An apolagy of the Holy Sea apostolicks proceeding for the gouernment of the Catholics of England during the tyme of persecution VVith a defense of a religious state, vvritten by Daniel of Iesus reader of Diuinity.

The necessity of the Diuine law for a Bishop in England, praetended by M^r. Doctour, confuted. CAPVT III.

1. THE third necessity much insisted vpon by M^r. Do∣ctour is, the obligation of the diuine law, binding the Pope as he thinks to giue England a Bishop to reside amongst Catholicks, which ordinance he thinketh to binde so seuerly and inuiolably,* 1.1 that ney∣ther a Country, nor any of the Country can ex∣cept against the mission of a Bishop into it, though his entrance might cause a persecution. His ground is because the Diuine law requi∣reth, not only that in generall there bee so∣me particuler Bishops to gouerne particu∣ler Churches, but also that a Bishop be pla∣ced in this or that particuler Church;* 1.2 this he proueth by three arguments.

First is the authority of two late Schoole Diuines, Sotus (sayth he) a learned Domi∣minican affirmeth, that it is, De Iure Diuino of the Diuine law, that in generall to euery particular Church according to the Ecclesiasticall diuision proper Bishops be applyed. And Bannes* 1.3

a later but learned Diuine of the same or∣der sayth,* 1.4 that Bishop•• cannot by the Pope be remoued from the whole Church, or a great and notable part of it.

* 1.5Secondly I thus argue, sayth he, by the Deuine law there must be particuler B shops in the Church; but there is no more reason why the particuler Church of F••ance should be gouerned by a Bishop or Bishops more or feawer according to the extent of the country, rather then the Church of Spay••e, or the Church of Spaine, rather then the Church of England or Flanders: Ergo France, Spaine, England, Flanders, and all other parti∣culer Churches of extent, must be gouerned by Bishops.

Thirdly I demand (sayth M^r. Doctour) why the Popes and Bishops of the primitiue Church were so diligent and exacte in consecra∣ting Bishops, yea and making Popes euen in the midst of the greatest persecution, and when the persecutions were principally intended agaynst Popes and Bishops, and would not for feare of pers••cution and other humane respectes, lett any Country or Church especially of any greatnes to be without a Bishop; but that they thought it was Iuris Diuini, of Diuine law, that euery Church or Country should haue its Bi••h••p.

Fower things shall be demonstrated, first that M^r. Doctours discourse is deuoy∣de of due respecte to the ••oly sea. Second∣ly that at least the Pope is not bond to send a Bishop into Englād. Thirdly that he is not

bound to giue a Bishop to euery Church that is capable of a Bishop. Fourthly, though he were, yet England as now things stand, is vncapable of a Bishop by the holy Canons.

M^r. Doctours discourse not so duetifull towards the holy sea. §. 1.

2. SInce our persecution and defect of Bishops in England, seauen Souerai∣gne Bishops haue seat in the sea of Peter, to witt, Pius Quintus, Gregorie the 13. Six∣tus Quintus. Gregorie the 14. Innocentius 8. Clement the 8. and Paulus 5. which neuer thought it fitting much lesse necessa∣ry to reestablish in England the gouernmēt of Bishops: may it not then seeme much bouldnes to preferr the verdice of these Schoolmen, before the iudgment and con∣stant practise of so many Bishops of God, especially directed by his holy spirit not to err in the gouernment of his Church? and vpon the testimony of these two (and that extorted vpon the rack, extending theyr words beyond theyr meaning, as will appeare) to condemne the holy sea of a so longe a continued violation of the Diuine law.

3. Nor is Pope Gregorie the 15. who sent into England the first Bishop of Cal∣cedon, free from this censure, no nor his

Holines which now sitteth in the Aposto∣licall Chaire, who sent the second: for they sent thither the Bishop of Calcedon (at the most (and (as som•• pretende) as theyr de∣legate o•• deputy vniuersall for England, with falculties reuocable at their pleasure: But in M^r. Doctours opinion Delegats or Deputy Bishops that be not Princes,* 1.6 be not such gouerners as the law of God requires: The Church (sayth he) 12. n. 3. contayned in it diuers particular Chur∣ches, which must be gouerned by Bishops who are Spirituall Princes: and againe: although Bishops depende of the Pope for theyr iurisdi tion, yet they be Spirituall Princes in theyr Kinde, and not his delegates. This supposed, M^r. Doctour must eyther graunt that the diuine law doth not exacte a proper Bishop in euery Church, or else accuse the Pope as doing against the Diuine law. I argue thus, eyther the Church of England now hath the go∣uernment ordayned by Christ for particular Churches, or not: if it haue, then the Pope may without violation of the diuine law gouerne all particular Churches by deputy Bishops that be not Princes, but his tenants at will, hauing faculties reuocable at his pleasure, for there is no more rea••on that the Church of Spaine, or France, or Flaun∣ders, or any other particular Church, be go∣uerned by spirituall princes and not by De∣puty Bishops, rather then the Church of

England, as M^r. Doctour doth suppose as certayne, but the Church of England doth not by the diuine institution, require a spi∣rituall Prince, but it may without breach of the diuine law be gouerned by Deputy Bi∣shops that haue no iurisdiction, but dele∣gated and reuocable at will. as now it is go∣uerned: Ergo the Pope without breach of the diuine law may gouerne France, Spaine, Flaunders, and the rest of Catholike Coun∣tries, by Bishops that be no spirituall Prin∣ces, but his Delegats only. If M^r. Doctour think this to be false, and hereticall, as he doeth, then he must say that the Church of England hath not as yett such Pastours, and gouernours as Christ by his diuine institu∣tion required should be seated in euery Church. whence it is further consequent, that the Pope is not giuing the Church of England a proper spirituall Prince, by the consequence of M^r. Doctours doctrine, doth grieuously offend against the diuine institution and law.

4. M^r. Doctour may seeme to haue en∣deauored in some sorte to excuse the Popes, by pretending they were misinformed.* 1.7 True it is (sayth he) that in England we were long without a Bishops, but that was because we could not gett one, and our Superiours were informed that a Bishop would not be permitted to enter into England, or would presently be taken, and putt to death, and so it was to no purpose to send one.

Thus he, not clearing but rather aggraua∣ting his accusation of Popes; for by this excuse he maketh them seeme light of be∣leefe, and yett also leaueth them not suffi∣ciently excused. They are made light of beleefe in giuing credit so easily to a tale incredi∣ble, which M^r. Doctour sayth was tould them, that a Bishop sent into England might not for a longe time escape to do some good.

M^r. Doctour must enforce the credit of his tale more then with his owne bare word, otherwise we shall neuer beleeue, that men of such authority, grauity, and prudence, as the Popes are gaue, credit to so silly a suggestion, rather we doe and will thinke that they knew a Bishop might for a time escape and confirme some Catholi∣cks, yet they esteemed this not so greate a good, as to be procured with increase of that persecution which was seuere and ra∣ging more then enough before. So we doe not doubt but these Popes held constantly against M^r Doctours Fancie of giuing En∣glish Catholicks a Bishop, whether they will or noe, and of forcing them to enter∣tayne him though therby the fury of per∣secution should be neuer so much incensed against them. This conceipt those holy Bi∣shops neuer esteemed cōforme to the piety, charity, discretion the holy Sea euer vsed: whose iudgment if we preferr before. M^r. Doctours, he hath no cause to complaine,

they being the guides of our soules, and in∣fallible teachers of truth.

5. Secondly though we should graunt the Popes were so slightly wonne to beleeue a tale, yet this doth not saue them from transgression of the Diuine law in in M^r. Doctours opinion, for he is so hott vpon a Bishop, as he will haue Bishops placed in particular Churches during the time of per∣secution, specially, though there bee no hope they should escape. This is manifest,* 1.8 because he sayth that a king hath so longe and powerfull armes as a particular Bishop cānot escape him if he bēde his minde to ap∣prehend him and yet he sayth, that in time of greatest persecution,* 1.9 when the rage and fu∣ry therof is intended principally against Bishops, Bishops are to be placed, and the auncient Po∣pes did euen then ordayne Bishops Knowing (sayth he) that the Church according to Christs institution, was to be gouerned by Bishops.* 1.10 What is this but to say that latter Popes who thinking a Bishop in England would in∣crease persecution, left vs without a Bishop did transgres the diuine institution, which theyr auncest••urs did in time of persecution so inuyolably obserue.

6. And how soeuer his excuse might som∣what protect former Popes, yet the same cannot serue to saue his Holynes that now is, from being (in M^r. Doctours iudgment) guylty of the breach of the Diuine law. For

M^r. Doctour sayth,* 1.11 that now experience sheweth that a Bishop may escape, and doe notable good in England, and yet we see his Holynes will not ordayne for England a Bishop, that is, one with the office, and iurisdiction of Bishop; nor giue vs any spi∣rituall Prince, and proper Pastour, but at the most, but a deputy Bishop. The summe of all is, that eyther we must say that M^r. Doctour is ouerseene much in venting t••o∣se kinde of assertions, so disgratfull to the holy sea; or else graunt that the Vicar of Christ may erre against the Diuine Law, in gouernmēt of a notable parte of the Church as M^r. Doctour houlds our English Catho∣licks to bee; and if he may erre about En∣gland, why not about Frāce? if about, Frāce why not a bote Spayne•• Italie, and Germa∣nie, and other Christian Gountries? Oh into what a laborinth of difficulties doe they vēture thēselues, who to satisfie theyr priuate, and particular intent's, will prae∣sume, though but indirectly to call in que∣stion, and taxe the facts of theyr Soueraigne Pastours?

Catholicks of England are not bounde with increase of persecution to enter∣tayne a Bishop. §. 2.

7. ALthough we should graunt that the law of Christ requires that

England should haue a particular Bishop besides the Pope, yet this Bishop is not bound to goe into England, nor to stay there in time of persecution, yea, he were bound not to goe thither, especially against the will of Catholicks, in case he should bring a persecution with him. This con∣clusion standeth vpon most ce••tayne Catho∣lick doctrine, to witt, that a Bishop though he cannot fly in persecution, or bee absent from his flock when his presence is necessary, for theyr constancy and courage, to giue them the meanes of Saluation, yet when a Country is abundantly fournished with courage to suffer, with a competent number of Priests, with all necessary Sacra∣ments, and helpes, then the Bishop may retyre, or not come (if he be absent) spe∣cially when the persecutiō is raysed against his person, and by his absence like to cease. This is a trueth defined by the Church against Tertullian, & other Montanists, and is proued by the words of the Ghospell contayning our Sauiours precept cum per∣secuti vos fuerint in vna ciuitate, fugite in aliam: whē they shall persecute you wn owe cittie fly to an other,* 1.12 which sheweth that a Bi∣shop in time of persecution may leaue his citty, ād Bishoprick, and fly to an other: For that this speech belōgeth not only to lay ca∣tholicks, but also vnto Bishops and Priests.* 1.13 S. Athanasius hath taught vs by word and

example, and with him all other Catholi∣ck fathers agree, that therof there can be no doubt, yea this case is putt expresly in the Canon law, that a Bishopa 1.14 persecutio∣nis rabie sauiente de Superioris licentia ad mona∣sticam vitam descendat: may in persecution leaue his flock with licence and become a Monck.

8. Now that a Bishop is bound not to come, w••en his presence is not necessary, and yet would cause a persecution, or vio∣lent increase therof, is manifest. For the office of Bishop and his residence w••s com∣manded only for the good of soules com∣mitted to his charge, but as S. Bernard sayth, what is vndertaken for charitie, and the good of soules is not to be continued against charitie, and with ruin, of soules, as many by violent persecution will certaynly be lost. This I confirme by the testimony of S. Cyprian,* 1.15 which is direct to this pur∣pose, where he giueth the reason why he retired in persecution, and would not re∣turne when the same was particularly ray∣sed against his person Sicut Domini mandata instruunt orto statim turbationis impetu primo, cum me clamore violento frequenter populus flagi∣tasset non tam meam salutem quam quietam fra∣trum publicam cogitans intercessi ne per inue∣recundam praesentiam nostram ••editio, quae cepe∣rat prouocaretur As the precepts of our Lord di∣rect, strait vpon the first brunt of the persecution,

when the people with violēt clamors called for me (to haue me cast to a Lyon.) not regarding so much my owne saftie, as the common quiet of my Bretheren. I retired my selfe least by the impuden∣cie of my presence, the rage of the tumult might be inflamed. And in another place when his flock did much desire his comming, though he had a greate desyre to concurr to theyr comfort. Oportet nos tamen (Sayth he) paci communi consulere,* 1.16 & interdum cum taedio ani∣mi nostri deesse vobis ne praesentia nostra inuidiam & violentiam Gentilium prouocet, & simus autho∣res rumpendae pacis, qui magis quieti omnium cō∣sulere debemus. not withstanding we ought to haue a care of the common quiet and ease from persecu∣tion, and somtimes though with taedious grief of minde be absent that our coming doe not in crease the enuye and violence of the Gentils, and so we become authors of persecution, who rather should procure the peace & quiet of all. Thus S. Cy∣prian sheweth, that a Bishop is bound to retyre, or not come when, his presence would cause an increase of persecution. Hence Pontius S. Cyprians Deacan who writt his life, sayth; Saint Cyprian retired for feare, least by staying he should haue offended God, to witt,* 1.17 in being the cause to increase persecution. Fuit vero (Sayth hee) formido ista, sed iusta formido quae dominum ti∣meret offendere formido quae praeceptis Dei mallet obsequi quā sic coronari. It was indeed feare that moued him to fly, but holy feare to offende God,

feare that made him rather obey the Diuine pre∣cepts then by staying to gett a cr••wne.

9. This being to, how 〈◊〉〈◊〉 M^r. Doctour be able to maintayne his paradox, that ney∣ther a country, nor any of the country can except against the coming in of a Bishop, though his entrance might cause a persecution.* 1.18 If a Bishop who by coming into a Country fournished aboundantly with Priests, and all necessaries, rayseth a persecution, goeth against the precepts of God, disobey his Diuine order, sinne against the dutie of a Bishop, so that his entrance in such cir∣cumstances be inuerecunda praesentia, a sha∣melesse and impudent coming, seeking his owne Good with the desolation of his flock, if, I say, his comming be liable to all these exceptions (as sainct Cyprian sayeth it is) wi••y may not Catholicks of that countrie except against this his entrance.

* 1.1910. M^r. Doctour giueth two reasons of his assertion, first (sayth he) because the go∣uernment of Bishops is instituted by Christ and hath been putt in practise euen in the greatest per∣secutions as hath been proued in the former chapter. This reason hath no force, for put case that the diuine law require a Bishop to be made for England, yet it doth not binde a Bishop with danger of his life, to come to his flock when his presence is not necessarie. In that case he may without breach of the Diuine law looke to his owne saftie, specially if by

comming he should cause a persecution where none was before. For where is M^r. Doctours diuine precept written, that a Bishop must tome, or not departe what per∣secution soeuer and desolation fall on his Church, in regarde of his entrance. The pri∣mitiue Church in the time of greatest per∣secution did appoynt Bishops (for reasons which haue not force in respecte of Englād, as in the next chapter is proued) yett those Bishops did in time of persecution often keepe absent,* 1.20 in so much as in the persecu∣tion of Decius, Seauenteen Bishops were absent from theyr flocks in Rome, yea they thought them selues bound so to doe, rather then by comming to bring a persecution vpon theyr flock, as hath been shewed by S. Cyprian his example.

His second reason is, the vtilitie and ne∣cessity of Confirmation, which cannot be giuen in the Bishops absence This hath been answered allreadie for there is noe shew of probabilitie, that a Countrie is bound to gett Confirmation, when the same cannot be had without a persecution. All deuines say Confirmation is not commanded but onely cum commodè haberi potest, when it may with commoditie be had, or as others say,a 1.21 quando commodissimè, when it may be had without any the least incommoditie in the world.

11. And wheras M^r. Doctour sayth that

the former Chapter, to witt, the thirtienth of his treatise; he proueth that by the diuine law, Bishops are to be placed in Churches euen in greatest persecution, the truth is, in that Chapter he speaketh much to litle pur∣pose. He proueth indeede that Bishops and Pastours must repaire to theyr flocks, and not desist for feare of persecution, when other sufficient preachers of Gods word, and ministers of the Sacraments be wanting. But he doth not proue that when other Priests sufficiently doe the deede, that then a Bishop is bound to come to his flock, with euident hazard of his life, and of bringing a violent persecution vpon the Catholick peo∣ple. Lett vs heare some of his proofes.

* 1.22Certes, sayth he, our B. Sauiour fooresaw, yea foretould the persecutions which were to be raised against his Apostles, for sayd he, behould, I send you as sheepe in the middest of wolues, and take heede of men, for homo homini lupus, for they will deliuer you vp. He foretould Peter his death by the Crosse, and did he therfore omitt to make him Bi∣shop? nay he made him not only Bishop, but chief Bishop, and Pastor of the Church; yea the Apostels knowing that they were made Bishops, to preach and conuerte the world, and after to gouerne it maugre all the Tyrants and all theyr engins of cruelty, they sett vpon this greate peece of worth, though they knew the persecution was specially raysed agai••st them. Thus M^r. Doctour which makes little to enforce Catholicks

to receaue a Bishop in England. True it is, that Pastors and Preachers of the Ghospell, must goe to their flock maugre all Tyrants and engins of crueltie when theyr flock needeth theyr presence, when they want other ministers of the word, and Sacramēts, nor are Pastors then to shrinck, though the persecution be bent personally against them. But when the Church is fournished aboun∣dantly with Priests and spirituall helpes, that a Bishop may be spared, (which is the case of England) where doth Christ com∣mand that then the Bishop goe to his Church, though he cannot goe without danger of his owne life? yea without put∣tinge nott onely the liues of others, butt euen their soules, into perill by causing a persecution to be raysed vpon them; And though M^r. Doctour say, that such an obli∣gation lyeth on the Bishop to goe, and on Catholicks to admitt of his comming, yet he must proue it; els it is soe heauie a bur then that noe wise man will vndertake to beare it, without first knowing why or wherfore.

12. His arguments if they haue any for∣ce, may seeme to enforce my Lord of Chal∣cedon not to stay, in England, which is so wel prouided, but to goe to his Church of Chalcedon: for that Church is on the one side miserably destitute of Sacraments and Pastors, and needeth the presence of a Ca∣tholick

Bishop, and on the other is my Lords proper body and spouse, wherof he cannot refuse to haue care.* 1.23 Vasquez much com∣mended by M Doctour writeth thus: A titular Bishop ordayned of a Church possessed by Turcks and infidels contracteth a spirituall ma∣riage, with that Church, so that he is bound to haue charge and care thereof, though he be not bound to goe thither, if there be noe hope to doe-good, and by going he shall incurr danger of his life, yett there haue not ••anted some that haue chosen to vndergoe that danger, rather then to be thought to loue themselues more then the people committed to theyr charge, in which number was Barth••lomaeus of Bononia, whoe as soone as he was ch se•• and consecrated Bishop of Arme∣nia went thither were he wrought wonderfull things. This Vasquez whose doctrine may seeme to touch his Lordship. But into my Lords conscienciall obligations in respecte of Chalcedon I will not Search, only this I will say that M^r. Doctour may sooner proue that he is bound to goe to Chalce∣don with euident hazard of is life, then that Catholiks are bounde to accepte of him in England, though theyr acceptance of him bring a persecution vpon them.

And to binde and encourage my Lord to this glorious enterprise, M^r. Doctours di∣scourse doth soe serue as it may seeme pen∣ned to that purpose, specially when he so vr∣geth the constancie of the Romane Bishops

in these words. Although the persecuting Em∣perour sayth S. Cyprian was so infestus Sa∣cerdo ibu•• vt ••anda & infanda comminaretur,* 1.24 and did so hate the Bishop of Rome that multo patientius & tolerabilius audiret leuari aduersus se aemulum Principem, quam Romae constitut Dei Sacerdotem▪ indured more pa∣tiently to heare of a prince competitor, then of a Bishop constituted at Rome, yett should you then haue seen•• (sayth hee) Cornelium sed••re intrepidum, to sitt in Peters chaire without fea∣re, nowing it to be protected by Peters Maister. O the courage and constancie of the Bishops of Rome who neuer shrunck their shoulders, neuer intermitted theyr succession, but least the Church should want a head, and the Herarchy an Hie∣rarchicall prince with euident hazard of theyr liues did maintayne ••e succession of Bishops in that seate, maugre the barberous crueltye of the bloody ••yrant. Thus much M^r. Doctour, and he proceedeth further with exclamations very efficaciously to binde his Lordship for Chalcedon, and so eloquently that in deede I am sorry that his discourse looseth the force with the learned, through some want of historicall truth specially in fower poyntes.

14. First what he sayth, that namely in the election of Cornelius the succession of Peters chaire, was neuer intermitted, to witt, by any longe Scauacancie, is a com∣mendation spoken soe out of season, as he

may seeme to speake by contraries, for after the Martyrdom of Fabian vntill the election of Cornelius there was an intermission or sea-vacancie of more then a yeare, to wit, of Sixteene months at least, as Baronius proueth, which was a longer intermission, then euer happened eyther before or after for more then a thousand yeares. Sancto Fa∣biano (sayth Baronius) martyrio coronato,* 1.25 ne per annum quidem valuit ei subrogari successor, licet causae vrgentissimae intercederent, quibus consultandis vniuersali optes esset Episcopo. S Fa∣bian being crowned with martyrdome a suc∣cessour could not be subrogated in his pla∣ce, no not within the space of a whole yea∣re, though there were greate vrgent que∣stions for the decision of which an vniuersall Bishop was needfull. And this is proued by a letter of the Roman Clergie to S. Cyprian.* 1.26 Post decessum nobilissimae memoriae viri Fabiani nondum est Episcopus propter rerum & tempo∣rum difficultates) constitutus▪ qui omnia isla moderetur: Since the decease of Fabian, a man of most noble memorie a Bishop is not yett (by reason of the difficulties of things and time••) appoynted to determine all these things. Hence M. Do∣ctour may learne that by reason of the per∣secution, the succession in Peters chaire was intermitted for sixteene monthes, euen at that time when heresies sprong vp. This may serue to somewhat allay his zeale, for Bishops in England, for the church vniuer∣sall

to want a Pastour sixteene monthes, was a greater inconuenience then for our En∣gland to want a particular Bishop for sixsce∣re yeares, being so sufficiently prouided of necessaries as it is, and still hath beene through the particular prouidence, care, and liberalitie of the supreme Pastor.

15. Secondly wheras he sayth the Tyrant did so hate the Bishop of Rome as he did more patiently heare of a prince competitour, then of a Bishop constituted at Rome, cannot stand with truth. For that Tyrant was De∣cius, who neuer heard of a prince competi∣tour stirred vp against him, so long as he li∣ued, and if he had, is it likely he would haue bene lesse troubled at such an opposition, then at the constitution of a Romane Chri∣stian Bishop? M^r. Doctour therfore mista∣kes, and with S. Cyprian speaketh of S. Cornelius, he applyeth it to the Tyrant. the text of S. Cyprian is: Quod nos simplici corde perspicere & laudare debemus sedere intrepidum in sacerdotali Cathedra eo tempore cum Tyran∣nus infestus sacerdotibus Dei fanda atque in∣fanda comminaretur, cum multo patientius & tolerabilius audiret leuari aduersus se aemulum principem, quam Romae constitut aemulum Sacer∣dotem▪ wherin we ought with sincere harte to acknowledg and prayse Cornelius his constant sitting in the priestly chayre wi∣thout feare, when the tyrant inraged against the Bishops of God, threatned things not to

be named, at which time, he (Cornelius) did more patiently heare that the opposite and emulous Prince was stirred vp against him; then that at Rome was constituted an emulous and opposit Bishop; This is to be vnderstoode of Cornelius, that he was les∣se troubled to heare of the emulation, ra∣ge, and fury, of the Prince against him, then of the emulation of Nouatus made Bishop of Rome, in schisme and opposition against him.

This Panelius well noteth, and that ther∣fore the true lection is not Dei Sacerdotem as M^r. Doctour citeth it, the Bishop of God, but aemulum Sacerdotem, an emulous and schismaticall Bishop, which lection also Ba∣ronius followeth.

* 1.2716. Thirdly in the same amplification of the constancie of the Roman Bishops, he sayth, that twenty seauen Popes were ma∣de Martyrs before the time of Constantine, whose names he setteth downe, and in that number nameth I••annes, Siluerius, and Martinus, whoe suffered at the least two-hundred yeares after Constantine▪ Finally to shew the zeale of the ancient Popes, whoe made Bishops for particular Chur∣ches in the time of greatest persecution, to moue his Holynes to doe the like for En∣gland,* 1.28 he beginneth thus: S. Linus S. Peters immediat successour ordayned eighteene Priests, and fifteene Bishops, in the persecution of Vespa∣sianus.

The persecution of Nero, the persecu∣tion of Domitian, the persecution of Tratan, I haue heard named, but the persecution of Vespasian, now first soundeth in mine eare, which I weene cannot but seeme strange to any man acquainted with Ecclesiasticall historie; for this Emperour was so far from being a persecutor of Christians, as he was specially affected to them, in so much that Iosephus the Iew, to please and flatter him, writt honourably of Christ; And though in his dayes some Christians were martyred by inferiour Magistrates, yet none by his order.

To conclude, M^r. Doctour bringeth noe solide proofe of the heauy obligation he would thrust vpon a Church sufficiently prouided of Priests, and other necessaries to receaue also a Bishop to reside amongst them, though his entrance begin, and his presence continue a most heauie persecu∣tion vpon them.

There is noe absolute diuine law binding the Pope to put Bishops in euery particular Church. §. 3.

17. SOme Diuines hold that Bishops in particular, and not only in generall bee of the diuine institution, which other Diuines of greater authority with fair grea∣ter probabilitie reiecte. But to abstayne

from questions, this is certayne, wherin all Catholicks doe and must agree, that that diuine precept if there be any) is not abso∣lute nor determinate in respecte of particu∣lar circumstances of pers••n, place, time, power; the reason is, because when the ne∣cessity and conueniencie of the thing com∣manded, dependeth of circumstances of ti∣me, and place, then the diuine precepts can∣not be absolute; for circumstances may al∣ter things, so that what at this time, and in this place is necessary, and conuenient, in an other place, and time, may be needlesse and inconuenient; hence the Diuine Wisdo∣me about such things commandeth nothing in particular, but leaueth all to the discre∣tion of his Vicar, or at least his diuine pre∣cepts be not absolute, but so far forth, as the circumstances of persons, times and places, make them possible, necessary, or conue∣nient.

This reason sheweth that the diuine pre∣cept, to put Bishops in euery particular church or Country cannot be absolute, but at the most condicionall, for places which at one time require a Bishop or many Bis∣hops, may with time so change, that Bishops seeme in respecte of them neyther conue∣nient nor needfull nor vsefull. For example, if a Country that was once a Florishing Christianitie be brought to that state, that now the Catholicks are so fewe as they may

be sufficiently prouided of priests without a proper Bishop, and in such seruitude that if they haue a proper Bishop it is likely so∣me seuere persecution will thervppon be raysed; in this case noe wise man will thin∣ke, God bindeth the Pope to giue that church a Bishop.

18. Hence that diuine institution (if there be any (doth intrinsecally include two li∣mitations or conditions; the first is,* 1.29 that the Pope put in euery church a Bishop so far forh, as the ende of the diuine institu∣tion doth require; for when the ende of the diuine institution and law ceaseth, then al∣so the obligation of the diuine law ceaseth, or rather God neuer intended to binde in such circumstances. What is the end that God commandeth that in euery particular Church there be a Bishop? noe doubt to the end that all Christians might be furnished with Priestes, and such necessary Sacramēts as depend on Priests, for the Ordination of Priests, and Church Ministers, is the only thing that doth infer the necessity of a Bishop, as shall be proued in the next pa∣ragraph; hence where a church that once needeth Bishops to ordayne Priests, now needeth them not, but is in such state that a Bishop would rather breede inconuenien∣ce then any furtherance, then noe doubt the Pope is not bound to giue that country Bishops. This is the State of England, and

so the ende of the diuine law ceaseth wholy in respecte of it; as afterward shall be more largely prooued.

Secondly if there be such a diuine Insti∣tution, the same is giuen with subordina∣tion to the supreme Pastour, and without derogation to the plenitude of is power: this plenitude of power is, that he may exempte particular places and persons from the iurisdiction of particular Bishops, reser∣uing them to himselfe as he shall thinke fitting. wherfore the diuine precept that in euery Church there be a proper Bishop ouer all, hath this limitation, except the Pope by the supremacye of his power, except some places or persons; This power to be in the Popea 1.30 noe Catholick can denye, the pra∣ctise therof being dayly notorious to the whole Church, especially through the Po∣pes exempting of soe many Religious or∣ders. In the same manner, the Pope hath re∣serued from Bishops sundry greate townes and Cittyes placing therin secular Abbots with Episcopal Iurisdiction; such was the gouernment of the Cittye of Valladolid in Spaine, till of late yeares, and such is now the gouernment of Medina Campi, and of other great places and townes in Spaine; wherby it is cleare, the Pope may witho••t breach of any diuine law exempt from par∣ticular Bishops and reserue to himselfe that handfull of Catholicks that liue within

England. Why may not he doe this? Is it because they be so greate a number, and a notable parte of the Church? Suerly the townes exempted in Spaine only containe more persons, then be the Catholiques of England, yea one Religious bo••y by it selfe, may be thought to exeede in number all En∣glish Catholicks, to witt, those of the Sera∣phicall order of S. Francis. And seing the Pope hath reserued all iurisdiction ouer the places in Englād to himselfe, seing the who∣le territorie of England in respect of spiri∣tuall Iurisdiction is subiect to the Pope only, so that my Lord of Chalcedon cannot chal∣lenge the poorest Church or parish as M. Doctour doth acknowledg, why may he not also reserue to himselfe the gouernmēt of the persons of Catholicks within this Territory, which is his owne and no other Bishops?

20. But that which doth alone suffice to make M^r. Doctours assertion loose all cre∣dit, is the weaknesse of his proofes, both in regarde of the authours and arguments he bringeth. The two Schoolmen Sotus and Bannes are alleadged otherwise then they meant, and in truth both the one and the other are against him. Sotus sayth it is de iurè diuino of the diuine law quod in genere s••••gulis Ecclesi••s secundum Ecclesiasticam diui∣sionem sui applicentur Episcopi;* 1.31 that in generall to euery particular Church proper Bishops be applyed, according to the Ecclesiasticall

diuision. Doth not M^r. Doctour heare Sotus say that this precept is not absolute nor de∣terminate, in all occasions and times? &c. but in genere secundū Ecclesiasticam diuisionem: in generall, according to the Ecclesiasticall diuision, that as the Ecclesiasticall diuision shall require which is variable as times va∣rye. True it is that as Sotus sayth, the diuine law doth in generall binde the Pope to de∣uide the Church into sundry distinct dioce∣ses, or particular Churches, and to apply vnto euery one a proper Bishop to ordayne Priests, ••nd Church-ministers according as times permit, and require, If the Ecclesiasticall d••∣uision be (as ordinarily it is) of such extente and multitude of persons as it cannot be cō∣ueniently prouided of Church-ministers, without a proper Bishop, then the Ecclesia∣sticall diuision bindeth the Pope to apply there a proper Bishop. If Diocesses be very smale, the Ecclesiasticall diuision dot not ne∣cessarily require that euery Church haue a proper Bishop, but two Bishopricks or mo∣re may be vnder the same Bishop, as antien∣tly the Bishoprick of Funda, was vnder the Bishop of Tarrason, or Tarracina, as it is noted in the Canon law, Cap. Illud. 21. q. 1. if some Diocesse, that according to the antient Ec∣clesiasticall diuision, did require a proper Bp. grow in time to be so small, as it needes not a proper Bp. to ordaine Priests, the Ecclesiasti∣call diuision doth not binde the Pope to put

there a proper Bishop any longer, he may make it parte of an other Bishopprick or make, it a Church exempte from Bishops, vnder some Arch-priest or Abbot, or other Ecclesiasticall power, receiuing ordination of Priests from neighboring Bishops. So that Sotus his very words cited by M^r. Doctour, shew, he was not of his minde that the Pope is bound to make Bishops in euery particu∣lar Church absolutly, and inuiolably, in all occasions and euents of what persecution soeuer; but in generall, according to the Ec∣clesiasticall diuision as hath been decla∣red.

21. Much lesse doth Bannes make for his purpose whom he citeth, teaching that Bi∣shops cannot by the Pope be remoued from the whole C••urch, or a great and notable part therof; what doth this make for M^r. Doctour? Suerly that is noe great nor notable part of the Church in respect of hauing Bishops, that can be aboundantly and conueniently supplyed with Priests, without hauing any proper Bishop, as England is; Bannes in the same place sayth; potest Summus Pontisex pro suo arbitratu vnum aut alterum Episcopum amo∣uere, nec in eorum locum aliquem designare: the Pope may at his pleasure remoue one or two Bi∣shops and not substitute any other in theyr places, is not this against M^r. Doctour? If the Pope may remoue some Bishops, and leaue some Churches without proper Bishops, why

may he not leaue England in that sorte, re∣seruing Episcopall Iurisdi••tion ouer the Ca∣tholicks therof to himselfe▪

22. We may also note that when Bannes sayth that the Pope cannot rem••ue Bis••ops frō a greate or notable parte of the Church, he meaneth pro suo arbitratu▪ for his sole plea∣sure, onely to honour such persons and pla∣ces by immediate subiection to himselfe; otherwise if necessity vrge (as when with∣out raysing a grieuous persecution, Bishops cannot be sent to some notable part of the Church,) then the Pope is not bound to send. Thus Africa a notable part of the Church,* 1.32 being depriued of more then two hundred Bishops at once, the Pope sent no other in theyr places, not to increase the persecution by such a supply vngratfull to their king. I wonder M^r. Doctour would broach a doctrine so dreadfull bi ding the Pope and English Catholicks to a thing most dissicill vnder paine of violation of the diuine law, for which he cannot alleadge one Authour truely, and fully, which makes not against his purpose.

23. But perchance the argument wheron he buildeth his doctrine is invincible; ve∣rely I cannot thinke it worthy of his much learning, noe, nor of his discretion to buyld so heauye a fabrick, on so feeble a foundation. Hee would proue because t••e diuine law bindeth the Pope to place Bi∣shops

in the Church indeterminatly, that therfore he must put them in all Churches absoutely. I argue thus, (sayth he) By the diuine law there must be particular Bi••hops in the Church, but there is noe more reason why the par∣ticular Church of France, should be gouerned by a Bishop or Bishops, rather then the Church of Spai∣ne, or the Church of Spayne, rather then the Church of England or Flanders: ergo, France. Spayne, England and all other particular Churches of Ex∣tent must be goue••ned by Bishops. This fashion of arguing maketh against all diuine pre∣cepts, wherby a thing is commanded inde∣terminatly, leauing the particularities to humane, arbitrement, of which yet noe doubt there be many. I will exemplifie to shew the weaknesse of this argumente in three precepts of this kinde. God com∣mandeth that euery, man to maintayne life, eate some kinde of meate, leauing the par∣ticular to his choyse, now comes M^r. Do∣ctours argument: By the diuine law euery man is bound to eate some meate, but there is no more reason he should eate flesh, rather then fish, or fish rather then whit∣meate, nor whitmeate rather then fruite; ergo, by the diuine law a man is bounde to eate fish, flesh, whitmeate, fruyte and all the sorts of viand. Againe, there is a diuine precept that euery one fast some dayes pre∣scribed, eyther by priuate deuotion of the Church, to mortify the lusts of the flesh, to

satisfie for sinns past, to o••••er a Sacrifice of religious worship to God: Now M^r. Do∣ctour argueth thus; euery one by the diui∣ne law, is bound to fast some dayes in the yeare: But there is no more reason why the days of March should be fasted, then the dayes of April, nor the dayes of April, then the dayes of May &c. Ergo, all the dayes of March, April, May, and all other mouthes, are to be fasted by the di∣uine law; Thirdly there is a diuine pre∣cept in generall, that the Pope appoynt some ceremonies at masse, that the Action of Sacrificing be with religious decencie performed, Hence in M^r. Doctours forme one may thus dispute. By the diuine law, some ceremonies are to be vsed in Masse; but there is no more reason why the cere∣monies of the Introitus be vsed, then the ceremonie of ••h•• Epistle, nor of the Epistle, then of the Ghospell, Offertory, Eleua∣tion. &c. Ergo, by the diuine law, all and euery one of these ceremonies are to be vsed.

24. He that shall examine M^r. Doctours argument according to the rules of logick,* 1.33 might finde many defectes therin, for i•• is apparent that there be more then tres termi∣ni, and his assumption hath no connexion eyther with his proposi••ion or conclusion. By the diuine law there must be a particular Bishops in the Church, this is true, But there is

n••e more reason that the Church of France should be gouerned by Bishops, rather then the Church of Spayne, nor the Church of Spayne, rather then the Church of Englād, what is this to the purpose be it so, what then, Ergo France Spayne and England are to be gouerned by Bishops; this doth not follow, but rather the contrary. Ergo, it is in the Popes arbitrement to giue Bi∣••hops eyther to France or to Spayne or to England as he thinks good, seeing the di∣uine law that there be some Bishops in the Church, may be kept though Bishops be wanting in eyther of these Realmes: In true forme M^r. Doctour should haue argued thus: By the diuine law there must be some particular Bishops in the Church, But this diuine law cannot be kept according to the the ende and intention therof, except there be Bishops in France, Spayne, and England Ergo Spayne, France and England are to be gouerned by particular Bishops, this argu∣ment is in forme and to the purpose, if the premisses be true as they haue some sh••w.

But I answer that the Minor may be sēsed two wayes, beīg in the one false, in the other partly true, partly false: If the sense bee, ex∣cepte there be Bishops in France, Spayne and England, this diuine law, that there bee particular Bishops in the Church, cannot be kept, so much as indeterminatly, ab∣stracting from the present circumstances of thi•• or t••at place or time, it is false; for the

diuine law requires no more then that there be some Bishops in the Church, so many in number, as there be no danger that the whole order be suddaynly taken away by theyr deathes, and so dispersed ouer the world, that all christians are pro∣uided sufficiently of learned and vertuous Priests. If this be done, the diuine law is sa∣tisfyed, though there be no Bishops in France, or Spaine or England: But if the sense be, that according to the present dis∣position of times, and circumstances of place, the diuine law, of hauing Bishops, cannot be kept except, there be Bishops in France, Spaine and England, it is partly false, true in respecte of France and Spa••∣ne, which cannot be prouided of Priests as the diuine law intendeth, except they haue proper Bishops; false in respecte of England which may sufficiently and most conueniently (as now things stande) be furnished with Priests, and not by the meanes of a proper particular Bishop. Hence M^r. Doctours assumption: there is no more reason that Spayn should be go∣uerned by particular Bishops, rather then England, speaking of what is requisite now, according to the present disposition of things, is palpably false, Though speaking in generall, abstracting from times, the di∣uine law of hauing Bishops, doth noe mo∣re concerne Spaine then England.

The Church of England as now things stand, according to the Holy Canons is not capable of a Bishop. §. 4.

26. THe diuine law is farr from en∣forcing the Popes Holynes to giue England a particular Bishop, as hath beene shewed: Rather our church (as things now stande) may seeme vncapable of a Bishop, except with some dispen∣sation in the Holy canons, which for the perfect obseruation of the diuine insti∣tution haue beene exacted. To proue this, we must suppose that the diuine institution and holy canons require, that a Bishop be not placed in townes and villages, or ouer a pettie multitude of Christians, nor where he is not needed in respect of orday∣ning Priests. The reason is, the honour and dignitie of a Bishop, that Office grow not contemptible, if one be placed where he is not generator Patrum, the Father of fathers, that is, of Priests, and where he can giue the people nothing necessary which they may not haue from Priests. For if this were, the feete might say to such a head, wee neede you not without you wee had, and when you are gone, wee shall haue all things necessary vnto saluation.

25. Some may say that not onely for ordi∣nation

of Priest, but also for gouernment, Bishops are necessary, to wit, to administer iustice, to conserue in the Church vnity and peace. I answere, when a Church may haue iuridicall administration of iustice, the power of gouernement is needfull, in which case they of such a Church neede a gouer∣nour; but if they neede not also ordina∣tion of priests from their gouernour, there is no neede their gouernour bee a Bishop. The power of gouernement of that Church, may be fitly committed and sufficiently exercised by a Preist. But if a Bishop be ne∣cessary in a Diocesse to consecrate Preists, so that the priests of the diocesse bee his sonnes, the deuine law (if not of necessity yet in reason and decency) requireth that the scepter of gouernemēt bee in his hands, not in the hands of any of his sonnes. The∣refore, giue me a multitude of Christians neuer so greate that hath no neede of a Bishop to ordaine priests, and I will bouldly say, that there is noe neede that the gouer∣nnour of that Company bee a Bishop, yea, put case, Ordinatiō of Priestes and Church∣men were not necessary in the Church, it will presently follow that there is noe nee∣de that the vniuersall Church be gouerned by Bishops superiour to Priestes. Generalls of Orders haue vnder them a great multitu∣de of subiectes, yet bee they not Bishops, nor is there neede they bee Bishops, because

their subiectes neede the direction of go∣uernement, not the ordination of priest∣hood at their handes.

26. Hence the Blessed Apostles appointed, that Bishops should not bee placed, where the power and care of Priestes may suffice, as testifieth S. Clement Epist. 2 Anicetus Epistol. 3. Euaristus Epistol. 2. & habetur Can. Audiuimus 3. q. 2. where a••so the de∣cree of the Counsell of Sardica is registred. Licentia ne sit Episcopo passim ordinandi in ci∣uitate modica, cum satis vnus esse p••ssit presb••∣ter. nec enim necesse est ibi Episc••pum fieri, vt Episcopi vilescat nomen & honori•• summi autho∣ritas. Let there be no Ordination of a Bishop in a little citty, where one priest may sufficie, (for there is noe neede of a Bishop,) that the name of Bishop, and the power of highest honour ••row not contemptible. Accordingly writeth S. Leo,* 1.34 that ouer little flockes, Bishops bee not placed, cum vbi minores sunt plebes, Presbyte∣rorum cura sufficiat, Episcopalia autem guber∣nacula non nisi maioribus populis & frequentio∣ribus ciuitatibus oporteat praesidere. Because when the flockes bee small, the Care of Priests doth suffice, but the gouernement of Bishops is not to preside, but in greater townes and places that haue multitude of people. In these Canons of the Church you see that Bishops are not to bee placed ouer little flockes, nor where there is no neede of Bishops. But in En∣gland, and where a Bishop is not needefull

to ordaine Church-Ministers, Priests may suffice, and a Bishop were needeles, soe that if one bee there placed, it is against the Ca∣nons, against the Churches perpetuall pra∣ctice, and a disgrace to Bishops.

27. If any say, that in England a Bishop is needefull, though not to giue Orders, yet to giue Confirmation, I answere, that Con∣firmation is noe Sacrament of necessity, nor is there any absolute necessity, that the sa∣me bee giuen by a Bishop as hath beene shewed. And so his giuing of Confirmation, doth not hinder but his flocke (if they neede him not to ordaine priestes) may still say to him, to witt, the feete to their head, wee neede you not, as you are Bishop. If the sole necessity of Confirmation were such, as it did inforce a Bishop to bee placed precisely in respecte of it, Bishops were to bee placed in euery village and towne, that none de∣parte this life without that Sacrament, as now thowsands doe through want of Bishops, and did also euen in the auncient Church, yea this was the cause, why the power of chrisming in Baptisme was giuen to Priestes, that none might die without Chrisme, soe saith Damasus of S. Syluester, Ordinauit vt Presbyter baptizatos lineret in ver∣tice propter transitum mortis. Hee ordained that the Priests should Chrisme the Bapti∣zed on the cro••ne of the head, by reason of the passage of death. That is, that none

might passe by death out of this world without holy Chrisme. Since which Or∣dination, to be Chrismed by a Bishop, non habet necessitatem legis saith S. Hierom, no law bindeth people to receiue the Sa∣crament of Chrisme of the Bishop, nor is that Sacrament absolutely required to giue any necessary perfection of Spirit, alio∣quin, (saith hee) si ad Episcopi tantum im∣precationem Spiritus Sanctus desluit,* 1.35 lugendi sunt qui in viculis & castellis & remotioribus ••••cis per presbiteros baptizati antè dormierant, quam ab Episcopis inuisentur: Otherwise, if at the Bishops inuocation onely the holy Spirit floweth downe, theyr case were lamentable, who in villages, townes, and remote places being baptized by priest, dy before they be visited by the Bishop.

28. I Add, that should wee graunte (what M^r. Doctour will neuer bee able to prooue) that there is a Diuine precept to take Confirmation, yet this will not inforce a Bishop, except also hee be needfull to or∣daine preistes. The Reason is. Because if there bee such a precept to receiue Confir∣mation yet it bindeth not, cum non potest com∣modè haheri as all teach, when Confirmation cannot bee had, but incommodiously, nor without the Churches doinge a thing vn∣usuall, vndecent, forbidden by the canons, as is the Ordaining of a Bishop for a place, where hee cannot haue imployment worthy

of his state, nor bee father of fathers. This I farther Confirme, by what Deuines com∣monly teach concerning the Holy Eucha∣rist, And I argue thus. The Church is not bound to prouide Christians of the Sacra∣ment of Confirmation, more then of the Sa∣crament of the Eucharist at the houre of death. Yea this obligation is the greater, because without doubt the Deuine law bin∣deth to receiue and giue the Eucharist against death; but that there is a diuine pre∣cepte to receiue Confirmation, is very vn∣certaine, the more common tenent of Deui∣nes being for the contrary. And yet the Church is not bound to giue the Sacrament of the Eucharist,* 1.36 when the same can not bee giuen without doing against the recei∣ued Customes, Ceremonies, and Canons. As when a Preist to giue a Consecrated hoast celebrate not beeing fasting, or in leuened bread, or without the sacred roabes of priesthood, as al deuines commonly teach. Therefore much lesse is the Church bound to prouide Christians of Confirmation, by doing against her receiued custome and Canon, of not makinge a Bishop ouer Com∣panies that neede not Ordination of priests, and consequently needeth not a Gouernour Bishop.

29. Hence wee may admire gods singu∣lar wisedome in directing his Vicar, in the gouernement of his Church to obserue the

sacred Canons, and by no importunity of men to bee mooued to violate receiued auncient customes. Wee may learne also euer to obey his Holynesses ordinances, which although wee see not the reason or conueniency of them, yet are still iustified within themselues. And the more that they are impugned euen by the learnedest Do∣ctours, the more their rectitude wil appeare, and now, most iust causes of their conue∣niency shew themselues, and how farre the spirit of diuine truth, is eminent aboue hu∣mane learninge. If any say that later Popes haue giuen England a Bishop, and so may seeme to haue gone against the Canons, I answere they haue not giuen England a proper Bishop, to rule it as his proper floc∣ke, and as their spirituall Prince, but onely haue sent a Titular Bishop for a time to gi∣ue Confirmation with voluntary ••urisdi∣ction, reuocable at his will, which is not against the Canons.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Pag. 380. l. 12.
• * 1.2

  pag. 375. lin. 18 & p 376. De iustitia & Inre lib. 10. q. 1. a. 4. Post 2. con∣clusionem.
• * 1.3

  Bannes 2.2.
• * 1.4

  q. 1 a. 10. co•• l••sime 6. ad vlti∣mu••
• * 1.5

  pag. 376. l. 10
• * 1.6

  pag. 341. lin. 13.
• * 1.7

  c. 14. n. 3
• * 1.8

  c. 15. n. 6.
• * 1.9

  c. 13. n. 3. 4. &c.
• * 1.10

  c. 13. n. ••.
• * 1.11

  pag. 37. & lin. 8.
• * 1.12

  Matt. 10.
• * 1.13

  Athan. A∣polog. profu∣ga August. Episc 180. Iulius Epis. a ••••rient. Pelag. Papa Epis a•• Be∣nignum.
• a 1.14

  Cap. Post trans∣l••t on••m. De renunt.
• * 1.15

  C••prian ••p. s. 15.
• * 1.16

  Cyprian Epis. 36.
• * 1.17

  Pontius in vita Cypria∣ni.
• * 1.18

  pag. 380. li••. 14.
• * 1.19

  Cap. 14. n. 5. & 6.
• * 1.20

  Baron. An∣no 283.
• a 1.21

  Peli∣gianus & Caual. in scolum. in 4. d. 7 q. 2. in scholio.
• * 1.22

  Cap. 13. n. 3.
• * 1.23

  Vasquez in 3 p. to 3. Disp. 241. c 1 n. 5 & 6. & Suar••z to. 3 De Re¦lig. lib. c. 8. n Episcopus titularis Ec∣cl••siam occu∣patam s••m∣per r••spi••t quamuis ei ins••ruire non possit.

  Ibidem n. 4
• * 1.24

  ibid••m n. 4.
• * 1.25

  Baron. anno 253.
• * 1.26

  Epis. 31. in∣t r Ep s. Cypriani.
• * 1.27

  vbi sup. a n. 5.
• * 1.28

  ibidem n. 5.
• * 1.29

  Suar. de leg. l. 6. c. 6.
• a 1.30

  Cap. Frater no∣st••r 16. q 1. Cap. lumi noso 18 q. 1 Glossa cap 1 de priuil. in 6 vid. Eras mum a ••ho Iurisdic. Ordin in exemptor p. 1. q 3. n. 14.
• * 1.31

  Sor. l. 10 de iusti••. & iu∣re q. 1. a. 4. post 2. ••ō••lus.
• * 1.32

  Bann. 504.
• * 1.33

  pag. 376. lin. 10.
• * 1.34

  Epist 4••. ••l 〈…〉〈…〉 A••ri ae.
• * 1.35

  dialog a••uer¦sus Lucifer. cap. 4.
• * 1.36

  Suares in 3. p. d. 8. & alij commu∣niter.