conueniently be had, [Page 63]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 sin [...]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 b [...]longi [...]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 cā enter into the deliberate thought of any reaso­nable Deuine, much lesse is it a doctrine to be broached vpō so weake, & mistaken, or ill applied grounds, as I hope todemōstrat [Page 64] 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 [...]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. prof [...]ssio fide [...] debita, suo quidem tem­pore est neces­saria, sed ad quā eliā ord: naria gratiae a [...]xilia su [...]i­ciut For the cof [...]ssio of our paith the or­dinary be [...]ps of grace are su [...]c [...]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 se­cōded 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.

[Page 65] 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 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 gro [...]th of it [...]onsisteth in [...]us [...]fying grace, which is of the same nature, and offence, by whatsoeue [...] sacrament, or meritorious worke [...]t be giuen, and ther­fore is not ryed to one meanes, but may and is afforded by diu [...]rs, as neither the actuall helps, or motions of gra [...]e, are nec [...]ssarily to bo [...]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 [Page 66] 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 mē, 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 en­ [...]re as in grace by continuall merit of good workes, and frequent receiuing of other sacraments doth strengthen a man not to f [...]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 [Page 67]he were to blame who for this reason of greater growth would be as forward, as M. Doctour, in imposing I know not what obligatiōs, 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 subiectiō 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 [Page 68]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 Cō ­firmation Catholicks shewed. I hold it noe rashnesse to affirme, that since En­glāds 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 c [...]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 au [...]yding the particular da­mage of a few, whose fal is voluntary, & to be ascribed only to thēselues, because they make not vse of other meanes, and sacra­ments, which may be had in England, and through their owne negligence, and liber­ty [Page 69]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 wilbe occasion of sinne, although euery particular occasion may be either auoided, or ouercome) he knowes, I say, that both a cōmonwealth may tollerate such a state, either for at­taining some greater good, or auoiding some notable inconuenience, and also par­ticular mē may without sinne embrace such a course of life, for example of a souldi [...]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 [Page 70]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 denoū ­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 [Page 71]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 cō ­trary is lesse, or not at all probable, Tanner [...]oin. 4 diss▪ 4. q. 4. dul. 3. asse [...]: 3. adding that the sayd common doctrine hath bene practised not onely by Gr [...]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 Ec­cles [...]e Oc [...]i­demalis & O [...]etalis in s [...]pt [...]m Sa­cramen or i [...] administra­tion [...] [...]. 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 mē of the sayd Order, had authority to administer [Page 72]the Sacrament of Confirmation, and fur­ther the same Father certainely auouched, that himselfe was wont to administer the said Sacramēt 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 an­ciēnt 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, & s [...]quitur Pau [...]us [...]at­ [...] lib. 5. tr [...]ct [...]t. 3. cap. [...]. a. 1 some great Deuines doe teach, that although such commission ought not to be grāted without iust cause, yet it is of force, and valid, howsoeuer it be graunted: because, it is not properly a dispensa [...]ion in the lawe of Christ, but ra­ther a commission of power according to Christs insticution, which is, that the Ex­traordinary Minister of Confirmation, [Page 73]should be a Priest by cōmission 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 cō ­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, [...]s it were by the way, might cō ­firme [Page 74]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 [Page 75]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 nūber 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 the [...]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 nūber 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 nūber, it is necessary to haue a Bishop for [Page 76]Confirmatiō, although by that meanes the persecutiō 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 o [...]casion, by confor­ming their practise to the cōtrary 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 s [...]bmit to authority) that a particul [...]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 persecutiō 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 [Page 77]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 Deu [...]nes, that Bishops haue greater ob­ligation to administer Confirmation, then people to receue it. Moreouer seeing my [Page 78]Lord hath stiled himselfe Ordinary of Scotland, doubtlesse he would extend his charity to that kingdome, if he were of M. Doct. opinion, cōcerning 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 [Page 88] 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 shalbe 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 [Page 80] 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 clear [...] 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. [Page 81]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 gro [...]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 ar [...] 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 [Page 82]when he shalbe confirmed by the Bishop, because otherwise he cannot be a perfect christian, but still ioyneth it with baptisme, and sayth: But when he shalbe 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 che [...]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 [Page 83]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 shalbe regenerated by water, and afterward, Confirmed by the Bishop with the seuenfold grace of the Spirits, because otherwise he cannot be a perfect Christian (where M. Doctour ends with an &c.) immediatly addeth words, where­in the very point in [...]u [...]stion consisteth, saying: St non necessitate, sed incuria sic, aut voluntate remanserit: if he shall remaine so, not by necessity, but by carelesnesse, or voluntarily. What good dealing this is, I leaue to the censure of an vnpartiall rea­der. Our case is when Confirmation can­not be had without hazard of goods, liber­ty, & life. S. Clement speaketh in case it be omitted, not vpon necessity, but care­lessely, and voluntarily. What is this a­gainst vs? Nay, is it not clearely for vs a­gainst M. Doctour? For S. Clement affir­ming, [Page 84]that without Confirmatiō, we cānot be perfect Christiās, if it be omitted with­out necessity, must be supposed to meane, that such as want it vpō necessity, & not by wil, may without i [...] be perfect Christiās, o­ther wise his exception, of necessity, were in vaine Stil M. D. cites Authors, which proue against himselfe, whē they are cited aright. Fif [...]ly I answere to this, & al the like argumēts, or authorities that M Doct. stil [...]failes in his proofe [...]. For if he wil needs vrge, that without confirmation we are not perfect Christians in some particular sense, then he must proue that there is a precept for vs to be perfect Christiās in that sēse, & also that such a particular perfectiō cānot be had, but by Co [...]firmation. For as for absolute perfection (consisting in Grace, & Charity) without the sacrament of Confirmation [...]t hath bene, and is had, by many holy men militant on earth, and Blessed Saints tri­umphan [...] in Heauen; among who n [...]l may reckon many of our constant Confessours & glorious Martyrs, to whose powerful in­tercession, & plentiful merits I most hum­bly commend my imperfect soule. And I wonder M. Doctour would seeke to terri­fie people with the Confused sound of im­perfect [Page 85]Christs anity seeing when all comes to all, hee himselfe chap. 14 n. 7. doth not denie, but that in Catholike Countreyes, Confirmation may be omitted by particu­lar persons without a morcall sinne; and n. 9 he further confesseth, that euery man in particular, cannot be condemned of sin [...]e for omitting Confirmation, for feare of loosi [...]g his life, landes, and libertie: and num. 7. he only sayth [...] that it may seeme pres [...]o­tion to omit it when it may commodiously be had. By all which it is cleare that not to be a perfect Christian in that sense, i [...] not so fearefull a thing as the words may see [...]e to import, before they be distinctly expli­cated, and resolued into their true mea­ning, as I haue endeauoured to doe in the beginning of this question, by occ [...]sion of S. Thomas his doctrine, that by con [...]irma­tion we get our perfect growth. And M. Doctor will not easily proue, that a whole Coūtrie is obliged rather to suffer inc [...]ease of persecution, then want a Bishop for Confirmation, seeing he graunteth, that euery man in particular, canno [...] be cond [...]m­ned of sinne, for omitting Confi [...]mation, f [...] feare of loosing, his life, landes, or liber [...]y [...] for as it is true, that the spirituall good of [Page 86]many, is more to be weighed, then of any one in particular: so like wise the generall persecution of a whole Countrie, is more to be auoided, then of any priu [...]te person who yet, as M. Doctour confesseth, is not obliged to hazard goods, or life, for enioying the Sacrament of Confirmation.

17. M. Doctour immediately before S. Clement citeth S. Dionysius Areopagita l. d [...] eccles. Hier. cap. 5. calling the Sacra­ment of Confirmation, a perfitting and con­summating Vnction. But I feare M. Doctour, wil proue no more exact in this allegation, then he hath beene in so many other. For in Saint Denny, his fift chapter cited by M. Doctour, I find no such matter. In his fourth chapter, he speaketh expressely of the oyle vsed in Baptisme, which Sacra­ment he tearmeth diuinus ortus, a deuine birth, or regeneration, by which he saieth Originall sinne is forgiuen. Saint Dennys, speakes also sometime generally of the vertue of Oyle, or Vaction, vsed not only in diuers Sacraments, but also in consecra­tion of Aultars. But what is this for M. Doctours purpose? Neuerthelesse, if S. Dennys eyther in the chapter cited by M. Doctour, or in any other place, call confir­mation [Page 87]a perfitting and consummating Vn­ction, it is nothing against vs, who grant, that confirmation giueth indeed a perfe­ction to the receyuer, but not such a per­fection, as may not be gotten by other meanes, as aboue we haue demonstrated, and cannot be denyed.

18. His other chiefe argument is out of Estius, in these words:Es [...]ius in 4. a [...]s [...]. 7. u. 18. Quòd si quaer as &c. But if thou aske, whether the omission of Cō ­firmation when it can commodiously be had, be a mortall, or veniall sinne? I answere, that it cannot be omitted without mortall sinne, in tyme and place of persecution of fayth, when namely there is daunger to a man by reason of infirmity least he deny his faith in word or doed, or at least be ashamed to co fesse (his faith) when he should: otherwise I thinke it only a veniall, sinne, so there be not contempt. I answere, that although Estius in some thing concerning the Sacrament of Con­firmation, hold against the common do­ctrine of other Deuines: yet in this parti­cular he is nothing against vs For his very demaund as it is set downe by M. Doctour answereth for vs, seeing his question is, what sinne it is to omit Confirmation when it can commodiously he had, which is not [Page 88]our case, but the quite contrary, namely, that it cannot only not be had commodi­ously, by reason of the persecution, and liwes common to all Priests (which were enough to put it out of the case proposed by Estius) but also, because we expressely suppose, that the very hauing a Bishop for Confirmation, is to increase the perse­cution: which I wonder M. Doctour did not remember, it being his owne supposi­tion in the very title of his 14. chapter, & in the same chapter is by him diuers times repeated. Yea, Estius by proposing the question as he doth, supposeth, that there cannot so much as question be made, of a­ny obligation to receiue Confirmation, in case it cannot commodiously be had. And fi­nally M. Doctour himselfe (as I related a­boue) num. 7. only sayth: It may seeme a presumption to neglect it (cōfirmation) espe­c [...]lly in time of perse [...]ution, when it may cō ­modiously be haa: Ergo, M Doctou [...] seemes to suppose the omission of Confirmation to be noe sinne, when it cannot commodi­ously be had, which is our very case: Besides, Estius speaketh, in time, and place of such persecution of sayth, as bringeth with it danger of a mans denying has faith, which, [Page 89]thankes be to God, we may say, is not our case in England, where for so many yeares of most hoate persecution, without the Sa­crament of Confirmation, the zeale, and constancy of Catholicks was so admirable, as God grant the like were seene, in these our dayes.

19 His last argument, is out of a con­iecture that without Confirmation, if one fall not, others probably will, as (sayth he) Nouatus did for want of it, for which he cyteth Eusebius. This example of No­uatus he bringeth not onely here, but in diuers other places of his booke, as if it were some mayster peece. To his conie­cture, I hope to haue giuen already a full answere. For Nouatus, I finde noe such thing in Eusebius as M. Doctour alleadg­eth (and I haue seene,Euseb. lib. 6. Hist. ca. 35. edit. Col [...]. and considered more impressions then one) but only Eu­sebius, out of Cornelius, in an Epistle to Fabius, recounteth that he fell, persecu­tionis tempore, metis debilitatus, et ni [...]i a vite cupiditate adductus: In time of perse­cution, weak [...]ned with feare, and mooned with too much desire of life. Still M. Doctour hath ill fortune in alleadging authours. It may well be that Nouatur sell for want [Page 90]of Confirmation; yet I deny that Eusebi­us sayth soe, or that the case of our En­glish Catholicks is not infinitely different from his. First, he differred to be baptized til he was forced with dāger of sicknesse, which delay was a thing vehemently re­prehended, by the Fathers of au [...]cient times, in so much that when Nouatus was to take holy Orders, both the clear­gy, and lay men, did oppose it; Quoni­ [...] (sayth Eusebius) minime licebat, que­quam in lecto propter morbum baptizatum, sicut huic contigerat, in Clerum assumt. Be­cause it was not lawfull, for any man bap­tized in bed, by reason of sicknesse, as he was, to be promoted to the Cleargy. After­wards, morbo clapsus, neque catera quibus post Baptismum, secundum Ecclesia Cano­nem, imbui oportuer at, acquisiuit, neque Domine sigillo ab Episcopo obsignatus fuit. He being recouered, omitted both other things which after Baptisme according to the Canōt of the Church he should haue had, and also Confirmation; which Sacrament he might haue receiued without danger, as other Christians did: and besides, this neglect was, when he had a particular obligation to [...]ce [...]ue that Sacrament, [Page 91]namely before he tooke holy Orders. All which things considered, I leaue it to any indifferent mans iudgement, whether it be not some iniury to English Catholicks, that they should by M. Doctour be frigh­ted with danger of lapse, by the example of Nouatus, in whom soe many soule causes of falling did concurre. For, besides all that hath bene sayd, there was ano­ther fault, which might assoone be cause of his fall as any other offence, according to the saying of our Sauiour. Quise exal­tat, humiliabitur. Luc. 8.14. He who exalteth him­selfe, shalbe humbled. For, as Eusebius in the place aboue cited expressely recordeth, the fellow was ambitious. What? Am­bition in those primitiue ages? in those sad times of persecution? so it was. Wher­in did his ambition consist? In desire to be a Bishop.

THE FIFTH QVESTION. Concerning M. Doctours Comparison be­twen [...] Bishops, inferiour Pastours, and Religious men.

1 MVCH against my will, I am forced to handle this point, by occasion of M. Doctour his Treatise, through all which, and particularly in his 11. chapter, he speaketh with ouermuch partiality, and disaduantage of Religious state, in comparison of Bishops, and other inferiour Pastours, or Curates. First then we will speake of Bishops; and in the se­cond place, of other Postours.

2 As for the first, to the end we may not erre in generalities, which breed con­fusion, nor deceaue our selues with specious words, not well vnderstood: it is to be obserued, that there be two States of perfection; the one, a state wherin we acquire perfection, the other, wherein we are to pr [...]ctise perfection already ac­quired, [Page 93]with this difference, that the for­mer state yeildeth aboundant meanes, to get that perfection, which it professeth; the other is to practise perfection, for at­taining whereof, within it selfe, it yeildeth not such meanes, but only presupposeth, that the person by other meanes, must haue gotten perfection, if he will exercise his function, and office as he ought. And hence resulteth a second difference, that the former state professeth to perfect a man in himselfe, and by consequence maketh him also more fit to perfect others: The second, of it selfe is ordayned to the per­fecting of others, and vnlesse a man other­wise be perfect, humane frailty conside­red, may indanger his owne soule: and therefore that same diuisiō of states, which other authours giue vnder the tearmes: perfectionis acquisitae, et acquir [...]dae, of per­fectiō already gotten, & to be go [...]ten: Caiet: 2.2. [...].189. a. 3 Suarez. de Rel. Tom. 3. lib. 1. cap. 14. n [...]. Caietan calles statum perfectionis propria, vel alienae, a state of perfecting a mans selfe, or of per­fecting others, which, s [...]th Suarez, is all one with the other diu [...]sion

3 It ought not to be denied, that a man by doing workes to perfect others, doth performe actions, of themselues me­ritorious, [Page 94]and perfectiue of the doer: yet vnlesse they be also done with perfection (which cannot be, vnlesse a man by o­ther meanes be perfect) they are more apt to hurt, then help, by reason of great imperfections, and manifold dangers, to which, by the euill performing of so no­ble actions, the party himselfe is subiect. Let vs heare that deuine Bishop, and Martyr,S. Dyonis. Eccles. Hie­ [...]rch. c. 3. S. Dionysius Ar [...]pag [...]ta speak­ing to this purpose: Vt in solis radijs tenui­ores, limpidior esque, substantiae, primae in­fluents luce replentur, sicque exuberante [...] lucemin subsequentes, solis vice transfun­dunt: ita non sine periculo diuinis in rebus, quibusque aliis se ducem praestare presumet, qui non per omnia euaserit similis De [...]. As in the sunne beames, the more transparent, & clearer parts are the first to be filled with infused light, and then insteed of th [...] sunne, doe transfuse an excessiue light into other ad [...]oyning parts: soe he who is not become like to God, shall not without danger pre­sume to guide others in matters belonging to God. Hence it was, that all holy men did so much labour to auoide so high a dignity, as Histories are full: and not long since, a famous secular Doctour, com­ming [Page 95]to die, did say, that he tooke it frō God as a signe of Predestination to eter­nall blisse Quod non [...]uisset Episcopum fieri that he had not permitted him to be made Bishop.Hist. soc. Ies [...] Tom. 2. [...]b. 1. n. 135. Yet whosoeuer, against his will, is truly called to such a state, may, and ought to conside, that God who imposed the burthen, will afford strength to sup­port it with great n [...]er [...]t.

4 But these two states (of perfect [...] already acquired, or, to be acquired, or, of perfecting ones selfe, & perfecting others) are not so distinguished, that they must of necessity be alwaies separated. For al­though a secular Bishop, be only in a state of perfecting others: yet a Bishop Regular, is in state of perfitting himselfe, and others; and those Religious men, who by there institute, beside their owne perfection, attend also to the help of there neyghbour▪ are both in state of perf [...]tting themselues, & also in the state of perf [...]tting others, according to that measure, perfec­tion, and multiplicity of measure, where­with they are furnished to helpe their neighbour. For within the latitude of obe­dience, vowed by such Religious men, the actions of illuminating, or perfitting [Page 96]others are comprehended: & such Religi­ous, not only as they attend to their owne saluation, but also as they professe the helping of others, are properly in a state, because they haue a perpetuall obligatiō to both those kinde of workes; and euen as they are employed in help of their neigh­bours, in this respect, they excell Secular Curates, who according to S. Thomas. and M. Doctour himselfe, are not properly in a state (which requires immobility) as hereafter we shall see. The same Reli­gious differ also, from a Regular Bishop; because to be a Regular is meerely acci­dentall to Episcopall state, but the very vowes of those Religious, whose proper Institute is to perfite, both themselues, and others, should wholy cease, if they were restrained, only to their owne perfection. Moreouer superiours in all Religions, if by their lawes they be perpetuall, are in a particular manner in both the foresaid states of perfection, as in my next questi­on shalbe declared. Nowe, I speake of Religious in generall, abstracting from particular Institutes, or Offices, as also of Bishops, not considering, whether they be Secular, or Regular,

[Page 97] 5 This being presupposed, it is not hard to answere the first comparison: by saying, that a Bishop is in a state, which supposeth perfection already acquired, & a Religious man in a state, not supposing, but yielding meanes for acquiring perfe­ction. The Bishop is in a state ordained of it selfe to perfect others: A Religious men in the state of perfecting himselfe. And this is a [...]l that Deuines vnderstand, when they say, that Bishops are Illumi­natours, and Perfectours; others to be illuminated, and perfected. The Bishop then is in a state, which presupposeth, but doth not giue perfectiō, which a Religious state doth not presuppose, but giue: soe that we may truely say: The state of a Bishop is higher, the state of a Religious mon happier: That more to be honoured; this rather to be embraced. And hence it is, that the more voluntary, the election of a Religious life is, the more commen­dable it is, and contr [...]riwise, the state of a Bishop is so much more securely vnder­taken, the lesse it hath of a mans owne will, and election, but proceedeth from necessity, o [...] such Obedience, as cannot be contradicted. For the more such a dig­nity [Page 98]is pretended, the greater danger it apporteth.

6 That the state of Bishops, doth not so wholy ouersway the Religious state, as that there be not many good things in Religion, which are wanting in Episcopal state, is manifest by many reasons. A vow made of not accepting a Bishopricke, is valid, and holy: A vow not to become Religious, is wicked, and of noe force. If one haue vowed Religion, he doth not satisfie his vowe by accepting a Bishopricke, as is defined cap. Pe [...]tuas de voto: where the Pope answereth to one, who after a vow of Religion, had accep­ted a Bishopricke: Vt si conscuntiam suam sanare desiderat, Episcopatum relinquat, et votum suum impleat. If he would cure his soule, he should relinquish his Bishoprick, and fulfill his vow. And that this was not onely a Counsell, or meerely for auoiding scandall, is prooued out of S. Thomas. For he brings it,S. Tho. [...]. [...]. q. 189. a 3. ad 1. in proofe of another matter, which certainely obligeth of it selfe, abstracting from scandall, namely, that a certaine Priest, who after a simple vow of Religion, accepted an Ecclesia­sticall Benefice, was bound in consci­ence [Page 99]to leaue all, and enter into Religion, which, as I sayd, he prooueth by the a­foresayd cap. Per tuas. What the Pope declared of him who had a vow of entring into Religion, may with proportiō be ap­plyed to a purpose, or vocation to such a state, that it is not, in the sight of God, satisfyed by another course of life, al­though it were a higher calling. Besides, to desire a Religious state, is by the whole Church of God commended, and all vowes are changed into Religious Profession; To desire a Bishopricke, euen for what is best in it, namely for the good of soules, according to S. Thomas 2.2. q. 185. ar. 1. seemes presumption; Valent. Tom. 3. disput. 10. q. 3. punct. 2. & there wants not, who sayth, that commonly it is a deadly sinne, but this belongs not to me to define. Onely, out of the premises, I may inferre, that something there must be, wherein a Religious state, surpasseth that of a Bishop; otherwise it were not lawfull to vow, not to accept a Bishop­ricke, seeing no lawfull vow can be made of that, which hindereth matus bonum, a good in all respects greater: A vow of Religion might be fulfilled by being a Bi­shop, if to be a Bishop, were wholy bet­ter: [Page 100]To desire, yea to procure a Bishop­ricke, were noe lesse commendable, then the desire, or seeking to be a Religious man, if the state of a Bishop, doe con­tayne the whole perfection, and commo­dity of a Religious state. Moreouer to be made a Bishop doth not dissolue Matri­monium ratum, matrimony contracted, but not consummated,Ioan. 22. in extran [...]g. v­nica de voto. as Ioannes 22. doth define of holy Orders: but it is a point of Faith, that Rel [...]gious Profession doth d [...]ssolue it. A Religious man when he is made Bishop doth still remaine a Religi­ous man,S. Thom. 2 2. q. 185. [...]. 8. as S. Thomas teacheth out of the Canons, and it is the common consent of Deuines; so as if a Bishop with leaue re­nounce his Bishopricke, and returne to his religious Order, he neede not make a new Profession: A Bishop, if he become Reli­ligious, forsaketh all that belongs to the Iurisdiction, and office of a Bishop. The same Angelicall Doctour 2.2. q. 184. a. 8. ad 4. sayth, that it is an argument to proue the excellency of Religious mē aboue Pa­stours inferiour to Bishop, as Curates, or Archdeacons, that when such enter into Religion they wholy relinquish their for­mer offices; whereas Religious men, being [Page 101]made Curates, neuer cease to be Religiou [...]. If this be so, I may likewise thence argue, some great perfect [...]iō in a Religious state, which for Episcopall dignity is not relin­quished, whereas a Bishop entring into Religion leaueth all Episcopall I [...]risdicti­on, and functions:Vole [...]t tom. 3. disp. 10. q. 2. pi [...]cto 4. yea there want not who affirme, that a Religious man is not made Bishop without some dispensation; and Boniface the 8. in cap. si [...]eligiosus de elect. in 6. makes void the consent of a Re­ligious man, accepting of his owne ele­ction to Prelacy, without leaue asked, & obtained of his Superiours, and in punish­ment of that fault, doth make inualide the election it selfe. Wherefore, as a Bi­shop cannot become Religious without leaue of the Pope; so a Religious man ac­cording to the Cano [...]s, cannot so much as ye [...]ld his consent to be elected a Bishop, without leaue of his Superiour: yea there is this difference, that the consent of a Re­ligious man, without his Superiours leaue, is vnlawfull, and inualide: But a Bishop elected may freely without any leaue enter into Religion, becau [...] by his election, [...]ll he be confi [...]med in his Bishoprick, there is contracted noe spirituall mariage b [...]wixt [Page 102]him and his Church; and in this there is the same reason of a Bishop only Dele­gate, in respect of that countrey, for which he hath no more, then a Breue of Delega­tion, and ad beneplacitum, because a Bi­shops spirituall mariage is only with that Church. of which he hath his Tytle (for Mariages are not ad beneplacitum, but re­quire permanency) yea a Bishop both ele­cted, and confirmed, if without leaue he Professe in Religion, the act is valid; and that it is not also lawfull, proceedes not from the nature, or any intrinsecall, and inseparable perfection of Episcopall digni­ty, but only from the Churches prohibiti­on; as likewise the inseparable Mariage, betwixt the Bishop, and his Church, ari­seth only from Ecclesiasticall command, according to the truer opinion of Deuines: for we dayly see renunciations of Bishop­ricks, and translations of Bishops from one Diocesse to another, vpon ordinary occa­sions, which could neyther be lawfull, nor valid, if the mariage betwixt the Bishop, and his Church, were de iure diuino, a de­uine precept. For, in deuine precepts, the Pope cannot validly dispense, without some particular cause, and yet if the Pope [Page 103]once giue leaue for a Bishop to renounce his Bishopricke, the renunciation is valid, although we should suppose no cause at all. And finally, to giue a Bishop leaue to become Religious, there is required no o­ther cause, beside the priuate good of the Bishops soule, supposing his Church be o­therwise prouided of a sufficient Pastour. All which considerations, are manifest ar­guments, that somewhat may be found in a Religious state, wanting in the state of a Bishop, although still it is true, that the state of a Bishop is higher.

If any demannd, wherein this par­ticular perfection of a Religious state con­sists? My answere is, that for full satisfacti­on to this question, I wish the Reader could once peruse, that golden booke, of Hieronymus Platus, de bono Status Religiosi, where he shall finde this argumēt, so copi­ously, solidly, and eloquently handled, that he will neuer repent himselfe, of hauing red, so pleasant, and profitable a volume. In briefe, I say, that it may seeme to con­sist, in multitude, facility, continuation, & perfection of perpetuall acts of vertue, and effectuall meanes, speedily to get, securely to conserue, and plentifully to increase per­fection, [Page 104]which if we speake properly as it is intended to be gotten by a sta [...]e of per­fection, consisteth not in charity howsoe­uer, but eyther in multitude, and perfection of Acts of charity, with as much continua­tion, and litle interruption, as our mortall life will giue leaue, or els in an Habit, with particular reference to the sayd frequency, and continuation of such Acts, as Su [...]rez doth well explicate this matter.Suarez. de Rel. tom. 3. l. c. 4. And cleare it is, that for attaining of such a perfection, as we haue described, vpon earth there is no state,Suarez. loc. cit. c. 19. n. 22. like to that of a Religious life, wherein (sayth the same learned Deuine) a man both auoydes the daūgers, to which Bishops are exposed, and by multitude of holy works, may recompense, the want, of some perfect actions, proper to Episcopall state.

8 To all which, we must add, that these aduantages are found in Religious state, in a particulari excellent manner, namely, in a kinde of life, proper to the time of Grace, by obseruance of the three Euangelicall Counsells, Pouerty, Chastity, & Obedience, which,S. Tho. 1.2. q. 104. a. 4. in corp. as [...]. Thomas teacheth, are proper to the New law. And truly, abstracting from all other respects, the Counsells of [Page 105] Pouerty, and Chastity, haue I knowe not what prerogatiue, by being in a manner consecrated by the Practise, and, as I may say, deïfied in the Person of him, who for our sake, and to giue example of all vertue, vouchsafed to assume our nature. And in this particular, there appeares a maine dif­ference, betwixt a Religious man, and a Bishop, who is not at all bound to pouer­ty, and to chastity, he is obliged only as o­ther Priests, by a vow annexed to holy Orders, which yet proceedes but from the Churches Ordination: in so much as a Bi­shop, not in holy Orders, Elected, may lawfully marry, and some also hold, that a Bishop confirmed, may doe the same, but of this I doe not dispute, yet if he marry it is valid. For my parte, I had rather want whatsoeuer perfection, wherein a Bishop may surpasse a Religious man, then be in a state, not requiring of its nature and es­sence Chastity, as the state of a Bishop doth not, whereas the state of a Religious man doth necessarily, and essentially imply that Angel-like perfection. Besides, if by occasion of sollicitous, & exact endeauour, to obserue the only vow of Chastity, with great purity, and perfection, all vertuous [Page 106]Priests by experience finde, how many o­ther vertues must be practised, and come annexed with that one, what shall we say of the triple knot of Chastity, Pouerty, and Obedience? How many vertues must in it, be necessarily tied togeather?

9 With these commodities, proper to Religious state, are to be ioined, two other, most important considerations, of security, and Immobility, wherin a Religious state, exceedeth that of a Bishop. Security from euill, and Immobility in good, are great points of happynes, and participations of the Saints felicity in Heauen. And in the busines of our saluation, euery small addi­tion to true, and not presumptuous Hope, ought to be greatly esteemed. For as Phi­losophers say, that a lesse knowledge of more perfect obiects, for example, of God, or Angels, is to be preferred, before a grea­ter knowledge of inferiour things, as of the elements, or mixt bodies: so in maters that concerne Eternity, a state more secure, & lesse subiect to change, is in that, to be pre­ferred, before a state, higher, but not so secure, or immoueable. It was a worthy saying, of a great Preacher, that men in e­lection of Episcopall state, are apt to haue [Page 107]their eyes vpon certayne considerations, which would quickly vanish, if they made another reckoning, and duly pondered, for how many soules they are accoun­table; and perhaps they would finde, that euen in a rich Bishopricke, they pawne their owne soule, for so great a number of other mens, that for each one, they receaue in payement, not a shilling by the yeare, and inferiour pastours, scarce two pence for each soule comitted to their chardge. A dreadfull reckoning! It was likewise a wise, and witty conceipt, of another great man, that in this world, mē are most estee­med for Gratiis gratis datis, that is, for such guifts of God, as haue reference to our neighbour, as learning, power of wor­king miracles &c. and I may adde, high­nes of degree and the like; But in the next life he shalbe most regarded, who is most replenished, with gratiis gratium facienti­bus, such guifts, as render a soule amiable, in the eyes of almighty God, as Humility, Pouerty, Obedience, Chastity, mortifica­tion of our will, and passions, and the like; and that the distribution of Superiours, & Inferiours theare, wilbe in a farre different fashion, frō what we behold here. What­soeuer [Page 108]therefore in speculatiō, be truly sayd of the height, & dignity of Episcopall state (which indeed cannot be too much exal­ted) yet in practise, and for election, a Re­ligious state by a particular man, ordina­rily is to be preferred, as more secure [...] yea, for this respect of security, and in regard of innumerable other helps,Ita docent Rich. in 4. d 38. art. 6 quest. 1. An­gel. verb Re­ligio [...] num. 16. cited by Suar. de Rel. tom. 3. l. 5. c. 8. n. 2. who sayth that it is a thing to be noted. which make sweet, & easy the apprehended burthen, & yoke of a Religious life, some good Deuins expressely teach, that euery one should iudge a Religious state to be agreeable to his forces, vnlesse by certaine cōiecture, or experience, he be assured of the contra­ry. That a Religious state, is also more im­moueable, then that of a Bishop, hath beene already sufficiently proued, because Bishops dayly leaue, or change their Bi­shopricks, by diuers wayes, but a Religi­ous man, neuer ceaseth to be such, euen al­though he be assumed to the highest state in Gods Church, which is that of a Bishop. Besides, the immobility of a Religious state, ariseth from the obligation of perpe­tuall vowes, which certainely bind by the law of God; but it is not certayne, that the Mariage of a Bishop with his Church, pro­ceedeth from any Deuine precept, yea it [Page 109]is more probable, that it comes only from the Ordination of the Church, as before hath beene touched.

10 Neither is this perfecton of a Religi­ous state profit [...]ble to the Religious mā a­lone, but oftentimes disposeth him further, to the helping of his neighbours, with much security, profit, freedom, & extensiō, as S. Fer ardirus Senensis, after refusall of three Bishopricks, professed that he would not be tied to such a dignity, to the end he might mors plētiful [...]y, and freely bestowe himself vpon the helping of his neighbour: and a certaine famors preacher, after he had bene from Religion, assumed to a Bishopricke, was accustomed to say, that it hapened to him, as to a virgin, who be­fore mariage is respected, & much sought after, but being placed in wedlock, is as it were forgotten: soe he while he re­mained a priuat Religious man, was fol­lowed by innumerable multituds, but after his contract with a particular Church, few did looke after him. And not vnlike to this was that prudent saying of a holy, learned, and wise Bishop, who was most willing that one of his clargie should en­ter into a certaine Religious Order, because [Page 110](said truly zealous Prelate) wheras other­wise might haue a Parish Priest, but in some one Church by taking a Religious course, he would be, as it were, a Curate, in many O [...]ocesses: And there haue not wanted Religious men, who refused a gre [...]ter honour, then Episcopall, not onely for humility, but particularly that by re­mayning in Religion, they might be more vsefull, for the common good of soules.

11 The perfection of a Bishop con­sists in this, that by his office he is obli­ged to enlighten others, & if occasion re­quire, to giue his life for his flocke, which occasion seldom happeneth. To those two obligations, the Bishop is tyed by Iustice, in regard of maintenance, and honour afforded him by his flocke, or by the vertue of Fidelity, in respect of a cen­taine implicit pact, where by he obligeth himselfe when he is made Bishop. But Religions men, meerely vpon charity, or Religion (more noble vertues, then Iu­stice or, Fidelity) do illuminate others, & aduenture their liues for the sauing of soules: whereto some Religious are oblig­ed, not only by their Institute, but by [Page 111]particular vowe, made to that effect. And here I cannot but cast my selfe, at the feete of our Reuerend, English Cleargy, who for sole Charity without expectation of any recompence except from God, doe faithfully labour the cōuersion of our Coū ­try, and I make bold to say, they would be vntimely Counsellers, if any should be making I know not what propositions, of Parishes, and Parish Priests, whereby no­thing else could be in these times gayned, but the change of Charity, into some infe­riour vertue, and forfeyture of that glory, comended by our Sauiour, to his Apostles; Gratis accop [...]stis; gratis date, Matt. 10.8. what you haue freely receiued, bestowe freely: to say nothing of the strict obligation, which by being Curates, they should vndergo for so poore wages as before hath bene touched. Sure I am, that diuers of our Clergly, would neuer haue bene Preists, but that by occa­sion of the present state of England, they might without any recompence, helpe, and voluntarily expose their liues for the good of others.

12 Merit doth not consist in office, but in the acts thereof. Let the whole worlds experience decyde, whether Secular Pa­stours, [Page 112]or Religious men, do in fact, more enlighten mankind, by preaching, rea­ching, filling libraries with learned vo­lumes, reducing hereticks, through Europe; and conuerting infidels in both the Indies, Iaponia, China, &c. So as their vncessant labours, with howerly hazard of their liues, haue no more narrowe extent, then the vast course of the Sunnes motion: And the late Feast of one of these good men, namely, S. Francis Xauier, puts me in mind of a Disticke, made of him, to this very purpose:

Nascitur occiduis; at Eôis occidit oris,
Hoc tantum differt: caetera Solis habet.
He sets in th' East, but riseth in the West,
Except in this; a Sunne hee's for the rest.

This Charity of Religious men, in exposing their liues for the conuersion of Infidels, & of their greater fitnes, for that purpose thē of secular Priests, my Lord Phillip Roue­nius, Archiepiscopus Philippensis, and the Popes vicar for Holland, doth plainely ac­knowledge, in his Treatise Demissionibus, parte tertia, with this addition, that, such places being once prepared by Religious [Page 113]men, the secular Clergy were to enter into them: as if there could be a better nurse for the Child, then the mother that brought it forth. S. Paul sayth: 1. Cor. 4.15. If you haue ten thousand Pedagogues, yet not many Fa­thers, for I begot you in Iesus Christ; insinu­ating, that one who hath begotten a soule in Christ, by his conuersion, ought with him to be in greater reckoning, then ten thousand Instructours, which yet the sayd Archbishop, a sauourer of the secular Cler­gy, makes secular Priests to be, compared to Religious men, into whose labours he would haue them enter. But of the fitnes of Religious men, to preach, administer Sa­craments &c. I shall haue occasion to speake after a while, and now will ad­dresse my selfe to the second comparison, betwixt Religious men, and Pastours infe­riour to Bishops, to whose sacred Dignity we willingly yeild precedency, and there­fore none can take it ill, that I haue made longer stay, in a lower place.

13 Yet before I end this point, I must set downe what M. Doctour, in the end of his 11. Chapter, sayth out of S. Tho­mas: S. Th. 2.2. q. 185. a 8. in co [...]p. That the State of Religion is in way to perfection, and the State of a Bishop, belonges [Page 114]to perfection as a certayne maistership of per­fection, Hen [...] Gand. quod lib. 12. [...]. 29. and (sayth he) Henricus de Ganda­uo handling this question, whether the Reli­gious [...]or the Bishop be in the greater state of perfection, concludeth in th [...]se words: Status Praelatorum so h [...]thet ad statum Religiosorum &c. the state of Prelates hath that Compari­son to the state of Religious, which the st [...]te of maisters, hath to the state of schollers, but the maister ought to be perfecter th [...]n his sch [...]ller. And agayne: Quando aliques Reli­giosus deductus est ad summum aliquid & perfec [...]um, tunc primum est idoneus, vt assum­matur in Praelatum. When a Religious man is brought ta an high, and perfect degree of perfection, then fi [...]st he is fit to be assumed for a Prelate. And so (sayth M. Doctour) where a Religious man endeth, there a Bishop or pastour beginneth, and the Bishop layeth his foundation, on the Religious mans toppe, and roofe. But truly this inference of M. Do­ctour is buil [...]ed vpon a sandy foundation, and he must eyther renounce the auctori­ty of S. Thomas, or of Gandensis, for this Authour speakes of Prelates inferiour to Bishops, wherin his doctrine is directly against S Thomas, who as we shall see anone, ex prof [...]sso doth prefer Religious [Page 115]Priests, before such Pastours; And Henri­cus de Gandauo holdeth also, that all such Pastours, euen Parish Priests, are properly in a state, which is both agaynst S. Th. 2.2. q. 84. art. 6. and M. Doctour himselfe, who in his 11. chap. num. 14. expressely sayth: To a state immobility is required, which the Pastour, nor Bishop, hath not. And lastly, the same Gandensis, in the que­stion by M. Doctour cyted, holds that to be in a State, is sufficient, to haue a purpose to remayne therein, without any other obligation, or immobility, which is not only against the common doctrine of Deuines, but also agaynst M. Doctour, in the sayd 11. Chapter num. 13. for which he alleadgeth likewise S. Thomas 2.2. q. 184. art. 4. where this doctrine is ex professo de­liuered. And I wonder, M. Doctour would alleadge Gandensis particularly for Bishops, he speaking of inferiour Pastours; and why in his inference vpon the sayd Authours words, he should put in Bishop, or Pastour, saying, where a Religious man endeth, there a Bishop, or Pastour, beginneth, whereas before the sayd Authours words, he had put only Bishop saying, Henricus a Gan­dauo handling this question, whether the Re­ligious, [Page 116]or the Bishop, be in the greater state of perfection concludeth &c. But most of all I wonder, that M. Doctour would ground his saying, that a Bishop layeth his founda­tion on the Religious mans top and roofe, v­pon a doctrine not true, whatsoeuer the thing inferred be in it f [...]lfe, I meane, con­cerning the dignity of Bishops, whereof we haue already spoken at large. Certes, if Bishops lay their foundation, vpon the most perfect in Religious perfection, such as are taken immediatly from a secular life, haue reason to looke in good earnest, vpon what toppe of perfection they lay their foundation. And truly this doctrine of Gandensis ought to be a point of dayly me­ditation, for all secular P [...]stouis. Finally, out of this same place of Ga [...]densis, M. Doctour might rightly haue inferred, that Religious perfection is an excellent dispo­sition to make a good, & worthy Pastour, with greater profit to others, and lesse daunger to ones selfe. For there is great diff [...]rence betwixt a maister of Perfection, (as Gandensis sayd Pastours are) & a mai­ster of Sciences, by teaching whereof the maister himselfe both renewes the memo­ry of old, & increaseth in new knowledg: [Page 115]But while a man teacheth his neighbour to be perfect, he may be in daunger to for­get, and impaire his owne soules good, vnlesse he come well furnished with the spirituall substance of solid vertues.

14 Now, as for the second com­parison of Religious men with inferiour Pastours, it may be done; eyther by comparing them absolutly, which o [...] them are more perfect in themselues; or els relatiuely to others, which of them is more fit to help soules, by preaching, teaching, administring Sacraments &c. In both questions, I will refer my selfe, to that Cherubim for knowledge, and Se­raphim for sanctity, the Angelicall Do­ctour S. Thomas of Aquin. He therefore 2.2. q. 184. art. 8. hath this expresse que­stion: Vtrum presbytri Curati, & Arch [...]d [...]a­con [...], sint maior [...]s perfectionis, quam Religio­si: Whether Priests hauing c [...]re of soules, and Archdeacons, be of greater perfection, then Religious men. His resolut [...]on is, that in State, the Religious as Religious, excelleth the secular Pastour, as Secular: If both of them be Priests, and both haue care of soules, as (sayth he) plertque Monachi, & Canonici Regulares habent, Most part of [Page 118]Monks, and Canon Regulars haue, they wilbe equall in Order, and Office; so as the only question remaining, is; Whether a Religious Priest, by reason of his State, be of greater perfection, then a Secular Priest Curate, in regard of his Office? The Saints answere is, that in goodnesse the Re­ligious Priest excells, and the secular Cu­rate in difficulty; bonè conuersandi; of li­uing vertuously, amongst so many occasiōs of dangers in the world; which difficulty, saith he, in his answere ad 6. doth not increase merit, because that difficulty only increaseth merit, which ariseth from the nature of the works in themselues, and not from extrinsecall occasions, not auoided by secular persons, which difficulty of works in themselues is greater in Religion, by reason of the strictnesse of Regular obser­uance, besides that the Religions doe also merite much, by voluntary quitting them­selues, of all such dangers, & impediments, as swarme in the world. Wherefore accor­ding to S. Thomas, the Religious Priest ex­celleth secular Pastours, in goodnesse, and in that difficulty, which is both full of merit, & security; beside that particular increase of merit, by flying from those impedi­ments [Page 119]of the world which m [...]ke the paths of vertue far more difficult: in so much as the same Saint teacheth, that the Religi­ous state, in comparison of the Office of Pastours, is like an Holocaust (the most perfect of all Sacrifices, wherein the whose victim was bestowed on almighty God) compared to other sacrifices, which were in a manner parted betwixt God, & man. The same verity S. Thomas proueth, be­cause a Pastour may enter into Reli [...]ion & wholy cease to be a Pastour; but a Rel [...] ­gious man is neuer so made Pastour, as he doth not retaine his Religious stat; whi [...]h is a signe, that the calling of a Pastour, is not so perfect as is a Religious vocation. Moreouer, the Canons of the Church do not only permit, but also much commend the entering of Secular Pastours, into Reli­gion, Quia meliorem vitam se [...]ui cupiunt: [...] Because they desire to embrace a better [...] de of life, saith the Toleran Councell. And Gregory the Great, lib. 10. epist. 39. ex­hotteth, that by all meanes such a spirit be nourished, saying: Quibus valetis ad­hortationibus, Pastorali admonitione su [...]en­dite, vt feruor huius desiderit in eo no [...]epe [...] eat. By the best exhortation you are a [...] [Page 120]inflame him (a secular Cleargy man, desi­rous to enter into Religion) that the feruour of such a desire may not in him wax cold. Yea S. Thomas 2.2. q. 189. art. 7. proueth out of the Canon law,19. q. 2. [...]. Due sunt leges. that a secular Cu­rate may enter into Religion, although his Bishop should exprestely be against it: E­tiam contradicente Episcopo, eat liber, no­stra authoritate: Although the Bishop op­pose himselfe, let him fr [...]el [...]e [...]ter your Authority, sayth the Pope. Now, as M. Doctour in his 11. Chapter n. 15. proueth out of S. Thomas▪ S. Th 22 q. 184. a. 7. that the state of a Bi­shop is a state of gre [...]ter perfection, then that of a Religiou [...] man, because otherwise it were not lawfull for him to be made a Bishop, because that were, retrò aspicere, to looke backe: So we may say, that seing secular Pastours, may enter into Religion, it must be an argument, that Religious state is more perfect, for the very same rea­son, least otherwise they should be con­uinced, retrò aspicere; to looke back. Which reason will wax more strong on our side, if we call to mind, that a Religious man can­not yield consensent to his election to be a Bishop, without his own superiours leaue, whereas a secular Curate may lawfully en­ter [Page 121]into Religion, euen agaynst the will of his Bishop. This whole resolution of Saint Thomas, is much confirmed, by an other doctrine, deliuered by him in the same 184 question art. 6. That only Bishops, & not inferiour Prelates, are in a State of per­fection, wheras in the next precedent Ar­ticle, he bad purposely taught, that Reli­gious men are in su [...]h a State.

15 To these determinations of S. Tho­mas, I will a [...]de nothing, saue only, that Religious state is of Deuine institution, as certaine [...]y Archdeacons, Deanes, Vicars &c. are not: and Suarez (in the same place,Suarez to. 4. in 3. p. disp. 25. n. 17. which M. Doctour cited, to prooue that Bishops are of Deume Ordinance) is of opi­nion that the Diuision of Parishes, with Institution of Parish Priests, (euen in gene­rall) is not de iure diuino, of Deuine iustitu­tion, because (sayth he) the Church might deuide more Bishopricks, and assigne to each one a lesse territory, ordayning that the Bi­shop himselfe, should be immediate Pastour, in his whole Diocesse, which he might go­uerne by Vicars, and Chaplins, which, al­though were not perhaps vniuersally expedi­ent, yet it is not directly, and clearly against the law of God. S. Thomas also, sayth of all [Page 122]inferiour Pastours, that in respect of the Bishop,S. Th. 2.2 q. 184. a 6. ad 2. they are sicut Baliui ad Regem; & in his answere ad [...]. he teacheth, that they haue not principall care of soules, but some particular administration by Commission from the Bishop. But howsoeuer this mat­ter be, at least, it is not so certaine, that the Institution of Parish Priests is de iure Di­rino, a Deuine institution, as it is, that Reli­gious state was instituted, by our Sauiour Christ.

16 And this shall suffice for the com­parison of Religious men with Curats, if their callings be considered in themselues. Which comparison is alwais to be vn­derstood, betwixt Religious men, & such Secular Priests, as are Ordinary Pastours, or Curats. For in England, where all Priests both Regular, & Secular, attend to the help of soules only by particular Mission. Priui­ledge, and Delegation, there is no doubt but Religious men are to be preferred; see­ing both in Order, of Priesthood, & Iuris­diction, or Office they are equall, and still the state of Religious, as Rel [...]gious, is more noble thē that of Secular, as Secular, which no Catholike can deny.

17 For the second comparison, whe­ther [Page 123]Religious, or secular, are more fit to help soules, by preaching, and other such Ecclesiasticall functions, let vs heare Saint Thomas teaching, that Religious men are made more fit for the performance of such functions of Preaching,S. Th. 2.2. q. 187. a. 1. teaching &c. by reason of the exercise of sanctity, which they haue vndertaken, adding: Stulium est dicere, quod per hoc quòd aliquis in sanctitate promouetur, efficiatur minus idoneus ad spi­ritualia officia exercenda. Et ideo stult a est quorundam opinto dicentium, quòd ipse sta­tus Religionis impedimentum affert, talia exequendi: It is a foolery to say, that by being improued in sanctity, as man is made lesse fit for the performance of Ecclesiasticall functi­ons. And therefore the opinion of some, who say that the very state of Religion, brings an impediment to such functions, is a foolish opi­nion Quorum errorem (saith the same Saint) Bonifactus Papa exeludit, dicens, vt habe­tur 16. q. 1. Sunt nonnulls, nullo dogmate fulti, andacissimè quidem, zelo magis ama­ritudinis, quàm dilectionis inflammati, asse­rentes Monachos, qui mundo mortui sunt, & Deo vinunt, Sacerdot alis officii potenti â in­dignos. Sed omninò labuntur. Quod oftendit, primò quidem, quia non so [...]r [...]riatur Regulae; [Page 124]subdit enim: neque enim Beatus Benedictus, Monachorum Praeceptor Almificus, huiusce­modirei aliquo modofuit interdictor. Et si­militer nec in aliis regulis hoc prohibetur. Secundò, improbat praedictum errorem, ex ideoneitate Monachorum, cum in fine Cap [...] ­tuli subdit: Quanto quisque est excellentior, tanto, & in illis (scilicet spiritualibus oper [...] ­bus) potentior. Whose errour Pope Boniface doth reiect, saying: There are some suppor­ted by no verity, who inflammed with zeale of bitternes, rather then of charity, do most boldly affirme, that Monks who are d [...]ad to the world, and liue to God, are not worthy of the power of Priestly office. But they are alto­geather deceyued. Which he prooueth. First, be­cause it is not agaynst the Rule: For [...]e ad­deth; S. Bennet, the Father of Monks, did not any way in his Rule forbid it. And like­wise it is not forbid in other Rules. Secondly, he disproueth the foresayd errour, by the fitnes of Monks, for such functions, saying: By how much a man is more excellent, by so much he is more powerfull in those (spirituall fun­ctions.) Behold the doctrine of the grea­test Prelate, and one of the greatest Schol­lers, vpon earth; a Pope, and a most lear­ned Saint. To those vulgar obiections (Vi­ta [Page 125]Monachorum &c. The life of Monks sig­nifies subiection, not an office of teaching, or gouerning others: Monachus non Doctoris &c. The profession of a Morke is not tea­ching, but weeping, & the like) S. Thomas in the same place ad 3. answeres; that such sayings only signify, that Monks precisely by being Monks, doe not acquire authority to preach &c. but not that by being Monks, they haue any thing repugnant to the perfor­mance of such actions: And secular Priests, and Bishops, not only as secular, but also as Priests, or Bishops haue no power law­fully to performe such actions, till it be granted them by lawfull Superiours.

18 And conformable to this Doc­trine, hath also bene the practise of Gods Church, which thought it selfe best furni­shed, whē Prelacy, & Religious state were ioyned together. For, as, Baronius witnes­seth Negari non potest, Baron. Ann. 328. n. 25. fuisse Monachismū, Seminarium in Ecclefia Dei sanctissimorū Episcoporum: It cannot be denied, but that Monasticall Institute, hath bene in the Church of God, a Seminary of most holy Bishops. the same most famous Author in the same place num 23. hauing related, how that Conquerour of the Arians, S. [Page 126]Athanasius, chose Monks for Bishops of diuers Churches, giueth this reason for it: Quòd for [...]ssimos, hos fore sciret, aduersus in­gruētem Ary haeresim in pugnatores, et qua­si munitissimas turres contra Miletianos Schismaticos. Because he was sure, that they (Monkes) would prooue stoutest, against the approaching Arian haeresie, and as it were most strong Forts against the Mi­letian Schismaticks. It is therfore very strang, and full of partiality, what M. D. auoucheth, in his 8. Chap. num. 12. that the titles of Patriarhes, Archbishops, Priests, and Pastours, are not titles of Orders of Religious, as they are Religious, but only of the secular Cleargy. Doth the name of Bishop, Priests &c. signify only a secular Bishop, or Priest? I alwaies con­ceiued, that there had bene both Regular, and Secular Priests, till now I heare a new doctrine, that the title of Priest, is a title of the Secular Cleargy. The names of Bi­shop, and Priests, are, I grant, names of the Clergy, but that they are names of the Secular Cleargy, I doe not vnderstand. If I would make comparisons, I could say that Religious, men as Religious, although they haue not so much as prima [...] tousu­ram, [Page 127]which is but a disposition to Orders, yea euen before they be Religious, and are but in their Nouiship, or way to a Religi­ous life, yet they enioy the Priuiledge, Ca­nonis, & Fori, as if in act they were Cleargy men, which is not granted to Secular per­sons as Secular: But my meaning is not to say al, that with great truth might be spokē of a Religious state, in comparision of the Secular Cleargy; & therfore, I wil go fore­ward to note, what I finde in M. Doctours 9. Chapter. n. 19. That the assumption of Regulars to the Cleargy is extraorainary; and n. 13. that Regulars were admitted, and sent to preach to the Gentils, yet that office doth not appertaine to them, [...]ure or­dinarto, by the ordinary lawe, but by Pri­niledg, and extraordinarily. I wish M. Doctour would explicat what he meanes, by extraordinary, or ordinary lawe. Is there any Lawe forbidding Religious men to be made Priests, or to receaue authority to preach, if once they be Priests? or will be saie that, Secular Priests, only by being Priests, may lawfully preach without any other Commissiō? I am sure, neither he, nor any Catholicke can say so. Wherein then consists this difference of Ordinary, and [Page 128] extrordinary, betwixt Secular, & Religious. It is well knowne that in some countries, none but Religious men can be made Bi­shops, and in our cuntry, the Monkes of S. Benets most holy Order, were so much of the Cleargy, that a mere compara­tiue, or conditionall mention of like Right in these dayes, made such impression in some, that there was to that particular framed an answere, with title of a Para­lel.

19 As for conuersion of Infidels, it is manifest, with how prosperous successe Religious men haue, & in these our daies do still employ themselues, in that labori­ous good worke, more then the secular Cleargy. And although some misapply the old saying; that Monkes out of their Monasteries, are like fish out of the wa­ter: yet they may be pleased to remember, that if those fishes, had neuer bene out of the water, English men might haue bene in an euerlasting fire. For such fishes are also Fishers of soules, as our Sauiour stiled his Apostles; and fishermen make no pro­fession, to liue onely in the water. Yet Religious men cannot but acknowledge it, for a singular benefit, that for repay­ring [Page 129]the vigour of their soules, they may vpon occasion, retire themselues to their Religious houses, and so returne to the helpe of others, with lesse danger to thē ­selues. Moreouer that those Fishers, who conuerted England, were of the very same Order of S. Bennet, Apostolatus Benedicti­norum in Angli [...]. which now is soe much impugned, hath bene prooued in a learned Treatise, by better arguments then M. Doctour will easily answere, if he chance to be of a contrary opinion.

20 And indeed, there is great reasō, why Religious persons, in regard of their state, should be fit for the conuersion of soules, because by s [...]nctity of life, they are more vnited to him, whose instru­ments mens endeauours are, in that great worke: and he who with profit, and se­curity, will shine to others, must first burne within himselfe. Our Sauiour Christ hauing called a certaine person to be his follower,Luc. 9 [...] and he demanding [...]espit, on­ly for the burying of his father, was bid, to leaue the dead, and that he should goe and preach the Ghosple; Tu [...]utem vade, e [...] annūtia regnum Det: whereby our Blessed Lord, gaue men to vnderstand, that a good disposition to be an excellant prea­cher, [Page 130]is a resolute, and actuall leauing all. S. Ambrose in this point is round, [...]. [...]ros [...]s. 10. in Luc. and cleare. Ille (sayth he) confirmare iubetu [...] fratres suos, qui dixit: Omnia reliqui­mus, et secuti sumus te. The charge of strengthening his brethren, is committed to him, who sayd: Behold we haue left all, and followed thee: Which are the very wordes, from which Catholicks prooue the three Euangelicall Counsels, of Pouerty, Cha­stity, and Obedience, vowed by Religi­ous men.

21 M. Doctour in his 9. chap. n. 16. sayth: That Popes sent Regulars to con­uert Countries, because Bishops, & Priests were busied in gouerning their subiects, and so could not be spared. But this reason is in­sufficient. For, besides Pastours, who haue subiects to be gouerned, there are numbers of the Secular cleargy, free from any such charge; yea all Pastours, except such Bishops as are maried to some par­ticular Church, may easily leaue their charge, & employ thēselues vpon the con­uersion of Infidels. And I know, M. Do­ctour will not approoue his owne reason, when he shall finde it to be so very like, to that of Beza, cited by Bre [...]lay, in his [Page 131]liues of Luther &c. chap. 7. Non magnop [...]r [...] (saith Beza) nobis de legatione ad vemotis­simas aliquas gentes laborādum, cum nobis domi, et in propinquo sit satis, superque quod nos, & posteros nostros exerceat. Has igi­tur potius tā longinquas peregrinationes, lo­custis illis, lesu nomē ementiētibꝰ, relinqua­mus. We are not much to trouble ourselues, with missions to certaine remote coūtries, se­ing at home, and neere at hand there is e­nough, and more then enough to busie vs, and our posterity. Let vs then leaue such farre pilgrimages, to those locusts, who vsurp [...] the name of Iesus. Wherefore we must of necessity, finde some better cause, why Re­lious men, haue bene so much emploied in conuerting Infidels, then that which was by M. Doctour alleadged; which I doubt not, will be obuious to the reader, out of the reasons, which haue bene giuē, of the great fitnes of Religious men, to deale with soules. But it must not be ex­pected from mee, who am resolued not to giue any offence, to yeild likewise a reason, why Secular Priests, do [...] not be­stow themselue [...] vpon those [...]ssions, as much as Regulars doe.

22 Out of what hath [...]ine said, the [Page 132]indicious Reader will of himselfe infe [...] two thinges. First that for such as in­tend to be made fit, to be of the Cleargy, the neerer their education comes to a Re­ligious life, the better it will dispose, and more enable them for their intended course, of profitably dealing with their neighbours. Secondly in how great an errour they are, who conceiue, that al­though it be not vnlawfull for Religious men, to imploy themselues in helpe of their neighbour, yet such functions are not so connaturall to them, as to Secu­lar Preists, but do, as it were, put them out of their element, and straine their pro­per vocation, as if Religion, were or­damed only to perfect a mans owne soule. But the contrary is manifest, out of what hath bene said, in this Question. For see­ing the proper, and essentiall end of Reli­gious State, is the perfection of charity, which according to S. Thomas, consists not only in the loue of God,8. Tho. 2 2. [...]. 18 [...]. a 3. [...] corp. but also of our neighbour, it clearely followeth, that when Religious men attend to help their neighbours, either in regard of their proper Iustitute, or by particular com­mission, and Mission from lawfull Supe­riours [Page 133]they do a thing most connaturall to their state, as the end of euery thing, is most connaturall to that thing in respect whereof it is the end. That the loue of God, & our neighbour, is the very end of a Religious state, [...] Tho 2.2. q. 188. a. 2. in corp. is a propositiō by S. Tho­mas taught, in these expresse tearmes; Reli­giou [...]s Status ordinatur ad perfectionē cha­ritatis, quae se extendit ad dilectionem Det, et proximi. A Religious State is ordained to the prefection of Charity which extends it selfe to the loue of God, and of our neigh­bour. Wherefore the Genericall Notion of Religious State, which tends to the per­fection of charity, finds it self, as it were, in his naturall center, and at home, when it doth compasse the full latitude, & per­fection of Charity, by being contracted by a Difference, or a Particular state, imploied in perfitting both our selues, and others: and the con [...]ary persuasion, can­not, I must needs say, be interta [...]ed by any man, well grounded in D [...]uinity, or who rightly vnderstands the nature, of a Religious state of perfection, for it were in effect to say, that it is not connaturall for Charity, to loue both God, and our neighbour, or for the, Beauficall vision, [Page 134]in God to represent created obiects. No, No: Mary, and Martha, Contemplation and Action are two; yet sisters: diuers; but not disagreing: noe more then the loue of God, doth hinder the louing of our neighbour.S. Th. 2.2. q. 188. [...].2. in corp S. Greg. Naz. [...]at. 20. For, as S. Thomas teach­eth, Contemplation belongs to the loue of God, & Action to the loue of our neighbour. And therfore S. Gregory Nazianzen men­tions it as a singular commendation of Saint Basil, that he conioyned the Actiue, and Contemplatiue life; vt quemad­modum terra & mare, ita etiam hae duae vita commoda sua inter se communican­tes, ad vnicam Des gloriam concurre­rent. That as the Sea and Land doe, so these two kindes of life, communicating with one another their seuerall commo­dites, might both concurre to the only glory of God.S. Th 2.2. q. 188. artis. [...].3.4. S. Thomas hauing taught that a Religion may be instituted for the works of an Actiue life, and also for a holy warfar; thence makes a most reasonable inference, that it is, Conuenientissimum, Most conuenient, that a Religion be insti­tuted to preach, and exercise the like spi­rituall functions: which the Religious of [...]he sacred Order of S. Domiusck, who [Page 135]haue their very name frō Preaching, haue, and doe still most happily performe, to the vnspeakeable good of soules. If then, it be most conuenient, that Religious men should preach, heare confessions, and the like; certainely it is very cōnaturall to their vocation so to doe. And out of this dis­course may be taken a cleare and weighty reason, in confirmation of all, that hath bene said, of the great fitnes of Religious men, to deale with soules. For in what proportion, a Religious state is more fit to attaine the perfection of Charity, then a secular vocation, in the same degree, it maketh a Religious man more fit, to help his neighbour, then secular as secular are, because, as hath bene said, charity extends it selfe also to our neighbour. I might add, that in Gods Church, there wāt not many, who either are about election of a Reli­gious state, or else desier in the world, to imitate the practise of Religious men, by contemplation, and such like meanes of vnion with almighty God: and to the direction of those well minded persons, noe doubt but experience of such exer­cises, gotten in Religion, doth much con­duce. And this shall s [...]ffice concerning [Page 136]the comparison of Religious men with secular Pastours or Prelates, wherein all that hath bene said is to be vnderstood only of the States, & Vocations in them­selues, not of the Persons, whose merites, are knowne only to him,Act. 1. Qui cord a nouit omnium; Who knowes the hearts of all men. It remaineth that I explicate a point, or two, handled by M. Doctour obscurely, & with disaduantage to Religious state.

23 The first is: That perfection cōsists in Charity, and that the three Euangeli­call Counsels are noe perfection, but instru­ments, and meanes to atraine perfection: by which manner of speach, so indistinct­ly proposed, the reacer may be apt to value the Luargelicall Counsels, much vnder their true worth. And therefore to cleare the matter: We must obserue, that the sayd Counsells may be considered either as of themselues they are apt to remooue impediments of Charity, and loue of God, for example, Pouerty, and Chastity euen of their owne nature, do ne­cessarily free a man from the daungers, temptations, and impediments of the loue of God, which arise our of the actuall possession of riches, & enioying the plea­sures [Page 137]of sensuall delights, and in this sen se they may be tearmed, but meanes, or in­struments to get perfection: or else they may be considered, as proceeding from particular vertues of Religion, Tempe­rance &c: and in this consideration, they are not onely bare meanes, or instrumēts. but also effects, properties, compamons, perfections, and causes of Charity, which alone makes not a man wholy perfect as the essence of a man without properties, & accidents is but imperfect. And there­fore S. Thomas 2.2. q. 184. a. 3. in corp. sayth that: Secundariò et instrumentaliter perfectio cōsistit in Consili [...]s; secondarily, and instrumentally Perfection doth consist in the Counsels, which is a thing much different from only instrumentally, as in the same place he sayth, that the perfection of Christian life consists in charity, prin­ [...]ipaliter quidem secūdum dilectionem Dei. secundariò autem secundum dilectionem proximi; Principally in the loue of God, and secondarily in the loue of our neighbour: in which words, we see that secondarily, and onely instrumentally, are tearmes much different, for who will say, that the loue of our neighbour is only an instrument of [Page 138]christian perfection? It being indeed an act of charity, or perfection, although not the prime, but a secondary act of that vertue. And whosoeuer reades, the first Article▪ of the same Question, will quickly finde, that other vertues beside Charity, are more then instruments, or meanes of per­fection, which M. Doctour could not but see, hauing cited the same place in his 11 chapt. num. 10. Yea S. Thomas fur­ther teacheth,S. Tho. 1. p. q. 5. a. 1. ad. 1. & q. 6. a. 3. that a creature is not ab­solutely good, nor perfect, by his essence, but by accidents, which perfect that essence; and this is particularly verified in charity, which is the essence of perfection, because it is increased by meritorius acts, not only of it selfe, but also of othervertues, whereas naturall substances, cannot be in­trinsecally increased in their natures, by their accidents, or proprieties: yea if one do embrace Pouerty, Chastity, & Obedi­ence, meerely out of loue to God, with­out the proper motiue of any othervertue, they are formall acts of charity, and in noe sense, can be properly tearmed only in­struments thereof. Seing then the Euange­licall Counselles, sealed with a vowe, are acts of great, and noble vertues, it [Page 139]followeth, that they are not only most fit instruments to attaine perfection, which consists in charity, but also are causes, and perfections of perfection it selfe, not only remoouing impediments of Charity, but also affording it positiue helps, & increase. All which wilbe more confirmed, by what I am nowe going to say, concerning a second point of doctrine, auouched by M. Doctour, either confusedly, or not tru­ly.

24 In his 11. Chap. num. 12. thus he writeth: There is only this diffe­rence, betwixt Religious, and other Christi­ans, that the Religious leaue all things ac­tually, other Christians must leaue them in preparation of mind. The former leauing of them actually, is noe perfection, but an instru­ment of perfection, vnlesse it be ioyned with the loue of God, in which consisteth perfecti­on. By these words the Reader may be apt to conceiue, that Religious state, hath no perfection more then all other Christians, because they differ only in actuall leauing all things, which, as he sayth, is noe per­fection. Yf therfore he vnderstand, that in the preparation of minde, common to all Christians, and that which is proper to Re­ligious [Page 140]men, there is no difference, the do­ctrine is Vntrue, in [...]urious to Religious State, and against M. Doctour himselfe, who in the same place distinguisheth that perfection of Charity, necessary to all Chri­stians, by which they are resolued not to offend God mortally, from another perfe­ction of Charity, by which we so loue God, as we are ready, not only to obserue the comman­dements, but also the Counsells for his loue, & this is the Charity of Religious: Ergo, euen according to M. Doctour, the difference betwixt Religious, and other Christians, is not only in the actuall leauing of all things, but also in a precedent greater perfection of Charity, and readinesse of minde, of which the actuall leauing of all things, is but an effect: ergo, according to his owne do­ctrine, it cannot be true, that Religious men differ from others, only in leauing all things actually. If his meaning be, that be­twixt Religious men, and other Christians, there is difference euen in preparation of minde, and not only in actuall leauing all things, then he spoke but confusedly, when he sayd, that only in leauing all things actu­ally, Religious men differ from other Chri­stians, who must leaue all things in preparatiō [Page 141]of minde. I therefore must craue leaue, to di­stinguish the preparation of mind, to leaue all things, proper to Religious men, from that other, which must be found in all Christians, if they meane to saue their soules: and I cannot doe it better then out of S. Thomas, who plainely tells vs: That it is the lowest degree of Charity, S. Th. 2.2. q. 184. art. 3. ad 2. to loue no­thing aboue, or against or equally wih God. This is the necessary perfection of all Chri­stians. But Religious men professe an hig­her degree of perfection by abandoning, not only what is contrary to the loue of God, as vtterly destroying it, but also whatsoeuer may be an impediment, to the very perfection thereof; which is a diffe­rence so remarkable, that the same holy Doctour in resp. ad 3. doubteth not to cō ­pare, the perfection of Secular men, to a child new borne, and that of Religious persons, to a man of perfect growth. Like­wise a. 8. in resp. ad 6. he teacheth, that it diminisheth the perfection of vertue, when one doth not loue it so much, that he is reso­lute to auoyd the impediments thereof, accor­ding to the Apostle 1. cor. 9. Omnis qui in agone contendit, ab omnibus se abstinet: and thence he prooueth, that although secular [Page 142]Pastours be in a calling, wherein vertue is exercised with greater difficulty, then in Religion; yet their vocation, is not so per­fect, as a Religious state, because the very auoiding of worldly impedimēts, is a thing very meritorious. And if S. Thomas speake thus of secular Pastours, we may easily i­magine, what difference he puts betwixt Religious, and all Christian secular People. I thinke there is no Father, who will not make a great difference, betwixt two Sonnes, of which the one cared no more, for contenting his Father, then were pre­cisely necessary, not to incurre danger of being put by his inheritance, but the other out of pure filiall loue, and respect to his Fathers pleasure, were sollicitous, and re­solute, to performe his very propensions, and councels, although not seconded with any command, or commination of punish­ment. This is the difference betwixt a Reli­gious and Secular state.

25 What M. Doctour sayth, that the actuall leauing of all things, is no perfection, but an instrument of perfection, must be vn­derstood, as aboue I haue explicated, num. 23. For, as such actuall leauing of all things, proceeds from the vertues of Temperance, [Page 143]Religion &c. it is not a meere instrument, of charity, or perfection, but doth meritori­ously greatly increase the same: yea, I add further, that according to the doctrine of S. Thomas, and others,S. Th. 2.2. q. 189. a [...] ▪ ad 2. that Religious pro­fession, like to Baptisme, or Martyrdome, remits the whole payne, due to our sinnes, the very externall act of leauing all things, hath a particular effect, which the internall act should not haue without it: To say no­thing of the Laurea, or accidentall Glory, of perpetuall Virginity, or of that preroga­tiue of Iudicature, promised by our Sauiour to such as for his sake leaue al. Sedebitis &c. you shall sit vpon twelue seates, iudging the twelue Tribes of Israel. Matth. 1 [...] That also which M. Doctour saith: that the actuall leauing of all things is no perfection, but an instrument of perfection, vnles it be ioyned, with the loue of God, in which consistteh perfection; needeth some explication. For if he vnderstand, that the actuall leauing of all things, conduceth not to perfection, vnlesse it proceed from formall acts of Charity, the doctrine is not true, because, not only acts of the loue of God, but also of other vertues, being per­formed in state of grace, and with other re­quisite conditions, doe meritoriously in­crease [Page 144]grace, and charity. If his meaning be, that the actuall leauing of all things is but an instrument of perfection, vnlesse it be ioyned with the loue of God, that is; vnlesse a man be in state of grace, it is not merito­rious of perfection, which consisteth in cha­rity; he sayth no more of this leauing all, thē he might haue said, of the acts of Faith, and Hope, and all other whatsoeuer good works, euen acts of Charity it selfe, for ex­ample, perfect contrition, of which none are meritorious of Grace, vnles the doer of them be in Gods fauour: and yet it ought not to be denied, but that as other acts of vertue, so the leauing of all things, may dis­pose a man for returning to Gods grace, and in that sense, be an instrument, or meanes to get perfection. Moreouer, it is not cleare what M. Doctour meanes in saying, that the actuall leauing of all things, is but an instrument of perfection, vnles it be ioyned with the loue of God. For, when it is ioyned with the loue of God, is it more thē an instrument of perfection? If it be; then perfection consists not only in the loue of God, but also in other vertues; and so Pouerty, Chastity, and Obedience, shalbe more then instruments of perfection. If the [Page 145] actuall leauing all things, euen when it is ioyned with the loue of God, be noe more then an instrument of perfection, and not perfection it selfe, what then ment he by that exception (Vnlesse) saying, that actuall leauing all is but an instrumēt of perfectiō, Vnlesse it be ioyned with the loue of God? for these words seeme to signifie, that if it be ioyned with the loue of God, it is more then an instrumēt according to that Rules Exceptio firmat contrariam regulam.

26 Howesoeuer men may flatter themselues with a Preparation of minde; yet it is not an easie thing, to possesse riches for example, and not to affect, and be possessed by them. Seneca said well Qui non facit cum potest nunquam voluit. He who does not a thing when he may, giues to vnderstand that he neuer had a serious will to do it. If men do not loue what they enioy, why finde they so great reni­tency to depiiue themselues thereof? O howe fewe keepe riches, freedom of their will, and the like, meerely out of election, and iudgment, that so to do, redou [...]s to the greater glory of our Creatour [...] We think our affections are at freedom, when vpon triall we find it otherwise, like a bird, [Page 146]that thinks not it is in the net, till it make offer to fly; or as our soule, and body, ne­uer feele their mutuall loue, till by approa­ching death, they are vpon their parting. That wonder of wit, and miracle of san­ctity, blessed saint Augustin, percerued not how much his affection was tyed to his most religious mothers life, till he beheld her depriued of life, and himselfe of her company. Q [...]oniam (saith he) dese [...]e­bar ‘tam mag [...]o eius solatio,8. Aug. Cos. [...]9. c. 12. sauciabatur anima mea, & quasi dilaniabatur vita, quae vna facta erat examea & illius. Because, I was depriued of so great a comfort, my soule was wounded, and my life as it were torne in peeces, which till then had bene composed of hers and mine. And that which pierced his soule was, ex con­suetudine simul viuendi dulcissima & cha­rissima repentè dirupta, vulnus recens: a greene woūd made by the suddaine brea­king off, of that custom, which I had to liue in her most sweete, and most deare conuersation.’ That young man in the Ghospel, felt not how much his heart was vpon his wealth, till by our Sauiour he was told of actuall leauing all, although before that time in preparation of minde [Page 147]he had left all, because he had keept the commandements: vade & v [...]nde omnia quae habes▪ & da pauneribus, & veni, & sequere me, said our blessed Sauiour.Matth. 19 Go sell all thou hast, and giue it to the poore, and then come & follow me. For vpon those words, he fell into a fit of melancholy, & rather chose to be rich thē perfect, athough persuaded to such a state, by the, words of the Word Incarnate. Let vs beare S. Au­gustin, speaking of that same young man to this very purpose: Nescio (saith he) ‘quomodo cum superflua & terrena dili­guntur,S. Aug. epist 34. ad Pau­lin. et The­rasiam. arctnis adepta, quam concupita cōstring unt: Nam vnde tristis ille dis [...]essit, qui consilium vitae a [...]ternae co [...]sequen [...]ae quaerebat à Domino, cùm a [...]dister vendē ­da esse omnia sua, si vellet esse perfectus, nisi quia maguas, vt Euangeli [...] loqui­tur, habebat diuitias? Aliud est e [...]n nol­le incorporare quae [...]esunt, aliud ram in­corporata diuellere: I [...]la velut cibi repudi­antur, haec velut membra praeciduntur. I knowe not how when superfluous and earthly thinges are loued, they more straightly tye vs if once they be possessed, then when they are onely desired (and much more may I say then, when they are [Page 148]neither possessed, nor desired, but volun­tarity contemned) for why did he, who asked our Sauiours aduise, howe he, might be saued, go away with a sad heart, vpon the hearing, that if he resolued to be perfect, he must sell all, but because, as the Ghopell witnesseth, he was in posses­sion of great riches? For it is one thing, to haue a resolution, not to incorporate to vs those things we haue not, and an other to teare awaie things already incorpora­ted: Those we refuse as we refuse meates; but these are cut off like parts of our body.’ The reason of this daily experience is, be­cause the passion of loue, being agreable, and sympathising with ones naturall incli­nation, is of great power to sway our soule, but not so easie to be felt, and dis­cerned, except by its effect, namely, so [...] ­row, when we finde ourselues depriued of what we loued. For sorrow being a sowre, and thornie passion, and much repugnant to our nature, is speedily discouered. To which purpose S. Thomas in proofe that in some respect,8. Tho. 1.2. q. 35. a. 6. men do more flie sorrow, then thirst after delight, alleadgeth S. Au­gustin saying: Amor magis sentitur, cum cum prodit indigentia. 8. Aug. 10. De [...]rinit. Loue is most felt, [Page 149]when it is discouered by want of the thing we loued: because, as S. Thomas saith, from such want procedeth sorrow. Therefore let not men trust the presumed indifferency of their affection, if they haue neuer tryed it by want of what they enioy.

27 Holy men were not ignorant, that perfection chiefly consisteth in Charity, & knewe as well, as men in th [...]se dayes knowe, what preparation of minde did sig­nify: Neuerthelesse by word, writing, & example, they exhorted men to reall, & actuall leauing all. And indeed there is greate difference, betwixt that young man, who, to keepe his riches, refused to keepe our Sauiour company, and the blessed Apostles, in whose name, S. Peter could truely say;Matth. 19. Ecce nos reliquimus omnia: Behold w [...], (not onely in pre­paration of minde, but actually) haue left all, and followed thee. It is a case wor­thy to be deplored with many teares, that in worldly, and temporall affaires, men will vse their vttermost diligence, & em­ploy all their wits, for comp [...]ssing such poore ends, with all possible security; and yet in the maine busines of our soule, we are willing to finde our any seeming pro­babilities [Page 150]or speculatiue distinctions, and all in effect to foster our already setled af­fections, by supposed preparatiō of minde, and the like goodly gay pretexts: where­as we cannot but knowe, that it is not an easie matter, to possesse riches, and enioy pleasures, vpon a pure motiue of vertue, or onely for the loue of God, not for the riches, or pleasures themselues; or to make sure, that our loue to them be not greater then it ought, & so make vs loue God either in a lesse degree, or with lesse frequented acts, while we loue other things, rather with him, then for him.

28 But, say these mentall Saynts, A­braham was rich, and yet a Saint: And I say, that when they shall haue but one onely sonne, the sole hope, not onely of the Posterity of Abraham, but of all faith­full beleeuers, & yet besides a meere pre­paration of minde, haue their arme actu­ally stretched out, to be his executioner, and to offer him in sacrifice, vpon Gods commaund; then say I, most willing I should be, to proclaime these men also for Sa [...]nts, if I did not further consider, that the case of those auntient Fathers, was much different from ours; because in [Page 151]those times our Blessed Sauiour, had not promulgated the three Euangelicall Coū ­sails, the excellency whereof was reserued for the law of Grace. For as S. Bernard sayth: It was sufficient for the auntient Fathers, to follow the Spirit of God one­ly in spirit, but after the Word was made flesh, and dwelled in vs, S. Bern. Hom. Ecce nos re­liquimus o [...] ­ [...]. in himselfe he gaue vs a paterne of perfection, to be imitated in act, & as it were corporally, that following hym with both our feete, we may noe more like the Patriarch lacob hault in one of our thighes, namely by an imperfect halfe i­mitation, in preparation of minde & not in act, or to vse S. Bernards words onely in spirit, and not in act, and as it were corpo­rally. Blessed S. Hierome speaking of cha­stity, one of the three Euangelicall Coū ­sells, hath these diuine words: Satim vt Filius Dei ingressus est super terram, nouam sibi familiam insli [...]uit, vt qui ab angel [...]s adorabatur in caelis, haberet Angelos et in terris. Assoone as the sonne of God came vpon earth, he made [...]o himselfe a new fa­mily, that he who r [...]s adored by Angells in heauen, should likewise haue his Angells on earth. I wil cōclude this point with the au­thority of two Saints vnder one: S. Thomas [Page 152]cyteth out of.S. Th. 2.2. q. 186. a. 4. ad 2. S. Augustine lib. de bon [...] coniugale cap. 22. these words: Melior est castitas coelibum, quàm castitas nuptiarū. Esse autem castus sine coniugio potuit (A­brahā) sed tunc non oportuit. The Chastity of single persōs, is better thē that of mariage, Abraham might haue bene chast without mariage, but it was not agreeable to those times. And then the Angellicall Doctour writes thus: Neither because the Fathers in the old law, did ioyne perfection with ri­ches, and m [...]trimony, which proceeded frō heroicall vertue in them, therefore weaker persons ought to presume, that they haue so great vertue, as with riches, and matri­mony, to attaine to perfection: as no man aduentures vnarmed to set vpon his enemies because Sampson with no other weapon, thē the [...]aw bone of an asse slew his enemies. For those auntient Fathers would haue kept Pouerty, and Chastity, more carefully then we, if it had bene sutable to those times. Thus far S. Thomas: and I only add, that by this very example of Abraham, we are taught, that the best way to know, how farre our affections be engaged, is an offer in good earnest, to be depriued, of what we possesse: in so much that God himselfe, [Page 153]after that great triall, sayd to Abraham: Now I know thou fearest God, Gen. [...], and for my sake, hast not spared thy only Sonne. Farre are they from Abrahams loue to God, who feare not to hinder their Children, from Sacrificing themselues to their Creatour, in a Religious life; therein passing the bounds of Parents authority, while to enioy their children a while on earth, they seeme con­tent that both of them, for Eternity, in a lower degree enioy God in Heauen. For their Children to be Religious, is but of Counsell: but for them, or any els, not to hinder so good desires, is a strict Commaūd: And the holy Councell of Trent, Conc. Trid. sess. 25. c. 18. de Regular. doth in­flict Excommunicatiō against all those: Qui sanctam Virginum, vel aliarum mulierum voluntatem veli accipiends, vel voti emitten­di, quoquo modo sine iusta causa impedierint. Who without iust cause, shall any way, hinder the will of Virgins, or of any other women, to be veyled, or to make a Vow. And although the Councell, Excommunicate only such, as hinder women, because ordinarily they are more subiect to feare, and the like pas­sions; yet thence we may gather, that in like manner to auert Men, from a Religi­ous course, cannot be free from a great [Page 154]sinne: especially if with it be ioyned, some diminution of the perfection of Religious state in generall, or els detraction, from some Religious Order in particular, which may happen in such as are eyther inexpe­rienced, or not well affected to such a course.

29 And heere I might make an end of this Question, if M. Doctour in his 9. Chapt. num. 9. Had not touched a point, which I cannot wholy passe ouer vnmentioned. In that place he writes, as if he were not vn­willing, the Reader should beleiue, that the Apostles made no vow of pouerty, and consequently were not Religious men. My meaning is not, purposely to handle this question, contenting my selfe, with saying; That it is the doctrine of the greatest De­uine, S. Thomas; S. Th. 2.2 q. 88. a. 4. ad 3. S Aug. 17. ciu. c. 4. of the greatest Doctour of Gods Church, S. Augustine; Of one, of the greatest authority vnder heauē, a Pope, namely Pius the fourth affirming, that cer­taine Religious mē are of that Order,Nau. com­ment. 4 de Regular. n. 7. apud Suar. Tom. 3. de R [...]l. lib. 3. [...].3. n [...]m. 6. which was instituted by the Apostles, as Nauar re­lateth. And no mā I thinke, can with reason deny, that the Apostles themselnes were Religious men, if once he grant, that they did institute a Religious Order, of Cleargy [Page 155]men. Lastly, M. Doctour, according to what himselfe writeth, must yeild to this verity. For in his 11 Chap. num. 9. He saith; that those words Matth. 19. (There are Eunuches which haue gelded themselues for the Kingdome of heauen) are most properly to be vnderstood, of those that vow Chastity, be­cause such haue neither the act, nor morall, or lawfull power of generation. By the same reason, I may say, when the Apostles an­swered our Sauiour; Behold we haue left all, and followed thee, those words are most pro­perly verified in those, who haue riches nei­ther in act, nor power. For it is but an im­perfect leauing of a thing, if it may be re­taken at ones pleasure. And if M. Doctour, out of those words (Behold we haue left all) deduce not a vow of Pouerty, how will he out of the same words, prooue a vow of Chastity? because after our Sauiour had ex­plicated the Counsell of Chastity, by the name of voluntary Eunuches, the Apostles said: Behold we haue left all, namely, both wiues, and goods: and to say, the same words (We haue left all) as they signify Chastity, imply a vow, and not as they sig­nify Pouerty, or leauing of goods, were a meere voluntary explication. And there­fore [Page 156] S. Augustine in the place aboue cited, explicated the words of the Apostles, (Be­hold we haue left all) of a vow of Pouerty, as S. Epiphaniu [...], out of those words of our Sauiour (There are Eunuches who haue gelded themselues &c.) teacheth, that the Apostles had a vow of Chastity, saying; Quinam hi fuerunt, S. Epiph. H [...]ref. 58. qui se castrauerunt, prop­ter regnum caelorum, nisi generosi Apostoli, a [...] Monasticam vitam d [...]gentes? Who were those, who gelded themselues, for the King­dome of Heauen, but the generous Apostles, and such as lead a Monasticall life.

30 And it is most conformable to all reason that the Apostles, who were not only Maisters, but also paternes of of all perfection, should haue all the per­fection of other Christians, not repugnant to their state, as certainely Religious vowes are not, which is cleare in Regular Bi­shops, who still remaine true Religious men: yea, a Bishop not Regular, may with merit make a simple vowe of Pouerty, be­cause there is no Deuine, or Humane law to the contrary, & by an happy necessity, it compelleth him more to auoide superfluous expences; besides that the vowe it selfe, as an act of Religiō, is very meritorious. As for [Page 157]Hospitality, Religious Bishops may keepe it, noe lesse then other not Religious, who are likewise bound, to imploy in good vses, what is superfluous to their state, and to more, Regular Bishops, are not ob­liged. It is well knowne, that in England, none kept greater Hospitality, then Reli­gious men. Certainely, in all reason, none are more like to be liberall to others, then who by vowe are bound, not to make any thing their owne. If the Apostles obserued the Euangelicall Counsails, there is no reason to thinke, but that they did it by vowe, which of it selfe addeth a great perfection, and as S. Thomas saith, it is a point of perfection, Opusc. 18. de perf. vi [...]. spirit. c. 15. not only to performe a perfect worke, but also to vowe it, be­cause both the worke, and the vowe, are Counsails: And who will deny, but the Apostles were carefull, to doe their works, in the most perfect manner? All this willbe much confirmed, if we call to minde, what in this Question I alleadged out of S. Thomas: That the Counsails, of which we speake, are proper to the New Law; S. Th. 1.2. q. 108. a. [...]. and it is no way credible that the Apo­stles would want a great perfection, proper to the Law, which they themselues [Page 158]first promulgated to the world.

31 What he citeth out of Vasquez, Vasq. 1.2. disp. 165. that the three vowes of Pouerty &c. are not sufficient to make a Religious man, vnles the Church by her Decree, or Consent, admit them, and ordaine that the same vowes, made before a Superiour, shall make a man Religious, is nothing a­gainst vs, who for the present, only in­tend, that the Apostles obserued the three Euangelicall Counselles, by obligation of vowe, and abstaine from other particular disputes, debated amōg moderne Deuines, as may be seene in Vasquez cited by M. Doctour &,Vasq loc. cit. Suar. de Rel. tom. 3. l. 2. c. 4.15.16. in Suarez at large; particularly in the places noted in the margent. Neither is it vnknowen to M. Doctour, that for diuers times, there haue bene different conditions required, to make one a Reli­ous man; as also that Religious Profession, hath not alwaies had the same effects, which nowe do necessarily accompanie it. Only in generall, we must say, that if to be Religious men, did well agree to the Persons, and Office of the Apostles, as I haue already proued, none knew better then they, what was requisit to place them in that State, neither would they be [Page 159]carelesse in performing, whatsoeuer they knew, necessary to that end. M. Doctour, citeth also Vasquez, as affirming, that out of the facts of the Apostles, nothing could be gathered of certaintie, wheras Vasquez, although he saith the thing is not certaine, yet he expresly unbraceth the doctrine of S. Thomas, that the Apostles made a vow of Pouerty, which M. Doctour concealed, and only brought as much as seemed for his purpose. He also citeth Vasquez, in such a fashion, as one would easily thinke, that he prooued, the state of B [...]shops, not to require Pouerty, because they must be Hos­pitall, whereas Vasquez giueth no such rea­son. As for that which M. Doctour seemeth willing to hold, that Ananias and Saphira, vowed not Pouerty, Coffeteau a Reuerend,Coffeteau Discuss. cap. 12. lib. 2. 01 learned Father of the Order of glorious S. Dominicke in his booke against Marcus Antonius de Dominis, sheweth that it is a­gainst the whole streame of Fathers, citing to that purpose S. Augustine, S. Fulgenti­us, S. Gregory, S. Athanasius, Saint Basil, Ruffinus, Cassianus, and, (saith he) al­most all besides. But truly I must needs say, M. Doctour seemeth propense enough, to take hold of any occasion, Authour, or [Page 160]Opinion, that may lesse exalt Religious state: whereas indeed through the sides of Religious men the whole Cleargy is woun­ded. For while he telleth mē (so indistinct­ly as he doth) that Vowes, are but instru­ments of perfection; that perfection con­sists in preparation of mind; that actuall leaning of all things is no perfection, and the like; Maried people may vse the same dis­course, concerning the vowed Chastity of Priests, and so while he speaketh lesse ho­nourably of our two Counsails, of Pouerty, and Obedience, he much extenuateth that of Chastity, common to Religious, and all Priests, in whome the Church is not con­tent, with only preparation of minde, but in so perfect a profession, requireth actuall Chastity, which is a signe, that voluntary actuall Chastity, is some especiall perfecti­on. Besides, this Euangelicall Counsaile of Chastity, is so prized by Gods Church, that in Concessions otherwise most ample, for chaunging Vowes, this is alwaies excep­ted, as likewise a vow to be Religious; wherein God grant people be as tender, as they ought, seeing vnlesse the cause be very sufficient, all such Dispensation is inualid, and can serue only to send a man to Hell, [Page 161]with a kind of quiet conscience.

32 I will not say, the spirit, but sure I am, the stile of some of this age, is far dif­ferent, from the writers of ancient dayes, in commendation of Religious State: and some are wont to obserue, that oftentimes, those, who either haue had greatest obli­gation to Religious men, or vocation, to such a State, are the men who (to say no worse) speake most reseruedly, in commen­dation of Religion, which although per­haps (for its part) may well say,Tob. 3. as Sara said, of her husbands; Illi forsitan me non fuerunt digni: yet on their behalfe, I wish they may in this businesse so proceed, that when the true colour of things shall begin to appeare, by the light of an approaching future life, they may haue no iust cause, to frame a different iudgement, and fill their soules with other wishes, thē at this present they do. S. Thomas to prooue that it was conuenient, to Institute Euangelicall Coun­sels,S. Th [...]. 1.2. [...] 4. hath this weighty syllogisine; B [...]ms amici consiliis anima dulcoratur (Fr [...]tterb. 27.) Sed Christus maxime est sapi [...]ns, & amicus; ergo, eius consilia maximam vtilita­tem continent. The soule is comforted by the good counsels of a friend (as Salomon saith) [Page 162]But our Sauiour Christ is most wise, & most friendly: Therefore his Counsels are most profitable. If it be so hearty a comfort, to heare the good, and wholesome Counsels of a friend; Let them consider, whether they may with ground looke for so sweet a cordiall, who reiect the Counsells not of a mortall man, but of God and man; not in some particular businesse, but for the whole course of their life. One thing, such men must giue me leaue not to conceale, because I hold it for a certaine truth, and it concerneth them to know so much: That one of the greatest punishments, which God can inflict, vpon such as haue negle­cted his vocation to a Religious State, is to permit them to runne a course in opposi­tion against Religious men: who, (if they be carefull to answere to their vocation) may in all occasions, find comfort enough, in what they haue so often heard allead­ged, out of that good Religious man, S. Bernard: S. Bern. Hā. Sur. est [...]eg­ [...]um Calor. hum. que [...]. bonas Marg. Quae est ista tam pretiosa Marga­rita, pro qua vuinersa dare debemus, id est, n [...]smetipsos (quia totum Deo dedit, qui seip­sum obtulit) ve possimus eam habere? Nonne haec est Religio sancta? in qua homo viuit pu­riùs, cadit rariùs, surgit velociùs, incedit cautiùs, [Page 163]irroratur frequentiùs, moritur considen­tiùs, remuneratur copiosiùs. What is that so pretious aiewell, for which we ought to giue all, that is, our selues (because he giues all to God, who maketh an oblation of himselfe) for the obtaining of it? Is it not holy Religious State? wherein a man liues more purely, falls more rarely, rises more speedily, walks more circumspectly, receiues diuine influence more frequently, dies more confidently, and is rewar­ded more abundantly.

THE SIXTH QVESTION. Whether Religious, as Religious, be of the Hierarchie of the Church.

1 NOthing is more frequent, then that some persons, who I dare say, scarcely euer red S. Dennys, nor euer were much conuersant in S. Thomas of Aquin (from whom we haue the best and almost only Treatises of the Hierar­chie) will be discoursing of the Secular Cleargy, as if they onely were of the Ec­clesiasticall [Page 164] Hierarchie. And M. Doctour after his wonted manner, is heere redu­plicating Religious, as Religious, but neuer Secular, as Secular, as he ought to haue donne, if he would make the comparison aright. But that had bene against his de­signe, for in such a comparison, it would instantly haue appeared, that Religious would haue had the better, who, if more­ouer they be Priests, or Bishops, in those respects are equall to Secular Priests, or Bishops, and at least as much of the Hie­rarchie as they: which were enough for my purpose. Neuerthelesse, I will endea­uour also to shew, that Religious, euen as Religious, according to S. Dennys, and S. Thomas, cannot be excluded from the Hierarchie of the Church: and so Reli­gious Priests, Pastours, and Bishops, shalbe in more respects, of the Ecclesia­sticall Hierarchy, then Secular Priests, Pa­stours, and Bishops, namely, not onely as Priests, or Bishops, but also as they are Religious.

2 I grant, if we limit the name of Hie­rarchie to Bishops, Priests, Deacons &c. then to say, that Religious not Priests, or Bishops, are not of the Hierarchie, is noe [Page 165]more thē to say, that Religious not Priests, or Bishops, are noe Priests, or Bishops, which surely is noe great mystery. But it should be prooued, with what groūd the name of Hierarchie should be so limited. The holy Councell of Trent defineth a­gainst some moderne heretickes,Sess. 23. can. 6. who would take away all Order, and distin­ction of Degrees, in Gods Church; That there is a Hierarchie, and distinction con­sisting of Bishops, Priests, and other Mi­nisters. But it were temerity, to affirme that the Councell intended to d [...]e as a matter of Faith, that vnder the name of Hierarchie, could be comprehended, on­ly Bishops, Priests, or other Ministers, indued with Order, and Iurisdiction

3 And first of all, it cānot be demed, but that the name of Hierarchy hath a latitude. For, if it hath not; I demaund whether it signifieth onely Order, or only Iurisdiction. If onely Order; then Bishops, Archbishops. Primates, and Patriarches, clected, and confirmed, and consequently indued with full Iurisdiction of Ordinaries, shall not be of the Hierarchy, till they be conse­crated: & so the Supreame Head of the whole Hierarchie, a Pope elected, shall not [Page 166]so much as be of the same Hierarchie, which, I suppose, M. Doctour will not grant. If the word Hierarchie, signify on­ly Iurisdiction, then Priests, Bishops, Deacons &c. shall not be of he Hierar­chie; till they be made Pastours, and re­ceiue power of Iurisdiction, which like­wise is against M. Doctour, chap. 8. n. 2. Therefore I inferre that the word Hierar­chie, hath a latitude, and signifieth distin­ction, both in Order, and in Iurisdiction.

4 Moreouer, I demaund, whether the name of Hierarchie, must signify onely such Order, Iurisdiction, Office, or Mini­sterie, as haue their Institution immedi­ately frō Christ: or else that to make one of the Hierarchie, it is sufficient they be insti­tuted by the Church. If none be compre­hēded, but such as are instituted by Christ, then it will remaine doubtfull, whether such as haue only lesser Orders, as Ostiarij, Lectours, Exorcists, and Acolythes be of the Hierarchie; because diuers Deuines hold, that those Orders were instituted onely by the Church: and Patriarches, Primates, Archbishops, Deanes, Vicar Generals, Archdeacons &c. shal certain­ly be excluded from the Hierarchie, be­cause, [Page 167]as such, they are not of D [...]uine In­stitution: yea, parish Priest, (abstracting from their Orders) may doubt, whether they be of the Hierarchie, because it is not certaine, that their Institution is De­uine. If to make one of the Hierarchie, Deuine Institution be not requi [...]ed, it is a signe, that it hath a great latitude, and that it may comprehend Religious Supe­riours, whose particular Iuris [...]ictions, & Offices, are not immediately from the de­uine Institution, as neyther Archbishops, Patriarches, Primates, Archdeacons, Vi­cars &c. are, although the Institution of Bishops in generall, be from our Sau [...]our Christ, who likewise instituted Re [...]s state in generall: So as Religious S [...] ours, must be of the Hierarchie, [...] we will also exclude Archbis [...]ps, P [...] ­archs &c. who ne no man [...]oth [...] exclude: yea seeing Superio [...]s to [...] ous Orders, are properly Ora [...] [...] Pastours of their sub [...]ects, i [...] that t [...] [...] of ordinary Iurisdiction, and as [...] Pastourship, they are more of the Hierar­chy, then a Bishop only Dele [...]te in [...]es­pect of that place, for which [...] then Delegate. Mo [...]eo [...]er, those R [...]l [...]g [...]o [...] [Page 168]Superiours who by their Office are immo­ueable, and perpetuall, (whereby they are properly in a State) and are obliged to go­uerne, illuminate, & perfect others (which are acts of perfection) are truly in a State of Perfectiō both to be acquired, & already ac­quired, & (in that respect) are in some par­ticular manner, & degree, of the Ecclesiasti­call Hierarchy, more than Secular Bishops, euen Ordinaries, although no doubt in o­ther respects Bishops do farre excell them.

5 That Religious Superiours as such, be of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy, S. Ber­nard (cited by M. Doctour chap. 1. n. 17. to another purpose) doth expresly teach, while together which Primates, Patri­archs, Archbishops, Bishops, and Priests, he puts Abbots in Hierarchie of the Church, saying, as that there (in heauen) the [...]er [...]ph [...]s, and Cherubins, Caeteri quo­qu [...] [...]s [...]ue ad [...]gelos, [...]. ca [...]. 4. & Archangelos, and all the rest, euen to the Angels, & Archan­gels (which M. Doctour translates, all the rest of the Angelles, and Archangels as if Seraphins, and Cherubins were Angels, and Archangels strictly vnderstood, and as they are of distinct orders, as S. Ber­nard heere taketh them) are ordered vnder [Page 169]one head, God; so here also vpon earth, vnder one cheife Bishop, Primates, or Patri­arches, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, or Abbots, and the rest in the same manner. Behold, according to S. Bernard, Abbots, as distinct from Bishops, and Priests, be­long to the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy: yea, he giueth the true reason thereof; namely, because all are ordered vnder one chief [...] Bishop, Christs Vicar. And heere, I haue rea­son, to complaine of M. Doctours dea­ling in the said place, for alledging S. Ber­nard, as if he said, that the Hierarchy of the Church is perturbed, when Abbots are subtracted from the Bishops Iurisdiction; whereas S. Bernard, in the very same place which M. Doctour cites, doth in expresse words, approue the exemption of Abbots from Bishops, and only disli­keth exemption procured out of a spirit of disobedience, pride, and Ambition. His words are: Nonnulla tamen Monasteria, sita in diuersis Episcopatibus, quòd speciali­ùs pertinuerint, ab ipsa sua fundatione, ad Sedē Apostolicam pro volunt are fundatorum, quis nesciat? sed aliud est quod largitur de­uotio, aliud quod molitur ambitio impati­ens subicetionis: Neuerthelesse who can be [Page 170]ignorant, that some Monasteries, seated i [...] diuers Bishopricks, haue from their very foundation, particulary belonged to the Sea Apostolick, according to the will of the founders? But it is one thing what deuotion bestoweth, and another, what ambition, not brooking subiection, do [...]h atempt. But doth M. Doctour indeede thinke, that Pope [...] perturbe the Hierarchy of the Church, by exempting Religious men, from the Iu­risdictiō of Bishops? or would he father on S. Bernard a thing, which neither himselfe, nor any good Catholick will auow? Mau­clerus also, whom M. Doctour in his 10. chapter. n. 23. stileth a learned Doctour of Sorbon, Mancler. de Monarchia 1. partis l. 5. cap. 5. compareth Superiours in Reli­giō, to the Principalities; Secular Pastours, inferiours to Bishops, to Archangels; and Priests, not Curates, to Angeles: So that this learned Deuine, not only placeth Re­ligious Superiours in the Ecclesiasticall Hie­rarchy, but also preferreth thē before Secu­lar Pastours, & other Priests not Pastours; as in the Celestiall Hierarchy, Principalities are an Order aboue Archangels, & Angels. But let vs now out of S. Deunys, & S. Tho­mas, prooue that Religious, as Religious, be of the Hierarchy. This I will do, in that [Page 171]manner which M. Doctour, ought to haue vsed, by giuing the Definition of a Hierar­chy, & by that to haue comprehended, or excluded Religious, or other persons whatsoeuer.

6 S. Dennys, de Eccles. Hierarch. cap. 1. defineth a Hierarchy in this manner. Qui Hierarchiam dixit, omnium simul sacrorum Ordinum dixit dispositionem. He that names a Hierarchy, names the disposition, or due ranking of all sacred Orders. What words are heere, to exclude Religious men? I am sure M. Doctour knowes well, that by sa­cred Orders, S. Dennys is farre from vnder­standing, as some vnlearned person might imagine, Holy Orders of Priesthood, Dea­con, and Subdeacon. But by Orders, he vn­derstands Professions, Institutes, Offices, Degrees &c. as before he had said; Hie­rarchia nostra dicitur, estque, ratio comple­ctens sacra omnia quae ad eam pertinent: Our Hierarchy, is a certaine manner, comprchen­ding all sacred things which belong to it. O­therwise all in lesser Orders, all Bishops, Archbishops, yea Popes, elected, but not consecrated, should not belong to the Hie­rarchy. But why should I seeke, a better interpreter of S. Dennys, then S. Dennys [Page 172]himselfe? Who in his 6. chapt. Titulo. Con­templatio; doth expressely put Monks to be one of the Orders in the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy: and a little after the beginning of the same Chapter, he plainely saith, Summus corum omnium qui initiantur, & perficiuntur, Ordo est sanctorum Monacho­rum. The highest of those, who are initiated, and perfected, is the Order of holy Monks. Before you heard him saying, that, a Hie­rarchy was the disposition of holy Orders, and now, almost word for word, he saith that Religiō is, Ordo sanctorum monachorū: The Order of holy Monks; & addeth, that this Order inde [...]uoureth to expresse the State of the perfecting Order of Bishops, with many other Encomiums of Religious Or­der, inculcating againe, that it is not Me­dij, eorum qui initiantur, Ordinis, sed sum­mi omnium: That it is not of the midle Or­der, of these that are initiated, but of the chiefe of all. What could S. Dennys haue written more, for declaration that Religi­ous are of the Hierarchy? And not only that they are of the Hierarchy, but that they are of it in a high Degree.

7 Out of S. Thomas it wilbe no lesse easy to prooue; That Religious men, are [Page 173]of the Hierarchy. He therefore 1. p. q. 108. art. 1. in corp. saith thus: Hierarchia est sacer principatus. In nomine autem principa­tus duo intelliguntur: scilicet ipse Princeps, & multitudo ordinata sub principe. A Hierar­chy is a holy Principality. By which name of Principality, two things are vnderstood, name­ly the Prince himselfe, and a multitude orde­red vnder the Prince. Are not, I pray you, Religious men, a multitude ordered vnder one Prince, the Vicar of Christ, & S. Peters successour? And if we will put force in the word Ordered, what multitude is more Or­dered, thē that of Religious mē, which hath his very name from Order? In his second Article, he demands, Whether in one Hierar­chy, there be more Orders (of Angels.) And he answers, that there are. Because it should not be an ordered, but a confused multitude, if in it there were not diuers orders. Which diuersity of Orders, is considered according to diuers offices, and acts, as in one Citty there are diuers orders, according to diuers acti­ons: for their is one order of Iudges; another of fighting men; another of such as tille the ground. Marke how S. Thomas doth hold, that diuerse functions, and Acts, are suffici­ent for the distinction of Hierachies, al­though [Page 174]they do not alwaies presuppose Iu­risdiction: And as temporall functions, not implying Iurisdiction, may make one of a Ciuill Commonwealth, so in the same manner spirituall Acts, professions, or fun­ctions, are sufficient to place one in the Ec­clesiasticall Hierarchy. This is also cleare out of S. Paul, in those very Texts, placed by M. Doctour in the Frontispice of his Booke, for proofe of diuerse Hierachicall Orders in the Church. Are all Apostles? are all Prophetes? are all Doctours? haue all the guift of Curing? Do all speake with Tongues? Do all Interpret? 1. Cor. 12. v. 28. Like­wise; And he gaue some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some other Euangelists, and o­ther some Pastours, and Doctours, to the con­summation of the Saints, vnto the worke of the Ministery. Ephes. 4. v. 2. In which testi­monies there are placed functions, ministe­ries, and acts, which import neither Order, nor Iurisdiction, as Prophets, Euangelists, Doctours, Working of Miracles, guift of Tongues &c.

8 S. Thomas goeth forward, saying; In Cities there is a threefold Order: Some are the highest, as the Chiefe men: Some of the lowest ranke, as the vulgar people: Some are [Page 175]of the midle sort; as Persons of better ranke; and so in euery Angelicall Hierarchy, Orders are distinguished. Out of which words, we may gather this ground; That all persons coipso, that they are parts of a Community, do belong to some Order thereof, accor­ding as the community it selfe is gouerned, by way of Democratie, Aristrocratie, or of a Monarchy; and so if it be a Monarchy, as the Church of Christ is, all persons that are parts of it, must like wise be of some Order. and ranke in such a Monarchy (for in Gods Church there is no confusion) yet so, as e­uery one haue a greater, or lesse eminent place, according to the perfection of his calling, and Profession, as we see S. Thomas placeth the common people in the lowest Order in a Citty, and S. Dennys c. 6. pla­ceth in the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy, Peni­tents, in infimo loco, scilicet, inter Purgandos, in the lowest place, namely, among such as were to be purged from their sinnes; and no Deuine will deny, that the very lowest An­gels, belong to the Celestiall Hierarchy, as euen now we haue heard out of S. Thomas. Now, in what degree Religious men are to be placed, in the Monarchy of Gods Church, if themselues were to determine, [Page 176]they would according to our blessed Saui­ours aduise, most gladly sit in the lowest place; but others who are well instructed, in the whole disposition of the Ecclesiasti­call Hierarchy, I [...]c. 14.10. come, and say, Amici ascen­dite superiùs. S. Greg. Na­zian. orat. in laudem Ba­silii. Ascend higher. S. Gregory Na­zianzen tells them, that their Order, is a very great one in the Church; Ecclesiae pars selectior, & sapientior: The more choise, and wiser part of the Church; and in another place, he tearmeth them: The Seruants, and Disciples of God; Orat 1. in Iulian. the first fruites ef our Lords stocke; Pillars, Crownes of Fayth; pretious Margarites &c. S. Hierom. ep. 17. ad Marcellam. S. Hierom saith, that the Quyre of Religious men is: Flos quidam, & pretiosissimus lapis, inter Ecclesiastica ornamenta; ‘A certaine Flowre, and most pretious stone among the ornaments of the Church.S. Bern. lib. de Praecepto & Dispen­s [...]. S. Bernard, demaunding why a Religious life, is called a second Baptisme, gi­ueth this answere: ‘Arbitror ob perfectam mundi abrenunciationem, ac singularem excellentiam vitae spiritualis, quae praeemi­net vniuersis vitae humanae generibus. Hu­iuscemodi conuersatio, professores & ama­tores suos Angelis similes, & dissimiles fa­cit, imò diuinam in homine reformat ima­ginem, configurans nos Christo instar Bap­tismi, [Page 177]& quasi denique secundò Baptiza­mur, dum per id quòd mortificamus mem­bra nostra quae sunt super terram, Christum induimus, complantati similitudini mortis eius. I thinke (it is so called) by reason of perfect renunciation of the world, and sin­gular excellency of spirituall life, which surpasseth all other kindes of humane life. This kind of conuersation makes the Pro­fessours thereof like, and vnlike to the An­gels, yea it reformes in man the image of God, configuring vs to Christ like to Bap­tisme, and finally we receiue a second Bap­tisme, while by mortifying our members which are vpon earth, we put on Christ, being complanted to the similitude of his death.’ S. Augustine, by saying, that it is not in his power worthely to commend a Religious life,S. Aug. l. de [...]orth. Eccl. cap. 31. doth by such silence highly speake in commendation thereof. Hunc Or­dinem (saith he) si laud are velim, neque dig­nè valeo, & vereor ne iudicare videar, per se­ipsum tantummodo, expositum, placere non posse. If I would praise this Order, I am not able worthily to doe it, and am afrayd least I should seeme to be of opinion, S. Diory [...]. eccles H [...]r. cap. 6. that of it selfe alone, it hath not power enough to please. What S. Dennys his esteeme was, of the [Page 178] Order of Religious, we haue already shewed; and in a word, he saith, that it is Ad summam perfectionem euectus, raised to the hight of perfection. Innumerable more praises of Religious life, I might alleadg out of the holy Fathers, but by these al­ready produced, the reader cannot but rest satisfied, what place Religious men do ho [...]d in the Ecclessiasticall Hierarchy. Let vs returne to S. Thomas.

9 In the said Question a. 8. he de­mandes, whether Men be assumed to the Orders of Angels. And his resolution is: That by grace men may merit so great glory, that they may be made equall to Angels, according to euery degree of Angels, which is as much as to say, that men are assumed to the Orders of Angels. If Gratia consum­mata, Grace in his full perfectiō, can place Men in the same Orders with Angels, in the Celestiall Hierarchy; we haue no reason to doubt, but that, a profession, and star of life, most powerfull for attaining of perfection, in grace, and charity of this life, may suffice to place the professours thereof, among the cheifest Orders of the Ecclesi [...]sticall Hierarchy, which is framed to the similitude of that other in Heauen: [Page 179]yea seing the end of the whole Hierarchy, is the perfection of Charity; that profes­sion cometh neerest to the very end, and scope of the whole Hierarchy, which tendeth most to perfection of our soules, consisting in Charity, and loue of God, without which, it importeth nothing to be, or not to be of the Hierarchy. And therefore S. Paule after he had set downe the Hierarchy of the Church,S. Paul. 1. Cor. 12. wherein he saith, God hath placed, Apostles, Doc­tours &c. cōcludeth: Aemulamini autē cha­rismatameliora, let your cheife endeauour be, to attaine Charity, and other vertues.

10 What we haue labored, in proo­uing that Religious, as such, truly, and properly are of the Hierarchy, hath not bene, so much in regard of ourselues, as out of Duty, and Gratitude to those Pil­lars of Gods Church, those Counselours, and sole Electours of Christs Vicar, those whose sacred Roabes, signify their ardent charity, and ready mindes, freely to Sa­crifice their life, for the good of the vni­uersall Church, I meane, the most Illus­trious Cardinals, of the holy Roman Church, whoso care, protecton, and sage aduice, next vnder God, and our [Page 180]Supreame Pastour, the Pope, haue kept our Church of England in a flourishing state, maugre all heate of a long continued persecution. For, if we restraine the Notion of a Hierarchy, only to such as are endued with Order, or Iurisdiction, those Peeres of Gods Church, must be excluded from the Churches Hierarchy, noe lesse then Religious men: Because the name of Car­dinals, as Cardinals, that is, as they are Counsellers, and Electours of the Pope, signifies neither Iurisdiction, nor Order, although accidentally as Priests, or Bi­shops, they may haue both, as likewise Re­ligious men may haue. And although a Cardinall hath power in his Church, and title, yet saith M. Doctour Chap. 10. n. 19. out of Belarmine, it is but like to the Iurisdiction, of a Parish Priest in his Pa­rish; besides that such a power, is also of it selfe separable from the dignity of Car­dinall, as Cardinall, whose charge is the vniuersall good, of the whole Church. But according to the grounds we haue laied, out of S. Dennys, S. Thomas, and reason itselfe, to proue that Religious are of the Hierarchy, it is euident, that the most Illustrious Cardinals, as Cardinals, are not [Page 181]only of the Hierarchy, but haue a most aminent place therein.

THE SEAVENTH QVESTION Whether by the precedent Questions, we haue sufficiently answered M. Doctours Treatise, for such points as eyther de­serued confutation, or required explication.

1. I must ingenuously confesse that I haue not laboured to examine all, that might haue bene discussed in M. Doctours Treatise. But whether I haue sufficiently answered the points, by me handled, must in reason be left to the in­telligent & vnpartiall Readers iudgement: whom I intreate to consider, whether I had not iust cause in my first Question, to saie, that the Reasons, and Authorities, by M. Doctour produced, for the most part proue against himselfe. Wherfo [...]e, in this Question, for the Readers ease, I will runne ouer, all the Chapters of M. [Page 182]Doctours Treatise; A suruey of M. Doc­tours and when any difficul­ty occurreth, point in what Question of mine, he may meete with the answere.

2 His Epistle in words exhorts to Charity,Epistle. but how much in deeds he hath by writing this Booke preiudiced Charity, the Reader will find in my first Question. What he saith n. 12. that Secular Priests, are by the deuine Institution gouernours of the Church I haue shewed to be a saying, without all ground, Question. 5. The Church must be gouerned by the Cleargy I grant, but I neuer heard that it must be gouerned by the Secular Cleargy. May not Bishops, and other Pastours, in Gods Church, be Religious men? How then is it the Deuine Institution, that the Church must be gouerned by the Secular Cleargy? In the same Number M. Do­ctour saith, the Seculars must honour the Regulars as helps, S. Paule vseth the word Opitulations. 1. Cor. 12. v 28. But he must giue vs leaue to hold, that in England, Regulars are no more ordained to help Secular Priests, then they to help Regulars: because all are Missionary Priests, equally sent by the Vi­car of Christ, for the conuersion of soules. The literall sence of S. Paul, according [Page 183]to good Interpreters, is that by Opitula­tions, or Helpes, are vnderstood those, who helpe others, by exercising the works of mercy, towards the sicke, poore, distressed persons,S. Th 2.2. q. 184. a. 6. ad 2. Pilgrimes &c. S. Tho­mas, applies the word (Opitulations) to Archdeacons in respect of the Bishop. His saying n. 17 That without a Bishop En­glish Catholiks are a stock without a Pastour; a spirituall Kingdom without, a spirituall King &c. (which similitudes, through his whole Treatise, he often, and tedious­ly repeates) is disprooued Quest. 2. where also is confuted that other Assertion of his n. 18. That without a Bishop we can be no particular Chruch, and his proofe out of S. Cyprian, affirming, that the Church is the people vnited to the Bishop &c. is cleare­ly answered. All that he hath in the same number, concerning the necessity of Con­firmation (without which, he saith, we are not perfect Christians) and the fall of No­uatus, is answered, Quest. 4.

3 For his first seauen Chapters; as I imbrace the Doctrine;His first seauen Chapters in generall. so I cannot but be sory, that Articles of Faith, and Deuine verities, are no better imployed, then to vsher a fewe Chapters, writen vpon Hu­mane [Page]designe.Chap­ter. 4. In his fourth Chapter. n. 2. he writeth: That an Ordinary must haue others to succeed him in the same authority, without any especiall new Graunt, and that in this consisteth the difference betwixt an Or­dinary, and a Delegate. Out of these words, it most euidently followeth, that my Lord of Chalcedon is no Ordinary, because he hath no successour in his Authority, with­out an especiall new Grant.

4 To prooue that a Bishop is of an hi­gher ranke in the Church, Chap­ter. 6. then a Priest, n. 4. he alleadgeth S. Ambrose in 1. Tim. 3. But I wish, he had brought a better proofe, for so true, and certain a Doctrine. For it is much doubted, whether those Commenta­ries vpon S. Paules Epistles, be indeed S. Am­brose his worke.Pet. Aroud. lib. 2.6.15. Petrus Arcudius writeth, that the Authour of the commentaries vpon the Epistles of S. Paul, affirmeth, Ecclesiasti­call functions, to haue bene promiscuously per­formed in the primitiue Church, so that the Priest did the Office of the Bishop, and the Deacon that of a Priest, and in particular, that the Priests of Aegypt euen in those tymes did Confirme in absence of Bishops. How doth M. Doctour like this doctrine about Confirmation? In this same Chapter n. 7. M. [Page 185]Doctour, saith that the ancient Fathers rely­ing on scriptures, haue euer taught that the Sacrament of Confirmation is to be ministred only by the Bishop, which hath also euer bene the practise of the Church. But concerning the Minister of Confirmation, I referre the Reader to my Quest. 4.

5 Heere, num. 14. He teacheth,Chap­ter. 7. that Catholicks ought to cōtribute maintenāce to my Lord of Chalcedon. This point tou­cheth lay Catholicks, nor will I further medle with it then to say, that M. Doctours arguments prooue only of an Ordinary as Scriptures, and Fathers commonly speake of Bishops. And accordingly S. Thomas sayeth: Plebs fidelis non tenetur, S. The. 2.2. q. 188. a. 4. ad 5. ex debito Iuris, ad sumptus ministrandos, nisi Ordina­rijs Praelatis: Faithfull people are not bound, in Iustice, to prouide for the expenses of others, beside Ordinary Prelates. I know some do further say: That (except for the Sacramēt of Confirmation, which yet hath not been administred to many, and which also may be committed to a Priest) they find not what greater benefit, Lay Catholicks haue reaped by my Lord Bishop, then they may receiue from Secular, and Regular Priests: That rather since my Lords comming, some [Page 186]inconueniences haue happened, which they will not easily be perswaded, they are bound to buy with mony: That they can­not take much comfort to spare from their owne necessities (arising from daily pres­sures) for the maintenance of Agents, in diuers places, which they conceyue may help, to make that weed grow faster, which all should wish were wholy rooted out: That this point, of exacting maintenance, should haue been particularly made knowē to his Holinesse, when the sending a Bi­shop to England was treated: And finally, That all concurre in desire; that what they bestow may be giuen propriomotu, freely, and not importuned by the negotiation, or sollicitation of other men. These things, I say, & the like are spoken; but truly I haue no mind, to intermeddle in such matters, nor would I for a world diuert the charity of any man, from my Lord of Chalcedon, or any other Secular, or Regular Priest. Ra­ther, I wish, all would excite themselues, wish that noble saying,Chrysost. [...]om. vlt. in [...]atth. of S. Iohn Chryso­stome; That he is more honoured by al­mighty God, who hath receiued ability to help the poore, then if he had receiued the power, to vphold the Heauens if they were [Page 187]ready to fall. What happinesse then, O what an incomparable happinesse is it, to haue the occasion, power, and will, to maintaine those good seruants of God, without whose continued labours, the Heauen of man­kind, true Religion, could not but fall in En­gland?

6 In this Chapter he treateth;Chapter. 8 Who in particular belong to the Hierarchy of the Church. Which point I haue hādled Quest. 6. and prooued that Religious, as Religi­ous, haue a very principall place in the Ec­clesiasticall Hierarchy. His example, of S. Frācis Xauiers respect to Bishops, prooues nothing, but where there are Ordinaries; & certaine it is, whatsoeuer submission he yeelded, euen to Ordinaries, it was of Hu­mility, not of Obligation, himselfe being the Popes Legate, and aboue Ordinaries, to whome he could not in conscience sub­iect himselfe, if it had bene claimed as due, as likewise Religious men, cannot lawfully renounce Priuiledges, graunted by the Sea Apostolick. His saying n. 10. that the tytles of Patriarches, Archbishops, Priests, and Pa­stours, are tytles only of the Secular Cleargy, is reiected Quest. 5. and shewed to be full of partiality.

[Page 188] 7 Num. 13. Chapter. [...] He citeth the Councell of Trent Sess. 24. cap. 4. for bidding Regulars to preach, euen in the Churches of their owne Or­ders against the will of the Bishop. But why doth he not cite the Councell entirely? The words of the Councell are: Nullus au­tem Secularis, siue Regularis &c. Let no Secular, or Regular, enen in Churches of their owne Order, presume to preach agaynst the Bishops will. Heere is no more against Re­gulars, then Seculars: yea Regulars need no leaue of the Bishop, for preaching in their owne Churches: Only they must not do it, if he absolutely contradict them; which are two things much different. But Secular Priests, must haue leaue to preach in what place soeuer, vnlesse they be Curates, and so may do it by their Office, which also Re­ligious may, if likewise they be Curates. Moreouer, the Coūcel speaketh only where there are Ordinaries: and according to the Councel, no Bishop can preach out of that Diocesse, of which he hath his Tytle, with­out particular Priuiledge; as also Religious men may do, if to that end they be pri­uiledged. Num. 15. He cites certaine say­ings, as that, the Office of a Monke is not tea­ching but weeping &c. which out of S. Tho­mas [Page 189]I haue answered Quest. 5. where like­wise is confuted the reason he giues n. 16. why Regulars came to haue care of the Church; and his saying, that their assump­tion to the Cleargy was extraordinary. Num. 18. he writeh thus: some may obiect, that some Religions Orders are instituted to preach, and to conuert Nations. Ergo, to these at least it appertaineth as well, as to the secular Cleargy to do these functions. I an­swere: that these Orders are indeed instituted to that purpose, but yet to help only, and assist the Cleargy; and to this they were not ordai­ned by the deuine law, as Bishops, and Priests are, but by the Churches Institution. To this answere of M. Doctour, I answere, that, as I sad aboue, in England Regulars, are no more ordained to help Secular Priests, then Secular, to help Regulars, but both a like are sent, endued with Priuiledges to be helpers of soules; & Superious of Regulars, haue as much authority to send their sub­iects, as Presidents, or Rectours of Semina­ries to send Secular Priests. And because M. Doctour, in the obiection speakes par­ticularly, of conuerting Nations, where it is cleare there is no diuision of Parishes, or Diocesses, or institution of Parish Priests, [Page 190]and the like: I vnderstand not, how he can imagine that in such a worke, Regulars are only to help the Secular Priests: yea, accor­ding to my Lord Philip Rouenius (as I re­lated in my 5. Question) Regulars are more sit for that employment then Seculars. What he saith, that such Religious, were not by the deuine law ordained to preach, as Bishops, and Priests are, hath been an­swered in the same 5. Question, where I shewed, that neither Secular, nor Regular Priests, cān preach without authority, and that Religious be as capable of such au­thority, and Office as Seculars: So as (if he compare a right Secular with Religious) he will in this find no difference. And I may add, that Regular Priests, of such orders as M. Doctour mentioned in the obiection, haue a particular kind of right, or, as I may say, dispositionem proximam, to such functi­ons, which secular Priests, precisely by be­ing Priests, haue not. For although Regu­lar Priests of such Orders, haue no actuall Iurisdiction, or authority for the exercise of such Actions, till they receiue it from their Superiours; yet by their Institute, they haue a kind of right, to haue such authority graunted by their Superiours, who with­out [Page 190]iust cause, ought not to debarre them of that, to which they haue obliged them­selues, by vndertaking that particular course of Religious life. But Secular Priests haue no obligation to such functions, vn­lesse they be made Pastours, and take care of soules, which thousands neuer do, nor haue any obligation, to vndertake such a charge. Of the Apostles vow of pouerty, whereof n. 19. he taketh a needlesse occa­sion to treate by reason of an obiection which himselfe maketh, I haue spoken something in my 5. Question; & wish that some, more able, would do it more at large. In the end of the same number, he saith, that although we suppose the Apostles had bene Religious men, yet Christ gaue them not power to preach &c. as they were Religi­ous, but as they were Bishops, and Priests; & so in this, not the Regulars, but the Seculars; to wit Bishops, & Priests, do succeed the Apostles. A strange speach! Because Bishops succeed the Apostles, therefore not the Regulars, but the Seculars succeed the Apostles: as if the name of Bishop, necessarily implied to be a Secular; or as if Religious Bishops, because they are not Secular, cannot succeed the A­postles in the office of preaching &c.

[Page 192] 7 In his 10.Chap. 10. Chapter. he treateth of the Dignity of Cardinals, whom we Quest. 6. haue shewed to be in a most eminent place, of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy, euen abstracting from all Power of Order, or Iurisdiction.

8 Here he treateth of the state of Religi­ous men, Chap. 11. and to this his Chapter answereth our 5. Question. Num. 10. To proue, that by loue two frindes are one soule, he aleadg­eth S. Augustine lib. 4. Confesse cap. 6. saying, He thought himselfe halfe dead, when his other halfe, Nebridius was dead. But euery woman, that reades S. Augustines Confessions, translated into English, will see, that M. doctour in this is much mis­taken. For, that friend, whose death S. Au­gustine, in that place mentioneth, died before the Saints owne conuersion, as is cleare out of the 4. chap. of the 4. booke by M. Doctour cited, whereas Nebridius was conuerted after S. Augustine; as may be seene lib. 9. chap. 3. That friend, died be­fore S. Augustine went out of Africke; Ne­bridius was with him in Italy. And although this errour be not, for the matter, of much importance, yet it sheweth, how litle exact M. Doctour is, in looking vpon his [Page 193]Authours. In the 15 num, he saith: Some inferre that the Bishops mariage with his Church, is fi [...]mer and more indissoluble, then is mariage betwixt man a [...]d wif [...], which is contracted, but not consummated: because Matrimony conctracted only, is dissolued by entrance into Religion, but the mariage be­twixt a Bishop and his C [...]urch, cannot so be disso [...]ued. But M Doctour might hēce haue rather inferred, the excellency of Religious Profession, which dissolueth Matrimony, only contracted, which Episcopall Dignity doth not dissolue. For certaine it is, that the Bond of Mariage, is more strict, then the conctract of a Bishop, with his Church; that being certainely of the Deuine lawe; this, at least probably, being only of the Churches Ordinance. Daily we see Bishops, leaue their Bishopricks, by renounciation, translation to some other Bishoprick, &c. But men cannot so leaue, or change their wiues, because the bond of mariage is more indissoluble. If a Bishop elected, and confirmed (not in holy Orders) do marry, it is valid, and the former contract with his Church is dissolued; But if he were first married, and afterward should take a Bi­shoprick, the first bond, as I said, still re­maineth: [Page 194]All which are manifest argu­ments, that the contract of Matrimony, is stronger, then that of the Bishop with his Church. Wherfore the opinion of those [...]uthors by M. Doctour not named, must [...]ot (if we will haue it passe for good) be [...]nderstood absolutly, as he seemeth to al­ [...]adge them, but in some one particular re­spect, namely, that a Bishop cannot enter into Religion without particular leaue, as maried persons may after Matrimony only contracted. I say, particular leaue; for if we examine the matter well, it wilbe found, that the bound of Matrimony, is dissolued by Religious Profession, only in vertue of the Churches Ordination, and as it were by a generall dispensation, thereby to testify the singular excellency of Religi­ous State: and so euen in this point, there is not much difference, bewixt maried per­sons, and a Bishop, who with leaue may also enter into Religion. Num 16. he al­leadgeth out of S. Hierom: S. Hieron. Ep. ad Rust. Monach. Sic viue in M [...]nasterio, vt Clericus esse merearis: So liue in thy m [...]a [...]e [...]y, that thou mayst de­serue to be a Clearke, to p [...]ooue that when a Rel [...]us man is made a Pastour, he is pre­ferred to an higher calling, and to a vocation [Page 195]of greater perfection. But by M. Doctours good leaue, I find a man, whom I must pre­fer before him, bring a far different expli­cation of S. Hieroms words.S. Tho. 2.2. q. 184. a. 8. ad. 4. For S. Thomas interprets those words, as exhorting lay Religious men, so to liue, as they may de­serue to be made Clearkes; and noe doubt, but Religious men, being promoted to Orders, are in a more perfect calling, then Religious men, who haue no such Orders; and this interpretation saith S. Thomas, is apparent by the very manner of speaking vsed by S. Hierom. And it is worth the no­ting, that S. Thomas obiecteth against himselfe, the said words of S. Hierom (& answereth them in the manner we haue seene) in that very place, where, of set purpose, he teacheth, and prooueth, that Religious Priests, haue a more perfect cal­ling, then Secular Pastours: So as M. Do­ctour both in the Assertion, and in his Proofe, expresly, and directly opposeth S. Thomas, whom yet he stiles the Prince of Deuines. Vtri credendum? Whom shall we beleiue? S. Thomas, or M. Doctour?

9 For as much as may seeme doubt­full in his 12. chapt. hath bene examined Quest. 2. and 3. Particularly in my 2. [Page 196] Question, his allegation, and inference out of S. Cyprians wordes, so often inculcated that the Church is Sacerdoti plebs adunata &c. and an explication he giues, of those other words of the same Father (Thou must knowe that the Bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the Bishop) are plainly confu­ted, as nothing consonant to S. Cyprians in­tention.

10 This 13. Chapter, the Reader will find answered (for as much as needes expli­cation) in my 3. Question, Chapt. 13. where all the examples he draweth from the African Church are at large discussed. To prooue, that notwithstanding whatsoeuer persecu­tion, raised particularly by occasion of Bi­shops, yet the Church must of necessity haue Bishops, n. 5. he writes thus: Wher­fore, as we may gather out of the Ecclesiasti­call histories, from the cruell Tyrant Nero, to the Clement Emperour Constantine the Great, there was scarce any Bishop of Rome, who was not a Martyr, or who at least suffered not great persecution. Twenty seuen of them are commonly auouched for Martyrs, to wit, Peter, Line &c. and in his margent he hath 27. Popes Martyrs before the time of Con­stantine. But in this account M. Doctour [Page 197]is much mistaken. For, the three last Popes by him reckoned, namely, Ioannes, Silueri­us, and Martinus, were long after Constan­tine, who reigned the yeare of our Lord three hundred & six, & two hundred forty nine years after Nero, whose raigne was fifty seauen yeares after our Sauiour: wher­as Ioannes was made Pope foure hundred sixty seauen yeares after Nero, and Silue­rius thirteene yeares after Ioannes; & Mar­tinus the yeare of our Lord six hūdred for­ty nine: after Nero fiue hundred ninety two years: so that vpon the whole account, in the first two, M. Doctour erreth more thē two hundred twenty yeares, in the space of only foure hundred sixty seauen; and in the last, namely, Martinus, he erreth three hū ­dred forty three yeares, in the space of fiue-hundred ninety two, which is more then halfe. Besids, these last three were made Popes in times, which did not particular­ly oppose the Creation of Popes, or Bi­shops, for which M. Doctour produceth them, but they suffered in time of Christi­anity, namely, Ioannes vnder Iustinus the elder, by the hereticall King Theodoricus [...] Siluerius by Theodora the Empresse; and Martinus vnder Constans the Hereticall [Page 198]Emperour. Still M. Doctour is found not to be so exact, as one would haue expe­cted.

11 For the answere of his 14. Chapter, Chap. 14. the Reader may be pleased to read what I haue sayd, quest. 2.3.4. Num. 3. He sayth that England was long without a Bishop, because Superiours were informed, that he would presently be taken, and put to death. If any reasons were proposed to Superi­ours, concerning the difficulties, of hauing a Bishop in England, I suppose they were other reasons, then this mentioned by M. Doctour: But this is a businesse which be­longs not to me. Neuerthelesse, M. Doct. in his next following 15. chapter, seemeth to contradict, what heere he sayth, and to make good this very reason, which heere he impugneth. For in that chapter n. 6. he telleth vs, that King [...]ames of famous me­mory, after he knew that the Bishop was en­tred, and was in London, he would not cō ­maund him to be apprehended, as he might easily both in London, and any part of En­gland, Kings hauing long, and powerfull armes.

12 His 15. chapter, Chapt. 15. is to prooue, that to haue a Bishop in England, cannot probably [Page 199]increase persecution. It were easie to shew, how insufficient M. Doctours arguments are, if it were conuenient, to enter into some particulars, from which it is better to abstaine, although M. Doctour, hath taken the freedome to do otherwise. Wherefore the iudicious reader, wilbe pleased to ex­cuse me, from answering M. Doctours ar­guments in patticular, which may be done onely by distinguishing, what indeed ought to be, and what is likely will, or rather hath already happened, by reason of the present circumstances in our countrey: and his arguments, do also prooue, that the whose profession, and practise of Catho­licke Religion, ought in reason to be tolle­rated in England, which is a thing in it selfe most true, yet we finde the contrary by experience.

13 Num. 10. He sayth, that my Lord of Chalcedon, hath onely a generall [...]rituall power and Iurisdiction, ouer the Cleargy, and lay Catholicks in spirituall matters. I haue noe intention to dispute of my Lords authority: But this proposition of M. D. makes good what I said in my first Questi­on: that he will either displease my Lord, by extenuating his Authority, or else make [Page 200]such his authority dreadfull to Catholicks. For if this generall authority which he giues to my Lord, be onely in foro interno, then it taketh from my Lord, power to make a certaine Hierarchy of Vicar Generals, Arch deacons, &c. (for such offices are for authority in f [...]ro externo) to meddle with Matrimoniall causes, to prooue Wills, dis­pose of pious Legacies, visit Catholicks houses, erect a Tribunall &c. and hence it further is clearely deduced, that my Lord is Ordinary, neyther in name, nor pow­er: For Ordinaries can do these things mentioned: yea this is also manifest, by what M. Doctour teacheth, that my Lord of Chalcedon can challenge No Bishopricke, no not so much as the poorest Parish in Eng­land. Ergo, according to M. Doctour. my Lord of Chalcedō hath not for England all the Faculties, which other Ordinaries haue, who certainly can challenge some one par­ticular Diocesse, and diuers particular Pa­rishes. Moreouer, seeing M. Doctour tea­cheth, that my Lord hath noe Title giuen him, to any particular Bishopricke in En­gland, but onely to Chalcedon, he must consequently auerte, that my Lord cannot giue the [...]les of Vicar Generall, Arch­deacon [Page 201]&c. of London, or any other place, seeing my Lord himselfe hath noe such Ti­tle, nor is Bishop of London, or any other Diocesse. If M. Doctours meaning be, that my Lords generall spirituall power ouer lay Catholicks, is also in foro externo, and ex­tēds it selfe to the things aboue mētioned, then Catholicks haue already told my L. in a letter directed to his Lordship, how preiudiciall such an Authority must be to them. To say, my Lord hath such power, but is resolued not to practise it, will not satisfy: because they are loath, all their se­curity should depend vpon the free will, or particular dictamen of a man, although ne­uer soe learned, and wise, who either vpon some new occurring motiues, and reasons, or by the instigation of others, may alter his minde, and practise that, which him­selfe once had no intention to practise. And they will thinke, that they are lesse to be blamed for such a feare, seeing my Lord claymed an authority (for example of approouing regulars, for hearing the Confessions of secular persons) which prooued not to be due vnto him, & which did concerne, euen the lay Catholicks, in highest degree (for who would not rather [Page 202]haue their bodies disioynted on the racke, then their soules tormented with scruple of inualid Confessions?) they will, I say, thinke it no vnreasonable feare, that if 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 thē 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 [Page 203]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 [Page 204]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 englād, or some authority by him chalēged; 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, [Page 205]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.

PageLineFaultCorrection.
226DiocessesDiocesse
441he doth wrongehe wronge
641reasonreasons
9524meanesmeasure
ibid25measuremeanes
1101(sayd truely(said this truly
12315as mana man
13117ReliousReligious
151Add in the margent ouer against the word S. Hierome this Note: Ep. 22. de Custod. virg. ad Eustoch.  

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.