A Defense of the Sermon Preached at the Consecration of the Bishop of Bath, Book 3 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI Titles of honour giuen to BB.
(Serm. sect. 13. pag. 52. Thus hauehave you heard, that the Angels or BB. of the Primitiue Church, were for the substance of their calling such as ours be. &c. to the end of the fourth point.)
HEere (I thanke him) he compareth me to such as be called Iuglers,Whether BB. may be called Lords. because as they can perswade men they see what they doe not see: so I would perswade my hearers that they heard which they did not heare. Whether of vsus doth vse more plaine euidence of truth, and whether of vsus tricks of legerdemaine, I appeale to the conscience of the Reader; though it bee the refuter himselfe. But good sir, though it was not in me to perswade eueryevery one that did heare, yet me thinks I might without offence say they had heard that which they did heare, whether it were true or false. And I hope in God, that which now I hauehave written in defence of that which they heard, will not onelyonly satisfie those which are not wilfully addicted to your nouelties; but also conuict the conscience of the gainesayers: whom I desire in the feare of God, to take heede how they resist a truth whereof their conscience is conuicted.Acts 9.5. foreign, it is hard to kicke against the pricks.
To that which hee obiecteth concerning the mentioning of prouinciall Bishops, whome I did not name before , I answere: that although I did not expressely and by name argue for prouinciall Bishops: yet diuers of my proofes were directly of them, and by a consequence from the greater to the lesse applied to Bishops: as also by this reason, because eeuery prouinciall Bishop is a diocesan Bishop, though not contrariwise. To his other cauill of not direct concluding, I hauehave answered already 4. or 5. times.
Ad page. 106.But before I ended this 4. point, I thought it needfull to preuent an obiection which is vsually made; that whatsoeuer the office of the ancient Bishops was, yet they were not called Lords, as ours bee. Whereunto I answered, that men were not to be offended at that title, for these two causes:
1. Because it is a title in the holy scriptures giuen, both to naturall and spirituall Fathers, as I proued out of Genesis 3….35.1. Kings. 18.7.13. 2. Because the title of Angels, which the Holy Ghost in this place giueth to them, is a title of greater honour, then the other, by how much the heauenly gouernours of men vnderunder God, are more excellent then the earthly. To the former, besides some insulting speeches,Psal. 91.11. Dan. 10.11. which hee will bee ashamed of, when hee shall finde himselfe put to silence: hee answereth, that the word Lord was a terme common too all superiours as foreign in Greeke, and Dominus in Latine: which I confesse to be true in the vocatiue case, the words being vsed as our English, Sir. But otherwise, where the word is to be translated Lord, it is both in Hebrew and Greeke a word of like honour with our English, Lord. And therefore it was a great ouersight in those, which translating 1. Pet. 3. where Peter saith that Sara called Abraham foreign, Lord, read, that she called him Sir. For her words, whereunto Peter had relation, were these, Vadoni zaken, and my Lord is olde. It were something foolish to say, and my Sir. Yea but saith he, the word Lord with vsus is appropriated to men of Nobility and speciall place in ciuill gouernment. To omitte that it is not so appropriated to them, but that euen meane gentlemen are so called in respect of the manours which they hold, it appeareth by that which hath bene said, that Bishops not onelyonly now hauehave, but in the Primitiue Church had, as speciall and as honourable a place in the gouernment of the Church, as the ciuill magistrates he speaketh of, hauehave in the common wealth. Their calling also beeing more honourable, I see no reason, why they should be enuyed an equall title of honour.
To the latter reason he answereth 2. things.§. 2. First, that the titles of honour now giuen to Bishops were also inferiour to the title of Angels, which the holy Ghost giueth them; and yet then they had them not, nor till Poperie (he meaneth the Papacie) was grown to his full height. His simple Reader would thinke that hee speaketh vponupon certaine knowledge, and cannot but beleeue him, and so be deceiued by his confident speeches; but he speaketh at all aduentures, as his affection, not as his knowledge lead him. The Papacie came not to the ful height vntil the time of Hildebrād, which was aboue a thousand yeares after Christ: when the Pope had gotten the temporall supremacie, and so both the swords. The beginning of that, which our writers call the Papacie, was when the Pope first obtained the spirituall supremacie, which was about the yeare sixe hundred and seauen. If therefore I shall prooue, that Bishops had as honourable titles in the first sixe hundred yeares, as they hauehave now with vsus; I shall euince, that not onelyonly before the height, but before the arising of the Papacie, they were called Lords, and by other titles no lesse honourable then Lord. But I will not desire so large a scope; the most of my proofes shall be contained within three or foure hundred yeares after the death of Christ.
Alexander therefore the Bishop of Alexandria, writing to Alexander Bishop of Constantinople giueth him this stile,aTheodor. l. 1. c. 4. foreign, To my most honourable brother: Not long after, Arius writeth thus to Eusebius of Nicomedia, bTh. l. 1. c. 5., foreign, to my most desired Lord. The same Eusebius cIbid. c. 6.foreign, to my Lord Paulinus Bishop of Treuers, vsing also the same title more then once in the same Epistle of Eusebius of Caesaria, calling him my Lord Eusebius. For though these two whom I last cited, were not sound in the faith; yet their writing sheweth, what was the custome of the Church before the Councill of Nice. Not long after the same Councill, Athanasius succeeded the foresaid Alexander: in his behalfe the Bishops which came out of Aegypt write to the Bishops assembled in Councill at Tyrus, dAtha. Apol. 2.foreign, to our most honourable Lords. The Synode held at Ierusalem eSozom. l. 3. c. 22.writing also in his behalfe to the Presbyters, Deacons, & people in Aegypt, Lybia & Alexandria moue thē to be thankful vntounto God, who hath now, say they, restored vntounto you foreign, your pastor and Lord. About the same time, certain BB. direct their letters to Iulius B. of Rome fSoz. l. 3. c. 23.the great Patron of Athanasius, vnderunder this stile foreign, to the most blessed Lord &c. Gregory Nazianzene gGreg. Naz. epist ad Greg. Nyss.writing to Gregory Nyssen concerning a false report which had beene spread, that the BB. had put him by the bishopricke, saith, let no man speake vntruths of mee, foreign, nor of my Lords the BB. The councell held at Illyricum writing to the Churches and Bishops of Asia and Phrygia &c. hath these words hTheo. l. 4. c. 9., we hauehave sent foreign, our Lord and fellow minister Elpidius to take notice of your doctrine, whether it bee as we hauehave heard foreign, of our Lord and fellow Minister Eustathius. George the Bishop of LaodiceaiSoz. l. 4. c. 13. writeth to certain BB. thus, foreign to the most honourable Lords. The fathers of the second generall Councell kConstantine p. 1. apud. Theodor. l. 5. c. 9.direct their letter foreign, to the most honourable Lords Damasus, Ambrose, &c. And in the same epistle, speaking of BB. call them foreign, most reuerend and most honorable brethren. The said Ambrose holding with other BB. a Synode, and writing a synodicall epistle to Syricius then B. of Rome, among other BB. Aper a Presbyter subscribed thereunto for his B. vsing these words: lAmbros. Epist. 81.Exiussudomini Episcopi Geminiani, at the commandement of my L. B. Geminianus. And this was the vsuall stile which Presbyters did vse when they did subscribe to Councels instead of their B. whose place they supplied. As to the Councell of Arles, mConc. Arelat. 3.Desiderius Presbyter directus à Domino meo Ioanne Episcopo, directed from my Lord Iohn the B. hauehave giuen my consent, and subscribed: and so three others there mentioned; & in like maner to diuers other nTuronens. 1. Epaunens. Valent. Aurelian. 3. Toleta. 3. &c.Councels. Whosoeuer will peruse the Acts of the great Councell of Chalcedon, hee shall seldome read any B. mentioned without some title of great reuerence and honour; as reuerendissimus, sanctissimus. And long before that, Socrates oSocr. hist. l. 6. in prooem.acknowledgeth, that it was the vsuall manner in his time, not to speake of BB. without titles of great honour, calling them foreign, most religious, most holy, or such like. And pChrys. in Ps. 13. apud Caes. Baron. an. 58.2.Chrysostome saith plainly, that Heretikes hauehave learned of the Diuell, not to giuegive due titles of honour to Bishops. But where hee findeth fault with them, for that in stead of those titles which argue their authoritie, they said, your reuerence, your wisedome, and such like; what would hee hauehave said to the tearmes that hauehave beene vsually giuen to our Bishops by the Disciplinarians among vsus? I say, among vsus: for Caluin, Beza, and others, when they hauehave had occasion to write to our Bishops, hauehave not refused to giuegive them their titles of honour. To omit the rest, Caluin qEpist. Caluin. ad Cranmer.writing to Archbishop Cranmer, vseth these titles, Illustrissime Domine, Ornatissime & clarissime Praesul, &c. Zanchius rEpist. Dedic. l. de 3. Elohius.to Bishop Grindall, Reuerendissime Antistes. Beza sSuru. 131. Septemb. 15. 1589.and Sadeel to Archbishop Whitgift, Reuerendissimo viro, & in Christo Patri, Domino Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, serenissimae Reginae Consiliario, & totius Angliae Primati, &c.
His second answer containeth two things: the former, that the title of Angels which the holy Ghost giueth to BB. (for that onelyonly J mentioned) is quite besides the purpose , my argument being this:
The holy Ghost giueth BB. a more honourable title, in calling them the Angels of the Churches, then if he had called them Lords.
Therefore wee should not thinke much that they are called Lords.
He answereth: The Angels are glorious creatures of heauen, and hauehave some fit resemblance of the Ministers office: Lord, Lordship, and grace, are tearmes of ciuill honour, not so well befitting the Ministers of Christ Iesus. I confesse they doe not so well befit them, because they come short of that honour and excellencie, which in the name of Angels the holy Ghost ascribeth to them. For they are called not only Angels, that is, messengers and ambassadours of God, as all ministers are, in respect of their ministerie; but also each of them is called the Angell of the Church, whereof he is B. in respect of his gouernment, and gardianship of the Church: as the holy Angels of God are said to be their Angels, ouer whom they are appointed Gouernours, and gardians. Therefore the name Lord giuen to them in respect of their gouernment and authoritie, is a title of lesse honour, then that which in the same respect is giuen them by our Sauiour Christ. Neither are they therefore ciuill Lords, because they hauehave that title of Lords common to them with the Lords temporall. For who knoweth not the distinction betweene the Lords spirituall and temporall, so often mentioned in the Acts of Parliament? And whereas in the second place hee would insinuate, that our Sauiour Christ expresly forbiddeth these titles of Lordship and grace, Luc. 22. where though hee readeth thus, tLuc. 22.26.The Kings of the Gentiles reigne ouer them, and they that beare rule ouer them, are called gracious Lords; but you shall not bee so: yet he is not so ignorant of the Greeke tongue, as not to know, that neither gratious nor Lords are there mentioned in the originall text. That was an affectionate translation of those, who were too partiall in this cause. That very title, which our Sauiour speaketh of, two of the Ptolemies, Kings of Aegypt, did assume vntounto themselues, either of them being called Ptolomeus Euergetes, Ptolemy the bountifull or benefactor. But indeed in the language, wherein our Sauiour spake, the word uforeign Nedibim.which is translated Benefactors, is often vsed for Principes or Heroes, as Psa. 118.9. It is better to trust in the Lord, then to put our trust in Princes. And that seemeth to hauehave beene Lukes meaning, as not only Merceru… *In Pagnia. thesaur.but Beza xIn Luc. 22.26.also supposeth. The 70. translate the word, Prou. 19.6. foreign, the King; in Psal. 118 9. foreign, in Princes. So Psal. 47.10.83.12.113.7. But 1. Sam. 2.8. foreign. Pro. 8.16. foreign. It is also plaine, that the disciples imagining that Christ should be a worldlie Monarch, expected, that themselues should be earthly Princes, in great authoritie about him, eueryevery one affecting a neerer place about him then his fellowes, as appeareth by the two sonnes of Zebede, whose ambitious suite to Christ, that they might sit one on his right hand, and the other on his left in his kingdome, gaue occasion of this speech, as Matthew yMatt. 20.20▪ 25.noteth. Whereas therefore they both erred in their imagination, thinking that they should be great Princes vnderunder an earthly Monarch, and were corrupt in their affection, each one of them ambitiously seeking superioritie ouer the rest, our Sauiour seeketh to reforme both, telling them that neither they should bee earthly Princes, as they imagined, in these words, But you not so; neither ought they to affect ambitiously superioritie ouer others, but that by how much they should exceed others in dignitie, they should labor by so much the more to excell them in humility, imitating his example. Neither did our Sauiour Christ interdict his Apostles, either superioritie of authority ouer others, or titles of eminent honour. The authoritie and dignitie of being his Apostles, is greater then any, either honour or title, that is giuen to our BB. Ierome zHier. in Tit. 1.writing on Pauls stile which he assumeth to himselfe, Tit. 1.1. saith, Where hee calleth himselfe the Apostle of Iesu Christ, it seemeth some such thing as of hee had said, Pr…fectus pr…terio Augusti Caesaris, Magister exercitus Tiberij Imperatoris. For euen as the Iudges of this world, that they may seeme the more noble, take names from the Kings whom they serue and from the dignitie wherewith they are puffed vp, euen so the Apostle challenging to himselfe great authoritie among Christians, he signified before hand that he was the Apostle of Christ, that by the authoritie of the name bee might bring in awe those that should reade, shewing thereby, that all which beleeue in Christ, must be subiect to him.
§ 27.Hauing thus answered the first obiection, I did easily foresee, that three other things would bee obiected: the first, if Bishops may be called Lords, then they may behaue themselues as Lords of the Churches: I answered, that although they may not behaue themselues as Lords of the Churches, yet being the Angels of the Churches, and spirituall Fathers, to whom a paternall and pastorall authoritie is committed, may worthily be honoured with the title of Lords. To this he replieth, that we call not Shepheards nor Fathers Lords, and therefore the paternall or pastorall authoritie of Bishops doth not make them capable of such Lordly titles. J answer, that Magistrates, yea Princes, both in Scriptures and prophane Writers, are called Pastors, as well as Bishops, and for the same cause are Lords. Neither doe I doubt, but that the title of Father, being giuen by way of honour to him that is not a naturall Father, is a word of as great honour at the least, as Lord: and that is the signification of the name Papa, which hauing beene giuen in the Primitiue Church to all Bishops, as a title of eminent honour, is for that cause by the Pope of Rome appropriated to himselfe.
The second, there is too great oddes betweene the titles of Bishops and other Ministers, the one being called Masters, the other Lords. I answered, there is no such great difference betweene Master and Lord, that inferiour Minister, which assume to themselues the title of Master, should denie the title of Lord to Bishops. Hee replieth, as conceiuing my speech simply, that there was no great difference betweene Master and Lord. If you respect their vse in relation, as they are referred to their correlatiues, there is no difference; if the vse, without relation among vsus, there is great difference; but yet not so great, as that Ministers which assume the one to themselues, should denie the other to Bishops, there being as great difference betwixt their degrees, as their titles. Where he saith, it is not assumed, but giuen by custome to them, as Masters of Arts ; both parts are false: for both it is giuen to all Ministers, as they are Ministers, though not Masters of Arts, though not graduates; and also I especially meant certaine Ministers, who not enduring the title of Lord to be giuen to Bishops, will neither tell you their name by speech, nor set it downe in writing, without the preface of Mastership.
The third, if Bishops bee called Lords, then are they Lords of the Church. I answered, it followeth no more that they are therefore Lords of the Church, because they are called Lords, then the Ministers are Masters of the Church, because they are called Masters: for neither of these titles is giuen to them with relation, but as simple titles of honour and reuerence. No? saith he, let their stiles speake, Lord of Hath and Welles, Lord of Rochester, &c. What? Lord of the Cities? nothing lesse, but Lords of the Diocese. They are Lords of neither, but Lord BB. both of the City and Diocese. And the relation is not in the word Lord, but in the word Bishop, though it bee not expressed alwaies, but many times is vnderstood.
The Refuter hauing thus weakly,§ 28. Ad pag. 107. friuolously, and fondlie shifted off my arguments and testimonies, rather then lie shifted off my arguments and testimonies, rather then answered them, there being not one line in my Sermon hitherto, which I hauehave not defended with euidence of truth against his cauillations; notwithstanding, concludeth with a most insolent bragge, as if he had (as his fauourites giuegive out) laid me on my backe. And therefore as some wrestlers, after they hauehave giuen one the foile, will iet with their hands vnderunder their side, challenging all others; euen so he, hauing in his weake conceit giuen me a strong ouerthrow, because he findeth me too weake to stand in his armes, hee challengeth all commers, saying, Let him that thinketh he can say more, supplie his default. I do vnfainedly confesse, there be a great number in this Land (blessed be God) who are able to say much more in this cause then I am: notwithstanding, a stronger propugner thereof shall not neede against this oppugner. And because I am assured in my conscience of the truth and goodnesse of the cause, I promise the Refuter, if this which now I hauehave written, will not conuince him, as I hope it will; whiles he will deale as a Disputer, and not as a Libeller, I will neuer giuegive him ouer (God giuing me life and health) vntill I hauehave vtterly put him to silence. In the meane time, let the Reader looke backe to that which hath beene said on both sides: let him call to minde, if he can, what one proofe this Refuter hath brought for the paritie of Ministers; what one sound answer he hath giuen to any one argument, or testimonie to my one proposition or assumption which I hauehave produced; and then let him consider whether this glorious insultation proceeded not from an euill conscience, to a worse purpose, which is, to retaine the simple seduced people in their former tearmes of factiousnes.