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.

M^r. Doctours errour that obedience is due to a Bishop in respect of his power of order, descouered and re∣futed. §. 2.

IT is not so easy for those of the vulgar sort to conceaue the difference of the power of consecration, from the power of Iurisdiction in a Bishop, whom they find to be Bishop by order, they presently con∣ceaue he is Bishop by office. Of this their weaknes M^r Doctour is content to make his aduantage, and because my Lord of Chalcedon is Bishop by order and name, because also he is theirs, as being their countryman, being applyed to helpe them, and hauing the faculty to giue them Con∣firmation, hence tacitly arguing à diuisis ad coniuncta, he supposeth as cleere that he is their Bishop, which supposed, he doth fur∣ther conclude, that whatsoeuer of reue∣rence and obedience is due from a Church

to their Bishop, the Catholiques of England owe the same to his Lordship, to this pur∣pose accommodating the sayings of fathers, requiring ful subiection of Christians to their Priests and Bishop, and their repre∣hensions of people disobedient. His dedi∣catory is ful of this, but most of al his se∣uenth Chapter, the drift and cōclusion whe∣reof, is contained in these the last wordes therof. Let vs then obey our Bishop as our lawful Superiour, reuerence him as Lord and spirituall Prince, loue him as our father. But how doth M^r. Doctour proue he is our Superiour, whom we must obey, and our Lord and spiritual Prince, to whom we must be subiect? Because he is in degree of order coequal to the Pope, in this respect we are his subiects and must obey him. Be∣cause I thinke the learned Reader wil not beleeue M^r. Doctour would vtter a para∣doxe so strange, I wil set downe his wor∣des, wherin he doth not only so affirme, but vndertakes solemnly the proofe therof. Thus he beginneth that Chapter. Out of that which hath bene said in the precedent Chapters, it followeth euidently, that the Bishop in power and dignity of Order, taketh the highest Roome and dignity in the Church of God. For though the Archbishop and Primate be aboue him in power of iurisdiction and Ecclesiastical dignity, yet in the order and power of Bishop, he is as high as any of them euen as the Pope himselfe,

True it is the Pope is head of the Church, and Pastor Pastorum, the Pastour of Bishops them∣selues, yet this superiority is in Iurisdiction, by which he can prescribe lawes to the whole Church, but in power of Order the Bishop can validly doe as much as the Pope himselfe, &c. Therfore in degree of Order the poorest Bishop is as great as the richest and greatest Patriarcke, yea as the Pope himselfe, and Superiour to Priests, much more to the laity be the Princes of Monarckes. When∣ce I may deduce two conclusions, the one, that the Bishop is to be honoured of all, euen of Mo∣narckes and Emperours, the second, that he is also to be humbly obeyd of al his subiects. Thus M^r. Doctour. These wordes shew that M••. Doctour holdes obedience to be due to a Bishop in regard of his Superiority ouer others in the degree of order, which do∣ctrine were it true, it would in deed thence follow, that my Lord of Chalcedon is to be humbly obeyed of al in England. But how much M^•. Doctour is herein deceaued may be cleerly demonstrated. First because if a Bishop were to be obeyed in regard of his superiority of Order, he were no lesse to be obeyed then the Pope, for they that be equal in the superiority to which obedien∣ce is due, are equally to be obeyed. The poo∣rest Bishop in the world is equall to the Po∣pe in Superiority of order, vnto which obe∣dience is due as M^r. Doctour saith, therfore the poorest Bishop is no lesse humbly to be

obeyed then the Pope. Secondly if a Bishops Superiority in order did require obedience of his inferiours, then subiection or infe∣riority to the Bishop in order did owe him obedience, and consequently whosoeuer be inferiour to the Bishop in order, owe him obedience, and be bound to obey him. But all men vnder heauen that be not Bishops are vnder Bishops in respect of dignity and power of order, yea saith M^r. Doctour c. 7. n. 7. none in heauen be he Angel or Archangel, nay a Cherubin or a Seraphin, is aboue a Bishop. Therfore all creatures in heauen and earth (only Bishops excepted) are bound hum∣bly to obey the poorest Bishop, or my Lord of Chalcedon. If this be absurd then M^r. Doctour must retract his proposition, that because the Bishop is equal to the Pope in order, thence it is deduced that he is to be obeyed of all his subiects.

10. Wherfore most certaine it is, that Obedience is due to the Bishop in respect of his power of Iurisdiction, not in res∣pect of his power of order. Hence if he haue no power of Iurisdiction, he is not to be humbly obeyed, but rather he is humbly to obey such as haue iurisdiction and com∣maund ouer him, though they be not Bi∣shops. A Bishop that leauing his Bishop∣ricke retyreth to religion stil retaineth his power of order, and is therin equal to the Pope and superiour to al Priests, and yet he

is not to be obeyed, but to obey his Gene∣ral, who for order is vnder him, and but a Priest. Do we not see titular Bishops, such as my Lord of Chalcedon is, and suffra∣gans who for order are equal to the Pope, to be vnder Bishops, and at their com∣maund and obedience, that be not so much as Priests? false then is M^r. Doctours asser∣tion, that from the Bishops Superiority in order aboue Priests, and his equality therin vnto the Pope, is deduced that he must be obeyed of his subiects. True it is, that if he haue subiects committed to his charge, they be humbly to obey him, but this is not because he is for power of order equal to the Pope, but because he hath power of commaund and iurisdiction ouer them.

11. Hence M^r. Doctour doth not alle∣adge any sufficient cause why Catholiques should be subiect to my Lord of Chalcedō, when he saith, c. 7. n. 14. of him and his pre∣decessour, though they had not that worldly splendour, honour, and riches, which our antient Bishops had, yet they are not inferiour to them in degree of order, no not in learning, life or labour, and therfore are to be honoured as much as they were and to be prouided for according as these times wil permitte, because as S. Paul saith, Priests that rule wel, that is Bishops, let them be esteemed worthy of double honour, not only of the honour of capp and knee, but of honourable maintenance also. This inference M^r. Do∣ctour

maketh, is greater then his premises wil afford, for though my Lord of Chal∣cedon were inferiour to none of our antient Bishops in the degree of order, or in lear∣ning, life and labour, yet this doth not proue him to be ruler of our Church or worthy of double honour, if he be not also our proper Bishop, for also some Bishops that be Religious are equal to my Lord of Chalcedon in the degree of order, and in learning, life, and labour, and yet cannot they claime maintenance of any Church, because they haue no iurisdiction ouer any Church. Had M^r. Doctour said that my Lord of Chalcedon is not inferiour to our antient Bishops, either in the degree of or∣der or in power of iurisdiction, or in lear∣ning, life, and labour, he had strooken ho∣me, but this is so false as he durst not affirme it. And yet except he affirme it, yea proue it, he wil neuer get his Lord∣ship one penny of maintenance as due to him in iustice. For Delegats are to receaue their stipend and maintenance from the Prince by whom they are sent, and not from the people vnto whom they be sent. M^r. Doctours comparison that his Lord∣ship is equal to our antient Bishops in lear∣ninge, life, and labour, to me seemeth ouer slender and ouer lashinge. For if his mea∣ning be that my Lord is not inferiour in le∣arning, life and labour to some of our an∣cient

Bishops, the commendation is but smal; In so mighty a number of Bishops some haue bene for learning life and labour of so litle esteeme, as they were scarce wor∣tly of the bread they did eate, much lesse of double honour or honourable mainte∣nance. But if the prayse be that my Lord is for learning, life and labour inferiour to none of our antient Bishops, the prayse may seeme greater then M^r. Doctour in∣tended; for wil M^r. Doctour say he meant to equal his Lordship in learning life and labour to S. Augustine our Apostle, or to S. Wilfride, or S. Cuthbert, or S. Dun∣stan, or S. Thomas our glorious martyr? Howsoeuer; obedience is not due to lear∣ning, nor to sanctity, nor to industry, no nor vnto the dignity of order, but only to iurisdiction, and to him that is Bishop by office, such an one though he neither haue the order of Bishop nor the learning nor the sanctity, is to be humbly obeyed of al his subiects how learned and holy, and for dignity of order eminent soeuer they be. Wil M^r. Doctour euer make this infe∣rence good, a Bishop in degree of order is equal to the Pope, ergo, he is to be obeyed.

12. His arguments shew rather the con∣trary, to witt, that the height of iurisdiction is that vnto which the subiection of humble obedience is due, which being found in a person, obedience must bow vnto him,

though he be no Bishop for order, nor emi∣nent for learning or sanctity. Let vs heare one or two of his arguments: first saith he, The Apostle commaundeth that euery soule be subiect to higher powers, for there is no po∣wer but of God, But the Bishop hath an higher power, for he hath power of order and iurisdiction, Ergo his flocke is subiect to it and must obey it. I answere S. Paul doth not say that euery one that hath any kind of higher power is to be obeyed, but that euery one is to obey higher powers, that is, them who be placed in office with power and authority to com∣maund and gouerne. The power of order to consecrate the body of Christ, to ordaine Priests, to hallow holy Chrisme and the like, be not powers, to which obedience is due, more then to the power of working mira∣cles, or the power of giuing much Almes, or the power and faculty to teach Theologie. M^r. Doctour proueth the Bishop is to be obeyed of his subiects, because he hath iu∣risdiction and is gouernour, which no man denyes or can doubt of, being in his right witts, and not because he is in degree of or∣der aboue all and equal to the Pope, which was his premise. And if he proue not this he cometh short of his intent, which is to haue my Lord of Chalcedon to be obeyed, because though he want the office of Bishop ouer England, yet in the degree of order he is equall euen to the Pope. This M^r. Do∣ctour

intended and promised to proue, and therfore al is impertinent that is brought to shew that Bishops that haue iurisdiction ouer a Diocesse and Church are to be obey∣ed of their subiects.

13. Wherfore no lesse from the matter is his second argument, S. Paul expresly com∣maundeth vs to be obediēt to our Prelates, because melior est obedientia quàm victima;† I ans∣were, S. Paul doth commaund that subiects obey their Prelates whether they be Bishops or no. And so he sheweth what is due to Pre∣lates that be in office in respect of their iu∣risdiction, not that they are humbly to be obeyed in respect that they can doe by the power of order validly as much as the Pope, howsoeuer in iurisdiction they be inferiour to him; from this roote M^r. Doctour promi∣sed to deduce the obligation subiects haue to obey a Bishop, which he doth not perfor∣me, but only proueth that superiours are to be obeyed, wherof there is no question. In like manner in his third argument he shoo∣teth wide of his marke bringing diuers sen∣tences of the fathers that Bishops are to be obeyed. Who doubts therof? That which M^r. Doctour vndertooke to shew, is, that a Bishop must be obeyed in respect of the su∣periority of his degree of order, because therin he is equal to the Pope. This is the thinge denyed, which could M^r. Doctour proue, he might do my Lord of Chalcedon

in deed Doctours seruice; otherwise to heap together sentences of scripture and antiqui∣ty, to proue in general that Superiours in re∣gard of their iurisdiction and office of go∣uernment are to be obeyed, cui bono? who denyes this? or what is this to my Lord of Chalcedon, that he may therupon exact obedience of Catholiques, he not being their Bishop by iurisdiction and office?

That M^r. Doctours vrging of Catholiques doth not so wel agree with Charity.

I Wish M^r. Doctour to consider in the sight of the eternal Iudge, before whom shortly we are to appeare, to giue an account of our writing, how his proceeding with poore persecuted English Catholiques can stand with Charity. For he layeth vpon thē a necessity either to doe a thing offensiue vnto God, or els to fal out with him and to be reproched by him. For to his suggestion about my Lord of Chalcedon of the Popes Deputy, to change him into their Pastour and spiritual Prince, placed of God to rule them, either Catholiques yeeld or they yeeld not? If they yeeld, they transgresse the holy Canons, they vsurpe the office of the supre∣me Pastour, making themselues the flocke of another without his order, they doe against the duty of the sheep of Christ, which is to obey none as their Pastour that doth not

enter by the doore, that is, not by the com∣maund of his Vicar imposed vpon them. If they yeeld not, al the hard sentences of the fathers against people disobedient to their Bishops are loden vpon them, particularly out of S. Ignatius. It becometh vs to obey the Bishops and to contradict him in nothing, for it is terrible to contradict such an one, for he that so doth, doth not deceaue him that is seen, but him who his inuisible that cannot be deceaued of any. For God saith by Samuel, they deceaued not him but me. And againe, it behoueth you then to obey your Superiours, that you may not only be called, but truly be Christians: If any cal him Bishop but yet doe al without him, to such an one, he that is the true first and only Pastour by nature wil say, what doe you cal me Lord, Lord, and doe not the thinges I say: for such seeme to me not to be men of a good conscience, but dis∣semblers, and personati, such as take vpon them the person they are not. These and many other bitter sentences of the fathers are by M^r. Doctour applyed to such as wil not con∣curre with him in the behalfe of my Lord of Chalcedon, of a delegate to make him their Bishop and Prince. What shal poore Catholiques doe? If they receaue him they trāsgresse the deuine law, they disobey their Soueraigne Pastour, who sendeth him as Delegate, and not as Bishop. If they doe not, they must endure bitter reproches, that they be not truly Christians, that they de∣ceaue

God, that they be men of no good conscience, dissemblers, and counterfetts. what can be more harsh?

But M••. Doctour saith: I haue proued at large that the lay Catholiques of England can not in conscience refuse a Bishop for feare of persecution, partly because the gouernment of the Church is committed vnto Bishops by Christ insti∣tution, who therfore haue bene gouernours of it in the greatest rage and fury of persecution. Thus he speaking very confidently of his prouing, how truly the reader may be able to iudge by the perusing of the third and fourth Cha∣pter of this treatise. But leauing this; to our purpose, to witt, in the behalfe of charity, I say when M^r. D. saith lay Catholiques cannot in conscience refuse a Bishop for feare of persecution, if he meane a Bishop of∣fred them and imposed vpon them by the sea Apostolique, it is true they cannot in conscience refuse him, nor doe they nor wil they. They know the charity of that mother Church, that laborem & dolorem con••iderat, and wil not put a Bishop vpon them to the encrease of their vexation without the ne∣cessity of their good so require. They be sure that Pillar of truth and sanctuarie of the holy Ghost, knowes what the deuine law and institution requires better then doth M^r. Doctour, let him therfore shew any order, or commaund from this holy sea, that my Lord of Chalcedon is made Bishop

with princely iurisdictiō to gouerne the En∣glish Catholiques as his owne flocke, and the controuersie is ended. But this M^r. Do∣ctour doth not so much as pretend, Kno∣wing the Popes institution to be of a Dele∣gate with voluntary iurisdiction for the so∣lace of soules, not of a spiritual Prince with a Bishops iurisdiction and office. What then would he haue of Catholiques? that they re∣fuse not a Bishop put vpon them by the or∣dinance of secular Priests, who be (as he saith) by the deuine institution gouernours of the Church, and by the ordinary right of their office haue authority to preach to Infi∣dels, to propagate the Church and gouerne countreyes conuerted. Alas this doctrine to our Catholiques seemeth new, harsh, vn∣couth, and more to be shunned then they will (out of reuerence to M••. Doctour) ex∣presse. Let him bringe the sentence of the holy sea that this doctrine is current, that Priests haue such ample au∣thority by diuine right, to erect new Chri∣stianityes, Churches, and Bishoprickes, and then to gouerne them: This done there wil∣be no further difficulty but they shal erect as many Bishoprickes as they desire. But if this doctrine be such as M••. Doctour wil hardly dare to stand to it, why doth he con∣tend? or what would he haue? wil he not be content except Catholiques do more then he dareth cleerly say is lawful? That is,

change a Delegate into a Bishop without the Popes order, make themselues a flocke of one pretended to be Prince and Pastour by deuine ordinance, without the leaue of their soueraigne Pastour? I thinke M^r. Do∣ctour must needes see his pressing is vnrea∣sonable.

The Conclusion to the Catholiques of England.

To conclude, to you the euer honoured Catholiques of England, I turne my speech in a few words, giuing you my aduise how to proceede in this dissention. Be wise as serpents and simple as doues, wise as serpents, to defend your head, the power and authority of the sea Apostolique, simple as doues, conseruing a charitable opinion of such persons, who in their zeale to Bishops, doe teach and practise what you neuer hitherto heard, nor doe wel vnderstand. For the first let the learning of no Doctour howsoeuer eminent for his for∣mer writinges induce you to beleeue, that the sea Apostolique hath so long a tyme together transgressed the deuine law, in their ruling you without other Bishops immediatly as their proper flocke, that against charity they haue depriued you of the being a Christian Church, leauinge you to be stil weake and only litle ones in spiritual life, wanting that Sacrament without which you cānot be per∣fect Christiās, that is, haue courage to professe

your faith in persecution. Do not harken vn∣to the pretence of deuine institution for go∣uernment of the Church, doe not venture to make to your selues, or to receaue from such pretended deuinely ordained gouernours, Bishops and Pastours. Yeeld them no more power then they bring you graunted them in writing by the soueraigne Pastour. Be per∣swaded that no new opinions be more dan∣gerous then such as dislike of the sea Apo∣stoliques proceeding occasioneth, and desire to haue authority immediatly of God and not from it. Let them that would trouble you know that you are the sheep of Peter, that you cleaue to the rocke, and are im∣mouable, that al writing in vulgar langua∣ge is in vaine to moue you to beleeue or pra∣ctise for your gouernment more then the Vi∣car of Christ shal expresly warrant.

Notes

• pag. 188.
• p. 206. lin. 13.
• c. 7 n. 15. p. 208.
• c 7. n. 16. pag. 209.
• †

  Obediēce to Bishops obay your Prelates and be su∣biect to them, for they watch as being to giue an ac¦count to God for your sou∣les. Where S. Thomas of Aquin noteth, that the Apostle comman∣deth † 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• l. 7 n. 17. pag. 211.
• Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrn. & epist. ad Magnes.
• pag. 213.
• c. 15. n. 12. pag. 414.