XVII. The chiefest cause of disdain and murmur against bishops in the Church of England is that evil-affected eye wherewith the world looked upon them, since the time that irreligious profaneness, beholding the due and just advancements of God’s clergy, hath under pretence of enmity unto ambition and pride proceeded so far, that the contumely of old offered unto Aaron in the like quarrel may seem very moderate and quiet dealing, if we compare it with the fury of our own times. The ground and original of both their proceedings one and the same; in declaration of their grievances they differ not; the complaints as well of the one as the other are1, “Wherefore lift ye up yourselves” thus far “above the congregation of the Lord? It is too much which you take upon you;” too much power, and too much honour. Wherefore as we have shewed that there is not in their power any thing unjust or unlawful, so it resteth that in their honour also the like be done. The labour we take unto this purpose is by so much the harder, in that we are forced to wrestle with the stream of obstinate affection, mightily carried by a wilful prejudice, the dominion whereof is so powerful over them in whom it reigneth, that it giveth them no leave, no not so much as patiently to hearken unto any speech which doth not profess to feed them in this their bitter humour. Notwithstanding, forasmuch as I am persuaded that against God they will not strive, if they perceive once that in truth it is he against whom they open their mouths, my hope is their own confession will be at the length, “Behold, we have done exceeding foolishly; it was the Lord, and we knew it not; him in his ministers we have despised, we have in their honour impugned his.” But the alteration of men’s hearts must be his good and gracious work, whose most omnipotent power framed them.
Wherefore to come to our present purpose, honour is no where due, saving only unto such as have in them that whereby they are found, or at the least presumed, voluntarily beneficial2 unto them of whom they are honoured. Wheresoever nature seeth the countenance of a man, it still presumeth that there is in him a mind willing to do good, if need require, inasmuch as by nature so it should be; for which cause men unto men do honour, even for very humanity’s sake: and unto whom we deny all honour, we seem plainly to take from them all opinion of human dignity, to make no account or reckoning of them, to think them so utterly without virtue, as if no good thing in the world could be looked for at their hands. Seeing therefore it seemeth hard that we should so hardly think of any man, the precept of St. Peter is3, “Honour all men.”
Which duty of every man towards all doth vary according to the several degrees whereby they are more or less beneficial, whom we do honour. “Honour the physician4,” saith the wise man: the reason why, because for necessities’ sake God created him. Again5, “Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the person of the aged:” the reason why, because the younger sort have great benefit by their gravity, experience, and wisdom; for which cause, these things the wise man6 termeth the crown or diadem of the aged. Honour due to parents: the reason why, because we have our beginning from them7; “Obey the father that hath begotten thee, the mother that bare thee despise thou not.” Honour due unto kings and governors: the reason why, because God hath set them8 “for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well.” Thus we see by every of these particulars, that there is always some kind of virtue beneficial, wherein they excel who receive honour; and that degrees of honour are distinguished according to the value of those effects which the same beneficial virtue doth produce.
Nor is honour only an inward estimation, whereby they are reverenced and well thought of in the minds of men; but honour whereof we now speak, is defined to be an external sign, by which we give a sensible testification that we acknowledge the beneficial virtue of others. Sarah honoured her husband Abraham; this appeareth by the title she gave him. The brethren of Joseph did him honour in the land of Egypt; their lowly and humble gesture sheweth it. Parents will hardly persuade themselves that this intentional honour, which reacheth no farther than to the inward conception only, is the honour which their children owe them. Touching that honour which mystically agreeing unto Christ, was yielded literally and really unto Solomon, the words of the Psalmist concerning it are9, “Unto him they shall give of the gold of Sheba, they shall pray for him continually, and daily bless him.”
Weigh these things in themselves, titles, gestures, presents, other the like external signs wherein honour doth consist, and they are matters of no great moment. Howbeit, take them away, let them cease to be required, and they are not things of small importance, which that surcease were likely to draw after it. Let the lord mayor of London, or any other unto whose office honour belongeth, be deprived but of that title which in itself is a matter of nothing; and suppose we that it would be a small maim unto the credit, force, and countenance of his office? It hath not without the singular wisdom of God been provided, that the ordinary outward tokens of honour should for the most part be in themselves things of mean account; for to the end they might easily follow as faithful testimonies of that beneficial virtue whereunto they are due, it behoved them to be of such nature, that to himself no man might over-eagerly challenge them, without blushing; nor any man where they are due withhold them, but with manifest appearance of too great malice or pride.
Now forasmuch as according to the ancient orders and customs of this land, as of the kingdom of Israel, and of all Christian kingdoms through the world, the next in degree of honour unto the chief sovereign are the chief prelates of God’s Church; what the reason hereof may be, it resteth next to be inquired.
← The arguments answered, whereby they would p · Contents · What good doth publicly grow from the Prelac →
Footnotes
-
Hieronymus contra Luciferian. “Salutem ecclesiæ pendere,” dicit, “a summi sacerdotis dignitate,” id est, episcopi. [c. ix. t. ii. 182. ed. Vallarsii.] Idem est in Hieronymo summus sacerdos quod ἄκρος ἱερεὺς in Carthaginensi Concilio. ↩
-
Vide C. omnes. 38 dist. [Decret. Gratian. pars i. d. 38, p. 184. Lugd. 1572. “Ex septima synodo.” … . “Substantia summi sacerdotii nostri sunt eloquia divinitus tradita, i. e. vera divinarum scripturarum disciplina: quemadmodum magnus perhibet Dionysius.” Comp. 2 Concil. Nicæn. ad 787. can. ii. οὐσία τη̑ς καθ’ ἡμα̑ς ἱεραρχίας ἐστὶ τὰ θεοπαράδοτα λογία, εἴτουν ἡ τω̑ν θείων γραϕω̑ν ἀληθινὴ ἐπιστήμη, κάθως ὁ μέγας ἀπεϕήνατο Διονύσιος. t. iv. 48. ed. Hard. comp. Dionys. de Eccl. Hierarch. c. v. § 7.] Item c. Pontifices, [Decr. Grat. pars ii. causa] xii. qu. 3. [p. 1001. “Pontifices quibus in summo sacerdotio constitutis ab extraneis aliquid … donatur … inter facultates ecclesiæ computabunt.” In Consilio Agathensi [can. 6. ad 506. t. ii. 998. Hard.] Item c. De his. [Decr. Grat. pars iii.] De Consecr. dist. 5. [p. 1991, from a supposed decretal epistle of Melchiades. “Utrum majus sit sacramentum manus impositionis episcoporum aut baptismi: scitote utrumque magnum esse sacramentum: et sicut unum majoribus, i. e. summis Pontificibus, est accommodatum … ita et majori veneratione venerandum.” Comp. Conc. i. 245.] ↩
-
1 Pet. ii. 17. ↩
-
Ecclus. xxxviii. 1. ↩
-
Levit. xix. 32. ↩
-
Ecclus. xxv. 6. ↩
-
Prov. xxiii. 22. ↩
-
1 Pet. ii. 14. ↩
-
Psalm lxxii. 15. ↩