THE FIRST QVESTION . What iudgment may be framed of M. Doctour his treatise in generall .

1. MY meaning is not to set downe what Censure 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 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 Persons , whom he thought good not to name .

3 And whatsoeuer he speaketh of Charity , in his Epistle , and through his booke , yet he could haue giuen no greater blowe against that vertue , then by being the first to print a treatise , in the English tongue , which euery vnlearned person might vnderstand , and to which he could not but expect answere , whereby it would be almost impossible some office should not either be giuen , or taken , & with returne of new answeres , & replies , Charity more , and more indamaged .

4 This treatise hath renewed , that no lesse improfitable , then odious comparison , betwixt the perfection 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 comparing 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 contrary of ●ll which circumstances 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 , & Presidents of Seminaries , were effect●●●lly ●arefull , that their subiects speake of Religious men 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 Children , othe●wise then in a cold remisse manner as if he had bene halfe consenting to their misdemeanour , whereby men were auerted from 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 , from whence it had bin good manners for vs to learne , what is by Christs i●stitution necessary for Gods Church ingeneral , & expedient in particular concerning our hauing a Bishop in England . But to tel euery man , & woman , in a language vnderstood only by those who ought to obey ( and which could not serue for information of those who were to be our Vmpiers ) that it is a deuine commandement to haue a Bishop in England , is but to lead men into temptation of disobedience ( in case his Holinesse should euer put in prctaise the contrary ) and of condemning the iudgments , and facts of so many learned , and holy Popes , who for diuers yeares , deemed it nether necessary , nor expedient togrant vs a Bishop .

8 The greater , and better part of English Catholicks wil be nothing well contented with this booke , wherein they are plainely enough taxed of want of Charity , and Obedience , in not being so vnited , & subordinate to my Lord of Calcedon , as it seemes M. Doctour thinkes they should . They are also in effect condemned of mortal sinne , by refusing so longe time a Bishop , against the law of God , & for being occasion , 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 persecution , can oppose against the comming in of a Bispop , though thereby only the Sacrament of confirmation should be wanting , auouching moreouer al those who haue not had the Sactament of Confirmation not to be perfect Christians , which is a saying by him more then once repeated , but how true it is , I hope , the reader wil be able to iudge by what shal be said in the follo●wing questions , as also how litle probability his other reasons carry for euincing the necessity of a Bishop in England .

9 Neither can my Lord of Chalcedon much like this booke , wherein the reader will finde some passages by me noted , whereby my Lord his Ordmariship is quite demolished , and other authority by him pretended , either extenuated , or made odious , & dreadfull to Catholicks .

10 It cannot be pleasing to Almighty God , to treate of holy things vpon particular designe , and humane respects . For I know not how deuotion is lessened euen towards sacred things , when they are commended by exaggeration , and for some priuate end , as in this treatise M. Doctour doth extoll Episcopall dignity aboue Religious state , vrge the necessity of Confirmation , prayse the Secular Clergy , and enforce the obligation of hauing a Bishop , much more then according to true deuinity he could , and more then , I feare , he would haue done , if all mortall men were as free from emulation , as the Saints in heauen . And as he hath written of the Hierarchie , so perhaps we shall in ty●e see some printed treatise of the Sa●rament of Confirmation , and the generall ambiguous speaches of some antient Fathers , or the particular opinions of some few deuines , misapplyed for the necessity of that Sacrament , or in proofe that it cannot be administred but by a Bishop , or some such like subject , & busines .

11 As for the manner 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 strange , & vntoward propositions : 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 ( as Christ hath instituted ) be a Hierarchie composed 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 them , which being granted also to Religious , they may performe the same actions no lesse then Seculars , as in due place shal be declared . In other points likewise , he speaketh , not so distinctly as a schollar would expect .

14 But the thing at which I most wonder , in a man 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 allegation of S. Cyprian , S. Clement , Sotus , Bannes et● .

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 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 ancient Fathers , the doctrine of all Catholicks concerning the necessity of hauing some Bishops in Gods Church , concerne 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 arguments . But least I may seeme to wrong so learned a man , I desire the reader not to giue me credit till in the following seuerall Questions , he finde by particulars , the truth of what I haue deliuered in generall .

THE SECOND QVESTION . Whether without a Bishop here can be a particular Church .

1 M. Doctor in diuers parts of his treatise doth teach , that without a Bishop there can be no particular Church , & in his 14. chapter , where he endeauoureth to prooue , that a particular courtry may not refuse Bishops , by reason of persecution , one of his maine arguments is num. 9. because without a Bishop there can be no particular Church ; & thence deduceth , that Catholicks of England , al the while they had no Bishop , were no particular Church , & shall no longer be a particular Church , then they shall haue a Bishop , but shal be a flocke with out a Pastour , ●●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 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 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. Cyprian 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 Nouatian heretick , and with too much credulity , and temerity , had giuen credit to certayne fa●sly reported crimes against S. Cyprian , for which he esteemed that the Saint ought to haue 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 docens 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 , & Ecclesiam 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 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 the Church ; that in vaine they flater themselues , 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 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 , 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 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 understanding wherof , was required no greater labour , 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 from what hath bene said that the true explication & reason of those wordes in S. Cyprian alleadged by him in his 12 chap. num. 4 vnde seire debes Episcopum in Ecclesia esse , et Ecclesiam in Episcopo , where vpon thou must know that the Bishop is in the Church , and the Church in the Bishop ( which words wee also euen now cited ) is not that which M. Doctour giueth , because the Church cannot be without a Bishop nor a Bishop without a Church but that , supposing a Church haue a true Bishop , they must not be deuided , one from another ; and therfore S. Cyprian immediatly after the said wordes , addeth ; Qui cum Episcopo non est , in Ealesia non est : He that is not with the Bishop , is not in the Church : And yet , I hope , English Catholicks , while they wanted 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 it . Seing then England 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 England , 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 , 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 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 than 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 man euer dreame , that for that c●use , they ceased to be particular Churches : Rather , such exāptions were accounted fauours , & such imme●iat subiection to the Pope , a great honour●til now M. Doctour tels the world , that the Church of Saiui Iohn Late●an , of Tull , of all exempted places , & persons , neither haue bene , nor shal be particular Churches , till they be taken from the Popes particular chardge , and put in the hands of some other Bishop ; & that in 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 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 can neuer be proued , or rather the contrary 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 existence of a particular church : it be not sufficient , that it be gouernd by such , as from his Holines receiue Delegated power , for al occasions , that may require iurisdiction . If he affirme that such a particular Church may be , then I inferre , that a Bishop is not necessary for the making a particular Church ; because whatsoeuer iurisdiction 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 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 obedience 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 wil be able to performe ) vnlesse he could further prooue , that such a precept were vndispensable , or did binde with whatsoeuer inconuenience , because there are many deuine precepts , for example , Vowes , materiall Integrity of Confession , Residence of Bishops &c. which do not binde alwayes , nor in all cases , or are not by the Vicar of Christ dispensable , and vntill he haue prooued , this his imaginary precept not to be of such a kinde , he is as neere as he was . For certain●ly , if any 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 assertion ) 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 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 vpon 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 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 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 cuen in time of persecution , 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 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 shal be ordained in carthage with his Cleargy , but also all other Bishops of the African prouinces with their Cleargie , shal be sent to the 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 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● 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 vpon earth , it shal be loosed in heanen . 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 . 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 fundamentis 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 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 persecuion can excuse the obligation therof , or giue sufficient 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 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 England , & Scotland also to be much lesse than the number of 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 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 : 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 than we grant , but cometh far short of what M. Doctor intendeth . 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 censendum est . When the minister of God , by his command performeth that which he instituted such an action is to be esteemed of de●ine 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 action 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 Institution & 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. sacramental 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 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 Christians marry they performe an action , 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 strongly 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 Sotus 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 occasions , as Sotus teacheth concerning the residence of Bishops . Finally by this ocasion , M. D●●●er I doubt not , wil be more circonspect in ●●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 manner , 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 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 Bannes answers , Quòd licet Summus Pontifex posset pros●● arbetr●tu , vnum aut alterum Episcopum amouere , nec in locum corum ali quem design●re , non tamè admittendum 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 haue alleadged at large , & not by halfes , as much as might seeme for his purpose ) the reader will quickly perceiue that it is not de iure diuino , a commandement of God , that euery particular Church haue a Bishop , seeing according to this Authour , the Pope may leaue some Churches without Bishops . Now I would aske M. Doctour , whether such Churches should cease to be particular Churches ? and whatsoeuer he answereth , will either be against his other Principle , that without a Bishop there can be 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 cannot forget , how M. Doctour alleadged first Sotus ▪ as teaching that iure diuino ▪ by deui●● Precept , euery particular Church 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 understanding that two authours should be rightly alle●●ged as teaching that very po●●● , wherein they are contrary . Contrary , 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 Bannes 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 reason that M. Doctour did inser●● from 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 example , should be gouerned by a Bishop , then the 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 mainetenance 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 , 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 compare 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 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 England , 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 what good vse I shal be able to make of his answere , whatsoeuer it be .

14 Lastly , here also I must craue leaue to shew , that M. Doctor his manner 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 argument 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 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 Scotland 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 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 etiam 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 : & also because in the Christian common 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 England 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 then , that I had reason to wish Suarez had bene by M. Doctour cited not by halfes , for he being entirely cited makes for vs , against him .

18 His examples drawne from the African church , may be answered all at once , if we consider . First , that examples prooue little , vnlesse we were sure , that all circumstances concurre alike ; and as those of Africke could best iudge , what was fit for that Church , so English men can best tell , how things stand in England , and what is most expedient for that Church . Secondly it is cleere , their case was farre different from ours in England . For the African Bishops , and people , had open meetings , yea the Bishops celebrated Councels : The Catholcks were many , & publicke , or rather the whole face of the country was catholicke : They had their knowne Primate , and other Bishops : and lastly ( which I desire the reader still to obserue ) if there had not bene Bishops in Africke , their Church would haue wholy 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 .

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 Trasamundus , vt absque exerto ad persequendum gladio , ipsae Orthodoxorum Eccelsiae , aliquo temporis spatio orbatae vniuersae Pastoribus sponte concidereat . To that end Trasamundus had commanded those thinges ( namely that no more Bishops should be ordayned in the place of those that dyed ) to the end that without dint of sword , the Catholicke Churches being all for some space of tyme destitute of Pastours , might of themselues fall . And for this reason Baronius sayd : what hope could there remayne for the churches , when their foundations , to wit the Bishops , were taken away ? And this I hope will satisfie the iudicious reader , that the three examples drawne from the African Church , prooue nothing for our case in England : yet by way of supererogation , I will touch euery one of them apart .

21 Concerning the first , of the peoples crying on t for a Bishop for the Church of Certhage , which Hunericus offered them , but vpon condition that the Arians of Constantinople , might enioy the free vse of their Churches , otherwise not onely the Bishop that should be ordayned in Carthage with his cleargy , but also all other Bishops of the African● 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 conditions , 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 England , be sure to cry for a Bishop , although it 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 England 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 , vpon 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 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 among those good Catholicks , who at one time were depriued , not onely of Bishops , but also of their Preists , and Deacons . This example being so farre from the purpose , I meruaile he would coople with it a certayne ( wherefore ) saying : wherefore as for other poynts of fayth we must dye , so we must dye , rather then deny the Hier aroby of the church , Which consisteth principally of Bishops . To dye for the defence of the Hierarchie of the church , is indeed sufficient cause of martyrdome , but I neither vnderstand how that truth is aptly deduced from the sayd example , nor can any body beleeue , that he were a martyr , who should dye for defence of the necessity of a Bishop in Englard , or for defence of some particuler pretence of authority , which a Bishop in England might make : although perhapps M. Doctour might not thinke it impossible , but that his booke being in English , ●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 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 .