immodestly then euer did any other heretickes And other reuerend diuines vse almost the same words Gregory de Valentia saith Certainely it is apparent that in the Catholicke Romane Church there are lawfull Ecclesiasticall Ministers as being rightly ordained of true Bishops but in the Synagogues of Sectaries it is euident that there are not lawfull Ministers for they are not ordained of lawfull Bishops and therefore it is manifest that they haue no Church seeing that a Church cannot want lawfull Ministers Likewise father Turrian saith That the Donatists and Luciferians had after a sort some fashion of a Church because they had Bishops though schismaticall and other Ministers whom Bishops ordained But the Protestants haue no forme or fashion of a Church at all because they haue no Ministers at all of the Church or word but meere Lay men Mattheus Lanoius hath proued that onely the Romane Church hath lawfull vocation And D. Tyreus hath written of the false calling of the new Ministers but these are sufficient And that this is the iudgement of holy Church may appeare by the practise for as you haue heard out of Rich. Bristow Your Ministers returning to vs are not admitted to minister vnlesse they take our Orders which sheweth that in the iudgement of the Church they are not lawfull Ministers but meerely Lay-men ORTHOD. Our Ministerie is agreeable to the blessed booke of God and therefore holy and I doubt not but when the chiefe Shepheard shall appeare those that haue instructed many vnto righteousnesse shall shine as the starres for euer and euer But how proue you that our Ministers are no lawfull Ministers PHIL. CAn there be a lawfull Minister without a lawfull calling ORTHOD. It is impossible For no man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but hee that is called of God as was Aaron It is written of Iohn the Baptist There was a man sent from God The Apostles did not preach before they had this warrant Behold I send you And S. Paul saith How can they preach except they be sent And the Lord in the Prophet Ieremie reproueth such as ranne before they were sent Therefore though a man were wiser then Solomon and Daniel he must expect till the Lord send him he that teacheth without a calling how can he hope that Christ will be with him This is an order saith Beza appointed in the Church by the Sonne of God and obserued inuiolably by all true Prophets and Apostles That no man may teach in the Church vnlesse he be called PHIL. If there cannot be a lawfull Minister without a lawfull calling then I must demaund how the Ministers of England can iustifie their calling Might not a man say to euery one of you as Harding said to Iewell How say you sir you beare your selfe as though you were Bishop of Salisburie but how can you proue your vocation by what authoritie vsurpe you the Administration of Doctrine and Sacraments what can you alledge for the right and proofe of your Ministerie who hath called you who hath laied hands on you by what example hath he done it how and by whom are you consecrated who hath sent you who hath committed vnto you the Office you take vpon you be you a Priest or be you not if you be not how dare you vsurpe the name and Office of a Bishop if you be tell vs who gaue you Orders ORTHOD. You please your selues and beat the aire with a sound of idle and emptiâ— words but leaue your vaine flourishes and let vs heare what you can say against our calling PHIL. Then I demand whether you haue an inward or an outward calling ORTHOD. We haue both PHIL. An outward calling must either bee immediatly by the voyce of Christ as was the calling of the Apostles or mediatly by the Church ORTHOD. We are called of God by the Church For it is he which giueth Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints PHIL. All that are called of God by the Church deriue their authoritie by lawfull succession from Christ and his Apostles If you doe so then let it appeare shew vs your discent let vs see your pedegree If you cannot then what are you whence come you If you tell vs that God hath raised you in extraordinary maner you must pardon vs if we be slow in beleeuing such things there are many deceiuers gone out into the world and Sathan can transforme himselfe into an Angel of light In a word euery lawful calling is either ordinary or extraordinary if yours be ordinary let vs see your authoritie if extraordinary let vs see your miracles If one take vpon him extraordinary authoritie as an Ambassadour from a King he must produce his commission vnder the Kings seale If you will challenge the like from God then we require a miracle that is the Seale of the King of heauen But to vse the words of Doct. Stapleton In the hatching of the Protestants brood no ordinary vocation nor sending extraordinary appeareth so the ground and foundation being nought all which they haue builded vpon it falleth downe ORTHOD. The Ministers of England receiue imposition of hands in lawfull maner from lawfull Bishops indued with lawfull authoritie and therefore their calling is Ordinary PHIL. Your Bishops themselues whence haue they this authoritie ORTHOD. They receiued it from God by the hands of such Bishops as went before them PHIL. But your first reformers whence do they deriue their succession ORTHOD. Archbishop Cranmer and other heroicall spirits whom the Lord vsed as his instruments to reforme Religion in England had the very selfe-same Ordination and succession whereof you so glory and therefore if these argue that your calling is Ordinary you must confesse that theirs likewise was Ordinarie PHIL. We must not onely examine Cranmer and such others consecrated in King Henries time but them also which were in King Edwards and in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths as Parker Grindall Sands Horne and the like which were Priests after the Romane rite but leaped out of the Church before they were Bishops ORTHOD. As the first Bishops consecrated in King Edwards time deriued their Spirituall power by succession from those that were in King Henries so the first that were aduanced vnder the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth receiued theirs from such as were formerly created partly in K. Henries dayes partly in King Edwards And the Bishops at this day vnder our gracious soueraigne King IAMES haue the like succession from their predecessours as may be iustified by Records in particular and is confessed in generall by â—udsemius who came into England in the yeere of our Lord 1608. to obserue the state of our Church and the Orders of our Vniuersities Concerning the state saith he of the Caluinian sect in England it so standeth that it may either indure long or be changed suddenly and in a trâ—ce in regard of the Catholicke order there in a
be present but they not willing to take knowledge of any of these things admitted the Communion of Euagrius and exasperated the eares of the Emperour against Flauianus PHIL. I will answere with Baronius Those things which Theodoret saith concerning the Ordination of Euagrius performed during the life of Paulinus are altogether repugnant to those things which are spoken by Socrates and Sozomen affirming that the auditors of Paulinus did not attempt to substitute Euagrius into his place till after the death of Paulinus ORTHO It is a shameful course of Baronius to reiect in Histories whatsoeuer doth not fit his fancie In this present point he pretendeth repugnancie where there is none at all For Theodoret speaketh of ordination Socrates and Sozomen of installation PHIL. How proue you the other Branch that Euagrius was allowed for a lawfull Bishop ORTHO Baronius saith Pro Euagrio Syricius Theodosium interpellauit Syricius the Pope did solicite Theodosius the Emperour in the behalfe of Euagrius And Binius Pontifex c. The Pope and with him almost all the Bishops of the West being against Flauianus as before they stood for Paulinus so now they tooke part with Euagrius and animated the Emperour against Flauianus Moreouer Innocent the first granted the Communion of the Roman Church to Alexander Bishop of Alexandria vpon this condition amongst others that he should receiue those that were ordained of Euagrius the successour of Paulinus with their orders and honours as is likewise confessed by Binius Here is a plaine example of a Bishop ordained by one Bishop alone and yet allowed both by the Bishops of the West and by two Popes Hitherto the examples of three Patriarches NOw let vs consider our neighbours of France concerning whom Iohannes Maior a Doctour of Paris saith Rusticus Eleutherius qui cum beato Dionysio ad Gallias venerunt non erant Episcopi sed Galliae Episcopos solus Dionysius ordinauit Rusticus and Eleutherus which came into France with S. Denys were no Bishops but Denys alone ordained the Bishops of France FInally I will adde some testimonies of your owne writers Iohannes Maior Dico esse constitutionem humanaâ— quod Episcopus ordinetur a tribus â— I say that it is a humane constitution that a Bishop should be ordained of three Petrus de palude In Ecclesia vnus Episcopus sufficit ad alium Consecrandum nec est nisi propter solennitatem ab Ecclesia inuentum vt tres concurrant i. In the Church one Bishop is sufficient to Consecrate another and it is nothing else but for the solemnitie of the matter that the Church hath deuised that three Bishops should meete together Cardinall Turrecremata is plentifull in this point and proueth it by foureteene Arguments PHIL. Yet other Doctours as you haue heard are of another opinion THE SECOND BOOKE WHEREIN THE CONSEcrations of the Bishops of England from the first planting of Christianitie till the last yeere of Queene Mary are examined CHAP. I. Wherein they descend to the second Question whether the Consecrations of the Bishops of England be Canonicall ORTH. SVppose I should admit that three Bishops were euerlastingly and vnchangeably required to the Consecration of a new Bishop and that of such absolute necessitie that the defect should make a nullitie what would this aduantage you or disaduantage vs PHIL. Very much For then it would follow that your Bishops are no Bishops ORTHO Why so There is not a Bishop in England at this day liuing which was not Consecrated by three Our booke of Consecrating may informe you That in the Church of England two Bishops doe alwayes present the person to be Consecrated and the Archbishop or some other Bishop appointed by his Commission pronounceth the Blessing as principall Consecratour Is not this Canonicall PHIL. No because your Consecrating Bishops are not themselues Canonicall For to a Canonicall Bishop it is required That he haue three such Bishops for his Consecrators as were euery one of them Consecrated by three And againe each of them by three And so by continuall succession till we come to the Apostles For as Doct. Stapleton saith Christi Ecclesia illa sola est quae suos Pastores Episcopos perpetua successione potest ostendere i. That onely is Christs Church which can shew her Pastors and Bishops in a perpetuall succession And againe Vbicunque talis perpetuâ— successio non in eisdem locis sed in eadem legitima successiua vocatione missione Ordinatione ostendi potest ibi sit vera Christi Ecclesia Catholica id est Ecclesiae Catholicae pars membrum i. Wheresoeuer such a perpetuall succession of Pastors can be shewed not in the same places but in the same lawfull and successiue vocation mission and Ordination there is a true Catholicke Church That is A part and member of the Catholicke Church Now If you can shew any succession of Bishops in England or elsewhere you can shew it no otherwise then could the Donatists of whom Optatus thus writeth Missus est Victor c. Victor was sent of the Donatists to Rome There was a sonne without a father a seruant without a ruler a scholler without a master a successour without a predecessour Igitur quia Claudianus c. i. Therefore because Claudian seemeth to succeed to Lucian Lucian to Macrobius Macrobius to Encolpius Encolpius to Boniface Boniface to Victor If now we should aske Victor in whose place hee sate and to whom hee succeeded Hee could not shew any other Chaire or See but the See and Chaire of pestilence Thus I say That as Victor among the Donatists so Luther among the Protestants of Wittenberge so Zuinglius among the Sacramentaries of Zurich so Caluin among those of Geneua so Bernard Rotman among the Anabaptists so M. Iewell Grindall and Horne and such other false Bishops among vs haue risen and started vp suddenly without fathers without predecessours without masters in any right and lineall succession Or if they haue any let them search their Records turne their Registers produce their Euidences vnfold their Monuments of Antiquitie and witnesse to the world their Canonicall succession which they neither doe nor can doe But we can shew you Bishops of Rome euen from S. Peter to our holy father Paulus Quintus who now liueth Antonius Democharis hath described the Bishops of France or rather of all the Prouinces of the Christian world Doct. Stapleton wrote with his owne hand a Catologue found in a Monasterie containing the Bishops of all the Westerne Church Histories Registers publique Tables the very Temples and most ancient Monuments of Ecclesiastical Colledges are euident Arguments of our succession Yea we haue a Catalogue in Polydor Virgil of all the Bishops of our Nation for almost a thousand yeeres Then was the Church of England like a Golden chaine whose Sacred linckes had such a mutuall connexion and dependencie that from the blessed Apostles we
OF THE CONSECRATION OF THE BISHOPS IN THE CHVRCH OF ENGLAND With their Succession Jurisdiction and other things incident to their calling AS ALSO OF THE ORDINATION of Priests and Deacons FIVE BOOKES Wherein they are cleared from the slanders and odious imputations of BELLARMINE SANDERS BRISTOW HARDING ALLEN STAPLETON PARSONS KELLISON EVDEMON BECANVS And other Romanists And iustified to containe nothing contrary to the Scriptures Councels Fathers or approued examples of Primitiue Antiquitie ¶ By FRANCIS MASON Batchelour of Diuinitie and sometimes Fellow of Merton Colledge in Oxeford Hebr. 5. 4. No man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but he that is called of God as was Aaron ¶ IMPRINTED AT LONDON by ROBERT BARKER Printer to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie Anno 1613. TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD GEORGE LORD ARCHbishop of Canterburie his Grace Primate of all England and Metropolitane And one of his Maiesties most Honourable Priuie Counsell AS in the Romane triumphes the worthy Conquerour gloriously ascending vnto the Capitoll did shew his magnificence by giuing ample gifts vnto the people euen so most reuerend father our victorious Sauiour and noble Redeemer hauing conquered Hell Death Diuell and damnation Triumphantly ascending to the Capitoll of Heauen did shew his vnspeakeable bountie in giuing admirable and incommparable gifts vnto men That is some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastours and Teachers For what hath the Church of God of so precious account as the holy ministery of the Word and Sacraments whereby CHRIST IESVS with all his blessings is reuealed and applied to the soule and conscience It may well be resembled to the Riuers of Paradise which did water and fructifie the Garden of God to the Golden pipes whereby the two Oliue branches replenished the seuen Lampes in the golden Candlesticke to the Crowne which the woman in the Reuelation cloathed with the Sunne and hauing the Moone vnder her feete had vpon her head being richly beset not with stones but with Starres Which holy function flowing from CHRIST as from the fountaine to his blessed Apostles was by thē deriued to posterity But as the water which neere the spring is cleare and chrystalline in further passages may be polluted so in processe of time by the subtiltie of Satan the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments being the ordinance of God was mingled with sacrifising and other humane inuentions Yet such was the goodnesse of God that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministeriall function notwithstanding the abominations cleauing thereunto was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods speciall prouidence in her Ordination of Priests reteined such Euangelicall words as in their true and natiue sense include a ghostly Ministeriall power to forgiue sinnes by the Ministery of Reconciliation consisting in the due administration of the Word and Sacraments So remission of sinnes is ascribed to the Minister as to Gods instrument in effecting it and Ambassadour in pronouncing it Wherefore in that they haue authority to forgiue sinnes they haue also authority to vse the meanes thereof that is the Word and Sacraments Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth although it did not reueale the truth vnto them Now when it pleased him which causeth the Light to shine out of darkenesse in the riches of his Mercie to remember his distressed Church those blessed instruments which hee first vsed in the Reformation were such as had receiued their Calling corruptly in the Church of Rome But when their eyes were opened they disclaimed the sacrifising abomination and other impurities which by the iniquitie of the time were incorporated into their calling Thus the pollution of Poperie by the Grace of God was drained and drawn away the Ministeriall function restored to the original beautie And here let vs admire and magnifie the Mercy of God who did not forget this remote Iland situate in a corner of the world but did most graciously shine vpon it with his Golden beames from the Sphere of Heauen For whereas in other Countreys the Bishops which should be starres and Angels of the Church did resist the Reformation and persecuted such as sought it It pleased God that in England among other Bishops Archbishop Cranmer the chiefest Prelate of the Kingdome was Gods chiefest instrument to restore the Gospel which afterward he sealed with his blood The euent whereof was That whereas other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessity to admit extraordinary fathers That is to receiue Ordination from Presbyters which are but inferior Ministers rather then to suffer the Fabrick of the Lord IESVS to be dissolued the Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre sacred Orders according to the ordinary and most warrantable custome of the Church of CHRIST And although in Queene Maries time fiue blessed Bishops were burned to ashes yet God reserued to himselfe a number which being then forced to take the wings of the Doue and fly beyond the Seas or to hide themselues in the clefts of the rocke when the tempest was ouerblowne the cloudes cleared and the Sunne of Righteousnes began to display himselfe in the happy raigne of Queene Elizabeth returned againe clapped their wings for ioy praised God preached the Gospel and with holy imposition of hands ordained Bishops Presbyters and Deacons in the Church of England These are the Ordinations which reprochfull Papists doe most traduce and slander as though they were no Ordinations at all but onely Nullities thence perswading their Proselytes That our present Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay-men and thereupon inferring that wee haue no Church no saluation In which point some Popish Recusants haue beene so confident that they haue professed That if we could iustifie our Calling they would come to our Churches and bee of our Religion The consideration whereof most Reuerend father gaue me occasion to made into this Controuersie being desirous next the assurance of mine owne saluation as I am a Christian to bee fully and clearely assured of my Calling as I am a Minister In prosecuting whereof I did euidently find That their chiefest Obiections are nothing but slanders confutable by Authenticall monuments of publique Record Whereupon I wished from the bottome of my heart That some learned man would haue vouchsafed for the glory of God and the good of the Church to scatter these Popish mistes and to set the Trueth in the cleare light A worke in my opinion very important First in respect of vs of the Ministerie and secondly in regard of the people committed to our charge For how chearefully and with what ioy of heart may we preach and they heare vs when the lawfulnesse of our Calling is made manifest to all men Thirdly If any haue formerly made scruple to enter our Orders out of ignorance how these odious and scandalous imputations blazed in Popish Bookes might bee truely answered and the point soundly cleared by Record it is verely to bee
hitherto God be thanked he hath missed the Chesnut PHIL. NOw I plainely perceiue That you are deepely ingaged in the schisme and heresie of England O England England thou wast sometimes a most famous and flourishing Church thy faith and Religion shining like a Diamond of true lustre thy zeale and deuotion burning like the flaming fire the sparkling Starres in the firmament were not so glorious but now alas since Caluinisme came in thou hast lost thy lustre thy glory is eclipsed there remaineth no sparkle of thy ancient loue no faith no Religion no Church ORTHOD. You tread in the steps of your foâ—efathers and helpe to fill vp the measure of their iniquitie For it hath bene alwayes their custome to lay odious imputations vpon our Religion that by this stratageme they might win Proselytes vnto their owne Rich. Bristow affirmed that our Religion is proued by experience to be indeed no Religion Cardinall Allen speaking of our Sacraments Seruice and Sermons calleth them things which assuredly procure damnation William Reinolds hath blazed to the world that our Religion is worse then the Turkish The bookes of Sanders and Parsons haue bene as full of slanders as a serpent is of poison To passe ouer Harding Stapleton and others the latter brood is as venemous as the former One example for all may be that lewd Libeller which exclaimeth That the Protestants haue no faith no hope no charitie no repentance no Iustification no Church no Altar no sacrifice no Priest no Religion no Christ. What shall we say to these intemperate spirits If they speake of malice then I say with Michael the Archangel The Lord rebuke them but if they speake of ignorance as I hope they do then I say with the holy Martyr S. Stephen Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Or with our blessed Sauiour Father forgiue them they wote not what they do For that faith and Religion which is agreeable to the Scripture is true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke But the faith and Religion publickly professed at this day in England is in euery Article and branch thereof agreeable to the Scripture therefore it is in euery Article and branch thereof true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke Moreouer where the Gospel is truely preached and the holy Sacraments rightly administred there is a true Christian visible Church but both these dueties are religiously performed in England what reason haue you then to say that we haue no Church PHIL. BEcause you haue no Ministerie for there cannot be a Church without Pastors and bishops as S. Cyprian teacheth who defineth the Church to be a people vnited to a Bishop And S Hierome when he saith That it is no Church which hath not Priests This doeth appeare euidently by S. Paul who declareth that Christ gaue Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints the worke of the Ministerie and the edification of the body of Christ vntill we meet all in the vnitie of faith into a perfect man and the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ. In which place as our learned Cardinall hath obserued the Apostle teacheth That there shall be Pastours in the Church till the day of Iudgement for then we shall meet the Lord in the vnitie of faith Behold saith father Hessius till the number of the Elect bee accomplished in the end of the world the Church shall alwayes haue Pastors and teachers Neither doeth Luther deny this but rather put it among the Notes of the Church And Caluin affirmeth That the Church can neuer want Pastors and teachers From this plaine approued principle thus I dispute Where there is no true Ministerie there is no true Church but among the Protestants in England there is no true Ministerie therefore among them there is no true Church CHAP. II. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministerie is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops the second of Presbyters The third of Deacons ORTHODOX WHat mislike you in our Ministerie PHIL. Not one thing or two but the whole frame of it absolutely and altogether for to deale plainly your Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay men Neither is this my priuate opinion but the generall iudgement of our learned diuines which affirme the same As for example Ri. Bristow Consider what Church that is whose Ministers are but very Lay men vnsent vncalled vnconsecrated and therefore executing their pretended Office without benefit or spirituall comfort of any man yea to the certaine and great damnation of themselues and others vnfit and vnworthy by this onely that they bee called to that fond function of any seruice in the Church of God holding therefore amongst vs when they repent and come againe no other place but the place of Lay-men in no case admitted no nor looking to minister in any Office vnlesse they take our Orders which before they had not M Harding In this your new Church Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons or any inferior Order you haue none D. Sanders The new Clergie in England is composed partly of our Apostataes partly of meerely Lay-men M. Houlet That either all or the most part of the Ministers of England be meerely Lay men and no Priests and consequently haue no authoritie in these things it is euident Cardinall Allen with our learned diuines at Rhemes All your new Euangelists which haue intruded themselues into Church and Pulpit be euery one from the highest to the lowest false prophets running and vsurping being neuer lawfully called D. Stapleton They being sent of no man nor hauing Ordination haue inuaded the Ecclesiastical Chaires D. Kellison Forasmuch as the inferior Ministers are made by those Bishops and are children of those fathers they also are no true Priests hauing neither Order nor Iurisdiction William Reinolds There is no feeder of sheepe or oxen in all Turkie which doeth not vndertake the gouernment of his flocke or droue vpon better reason and greater right order and authoritie then these your magnificent Apostles and Euangelists can shew for this their Propheticall and Apostolicall and most diuine and most high Office of gouerning soules reforming Churches teaching heauenly Trueth and declaring the minde and will of God to men And finally the Catholicke Priests in their supplication to King Iames Neither is any of your Protestant Ministers comming to our Catholicke fraternity reputed other then meerely Lay-men without Orders Thus you see how we all agree in this point Neither is this the opinion of vs English Exiles onely but other Catholicke doctors are of the same minde The Hereticks of our age saith Bellarmine haue neither Ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and Office of a Bishop more
Bishops but they are found in the Church of Rome and not in the Church of England PHIL. YOur Bishops are no Bishops because they are not ordained according to the Canons ORT. The ancient Canons are more reuerently regarded in the Church of England then in the Church of Rome For how well you haue obserued them in former ages let your owne Baronius testifie How foule saith hee was then the face of the holy Romane Church when most potent and withall most filthie harlots did beare all the sway at Rome at whose lust Sees were changed Bishops appointed and which is horrible to be heard and not to bee vttered whose louers the false Popes were thrust into the seate of Peter which were not to bee written in the Catalogue of the Romane Bishops but onely for the noting of the times for who may say they were lawfull Popes which were thus without right thrust in by such strumpets No where wee finde any mention of Clergie choosing or giuing consent afterward All Canons were put to silence the pontificall decrees were choked ancient traditions proscribed and the old customes sacredrite and former vse in choosing the high Bishop vtterly extinguished And for later times your owne learned friends also complaine as followeth Budeus The holie Canons and rules of Church discipline made in better times to guide the life of Clergie men are now become leaden rules such as Aristotle saith the rules of Lesbyan buildings were For as leaden and soft rules doe not direct the building with an equall tenour but are bowed to the building at the lust of the builders so are the Popes Canons made flexible as leade and waxe that now this great while the Decrees of our ancestours and the Popes Canons serue not to guide mens manners but that I may so say to make a banke and get mony Franciscus de Victoria Doct of the chaire at Salmantica in Spaine Wee see dailie so large or rather so dissolute dispensations proceede from the Court of Rome that the world cannot indure them Neither is it onely to the offence of the little ones but of the great ones also No man seeketh a dispensation but hee obtaineth it Yea at Rome there are which giue attendance to see if any bee willing to craue dispensation of all things established by law all that craue it haue it If you Philodox would see the particulars reade but Claudius Espencaeus a diuine of Paris vpon the Epistle to Titus and vnlesse your fore-head bee as hard as brasse it will make you blush I will conclude this point with the saying of Ruardus Tapperus Chancelour of Louaine In the Court of Rome all things are set at sale with dispensations contayning many things wherewith Christ himselfe is not able to dispence Behold this is your keeping of Canons in the Church of Rome But because you accuse the Church of England for breaking the Canons in making of Bishops I answere first that the consecration of our Bishops is most canonicall Secondly that if wee failed in this or that Canon yet euery transgression of an Ecclesiasticall Canon doth not make a nullitie in a consecration As for example It was prouided by the great Councell of Sardica that none should bee made Bishop vnlesse hee had passed the inferiour orders and staied a long time in them Notwithstanding Nectarius was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople being not only a lay-man but as yet vnbaptized and was presently made Bishop in the second generall Councell held at Constantinople Likewise Saint Ambrose Tarasius Nicephorus Eusebius of Caesarea Thalasius yea and some Popes also as for example Petrus Moronaeus were of lay men aduanced to the Episcopall office yet I know you dare not pronounce a nullitie in their Consecration Wherfore seeing it is a plaine case that euery breach of a Canon doth not annihilate a consecration you must tell vs what Canon you meane and wherein we breake it PHIL. I meane that Canon which requireth that a Bishop should bee consecrated by three Bishops which Canon the Councel of Trent calleth an Apostolicke tradition ORTHO HEre arise two questions the former whether three Bishops be required of necessitie to an Episcopall consecration the later whether the Bishops of England be consecrated by three Now that the state of the former may be the clearer giue me leaue to aske you a few things And first what say you to Amphilochius who was created Bishop not by men but by Angels vnlesse Nicephorus delude vs with fables PHIL. It seemeth to bee no fable but a true Story For Amphilochius was allowed for a lawfull Bishop but this was done as Cardinall Bellarmine saith by diuine dispensation extraordinary ORTH. What say you then to the blessed Apostles were they Bishops or no And if Bishops whether in that they were Apostles or by distinct consecration and if by distinct consecration by whom were they consecrated PHIL. Cardinall Turrecremata teacheth that Chirst himselfe made Peter a Bishoppe immediatelie and Peter ordained the rest first Iohn next Iames then others And Cardinall Bellarmine maketh it the two and twentith prerogatiue of Peter Quòd solus Petrus a Christo ordinatus Episcopus fuerit caeteri autem a Petro Episcopalem consecrationem acceperint i. That onely Peter was ordained Bishop by Christ and the rest receiued their Episcopall consecration from Peter ORTHOD. These conceites and fancies when they shal be weighed in the ballance wil be found too light In the meane time what say you to the consecration of Iohn and Iames were they sound and Canonical PHIL. They were sound no doubt but why should you aske if they were canonicall seeing the Canon was not then made You must vnderstand that there is one consideration to bee had of the Church when it is in the cradle and another when it is growne to ripe and florishing yeeres In the infancie of the Church when Christ ascending into glorie had consecrated Peter and made him the spring and fountaine of all Episcopall Order it was necessarie that the first should bee consecrated by Peter alone the next by two at the most and these consecrations were sound and sufficient but when Iames the brother of our Lord was ordained Bishoppe of Ierusalem by Peter Iohn and the other Iames they gaue a Forme or Patterne to their successours as Anacletus declareth that a Bishop should by no meanes bee consecrated by fewer then by three all the rest giuing their consent ORTHO Suppose a Church should suffer such desolation which the Lord forbid that a Canonicall number of Catholicke Bishops were not to be found what should then be done in this case of necessitie PHIL. Wee may learne that partly of the Councell of Sardica which permitteth a supply from the next prouince partly of Pope Gregory the seuenth who when the Churches of Africke were brought to so lowe an ebbe that they had
onely two Bishops would not suffer those two to consecrate a third but willed them to proceede to an election and send the party elected to Rome to be consecrated by three ORTHO The presence of three when they may conueniently be had we greatly commend yet not as a commandement of God but as a constitution of the Church to be imbraced of congruity and not of necessitie PHIL. YEs of necessity and that both necessitate precepti by the necessity of a command which we are bound to obey because as Anicetus saith instituente domino sieri iubetur it is commanded to be done the Lord so appointing and also necessitate medij as a necessary meanes necessary I say not only ad bene esse to the well performance of the consecration but also ad esse to the very being of it so that without it there is a nullity For first of all this is the generall iugdement of the Iurists as appeareth by those words of Cardinall Turrecremata Iuristae quasi omnes sunt huius opinionis quod requiratur ternarius numerus Episcoporum ita vt si quis a paucioribus consecretur dicatur nihil agi that is almost all the Iurists are of this opinion that the number of three Bishops is so required that if one be consecrated by fewer it may be said that nothing is done Which iudgement of the Iurists preuaileth with most eminent Canonists as appeareth by the words following in the Cardinall Vnde Hugo Archidiaconus dicunt vt Papa solus cum vno Episcopo non posset consecrare hac forma durante that is whereupon Hugo and the Archdeacon say that the Pope alone with one Bishop cannot consecrate so long as this forme endureth The words of the Archdeacon are these est ergo de forma substantia sacramenti quod ibi sint tres Episcopi si ordinetur a minus non est Episcopus quia deest substantia siue forma quâ— exigitur in collatione illius ordinis that is therefore it is of the forme and substance of the Sacrament that there be three Bishops and if one be ordained of lesse he is no Bishop because the substance or forme required in the Collation of that Order is wanting Moreouer whereas in the second Counsell at Arles it is saide that a Metropolitan should not presume to ordaine a Bishop without three of his prouinciall Bishops which the Canon Law aleadgeth three or two that is three with the Metropolitan or two besides him the glosse vpon the word three saith thus quod dicit tribus est de substantia consecrationis alias non esset consecratê° â—iessent pauciores that is Whereas the Councell saith three it is of the substance of the consecration otherwise he should not be consecrated if there were fewer ORTHO IS this the Iudgement of your Iesuites PHIL. Father Turrian speaking of the Metropolitan and two Bishops assistant saith Hi sunt tres prorsus necessarij these are three altogether necessary and elsewhere he produceth this saying of Damasus Quod Episcopi non sint qui minus quam a tribus ordinati sunt Episcopis omnibus patet quoniam prohibitum est a sanctis patribus vt qui ab vno vela duobus ordinati sunt Episcopis neque nominentur Episcopi si nomen non habent qualiter officium habebunt that is it is manifest to all men that they are no Bishops which are ordeined of lesse then three Bishops Because the holy Fathers forbid that such as are ordained of one or two Bishops should not so much as be called Bishops if they haue not the name how should they haue the office and he inferreth this conclusion in the words of Damasus Quare quicquid inter Episcopos aut de rebus solummodo adeos pertinentibus egerint necesse est vt irritum fiat quia quod non habent dare non possunt that is Wherefore whatsoeuer they shall doe among Bishops or concerning things belonging onely to Bishops it must needs be void because they cannot giue that to another which they haue not themselues Whereupon he accounteth your Bishops no Bishops your Ministers no Ministers your ordinations no ordinations Nec enim schismaticae ordinationes sunt sed nullae penitus ac potius meré laicae For the ordinations of the Protestants are not Schismaticall ordinations but no ordinations at all and mere laick ORTHO What saith Bellarmine to this matter for he was the noble and renowned Iesuite though now he hath changed his habit for a red hat PHIL. He saith Nostri temporis haeretici neutrum habent id est nec ordinationem nec successionem propterea longé inuerecundiús quam vlli vnquam haeretici sibi nomen munus Episcopi vsurpant i. the Heretickes of our time haue neither that is neither ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and office of a Bishop farre more immodestly then euer did any other Heretickes the ground of which assertion as may appeare both by the antecedents and consequents is because they are not consecrated by three ORTHO Doth hee not allow a consecration by fewer in case of necessitie PHIL. It cannot be doubted saith he but ordinarily three Bishops are required to the ordination of a new Bishop vnlesse peraduenture by dispensation with one Bishop ordaining there be present two mitred Abbots which may supply the place of Bishops as it vseth sometimes to be done ob Episcoporum raritatem for the scarcitie of Bishops Hetherto Bellarmine to which Binius addeth aliamue iustam causam or for any other iust cause ORTHO By whose dispensation must this be PHIL Binius saith per summi Pontificis dispensationem by the Popes dispensation ORTHO If there bee neither three nor two nor any Abbots assisting nor yet the Popes dispensation what is then the iudgement of Bellarmine PHIL. You shal heare himselfe speake from which an insoluble argument is taken in this manner A Church cannot be without Bishops as we haue declared among the Lutherans there are no Bishops for they haue no ordination nor succession from the Apostles therefore among them there is no Church And verely that neither Luther who was accounted Bishop of Wittenberge nor Zuinglius who was reputed Bishop of Tigur nor Oecolampadius who in the very Epitaph vpon his graue is called the first Bishop of Basill nor Caluin who was called the first Bishop of Geneua nor any other of them were ordeined of three Bishops nor of one by dispensation with the assistance of Abbots is a thing notoriously knowen neither do they deny it Therefore these are no Bishops at least in the iudgement of the Fathers of the Nicen and Carthaginian Councell yea in the iudgement of the Apostles themselues who haue decreed that a Bishop ought to be ordained by three Bishops Thus Bellarmine is clearely of opinion that a Bishop must either be ordained of three or haue assistance
of Abbots with a dispensation or else he is no Bishop and this argument he calleth insoluble ORTHO HOw this doth crosse and condradict it selfe in due place shall appeare in the meane time I would willingly know what is the receiued opinion of your Seminaries There is a certaine manuscript booke called Controuersiae huius temporis in Epitomen reductae made by Parsons the Iesuite out of the Dictates of Bellarmine and Maldonate and appointed to be written out by euery Student in your Colledge I pray you what saith that booke to this point PHIL. It agreeth with the former the words are these Primus Canon Apostolorum hoc idem declarat scilicet Episcopum non posse ordinari nisi a tribus Episcopis hinc sequitur ineuitabiliter Haereticos non habere vllos pastores seu Episcopos cum primi illorum Episcopi Caluinus Lutherus Zuinglius nunquam fuerunt ordinati ab alijs Episcopis That is The first Canon of the Apostles declareth this same thing to wit that a Bishop cannot be ordeined but of three Bishops hence it followeth vnauoydably that the Hereticks haue not any pastours or Bishops seeing that their first Bishops Caluin Luther Zuinglius had neuer beene ordained of other Bishops ORTHO HItherto we haue seene how you hold the state of the first question but doe your Iesuites and Seminaries vrge this against the Church of England PHIL. Yes for it is a maine point ORTHO Then your maine point is a vaine point but let vs heare them PHIL. Bellarmine speaking of the marriage of English Bishops saith Nullam excusationem habent nisi forte velint liberè confiteri quod verissimum est se veros Episcopos non esse neque aliquid de Episcopatu habere nisi quae sibi iniuste vsurpant nomen opes That is They haue no excuse vnlesse peraduenture they will freely confesse which is most true that they are no true Bishops neither haue any thing of the Episcopall function but what they vniustly vsurpe vnto themselues to wit the name and the riches If nothing else then not the Character not the Iurisdiction not the Order not the Office they haue nothing nothing at all except the name and the riches ORTHOD. The riches alas Is it not strange that a Cardinall swimming in streames of gold to the chinne should enuy the riches of the Bishops of England But be they rich or poore surely if the Pope might haue had his will before this time he would haue made them poore ynough In the daies of King Henry the eight when a view was taken it appeared that he had receiued out of England onely for Inuestitures of Bishops 4000. pounds by the yeere one yeere with another and that for 40. yeeres together But how dare Bellarmine thus accuse our Bishops as though they had nothing belonging to the Episcopall function What no learning none at all It is not long agoe since he put off his Cardinals robes disguising himselfe vnder the ill fauoured habit and vizard of Tortus when one of our Bishops whether learned or no let the world iudge did so vnmaske and display him that all Popish hearts haue cause to bleed to see the weakenesse of their chiefe Champion so plainely discouered And as our Bishops haue learning so let the Cardinall know that they are famous and eminent Preachers very labourious in the Vineyard of Christ and in this respect farre vnlike to his brethren the Cardinals For Iulius the second said that he could not with a good conscience make Frier Giles a Cardinall because then he should leaue his preaching and afterward Leo the tenth made him a Cardinall that he might hold his peace For commonly in the Church of Rome the great Bishops preach seldome the Cardinals seldomer and the Popes neuer But what is the ground of his accusation PHIL. Because they are not Canonically ordeined The same point is likewise vrged against them by Doctor Stapleton Whether went they into France Spaine or Germanie seeing that at home there was no number of such as might and would serue their turne No no as their Religion is contrary their ende is diuers their beginning hath bene vtterly different from the true Christian faith planted among vs so are their proceedings different and repugnant they haue not come in by the doore they haue stolne in like theeues without all Spirituall authoritie or gouernement This difference betweene the Protestants and our true Bishops the first Apostles importeth so much that it may not lightly be passed ouer for their authoritie being proued nought all their doings can be no better I say therefore by the verdict of holy Scripture and practise of the Primitiue Church these men are no Bishops Your pretended Bishops haue no such Ordination no such laying on of the hands of Bishops no authoritie to ordaine Priests and Ministers and therefore neither are you true Ministers neither they any Bishops at all ORTHOD. What reason haue you to say that our Bishops are not consecrated by three the Canon hath alwaies bene obserued in our Church neither can all the Papists in the world giue any one instance to the contrary since the time of Reformation PHIL. Doct. Sanders declareth That there was a time when you had neither three nor two Bishops and yet at the same time your new Superintendents inuaded the Ecclesiasticall Chaires and were glad to seeke their Confirmation from the Prince and Parliament after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration And therefore all the water in the Thames cannot cleare the Clergie of England from being vsurpers ORTHOD. But if this be false then all the water in the Tybur though it were turned into Holy-water cannot purge the Papists from being slanderers And how false it is shall hereafter be declared out of authenticall Records by which it shall appeare That the Queenes Letters patents of Commission concerning the Confirmation and Consecration of the very first Bishop made in her time were directed to 7. Bishops and also that the Consecration was accomplished by 4 Bishops whose names and titles shall be specified In the meane time this onely I say In lying and slandering many Papists haue had an admirable dexteritie but Sanders surmounted them all For as his booke of Schisme is truely called by a learned Bishop Sterquilinium mendactorum A dunghill of lies so it might be iustly termed Sterquilinium calumniarum A very dunghill of slanders Insomuch that for his noble facultie that way he deserueth no more to be called M. Doct. Sanders but M. Doct. Slanders PHIL. It is no slander but a trueth which shal be auouched to your faces for I wil proue al that I haue said in order My masters marke what I say If you can iustifie your Calling we will all come to your Church and be of your Religion ORTHOD. Remember your promise and proceed with your Argument PHIL. I will proceed and
prosecute an vnanswerable Argument Euery true Bishop must of necessitie be Consecrated by 3. Bishops at the least But the Bishops of England are not so therefore the Bishops of England are no true Bishops ORTHOD. The Bishops of England are so as in due place shall appeare And if in case of necessity they were not so What then The presence of 3. is required onely to the well-being not simply to the being It is no essentiall part of Episcopall Consecration but an accidentall ornament a comely complement of singular conueniencie no substantiall point of absolute necessitie CHAP. IIII. Wherein the Popish Arguments drawen from the Canons of the Apostles and the Decretall Epistles are proposed vrged and answered PHIL. I Will prooue the contrary by sundry arguments and first by the Canons of the Apostles which were collected and set out by Clemens Saint Peters scholar ORTH. If those Canons were made by the Apostles then the Church of Rome is much to blame for the 84. Canon alloweth the 3. Booke of Maccabecs as also 2. Epistles of Clemens and his eight bookes of constitutions for Canonicall Scripture which the Church of Rome reiecteth againe it omitteth the Sonne of Sidrach Wisdome and diuers others which your Church imbraceth for Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth probable saith Bellarmine that this Canon was not set out by Clemens yea it is Apocryphus and Surreptitius as is affirmed by Binius ORTH. What say you then to the 65. Canon which forbiddeth to fast vpon the Saturday excepting one onely that is as Binius declareth the Paschall Saturday PHIL. I say with Baronius it is counterfeite ORTH. But what say you to Pope Gelasius who in a councell at Rome of 70. Bishops saith Liber Canonum Apostolorum Apocryphus the booke of the Canon of the Apostles is Apocryphall And in what sence he called it Apocryphall is expounded by Bellarmine Eos libros vocat Apocryphos qui sunt aediti ab auctoribus haereticis vel certè suspectis Gelasius calleth those bookes Apocryphall which were set out by such authors as were either hereticall or at least suspected PHIL. Gelasius did not call the booke Apocryphall as though all the Canons therein conteined were Apocryphall but as Bellarmine thinketh Propter aliquos vel corruptos vel additos ab haeretâ—cis that is in respect of some which were either corrupted or added by heretikes of which stampe were those two which you alleadged But the first 50. conteining nothing but Apostolike and Orthodoxe doctrine approued of auncient Popes Councels and Fathers Velut authentici recipiuntur are receiued as authenticall saith Binius ORTH. Pope Zephirine allowed 70. or at least 60. for there are diuerse readings how doth this agree PHIL. Well ynough for Pope Zephirine speaketh not of Canons but of Sentences and you must know that those 60 or 70. sentences are all conteined in the 50. Canons as Binius affirmeth out of Father Turrian ORTHOD. Bellarmine expoundeth these sentences to bee so many Canons in these words Zephirine the fifteenth from Peter deliuereth in his first Epistle that there were onely 70. Canons of the Apostles PHIL. Pope Leo alloweth onely fifty Apostolorum Canones numerant patres inter Apochrypha exceptis 50. Capitulis The fathers doe recken the Canons of the Apostles amongst Apocryphall writings excepting fifty Chapters by which he meaneth fifty Canons ORTHO Then to passe ouer the fifth Canon forbidding a Bishop or Priest to cast off his wife vnder pretence of religion as also the one and thirtith inhibiting all other Bishops to restore a Priest or Deacon excommunicated by his owne Bishop What can you possibly say to the ninth which excommunicateth all those which beeing present at the communion doe not communicate concerning which Binius is forced to confesse Totum hoc decretum non diuine sed humano iure constitutum iam contraria consuetudine est abrogatum that is This whole Decree beeing made not by law Diuine but humane is now abrogated by a contrary custome and alleadgeth for him Bellarmine Zuarez and Turrian which is a notable acknowledgement that such a Canon as you account Apostolicall and Authenticall may not withstanding bee abrogated But not to stand vpon these and the like exceptions let vs heare what the Canons say concerning the consecration of Bishops PHIL. THe words are these Let a Bishop bee ordained of two or three Bishops ORTHO Doth the Canon require two or three Then ordination by two is canonicall as well as by three PHIL. Not so for the Canon meaneth that there should be two or three assistants besides the Metropolitane as is declared by Cardinall Bellarmine and father Turrian ORTHOD. The Canon saith not two or three assistants but two or three Bishops Neither hath it this clause besides the Metropolitane but pronounceth simply let a Bishop bee ordained by two or three Bishops Wherfore the Canon is satisfied with the presence of two or three Bishops This is the iudgement of your owne Pamelius who saith that conseration or imposition of hands was per Episcopos qui conuenerant quos vt minimum duos esse oportebat i. By the Bishops which were assembled which should bee two at the least Where note that hee doth not say the Bishops assistant but the Bishops assembled should bee two at the least This also was the iudgement of Cardinall de Turrecremata who vrgeth this very Canon against your position and prooueth by it that three are not necessary Neither is the presence of two required of absolute necessity if you will beleeue the Apostolike constitutions of Clemens a booke which for my owne part I would not once name but onely that your chiefe champions doe so commonly alleage it Wherefore as Saint Paul cited a Poet against the Athenians so let mee cite this booke against you which so highly esteeme it I Simon of Chanany appoint by how many Bishops a Bishop ought to be ordained to wit by two or three Bishops but if any shall be ordained by one Bishop let both the ordained and the Ordainer bee deposed but if necessity shall compell to be ordained by one because many cannot bee present for persecution or some other cause let the Decree of the commission of many Bishops be produced If this authority bee of credit then you are confuted for it alloweth consecration by one in case of necessity PHIL. But that one must haue the commission of many ORTHOD. The commission is onely for concord sake and to auoide Schisme for the absent cannot impose hands nor giue the power therefore they doe not ordaine though they consent to the ordination which is performed by him onely that is present Now if in any case a Bishop may bee ordained by one and yet bee a true Bishop then the presence of moe is a matter of conueniency and not of absolute necessity And if you thinke that these
constitutions proceeded from the Apostles then you must confesse that they are the fittest interpreters of the Canons of the Apostles PHIL. THe Canon will be cleerer if wee compare it with the Decretall Epistles ORTH. Those Decretals are out of date They haue long shrowded themselues vnder the vizard of reuerent antiquity but now they are vnmasked and appeere to bee counterfeit as is confessed by your owne men Yet I will not take you at this aduantage and therefore let vs heare them PHIL. Anacletus saith that Iames who was named the Iust and the brother of the Lord according to the flesh was ordained the first Archbishop of Ierusalem by the Apostles Peter the other Iames and Iohn giuing a forme to their successours that a Bishop should by no meanes bee consecrated by fewer then three Bishoppes all the rest giuing their consents Likewise Anicetus Wee know that the most blessed Iames called the Iust which also according to the flesh is called the brother of our LORD was ordained Bishoppe of Ierusalem by Peter Iames and Iohn the Apostles Now if so great a man was ordained of no lesse then three verilie it is apparant that they deliuered a forme or pattern◠the Lord so appointing that a Bishop ought to bee ordained of no fewer then three Bishops ORTHODOX Heere are two things to bee considered the ordination of Iames and the collection thereupon Concerning the ordination your Anacletus and Anicetus affirme that hee was ordained Bishop of Ierusalem by three Apostles and the same is auouched by Eusebius Hierome and others But what is meant when it is said that the Apostles ordained him PHIL. What else but that they conferred vpon him the Episcopall power as our Bishops doe when they consecrate a Bishop ORTHOD. Then belike before this ordination Saint Iames had not the Episcopall power PHIL. Very true ORTHOD. Was not he an Apostle of Iesus Christ PHIL. Yes for they speake distinctly of Iames the brother of our Lord of whom Saint Paul saith None other of the Apostles saw I saue Iames the brother of our Lord so it is euident that hee was an Apostle ORTHOD. And was he not called to the office of an Apostle immediatly by Iesus Christ consequētly had he not from him al Apostolick authority PHIL. All Apostolick I grant but we speake of Episcopal ORTHOD. As though all Episcopall authority were not comprehended in the Apostolick For what commission can be more ample then this which Christ gaue ioyntly to all his Apostles As my Father sent mee so send I you and Saint Paul proclaimeth that hee was in nothing inferiour to the chiefe Apostles If in nothing then not in Episcopall power and authority This is agreeable to the iudgement of the best learned among you Bellarmine saith Obseruandum est in Apostolica authoritate contineri omnem Ecclesiasticam potestatem i. It is to be obserued that in the Apostolicke authoritie is contained all Ecclesiasticall power If all Ecclesiasticall then surely all Episcopall In another place he proueth the same by the authoritie of S. Cyrill grounding vpon the words of Christ before alleadged Likewise Franciscus de Victoria Omnem potestatem quam Apostoli habuerunt receperunt immediatè a Christo i. The Apostles receiued immediatly from Christ all the power which they had Wherefore to say That Christ made Peter Bishop with his owne hands and that the rest deriued Episcopall power from Peter is a mere fancie Likewise to say that Peter Iohn and Iames did ordeine Iames Bishop that is conferre vpon him any Episcopall power is a mere dreame PHIL. Doe not the fathers commonly say That he was a Bishop ORTHO They say so And in so saying they say truely if they be rightly vnderstood For 1. The Scripture saith of Iudas His Bishopricke let an other man take That is his Apostleship If the Apostleship may be called a Bishoprick then an Apostle may be called a Bishop 2. The word Bishop signifieth an Ouerseer and may most aptly be applied to the Apostles which were the chiefe ouerseers of the Church of Christ. PHIL. Euery Apostle in that he is an Apostle may be called a Bishop in this generall sence But Iames being an Apostle was properly made a Bishop in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sence ORTHOD. A Bishop in the Ecclesiasticall sence hath two properties For 1. hereceiueth his Episcopall power by imposition of hands 2. For the execution thereof hee is confined to a certaine place Neither of which can properly be applied to an Apostle For though the Apostles made their chiefe abode in great Cities and populous places as namely Iames at Ierusalem yet because their Commission extended to all Nations they could not be so tied to any one place as the Bishop was Which is well expressed by Epiphanius saying The Apostles went often to other countreis to preach the Gospel and the Citte of Rome might not be without a Bishop As though he should say The Apostles were to preach to all Nations but the Bishops duetie did confine him to his owne charge This is correspondent to the Scripture which calleth the Apostles The light of the world whereas the 7. Bishops of Asia are stiled The 7. Starres and Angels of the 7. Churches And though the Apostles while they stayed in those Cities did preach ordeine Ministers execute Censures and all other things which are now performed by the Bishops who succeed them in the gouernement of the Church in regard whereof the fathers call them the Bishops of those places yet their Episcopall power was not distinct from their Apostolicke but included in it as a branch thereof not deriued from any Ordination by the hands of man but giuen them immediatly by Iesus Christ. PHIL. If Iames receiued no Episcopall power by Ordination in what sence is it said That they ordained him ORTHOD. Your glosse of the Canon Law giueth 4. senses of that speach Either say that these 3. did Consecrate him onely with visible Vnction but he was before Annointed of the Lord after an innisible maner Or say they did not ordeine him but onely shewed a forme of ordaining vnto others Or say that they ordained him not to be a Bishop but an Archbishop Or say that they ordained that is Inthronised him to the administration of a certaine place for before he was a Bishop without a title Hitherto the Glosse And verily as the Prophets and teachers at Antioch imposed hands with fasting and prayer vpon Paul and Barnabas not to giue them any new Ecclesiasticall power for that is more then wee finde in the Scripture but as the Text saith To set them apart for the worke whereunto the Lord had called them So the Apostles might impose hands vpon Iames not to giue him any Episcopall power that fancie hath bene before confuted but by common consent to designe him to the gouernement of the Church of Ierusalem and to commend him and his
within his own Prouince according to the custome of Rome which custome they commend and propose for a patterne But the Bishop of Rome careth neither for Canons nor Customes which make against him He is not content to bee Bishop in his owne Diocesse and Metropolitan ouer Bishops in his owne Prouince and Patriarch ouer his owne Metropolitans but he would stretch out the pawes of his Supremacie ouer the Christian world Fiftly the Nicen Canons would haue no Priest made without examination and such as are rashly ordained they doe not allow But the Bishop of Rome maketh boy Priests and boy Bishops and boy Cardinals Ferdinandus Medices a Florentine was made a Cardinall by Sixtus Quintus when he was not ful thirteene yeres old and Iohannes Medices which was afterwards Pope Leo the tenth was Cardinall before he was fourteene yeeres complet yet he was an Archbishop fiue yeeres before he was Cardinall And least you should imagine that this fauour was afforded only to Florentines Odettus Castilioneus was Cardinall at eleuen yeere old yet he was elected Bishop before he was Cardinall Alphonsus sonne to Immanuel King of Portugall was Cardinall at seuen yeeres old and yet he was Bishop before he was Cardinall These are the men whose office is to chuse the Pope to assist him with their Counsell and to sit with him as Iudges of the whole world And that which is more wonderfull if we may beleeue Glaber Rodulphus a Monke of your owne which liued at the same time Benedict the ninth was made Pope at twelue yeeres olde Was not this a fitte man to be Father of the Church Moderator of generall Councels Decider of all Controuersies Expounder of all Scriptures the onely Oracle vpon the face of the earth and Iudge Paramount of the Christian World Sixtly the Nicen Canons doe not suffer a Deacon so much as to sit amongst Priests but as the Priest was in place inferiour to the Bishop so the Deacon to the Priest Now though it were granted to be true which Bellarmine affirmeth that vnder Syluester there was seuen Cardinal Deacons in Rome yet the Nicen Councel maketh no exception at all of Cardinals But be he Cardinal or not Cardinall the Deacon is inferior to the Priest and the Priest to the Bishop but the Bishop of Rome hath aduanced his Cardinals euen such as are neither Bishops nor Priests First aboue Bishops then aboue Archbishops last of all aboue Patriarches Seuenthly the Nicen Canons forbid any Bishop to ordaine in his Church a Clerke belonging to another Bishop without the consent of the Bishop to whom he belongeth But the Bishop of Rome ordaineth whomsoeuer wheresoeuer whensoeuer not expecting the consent of any man Last of all the Nicen Canons forbid all Clerkes to follow filthy lucre Wherein how his holines excelleth is plainely platted out by Claudius Espencaeus a Diuine of your owne out of a shamelesse booke openly sold in Rome called the Taxe of the Chamber or Chauncery Apostolicke wherein a man may learne before hand at what price to be dispensed withall for any villany he shall commit be it adultery symony periurie incest or worse then incest Wherefore Philodox if paper could blush I am perswaded the leaues of that booke would be as red as scarlet So at Rome nothing is forbidden but to come without money if a man bring money it will procure a dispensation for any thing A wedge of gold findeth gâ—ace wheresoeuer it goeth and a Key of gold can open Saint Peters locke For all things are weighed at Rome in a ballance of golde as though pouerty were the onely irregularitie and no sinne in the world were greater then to want money so well doth the Church of Rome obserue the Nicen Canons But let vs heare the words of the Canon PHIL. A Bishop must be ordained if it be possible of all the Bishops in his prouince if this be hard to performe either by occasion of vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet surely three ought to bee congregated into one place so that they haue the consent of the absent solet theÌ„ make an ordination Likewise the fourth Councell of Carthage when a Bishop is ordained let two Bishops lay the Booke of the Gospels and hold it ouer his head and necke and one Bishop powring the blessing vpon him let all other Bishops that are present touch his head with their handes Likewise the second Councell of Arles Let no Bishop presume to ordaine a Bishop without permission of the Metropolitane nor any Bishop being a Metropolitance without three Bishops of the same Prouince so that others of the same Prouince be admonished by Epistles that they may signifie by their answere that they haue consented So the sixt Councell of Carthage A Bishop must be ordained of all the Bishops which are within the Prouince but if this bee hard either for vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet by all meanes three meeting together there may bee imposition of handes the absent Bishoppes consenting thereto by writing So the second Councell at Brachar It is meete that Bishops should bee appointed especially by the whole Councell but if this shal be hard in respect of necessitie or for the length of the iourney let three of them bee gathered together and let the subscriptions of all both present and absent bee taken and so afterward let the ordination be performed Thus you see the Councels and namely the Nicen requireth the presence of three For first it should bee performed by all the Bishops of the Prouince but if that cannot be by reason of vrgent necessitie yet surely three must bee congregated so they make it not a thing indifferent but a matter of necessitie and in any case require three ORTHOD. WHat if three present proceede to a consecration not expecting at all the consent of the absent PHIL. Their consent seemeth to bee onely of congruitie and not of necessitie ORTH. But the Nicen Canon not content with three present requireth also the consent of the absent in the same strictnesse of wordes Yet surely let three be congregated into one place so that they haue also the consent of the absent and so let them make an ordination Wherefore if you expound the one branch as a point of coÌ„gruâ—ty why do you vrge the other as of absolute necessitie Againe these Councels were holden Florente Ecclesia when the world was furnished with plentie of godly Bishops but you vrge them against a Church lately eclipsed and newly recouered from darkenesse the world round about being drowned in superstition and Idolatry These answeres might bee sufficient but for your better satisfaction let vs search the sence of your authorities by comparing them one with another The first was a Canon ascribed to the Apostles which being made when Bishops were scant requireth two or three The second drawne from the decrees of Popes supposed to
will make vs beleeue That the Apostle speaketh of Lay-Elders but I pray you doe not trouble me with such phantasticall conceits vnknowne to Antiquitie ORTHOD. You need not feare For it is cleare that the Presbyterie here mentioned ordained Timothy by imposition of hands which no Lay-man may doe therefore doubtlesse they were no Lay-men But what in your iudgement is meant by Presbyterie PHIL. What else can Presbyterium signifie but a company or assembly of Presbyters ORTH. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doeth signifie not onely a company of Presbyters but also the Office and function of a Presbyter For example Eusebius saith That the Bishops of Caesarea and Ierusalem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is Imposed hands vpon him .i. vpon Origen for the Office of a Presbyter And againe The Bisop of Caesarea prayed him to expound the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is When as yet hee had not obtained Ordination of Priesthood And not long after he receiued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is The Ordination of Priesthood And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is likewise vsed Socrates saith That Atticus placed Proclus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is in the Order of Deaconship And hee was thought worthy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is the Office and Order of a Priest This signification is imbraced by Hierome Primâ—sius Anselmus expounding Presbyterium by Presbyteratus or Episcopatus That is the Office of a Priest or Bishop Likewise Lyra Presbyterium est dignitas vel Officium Presbyteri That is The Presbyterie mentioned by Saint Paul is the dignitie or office of a Priest Yea your owne Rhemistes confesse so much in that they transtate the word Presbyterium in this very place Priest-hood which doth not signifie a company of Priests but the office and order of a Priest If this bee true then your argument is shaken in peâ—ces For that may bee said to bee performed by the order or office of Priest-hood which is done by one Priest onely as well as though it were done by a thousand and this interpretation may seeme to bee countenanced by conference of Scripture because Paul though an Apostle yet according to the phrase of Scripture may bee Called a Presbyter for this word Presbyter in the New Testament taken for an Ecclesiasticall person doth signifie sometimes the Pastour of a particular flocke as when Paul willeth Titus to ordaine Presbyters in euery Citie sometimes it is taken more generally and extendeth euen to the Apostles themselues so Iohn calleth himselfe a Presbyter and Peter speaking to Presbyters calleth himselfe their fellow Presbyter Whence wee may conclude by analogie that Paul also may bee called a Presbyter Now it is certaine that Saint Paul imposed hands vpon Timothie For hee saith I put thee in remembrance that thou stir vp the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands Wherefore seeing the word Presbyterie may signifie the office of a Presbyter and Saint Paul may bee called a Presbyter and it is euident that Timothie was ordained by the hands of Paul therefore it is possible that when the Scripture ascribeth his ordination to the Presbyterie it may bee meant that hee was made only by the hands of Paul which is the opinion of Dionysius Carthusianus who saith manuuÌ„ Presbyterij id est manuuÌ„ mearuÌ„ qui te ordinaui Episcopum Of the hands of the Presbytery that is of my hands which ordained thee a Bishop But suppose that Presbyterie in this place signifie a company or assembly of Bishops as Chrysostome Theophylact and Oecumenius interpret it How many will you iudge to make an assembly PHIL. Suppose that three ORTH. If it be so then vpon Bellarmines imagination that an assembly of Bishops imposed hands together with the ordainer it will follow that Timothie was consecrated by foure therefore if you make this example a perpetuall patterne then all Bishops must be consecrated by foure which is against your selfe PHIL. It seemeth that two Bishops may be Called an assembly ORTHOD. Though it were so yet you cannot conclude for how proue you that there was an assembly besides the principall consecrator PHIL. Bellarmine hath proued it by the fathers alleadged ORTHO Bellarmine abuseth his Reader for to beginne with Chrysostome he saith Hee speaketh not of Presbyters in this place but of Bishops for Presbyters ordained him not a Bishop And Theophylact with imposition of hands of the Presbyterie that is of Bishops for Presbyters did not ordaine a Bishop Likewise Occumenius by Presbyters hee meaneth Bishops for Presbyters were not to impose hands vpon a Bishop So these fathers by Presbyterie vnderstood Bishops the number they doe not define neither doe they affirme that there was an assembly besides the principall consecrator But concerning the number you shall heare the iudgement of your Angelicall Doctor who bringeth two readings of this place Presbyteri and Presbyterij and handling the first hee demaundeth Why it should bee said Presbyteri in the singular number seeing a Bishop should bee consecrated by three to this hee frameth two answers First because though many meete together yet one is principall the rest conssistants Secondly yet saith hee it may bee said that this Canon was not then made and that then there were but few Bishops which could not bee congregated So hee thinketh it probable that Timothy was not consecrated by three Whereto agreeth Cardinall de Turrecrematâ— Petrus dicitur solus consecrasse beatum Iohannem Euangelistam Paulus Timotheum Titum Dionysium i. Peter is said alone to haue consecrated blessed Iohn the Euangelist and Paul to haue consecrated Timothy Titus and Dionysius And Iohannes Maior Paulus non quasiuit duos pro ordinatione Titi Timothei i. Paul sought not other two Bishops for the Ordination of Titus and Timothy So farre is this place from prouing the necessity of three Bishops PHIL. I Wil prooue it by another place For there were in the Church which was at Antioch Prophets and Doctors among whom was Barnabas Simeon that was called Niger Lucius of Cyrene and Manahen who was the foster brother of Herod the Tetrarch and Saul And as they were ministring to our Lord and fasting the holy Ghost said Separate me Saul and Barnabas vnto the worke whereto I haue called them Then they fasting and praying and imposing hands vpon them dismissed them Behold not onely Barnabas but also Saul that is Paul the Apostle was consecrated Bishop that by three Bishops Simeon Lucius and Manahen Though he were an Apostle not of men nor by men yet it was the will of God that hee should bee ordained Bishop by 3. Bishops that the discipline of the Church might be obserued ORTHO Neither were they Bishops neither did they make Paul and Barnabas Bishops PHIL. Father Turrian sheweth that by Doctors were meant Presbyters and by Prophets Bishops and also that Barnabas and Saul were Doctors or Presbyters the other three
might descend by degrees to the lowest lincke euen to the last Bishop of England whence we might returne againe ascending and climbing vp to the Apostles themselues But now alas since the time of Schisme in stead of Golden linckes you haue added leaden so that there is a breach a rupture a plaine dissolution in the chaine You may well climbe vp a few steps by the leaden ladder but you must downe againe you haue no part nor portion in the Golden ladder of succession which leadeth vs vp to S. Peter and so to Christ himselfe For the Church of Rome and that onely hath Canonicall Bishops All other are but counterfeit ORTHOD. Iust For all the Popes geese are Swannes and other mens Swannes are geese PHIL. I Might bring the Church insulting against you as Tertullian did against the heretickes of his time Qui estis quando vnde venistis quid in meo agitis non mei quo Marcion iure syluam meam caedis qua licentia Valentine fontes meos transuertis Mea est possessio olim possideo prior possideo habeo origines firmas ab ipsis authoribus quorum fuit res Ego sum haeres Apostolorum sicut cauerunt testamento sicut fidei commiserunt sicut adiurauerunt ita teneo 1. Who are you when and whence came you what doe you in my ground seeing you are not mine O Luther by what authoritie doest thou cut downe my woods O Caluin By what licence doest thou turne away the course of my fountaines It is my possession I possesse it by prescription I was first in possession I haue strong Euidences from the true owners I am the heire of the Apostles as they appointed by testament as they committed it to trust as they bind men by adiuration that it should be enioyed so I enioy it ORTHO To answere all your demaunds in order We are the children of God and when it pleased him which causeth the light to spring out of darkenesse we did spring from your selues being still content to be yours so you would be Christs Otherwise know that the Vineyard is not yours but Christs wherein we haue cut downe nothing but your corruptions Neither haue we diuerted the fountaine though wee were forced to cut out a chanell to draine it to straine it to purge it from your pollutions that so wee might drinke the water of Life out of the wells of saluation Whatsoeuer you haue by lawfull possession by ancient and iust prescription by inheritance from the Apostles whereof you haue sound Record and euidence out of the Scripture All that is common to vs with you Whatsoeuer is controuersed betweene vs in any point of Religion therein we appeale to the written Will and Testament of Christ Let that be Iudge betweene vs and you PHIL. When the question was betweene the Iewes and the Samaritanes concerning the Temple whether the Lord in his Law allowed that at Ierusalem or that other in mount Garizin Andronicus produced the succession of the high Priests from Aaron Whereupon Ptolomeus King of Egypt gaue sentence for the Temple at Ierusalem What say you had he not reason ORTHO He had For the Lord gaue the Priesthood onely to Aaron and his sonnes so they only had title to the Priesthood who descended from Aaron by carnall generation But Aaron and his sonnes according to the Law of the Lord performed the Priests Office in the Tabernacle and afterward in the Temple at Ierusalem the place which the Lord had chosen Wherefore as they alone were the Priests of the Lord so that alone was the Temple of the Lord. PHIL. Very well Now to proceed We of the Church of Rome are built vpon S. Peter as it were vpon mount Sion you are built vpon Cranmer as it were vpon mount Garizin We haue a Church and Priesthood which deriue their originall from Christ you can goe no further then Cranmer Now if this matter were put to King Ptolomy or any other indifferent man would not he giue iudgement for vs against you ORTHOD. No Neither for your Priesthood nor for your Church Not for the first because the Priesthood which the Apostles conferred was only a power to minister the word and Sacraments which being conueied to posteritie successiuely by Ordination is found at this day in some fort in the Church of Rome in regard whereof you may be said to succeed the Apostles and Cranmer you and wee Cranmer and consequently we also in this succeed the Apostles as well as you But besides this which is the Ordinance of God you haue added another thing the imagination of your owne braine which you esteeme the principall function of Priesthood to wit a power to offer a Propitiatorie Sacrifice for the quicke and the dead Now how is it possible that in this you should succeed the Apostles seeing as in due place shall be prooued they neither were such Priestes themselues nor euer by Ordination deliuered any such Priest-hood And as Ptolomy if hee liued in this age could not iustifie your Priestes so neither could hee nor any indifferent man iustifie your Church by vertue of this Argument drawne from outward succession For how slender it is may appeare by consideration of the Greek Church which Bellarmine denieth to be a Church pretending That they were conuicted in three full councels of Schisme and heresie yet Constantinople can fetch her pedegree from Saint Andrew the Apostle as witnesseth Nicephorus and bring it downeward euen to Ieremie who liued in this present age Likewise the Church of Alexandria chalengeth succession as well and as truely as the Romane Baronius recordeth an Ambassage from Gabriell their Patriach to Clemens the eight in the title whereof he calleth himselfe the 97. Patriarch successor of Saint Marke the Euangelist If you say that the line of Constantinople and Alexandria hath beene interrupted be it so And hath not the Romane beene so likewise Genebrard is of opinion that fifty Popes by the space of almost 150. yeeres were not Apostolicall but Apotacticall and Apostaticall Baronius lamenteth that false Popes were thrust by strumpets into the seat of Peter Platina saith it was grown to that passe that any factious fellow might inuade the seat of Peter I passe ouer your hereticall Popes your woman Pope and your Antipopes whereof you haue had some times two some times three at once so that one could not tell which was the true Pope but onely by the preuayling faction For he that wonne it in the field must weare the garland the weaker side must to the walles and ambitious wittes must bee set a worke by writing to maintaine the Popes quarrell Haue you not now great cause to bragge of this noble succession If you expound your selfe not of Local and personall but of such as appeareth in successiue Vocation Mission and Ordination then why doe you tell vs of Polydor Virgil or of Democharis or of the old monument found in a
Monastery which haue onely set downe the names of such as succeeded such persons in such places but haue not described their successiue ordination if you could shew vs this also yet it would not proue the Church of Rome to be a true Catholike Church For why should wee not thinke that Constantinople and Alexandria might haue this as well as Rome Moreouer your owne former example doth confute you For Manasses the high Priest of the Temple in mount Garizim was brother to Iaddi the high Priest in Ierusalem and had the like succession from Aaron yet the Samaritans were not a true but schismaticall Church in regard whereof their Temple was called Templum transgressorum Finally suppose that into the place of a Catholike and Canonicall Bishop deceased a capable and Catholike man were canonically chosen and consecrated yet it is very possible that hee may become an heretike as for example an Arrian and may draw his flocke after him Will you now say that this flocke so poysoned with Arrianisme are the true members of your Catholike Church Yet here is locall and personall succession yea euen the golden chaine of successiue ordination Therefore that assertion of Stapletons to with that wheresoeuer this succession is there is also a true Catholike Church cannot bee defended but Bellarmine saith farre more truely It is not necessarily gathered that the Church is alwaies where there is succession For besides this outward succession there must likewise bee the inward succession of doctrine to make a true Church Irenaeus describeth those which haue true succession from the Apostles to bee such as with the succession of the Episcopall office haue receiued the certaine grace of truth And this kind of succession hee calleth the principall succession so Gregory Nazianzen hauing said that Athanasius succeeded Saint Marke in godlinesse addeth that this succession in godlinesse is properly to be accounted succession For hee that holdeth the same Doctrine is also partaker of the same throne but he that is against the Doctrine must bee reputed an aduersary euen while hee sitteth in the throne for the latter hath the name of succession but the former hath the thing it selfe and the truth Therefore you must proue your succession in doctrine otherwise you must bee holden for aduersaries euen while you sit in the throne PHIL. Wee can proue it when occasion requireth In the meane time though we cannot conclude affirmatiuely that where successiue Ordination is there is a Church yet we may conclude negatiuely that that where it is not there is no Church ORTHO Had not Pope Pelagius this ordination you speake of PHIL. He had no doubt and so succeeded the blessed Apostles ORTHOD. But he was consecrated onely by two as I haue proued So Euagrius was a lawfull Bishop approued by the Pope and Church of Rome and consequently in your owne iudgement had succession from the Apostles Yet as hath beene declared he was consecrated onely by one therefore you must confesse that one may be a lawfull Bishop and haue succession from the Apostles although he were consecrated onely by one Yet mistake me not I speake not this as though any of our English Protestant Bishops since the time of reformation were so consecrated We are readie to iustifie that their Orders are not onely sufficient in the nature of the thing but also exact according to the strictnesse of the Canon PHIL. Or if they be not then as those which could not shew their pedegree from Aaron were put from the Priest-hood so you must be content to be serued in like manner ORTHODOX SEeing you accuse vs for breaking the golden chaine behold take it in your hand examine it from end to end looke vpon euery lincke let vs see those breaches those ruptures those dissolutions you speake of and let it appeare to the world whether you or wee haue broken the Canon And because you so bragge and blaze your owne Armes let vs first see how you can proue your glorious succession PHIL. We can name the Bishops which succeeded one another in their seuerall Sees euen till the time of Schisme ORTHOD. What is this to the purpose It is one thing to make a Catalogue of Bishops succeeding one another and another thing to plot out the whole chaine of their successiue ordination This is the thing you require at our hands can you performe it if not by your owne sentence you must bee put from your Priest-hood PHIL. We can if you will grant that vnto vs which is reason should bee graunted For you must vnderstand that our English Catholicke Bishops deriue their succession from the Saxons the Saxons from the French some of both from the Romane and the Romane from all Nations therefore an infinite number of Recordes must bee searched if wee will particularly deduce the successiue ordination of any one Bishop of later times Now although the Church in all ages hath beene carefull to record the Consecrations yet it is possible that some may bee omitted by negligence of Registers it is possible that some formerly recorded may bee perished by iniury of time it is possible that some yet remayning vpon record cannot by vs bee attained because they are in the hands of our enemies But what of all this seeing the law of the Church in all ages and kingdomes required three seeing the constant practise of the Christian world was continuallie by three therefore when wee reade of any Bishop generally reputed a Bishop performing the office of a Bishop by giuing holy orders subscribing to generall Councels executing without any checke or controulement the duties belonging to a Bishoppe wee may in all reason presume that he was made canonically by three if there be neither publike fame nor probable reason nor suspition to the contrary For wanton wittes must not bee suffered vpon their owne fancy to call reuerend antiquity into question Otherwise seeing none can bee a Bishop vnlesse hee bee first a Priest a peeuish man might denie them to bee Bishops vnlesse hee did see their letters of orders Againe seeing no man can bee a Priest except hee bee baptised a froward fellow might deny their Priesthood vnlesse it could bee produced by whom and where they were baptised No Sir wee may not admit of such dealing neither must wee bee put to prooue these things but when there is nothing to the contrary wee may presume them to bee done according to the lawes of the Church and the generall practise of all Christian nations ORTHODOX You speake reason Onely this I require at your hands that the same libertie which you assume to your selues you will according to equity allow to others and seeing you chalenge all the Bishops before Cranmer for your owne may it please you to let vs see the seuerall linckes of your golden chaine from the first conuersion vntill his time and we will extend them to this present day CHAP. II. Of the first Conuersion of this
Aristobulus S. Peters scholler doe testifie in like maner the foresaid authours Mirmianus Dorotheus Baronius out of the Greeke Martyrologe that he was sent by S. Peter into Britaine and there made a Bishoppe ORTHO What you or your fellowes say is not greatly materiall but how falsely you report of Dorotheus may appeare by these his words Aristobulus euen he which is mentioned by the Apostle to the Romanes was made Bishop of Britaine this is all which he saith if he say so much for there are diuers readings But howsoeuer there is not one word of S. Peter yet Parsons brings him to auouch that Aristobulus was sent by S. Peter And whereas Parsons calleth him S. Peters scholler he is not so described by Dorotheus but rather as S. Pauls Therfore if he were Bishop of Britaine it is farre more likely that he was sent by S. Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles then by S. Peter Let vs now proceed to Ioseph of Arimathea PHIL. OF Ioseph of Arimathea his comming into France and his sending thence into Great Britaine either by S. Philip as some say who preached then in Gaule or as others hold by S. Peter himselfe as he passed that way to and from Britaine and how he obtained a place to exercise an Eremiticall life for him and his ten companions in the Iland called Aâ—allonia where Glanstenbury after was builded albeit I find no very certaine or ancient writer to affirme it yet because our latter Historiographers for two hundred yeeres past or more doe hold it to haue come downe by tradition and namely Iohannes Capgrauius a learned man of the order of S. Dominicke and others after him I doe not meane to dispute the matter here but rather to admire and praise the heauenly prouidence of God c. ORTHOD. The words of Iohn Capgraue are thus Ioseph cum silio c. i. Ioseph with his sonne Ioseph and other ten companions traâ—eiling through Britaine vnder the raigne of King Aruiragus preached the faith of Christ boldly in the yeere of our Lords incarnation 63. And againe They came into France to Philip the Apostle and of him were sent into Britaine And againe The King granted vnto them a certaine Iland inuironed with woods bushes and fennes called of the inhabitants Jnis Ditrin i. the Iland of glasse Which relation seemeth very probable There is extant an Epistle if it be not counterfeit alledged by Lelandus and other Antiquaries and ascribed to S. Patrick wherein it is thus written Ostenderunt mihi c. i. The brethren which I found at Glastenbury shewed vnto me the writings of Fugatius and Damianus in which it was contained That 12. disciples of Philip and Iacob had built the old Church and that three Pagan Kings gaue to the said 12 so many possessions of lands King Henry the second in the Charter of Glastenbury affirmeth That the Church thereof was founded by the Disciples of our Lord. William of Malmesbury in his booke of Glastenbury Abbey saith That the olde Church was built by Ioseph Yea The ancient Monuments of the said Abbey doe testifie the same And also that Ioseph was sent thither by S. Philip out of France This is that Ioseph which made Sepulchre in his Garden That in the middest of his pleasures he might thinke of mortalitie He buried the blessed body of Christ and afterward became a Preacher of the Resurrection In Glastenbury he powred out his precious Ointment and all Britaine was filled with the sweetnesse of the odour Now whether he were the first Preacher in Britaine I cannot define but if hee were then the first Conuerter came from Arimathea and not from Rome being sent by S. Philip and not by S. Peter PHIL. That the Gospel came first to Glastenbury from Rome may thus be proued King Inas aboue 900. yeeres past when he layd the foundation of Glastenbury Abbey in memory of S. Ioseph and his fellowes that had liued a solitary life there caused these Verses to be written in the Church Anglia plaude lubens mittittibi Roma salutem Fulgor Apostolicus Glasconiam irradiat Be glad England for that Rome sendeth health to thee and Apostolicall brightnesse doeth lighten Glastenburie Which could not well be spoken if the comming of these Saints and first inhabiters there had not had some relation to Rome and to the Apostles that sent them ORTHOD. If Inas layed the foundation of Glastenbury Abbey in memorie of S. Ioseph who liued there then we haue a noble Monument of Iosephs being in England But that euer he was at Rome or sent hither by any Bishop of Rome is more then we can find or you can proue William of Malmesbury declareth That when the ancient Church built by Ioseph was vtterly decayed there was another built by Deui Bishop of S. Dauids Which also in time growing ruinous was repaired by 12. men comming out of the North but K. Inas pulled it downe and reared a stately one to Christ Peter and Paul In this certaine Verses are written The first 12. whereof are a continuall commendation of Peter and Paul by way of comparison then follow those two which you haue cited in which he willeth England to reioyce And why because Rome sendeth her health But how the next verse declareth Because the Apostolicke brightnesse doeth lighten Glastenbury Where if the Poet speake of the brightnes of doctrine as you seeme to take it then it is not necessary to referre it to the first inhabitants it may haue relation to the doctrine not long before preached by Austin For I know you will call his doctrine Apostolicke Yet it seemeth that the Poet meaneth not the brightnesse of doctrine but of patronage and protection imagining according to the corrupt opinion of those times that the Saints by whose names the Churches were called were Patrons and Protectors of the said Churches For in the words following Peter and Paul are called two Bulwarks and towers of faith And K. Inas who dedicated the Church vnto them is said to haue giuen these Bulwarks as euerlasting gifts to his people By which what can be meant but that those Apostles were now by his Dedication become their Bulwarks and towers of protection So the Apostolicke brightnesse that is their glorious Patronage and protection is said to shine most radiantly ouer Glastenbury And health is said to be sent from Rome because they ascribe their safety to those Apostles which were the founders of the Church of Rome which doeth in no case argue that Christianitie was first brought hither from Rome NOw what will you say if the Britaine 's were Christians before the Romanes For who was the first founder of the Church of Rome you proclaime euery where that S. Peter But when came S. Peter thither Baronius saith in the yeere 44 being the second of the Emperour Claudius Now let vs consider when our Iland first receiued the sweete influence of the
industrie the Heretickes were confounded and the faith of the Britaine 's strengthened When the disease did breake out againe Germanus went againe and cured the malady So we were not recouered by such as came from Rome but by our neighbours of France teaching the same faith that was here from the beginning PHIL. That was the Roman faith euen the same which we professe at this day For that which S. Austin brought and that which the Britaines had before must needs be one and the selfe same in all materiall and substantiall points And that is the same that came from Eleutherius which being first planted by the Apostles continued from King Ethelbert to King Henry the eight ORTHOD. That there was the same vnder the Apostles and vnder Eleutherius we grant neither will we depart further from you then you depart from Eleutherius But if the faith of Austin and the old Britaines were the same in all materiall and substantiall points Then the obseruation of Easter after the Roman rite is no substantiall point Againe if the faith of the Britaines and Apostles were all one then the Popes Supremacy was no Article of the Apostles faith for vndoubtedly it was none of the Britaines faith Thus neither the conuersioÌ„ of the Iland nor the planting of the Bishoppricks nor the supplanting of Heretickes nor the replanting of the faith can bee referred to the Bishop of Rome Now time requireth that we speake a word or two of the Bishops themselues What say you therefore were they Canonicall PHIL. WHat else For were they not approoued through the Christian world ORTHO There is no doubt of it At the Councell of Ariminum in the yeere 359 were three Bishops of Britaine as witnesseth Sulpitius Sâ—uerus At the great Councell of Sardica in the yeere 347. were present also some Britaine Bishops as witnesseth Athanasius At the Counsell of Arles in France in the yeere 314. Restitutus Bishop of London was present and subscribed But if the Britaine Bishops were Canonicall then by your assertion they had successiue ordination by three Whence had they three you will not grant that there was any Bishop in the land when Lucius sent to Eleutherius Of the two that were sent to Rome he made only one that is Eluanus a Bishop from Rome there came two Fugatius and Damianus but we cannot learne that either of them was a Bishop neither doe we read of any comming at that time from France or any other place to assist him therefore it is probable that all the British Bishops did originally spring from Eluanus alone though afterward when the number increased they might obserue the Canon PHIL. If they had their beginning from him alone yet it toucheth not vs because the English Catholicke Bishops deriue not their succession from the Britaines but from the Saxons ORTHOD. Though it touch not your persons it toucheth your positions But seeing you discend from the Saxons we will dismisse the Britaines and come to the Saxons CHAP. IIII. Of Austin the first Archbishop of Canterbury sent hither by Pope Gregory PHIL. NOw are we come to holy Pope Gregory whom to vse the words of S. Bede we may well and also must call our Apostle for although he were not an Apostle to others yet he was vnto vs the scale and token of his Apostleship wee are in our Lord. ORTHOD. If Gregory had beene truely an Apostle he should not sit still at home and send another but goe himselfe For Christ saith not sit still and send but goe and teach Wherfore an Apostle is so called not because hee sendeth another but because he himselfe is sent PHIL. Though Gregory being Pope sent another yet before hee was Pope he should haue beene sent himselfe For being Archdeacon of Rome passing through the Market place he espied certaine beautifull boyes and demaunded out of what Countrey they came answere was made that they came out of the I le of Britaine where the inhabiters were all of that beauty Then asked he whether the people of the land were Christians and it was answered that they were Paynims Then sighing from the bottome of his heart Alas quoth he that the author of darkenesse should possesse men of such shining beauty and so gracious a countenance should inwardly beare so foule a soule then he inquired the name of the people and it was answered that they were called Angles or English It is wel saith he for both they haue an Angelicall face and it is fit that such should be fellow heires with the Angels in heauen But what saith he is the name of the Prouince It was answered the people of that Prouince were called Deiri It is well saith he they may be called Deiri that is de ira eruti deliuered from the Ire of God then he demaunded what was the name of the King it was answered Elle then saith he an Alleluia must be sung in those parts to the praise of God He went to the Pope besought him to send some Preachers to conuert Britaine and offered his seruice but the Romans being vnwilling he could not be suffered So one after he himselfe being Pope sent S. Austin and so the worke was accomplished but if for all this S. Gregory may not be called our Apostle because he was not sent Yet I hope you will giue vs leaue to honour S. Austin with that title because he was sent ORTHOD. He was sent I grant but not as an Apostle that is immediately by Christ neither did hee lay the foundation of the Church but built vpon another mans foundation for there were in Britaine at his arriuall seauen Bishops and an Archbishop professing and teaching the Christian faith and aboue 2000. Monkes in the Monastery of Bangor PHIL. They were Britaines but Saint Austin laid the foundation in the other parts of the Iland ORTHOD. Not so for the Scots receiued the Gospell euen before the preaching of Palladius The Picts which were more Southren receiued it afterward by Ninianus a Britaine borne The rest of them inhabiting the high Northren mountaines and craggie cliffes were conuerted by Columba an Irish man PHIL. Yet Austine conuerted the Angles or English ORTHOD. The Angles possessed the Kingdomes of Northumberland and Mercia Northumberland was conuerted in the dayes of King Oswald by the ministery of Aidan a Scot And Mercia vnder King Penda who being desirous to marry the King of Northumberlands daughter could not enioy her but vpon this condition that he and his people should become Christians By which occasion hee first attained to the heauenly trueth wherein hee was exceedingly delighted aboue all earthly ioy So he was brought to Christ by meanes of his blessed bride baptized by Finanus one of Aidans successours PHIL. The people which were procured to come out of Germanie to assist the wearied Britaines against the Scots and Picts were generally called by the name of English
strangers a common courtesie is a token of arrogancie And a proud looke doeth argue a proud heart according to the saying A man may be knowen by his looke PHIL. It is the iudgement of S. Iohn the Apostle That we must vouchsafe such men as are diuided from the Catholicke Church no honour or office of courtesie in these words If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine receiue him not into house neither say vnto him God saue you ORTHO How can you apply this to the british-British-Bishops who confessed as Bede relateth That they vnderstood that to be the true way of righteousnes which Austin had preached Yea Parsons the Iesuite affirmeth That the faith which S. Austin brought and that which the Britaines had before must needs bee one and the selfe same in all materiall and substantiall points PHIL. They were all Schismaticks and guiltie of departing from the Church of Rome ORTHOD. How could they depart from it seeing they were neuer lincked to it by any bond of obedience For when should Rome haue any such iurisdiction ouer Britaine At the first planting of Religion You cannot proue it In the dayes of Eleutherius it doeth not appeare that euer he chalenged any such thing And euen their maner of Baptizing obseruing Easter and other Ecclesiasticall institutions contrary to the customes of the Church of Rome make more then probable proofe that Britaine was not vnder the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome Wherefore though we cannot excuse the Britaines for refusing to ioyne with him in the conuersion of the Saxons yet wee must needs say they had iust reason to refuse to put their necks vnder his yoke And surely if Austin had not had a proud spirit hee would onely haue requested their helping hand for the Lords worke and not haue sought dominion ouer them for himselfe and for his lord the Pope Yet the pride of his spirit and his aspiring cogitations may further appeare in that he demaunded of Gregorie i How he should deale with the Bishops of Britaine and France thereby affecting not only to haue iurisdiction ouer the Britaines but ouer the French also Which Gregory well ynough perceiuing answered We gaue thee no authoritie ouer the Bishops of France for that of ancient time of my predecessours the Bishop of Arles receiued his Pall whom we must not bereaue of his authoritie Thus much of his pride NOw whether he were the cause of the massacre following I will not define You shall heare the opinion of Amandus Xierixensis a Frier Minorite When the Brittans saith hee were Catholiks the Saxons were Gentiles for the conuersion of whom blessed Gregory sent Austin and Mellitus which conuerted the Saxons but when Austin would haue brought the Bishops and Abbots of the Brittans by Apostolicke authority that they should receiue him as Legate and preach with him to the English discord was mooued for their disobedience to Saint Austin and so warre was raised betweene the Kings of the Brittans and of the Saxons which now beeing conuerted would haue subdued the Brittans to Austin Bede himselfe testifieth how Austin threatfully prophesied that if they would not take peace and bee at concord with their brethren they should receiue warre from their enemies and if they would not preach to the Englishmen the way of life they should suffer at their hand and by their power the vengcance of death Now because the euent did answere to the speech it is called a prophesie For what followed Edilbert King of Kent moued Edelfride King of Northumberland to ioyne with him against the Brittans and there was made a bloudy massacre the narration whereof is thus set downe by Galfridus Monemutensis In a part of the Brittans Christianity yet flourished the which beginning in the daies of Eleutherius neuer failed among them When Austin came hee found seuen Bishopricks and an Archbishopricke supplied with very godly Gouerners and Abbies a great number in which the flocke of Christ was kept in good order Besides other Cities in the Citie of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 21. hundred monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinooch a man marueilously well learned who by diuerse arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to bee subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edilbert therefore the King of Kent as soone as hee saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching stirred vp Edelfride and other Princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and goe to Bangor to destroy Dinooch and his Clergie Who taking the City commaunded the swords of his men to bee turned first vpon the monkes so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with martyrdome entred the kingdome of Heauen If they were martyrs what were they that made them Martyrs If the Saxons were persecutors and did persecute them to that end that they might make them subiect to Austn what then is to bee thought of Austin It had beene the dutie of Austin saith Lelandus to haue admonished the Saxons that perfidious nation that if they would admit Christianity sincerely they should restore to the iust Lords and possessours the Empire of Brittaine which contrarie to the oath of warfare they had occupied by tyranny If Austin sought by any sinister meanes to enlarge his owne iurisdiction hee was farre vnlike to Palladius Bishop of Scotland who as Polydor witnesseth besought Constantine their king with many prayers that hee would not assist with armes the idolatrous nation of the Saxons against the Christian Brittans PHIL. Saint Bede saith that Saint Austin long before that time was taken out of this life to the kingdome of Heauen ORT. That is not Saint Bedes but some false finger hath foysted it in For a learned antiquary skilfull in the Saxon language affirmeth that it is not found in the Saxon copie Hitherto of circumstances incident to his person Now at last let vs come to his ordination and I hope you will confesse him to be a canonicall Bishop PHIL. HEe was most canonicall For as Doctor Stapleton declareth out of Saint Bede hee was sent from the Bishop of Rome the successor of Peter and consecrated by the Bishops of France ORTHOD. Pope Gregory saith hee was consecrated by the Bishops of Germany PHIL. That is the fault of the copie for it should not bee Germaniarum but Galliarum as Baronius thinketh ORT. When did the French Bishops ordaine him PHIL. After he had bin a while in Brittaine and had conuerted diuers ORTHO Baronius is perswaded by a place of Gregory that it was before the conuersion of the English but by whom was hee ordained PHIL. Saint Bede saith that it was performed by Aetherius Archbishop of Arles ORTHOD. Baronius saith that Aetherius was Bishop of Lyons not of Arles and that Virgilius was then Bishop
meanes of the brasen serpent yet the vertue of healing proceeded not from the brasen serpent but immediatly from himselfe For â—e that turned towards it was not healed by the thing that he saw but by thee O Sautour of all Euen so though God in giuing this Spirituall power vse the ministerie of man yet the power it selfe is immediatly from God For whereas S. Paul among the gifts of God to the Church nameth gouernments And S. Peter saith If any man minister let him doe it as of the abilitie which God ministreth Your Iesuit Salmeron though striuing to deriue it from the Pope as it is actuall yet considering it in it selfe being conuicted with the euidence of trueth saith thus Ministrationes quoque Domino ascribuntur sicut gubernationes à Paulo quia quicquid est supernaturale in ministerio gubernatione Deus per se fecit id autem ad quod creatura potest concurrere sinit eam agere etsi ipse praecipuè id operetur Gratia igitur gratis data administrandi gubernandi à Deo est immediatè i. Ministrations are ascribed to the Lord by S. Paul as also gouernments because whatsoeuer is supernaturall in ministerâ—â— and gouernment God hath wrought that by himselfe but he suffereth the creature to worke that vnto which it can concurre although himselfe in that bee the 〈…〉 pall agent Therefore the freely giuen grace of administring and gouerning is 〈…〉 tly from God And againe â— Si sâ—matur pro gratia gratis data gubernandi vel administrandi iurisdictionem vt sumunt Petrus Paulus procul dubio donumest quod ab homine procedere non potest i. If Iurisdiction or gouernment be taken for the freely giuen grace of gouerning or administring Iurisdiction as Peter and Paul take it without doubt it is a gift which cannot proceed from man Wherefore when S. Paul willeth Timothie To stirre vp the grace which is giuen him it is to be expounded not onely of the grace of Order but of all Episcopall grace And S. Ambrose when hee saith God giueth the grace doeth vndoubtedly meane all Episcopall grace For who can giue any grace to the Pastours of the Church but onely the God of all grace which giueth Pastours to the Church and appointeth them to be rulers ouer his family To Salmeron we may adde Henr. Gandauensis affirming that Bishops haue their power both of Order and Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ As also Gottifredus de Fontibus and Iohannes de Poliaco all alleadged by Salmeron Whose opinions he controuleth without reason seeing before in effect he affirmed the same I will conclude this point with the Vniuersitie of Paris which ratified this position with a Decree and caused one Iohannes Sarazim a Frier to recant the contrary PHIL. If Iurisdiction be giuen in Consecration then it should be equall in all Bishops ORTHOD. The power it selfe is equall in all though the determination of the power which is from the Church be vnequall When a Bishop is translated to another See hee doeth not lose his former habituall power no more then the Sunne doeth lose his light when hee passeth to the other Hemisphere When a Bishop of a smaller Circuit is aduanced to a greater he getteth not a greater power but a larger subiect whereupon he may exercise his power And when a Bishop is deposed hee is not absolutely depriued of his power but the matter is taken away vpon which his power should worke This is confessed by Vargas to be the opinion of Alphonsus and others If it happen that a Bishop for any crime bee depriued of his Bishopricke then he shall bee depriued of his subiects vpon whom hee ought to exercise his power of Iurisdiction but hee shall not be depriued of the power of Iurisdiction it selfe receiued in his Consecration CHAP. II. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all Spirituall Iurisdiction PHIL. THe giuing of Iurisdiction must onely proceed from him that is the fountaine of all Spirituall Iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane or Bishop vnder him that hath authoritie and commission from him For the Church of God is like vnto a Citie which hath one onely fountaine from whence there issue diuers great floods which are branched out againe into sundry goodly streames whence the water is conueyed by pipes and conduits to serue the whole Citie This fountaine is the Bishop of Rome the great floods are the Patriarches Archbishops and Metropolitanes the streames are the rest of the Bishops the pipes and conduits are all those which deriue their Iurisdiction from the Bishops Now the Church of England was sometimes flourishing like the Paradice of God but since it was cut off from the liuely spring alas for woe it is like to a barren and forsaken wildernesse ORTHOD. The Church of England God be thanked is in such a case that all her friends haue cause to reioyce and all her enemies to gnash their teeth And as for the fountaine you speake of it is not a well of liuing water made by the King of heauen but a puddle or pit of poyson digged by the Prince of darkenesse The Bishop of Rome wee graunt hath of ancient time beene reuerently regarded and had though not a generall iurisdiction yet a large extent yea hee had precedencie of dignity and place before all other Bishops but this was onely by law humane because he was the Bishop of the Imperiall Citie but now hee is like a furious floud which ouerfloweth the bankes he will be no more confined with bounds and limits hee chalengeth a generallity of iurisdiction ouer the Christian world and that by law diuine PHIL. I Will proue That he is the fountaine of al spirituall iurisdiction by law diuine for Saint Peter was so and the Pope succeeded him in this right ORTHOD. There is more required to inferre this conclusion then al the Seminaries Iesuites in the world are able to performe but first how proue you that Peter was inuested in this right by law diuine PHIL. The Scripture is full of testimonies declaring both his lawfull authority and his due execution thereof his authority might appeare by many arguments but I will make choice of two which proue the point in question most directly the promise of the keyes the coÌ„mission of feeding the sheep To begin with the first Christ said to Peter I wil giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen Christ gaue him not one keye only but 2. the key of knowledge the key of power by the key of knowledge he was able to open all Scriptures controuersies of religion The key of power is of order or of iurisdiction by the key of order he was able to ordaine Bishops and Pastours of the Church and againe to lock them out of the ministery by deposing degrading as occasion required by the key of iurisdiction hee might open and shut
deliuering the incestuous Corinthian vnto Satan by which in the iudgement of Hilarie Hierome and Anselmus followed by Bellarmine Baronius and others both of your side and ours is meant Excommunication And though some doe take it for a miraculous operation whereby the offendours were committed for a time to Satan to be tormented bodily yet they doe not deny that the Corinthian was Excommunicated Let vs therefore see by what authoritie this was done I verely saith S. Paul as absent in body but present in spirit haue determined already as though I were present that hee that hath so done this deed in the Name of our Lord Iesus Christ you being gathered together and my Spirit with you with the power of the Lord Iesus Christ be deliuered vnto Satan c. He saith not the Spirit of S. Peter but my Spirit So your visible head had neither hand nor foote in this action S. Paul acknowledgeth neither subordination to him nor deriuation of authoritie from him And as he had Iurisdiction so had Timothy and Titus to receiue accusations to command them not to teach any other doctrine or if they did to stop their mouthes All which places are to be expounded of iudiciall proceeding in the Consistory and argue a Iurisdiction in Titus and Timothy which so farre as we can learne they receiued from S. Paul and not from S. Peter Wherefore we conclude that S. Peter was not the onely fountaine vnder Christ of Spirituall iurisdiction by Law diuine but the 12. Apostles were 12. fountaines all equally deriued from Christ Iesus the Fountaine of fountaines But if Peter had any such prerogatiue by Law diuine what is that to the Pope CHAP. III. Whether the Pope succeed S. Peter in all his right by Law diuine PHIL. THe Pope is the successour of S. Peter therefore what power soeuer belonged to S. Peter belongeth to the Pope ORTHOD. Was not S. Peter an Apostle can there be succession in the Apostleship PHIL. Doctour Stapleton teacheth that of the Apostleship there is no succession ORTH. Why then do the Popes so adorne themselues with Apostolicke titles his See apostolicke his Legat Apostolicke his pardon Apostolicke his seale Apostolicke his Bull Apostolicke and all Apostolicke yea his office is an Apostleship causes must be heard by his Apostleship weighty matters must be reserued to his Apostleship and Bishops must visite the thresholds of the Apostles vnlesse they be dispensed withall by the Apostles that is by the Pope Yea the Rhemists affirme That certes the roome and dignity of the Pope is a continuall Apostleship And of late the Pope had a title giuen of the first Euangelist and of the 13. Apostle as is related and approued by Baronius But we hope that God wil raise such Angels in our Church as he was in the Church of Ephesus of whom it is written That he had tried them who say they are apostles and are not and had found them liars But if the Pope doe not succeed S. Peter in the Apostleship how is he then his successour PHIL. Not in that he was an Apostle but in that hee was the ordinarie Pastour of the whole Church ORTHOD. If not as an Apostle then the Pope succeedeth him not in all his right But haue not other Apostles successours as well as Peter PHIL. No For their authoritie was extraordinary his ordinary whereupon it followeth That theirs was temporary and died with their persons his perpetuall and liueth with his successours ORTHOD. This you say oft but proue neuer For the clearing whereof we must consider that in the Apostles some things were extraordinary some things ordinary They had 4. extraordinary prerogatiues immediate vocation by Christ himselfe vnlimited Commission ouer all Nations infallible direction both in preaching and writing and power to worke Miracles All which were necessary for the first planting of Churches but were not conueyed to posteritie by succession Other things they had which were necessary for the Church in all future ages in which they had successours They had power to minister the word and Sacraments wherein euery Presbyter succeedeth them They ordained Ministers executed censures and other things belonging to the gouernment of the Church wherein euery Bishop succeedeth them So in the latter the rest haue successours as well as Peter In the former as the rest had no successours so neither had Peter PHIL. Yes the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the gouernment of the whole world ORTHO You dare not say that this power in Peter was extraordinary for then it could not go by succession if it were ordinarie in Peter why not in the rest seeing as hath beene proued Christ gaue as ample commission in as ample words to the rest as to Peter But if wee should faigne that Peter had such Monarchicall iurisdiction by what law shall the Pope succeed him in it PHIL. The succession of the Bishop of Rome into the Popedome of Peter is of Christs institution and therefore by Law diuine ORTHOD. Of Christs institution where or when if you alleadge these words feed my sheepe they were spoken onely to Peter yet so that the substance of the precept was not proper to him but common to all And if wee should imagine that Christ did institute a monarchy personally in Peter how commeth it to be locall This certainely cannot be Christs institution because he nameth no place PHIL. It was in Peters power neuer to haue chosen to himselfe any particular See but to haue continued as he did the first fiue yeeres And then after his death neither the Bishop of Rome nor the Bishop of Antioch had succeeded but hee whom the Church had chosen ORTHOD. Then you make it locall by Peters choise and not by Law diuine and if it be local is it tied to the Bishop of Rome by Law diuine PHIL. Was not Saint Peter Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. So men say but can you proue it by Law diuine PHIL. Will you deny a History so famously recorded by Eusebius and other ancient authors ORTH. Not I but now you ground vpon humane history and not vpon Law diuine And as the histories say that he was Bishop of Rome so they say he was Bishop of Antioch before he was Bishop of Rome PHIL. It was in his power to haue continued at Antioch and then without doubt the Bishop of Antioch had beene his successor but because he translated his chaire fixed it at Rome there died thence it comes to passe that the Bish. of Rome succeedeth him ORTH. If the succession depend vpon the fixing of Saint Peters chaire at Rome what shal be said of those Popes which kept at Auinion in France and neuer came at Rome Moreouer this is to build vpon the fact of Saint Peter and not vpon Law diuine PHIL. It is not improbable that the Lord did expresly commaund that Peter should so fix his seat
in the election of Conon wherefore if the people gaue Suffrages by subscription in those times wee neede not doubt that they gaue Suffrages in the time of S. Cyprian neither was it by the Popes permission For S. Cyprian maketh no mention of the Pope but declareth that almost in all Prouinces after the death of a Bishop the Bishops next adioyning did meet about an election in the citie of the Bishop deceased and so the election was performed in their presence by the Suffrages of the whole fraternitie that is both of the Clergie and like wise also of the people Wherefore that which you say concerning the Pope is but a voluntary speech without any ground And surely seeing God hath set downe no certaine rule nor precept in holy Scripture but left it as a thing indifferent it was most fit that in those primatiue times the people should haue a Suffrage for by this meanes it came to passe that they did not only more quietly receiue diligently heare and heartily loue but also more willingly and bountifully maintaine their Bishop wherefore their Suffrage was grounded vpon right and reason PHIL. The Church of God hath had dolefull experience of the tumults which arise from popular elections Euagrius declareth what vprores were at Alexandria about Proterius when the people beate the souldiers into the Church and destroyed a number of them with fier yea they slew Proterius in the Temple vpon Easter day drew his body along the citie hewed it in most miserable manner burned that which was left and scattered his ashes in the wind And Amianus reporteth that at the election of Damasus the people slew in the Church in one day 137. persons so that the holy places did flow with streames of Christian blood These are the fruites of popular elections CHAP. V. An answere to certaine obiections against the election of Bishops by Christian kings and Emperours out of the Councells and other authorities ORTH. IF popular elections bee so dangerous vnto whom should their ancient right rather be translated then vnto the Prince who by the law of God is their Soueraigne to rule them and the Father both of Church and Common wealth to prouide for their good PHIL. The Councell of Paris saith that if any man by ouermuch rashnesse presume to inuade the height of this honour by the Princes commandement let him in no wise be receiued by the Bishops ORTHO The meaning of the Councell appeareth by the words going before let not a Bishop be intruded by the Princes commandement nor by any other meanes against the consent of the Metropolitane and the Bishops of the Prouince so this Councell maketh nothing against our kings of England who vse most orderly lawfull and Canonicall proceeding neuer intruding any against the consent of the Metropolitane and comprouincialls PHIL. In the yere 566. there was a Councell holden at Santonia in France where d Emerius was deposed from his Bishopricke because hee was intruded by King Clotharius ORTHO He was put in contrary to the Canons For he had the decree of the King that he should be consecrated without the aduise of the Metropolitane so this is no paralel for our Princes PHIL. By the second Nicen Councel All elections of Bishops Priests and Deacons made by the Magistrates are voide And the ground of their assertion is that Canon of the Apostles If any obtaine a Church by secular powers let him be deposed and all that communicate with him ORTHO That Canon is to be expounded of secular powers excluding the Clergie or inuading the Church by force and violence and so the Councell tooke it neither did they vrge it any otherwise as may appeare plainely by the very title of their Canon Electiones Episcoporum quae vi Principum procedunt infirmari debent i. the elections of Bishops which proceed by the violence of Princes ought to be infringed PHIL. But you cannot so delude the 22. Canon of the eighth generall Councell being the fourth at Constantinople which is most pregnant to this purpose For there it was decreed That no Lay. Prince or Potentate should interpose themselues in the Election or promotion of a Patriarch Metropolitane or any Bishop especially seeing it is not conuenient that they should haue any power in such things but rather bee silent till the Election bee finished by the Ecclesiasticall Colledge ORTHOD. The 22. Canon is a counterfeit not found in the Greeke copies And the true Canons of the same Councell grounding vpon the Canons of the Apostles and ancient Councels doe iustifie my former answere in these wordes If any Bishop shall receiue the Consecration of Episcopall dignitie by the fraud and tyrannie of Princes let him be deposed Wherefore the intention of the ancient Councels was not to exclude Princes but onely to remooue fraude and compulsion that all things might be done according to the Canons That Hildebrandicall doctrine was not yet knowne to the world PHIL. Athanasius asketh where there is any such Canon that a Bishop should be sent out of a Palace ORTHOD. Athanasius speaketh of the proceedings of Constantius who so farre contemned all Canons that hee would haue had his owne will to bee for a Canon And whereas in those dayes Bishops vsed to be chosen by the consent of the people and Clergie openly created in the Church and ordained if it were possible by all the Bishops of the Prouince at least by three with the consent of the Metropolitane Constantius in stead of the Church would haue it done in his Palace In place of the people there were present three of his Eunuches and for the Bishops of the Prouince three which Athanasius calleth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Bishops but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is spies Thus was one Felix created a Bishop This sending of Bishops out of a Palace was against all Canons this Athanasius misliked neither can any man of wisdome speake well of it But such proceedings as are vsed in the Church of England shall be iustified as agreeable both to the Councels and stories of antiquitie PHIL. Valentinian when the Bishops would haue had him to elect a Bishop of Millan said It is a greater matter then is conuenient for vs but you being indued with diuine grace and shining with the brightnesse thereof shall make the election ORTHOD. The Bishops did shew their duety to their Prince and the Prince shewed his elemencie to his Subiects But what is this to your purpose There is no doubt but a Prince may if it please him relinquish his right for a time and he or his successours may resume it againe when it seemeth good to their Princely wisedomes For that this was anciently acknowledged to be the right of Christian Princes will appeare if we consider the election of Bishops in the Imperiall Cities of Rome and Constantinople as also in the Kingdomes of France and Spaine CHAP. VI.
Christian Princes that they should be nursing fathers of the Church therfore it must bee a part of their Princely care to prouide such nurses as shall feede it with the milke of the Gospel Thirdly in the new Testament Concerning the election of pastours we find neither precept nor any such example as can bee vrged for an euerlasting and vnchangeable rule And if wee look into the practise of the Church it will appeare that it hath bene disposed of in diuers ages in diuers maners according to diuers customes and positiue lawes of Princes growing out of the diuersitie of circumstances and occasions Wherefore it seemeth that the Lord hath left it as a thing indifferent to the discretion of the Church whereof the Christian Prince is not onely a part but Supreame gouernour vnder Christ in which respect though hee were not Patron he hath a transcendent and supereminent power so that the Soueraigne direction and moderation of the matter belongeth vnto him Which was acknowledged to be the kings right euen in the time of Popery as may appeare by the practise for after the death of any incumbent of any Church with cure if the Patron presented not within sixe monethes the Bishop of that Diocesse might bestow it to the end the cure should not bee destitute of a pastour if he neglected the time appointed the Metropolitane of that Diocesse might aduāce one to that Church if he also should leaue the Church destitute by the space limitted vnto him then it belonged to the king and not to the Bishop of Rome to prouide a competent pastour for that Church Thus it is euident that though Churches had Patrons to prouide Pastours for them according to the kings Lawes and Bishops and Archbishops to see it sufficiently done yet in case of neglect the care of it was deuolued to the King as being Supreme gouernour euen in these cases within his own Dominiōs If you say that this was by the grant of the Pope the contrary is manifest because in the 25. of Edward the 3. in the noble statute of prouisours the Bishop of Rome is said to vsurpe the Seignories of such possessions and benefices Wherefore the Lawes of the land and the ancient custome of the Kingdome concurring with the generall practise of Princes receiued with the applause of the whole Christian world doe sufficiently proclaime the right of our Princes in this behalfe especially seeing as K William Rufus truly said The king of England hath all the liberties in his Kingdome which the Emperour challenged in the Empire Hitherto of the right of Princes as they are Princes Now of their right as they are Patrons IN Patronages we may consider two things The causes and the effects The causes originally inducing the Church of God to approoue them were three First because Princes and Lords of the soile out of their deuotion and charitable bounty gaue some of their owne ground for the situation of Churches and the habitation of Ministers resigning their owne right into the hands of the Bishop of the Diocesse and so dedicating it euerlastingly to the Lord. Secondly because vpon that ground they built Churches for holy meetings and dwelling places for the messengers of the Lord. Thirdly because they allowed maintenance both for the Church and the Minister as is expressed in this verse Patronum faciunt dos edificatio fundus The effects of Patronage are three Honos Onus and Vtilitas The first is Honos honour of nominating and presenting a fit Clerke the honour of precedency in sitting in his owne Church and in some places to great personages the honour of Procession For example to the Duke of Venice in the Church of S. Marke The second is Onus a burden for in being a Patron hee vndertaketh the Protection of that Church The third is Vtilitas profit for if he or his children fall into pouerty they must be releeued out of the reuenues of the same Church An example whereof happened in a noble citizen of Perusia These prerogatiues of Patrons were all anciently approoued both by Ciuill and Canon Law But to passe ouer the rest I will onely single out the prerogatiue of presenting In the 9. Councell of Toledo holden in the yeere 655. it was decreed as followeth As long as the founders of Churches remaine aliue they shall bee suffered to haue the chiefe care in those places and they shall offer fit Rectours vnto the Bishop to be ordained in the same Churches And if the Bishop while the Founder liueth shall despise them and presume to ordaine Rectours in the same place Let him know that his Ordination shall be voide and to his shame others shall be ordained whom the Founders shall chuse And before that in the yeere 541. Iustinian made this Constitution That if any man will build an house of prayer and hee or his heires will haue Clerkes to be promoted therein if they allow maintenance for those Clerkes and name such as are worthy let those which are named be ordained Now to apply this to our present purpose It is a cleare case that all the Bishopricks in England were founded by the Kings Ancestours And therefore the Aduousons of them all belong to the King And it is cleare by the Lawes of the land That our Kings haue had and ought to haue the custodie of the same in the Vacancy and the presentments and collations of those Prelacies as Lords and Aduowes of all the lands and possessions that belong either to Cathedrall Churches or Bishops Vpon all these premises this conclusion followeth that this right we speake of belongeth to our Princes as Patrons by Ciuil Canon and the common Lawes of the land To these two former respects we may adde a third drawne from this consideration that our Bishops by the fauour of Princes are Spiritual Lords and Barons in Parliament and therefore it were very hard if men of so great power and place should be obtruded vpon the Prince without his consent Hitherto of the lawfull right of Princes ANd as they haue the collation of Bishopricks most lawfully so they conferre them most fitly most freely and most safely Most fitly because they haue largest scope to choose best meanes to discerne greatest power to procure and assist such as are most eminent for learning and vertue Most freely because they are farther from suspition of corruption then either people or Prelate For to vse the words of a reuerend Bishop Howsoeuer ambitious heads and couetous hands may lincke together vnder colour of commendation to deceiue and abuse Princes eares yet reason and duetie bindeth mee and all others to thinke and say that Princes persons are of all others farthest from taking money for any such respects In meaner persons more iustly may corruption be feared then in Princes who of all others haue least need and so least cause to set Churches to sale Their abundance their magnificence their
hoped That all such shall receiue singular comfort when they see our Calling iustified not onely in it selfe as the true Ministerie of the Gospel but also in regard of the deriuation to vs by such Bishops and in such maner as is most correspondent to the sacred Scripture and the practise of Primitiue Antiquitie And if any vpon this surmise bee fallen away to our aduersaries who knoweth what effect God may worke in them when they shall plainely perceiue how they haue bene deluded with Popish stratagemes Or who can tell whether this may bee a gracious meanes to stay others from yeelding to the inticements of subtill serpents Finally the defence of innocencie in a matter of so high a nature must needes reioyce the hearts of the godly when Popish polititians shall bee forced to hide their faces for shame and confusion These motiues induced mee to wish that some great Master in our Israel would haue vndertaken this eminent Argument which now the Diuine prouidence so disposing is befallen vnto me One of the children of the Prophets Which my labours concerning the Ordination of the Pastours of England to whom should I rather present then to your Grace whom God by the meanes of a most prudent and Religious Soueraigne hath to the singular comfort of all that sincerely loue the Gospel aduanced to bee the chiefe Pastour and chiefe Ordainer in the Church of England Especially seeing I proceeded in this Argument with your graces fatherly direction and incouragement Now the Lord so direct and sanctifie your endeuours That as the Rod of Aaron did bud and blossome and bring foorth ripe Almonds so the Church and Ministerie of England by the meanes of your Grace as of Gods blessed instrument may prosper flourish and bring foorth fruits of Righteousnesse to the glory of God and the comfort of all true Christian hearts Your Graces in all humble duetie at command FRANCIS MASON THE CONTENTS OF THE BOOKES FOLLOWING THE first booke containeth the entrance and diuision of the whole worke into three controuersies with their seuerall Questions as also the handling of the first Question whether three Canonicall Bishops be absolutely necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop The second is of the Consecrations of the Bishops of England from the first planting of Christianitie till the last yeere of Queene Marie The third is of the Bishops consecrated in the Reigne of Queene Elizabeth and of our Gracious soueraigne King Iames. The fourth intreateth of Episcopall Iurisdiction The fift is of the second and third controuersie concerning Priests and Deacons ¶ The particular Contents of the first Booke CHAP. 1. THe entrance wherein is described the proceeding of the Popish Priests in winning of Proselytes by praising Rome the Romane Religion the Popes loue the English Seminaries As also by dispraising the Vniuersities Church Religion and Ministery of England Pag. 1. CHAP. 2. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministery is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops The second of Presbyters The third of Deacons Pag. 8. CHAP. 3. Wherein they descend to the first branch concerning Episcopall Consecration whereupon arise two Questions The former whether three Bishops be required of absolute necessitie to the Consecration of a new Bishop the state whereof is explained out of Popish writers Pag. 14. CHAP. 4. Wherein the Popish Arguments drawne from the Canons of the Apostles and the decretall Epistles are proposed vrged and answered Pag. 21. CHAP. 5. Wherein their Argument drawne from the Councels is propounded vrged and answered Pag. 26. CHAP. 6. Wherein their Arguments pretended to be drawne from the Scripture are answered Pag. 30. CHAP. 7. That the presence of three Bishops is not required of absolute necessitie Pag. 34. ¶ The Contents of the second Booke CHAP. 1. WHerein they descend to the second Question whether the Consecrations of the Bishops of England be Canonicall Pag. 39. CHAP. 2. Of the first conuersion of this Land in the time of the Apostles Pag. 44. CHAP. 3. Of the second conuersion as some call it or rather of a new supply of Preachers and a further propagation of the Gospel in the time of K. Lucius and Pope Eleutherius Pag. 51. CHAP. 4. Of Austine the first Bishop of Canterbury sent hither by Pope Gregorie Pag. 56. CHAP. 5. Of the Bishops from Austin to Cranmer Pag. 61. CHAP. 6. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie Pag. 64. CHAP. 7. Of the abolishing of Papall Iurisdictions by K. H. 8. which the Papists iniuriously brand with imputation of Schisme Pag. 67. CHAP. 8. Whether to renounce the Pope be schisme heresie Pa. 74. CHAP. 9. Whether schisme heresie annihilate a Cōsecration Pa. 78. CHAP. 10. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Henry the eight after the abolishing of the Popes Iurisdiction Pag. 88. CHAP. 11. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Edward the sixt Pag. 91. CHAP. 12. Of the B. Cōsecrated in the dayes of Q. Mary Pag. 97. ¶ The Contents of the third Booke CHAP. 1. OF the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some antecedents and consequents of their depositions Pag. 99. CHAP. 2. The deposition of the Bishops iustified by the example of Salomon deposing Abiathar Pag. 106. CHAP. 3. Of the oath of the Princes Supremacy for denying whereof the old Bishops were depriued Pag. 113. CHAP. 4. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend Father Archbishop Parker Pag. 121. CHAP. 5. Of the rest of the Bishops Consecrated in the second and third yeere of Queene Elizabeth Pag. 132. CHAP. 6. A briefe view of all the Bishops of some of the principall Sees during the whole raigne of Queene Elizabeth Pag. 135. CHAP. 7. Of the Bishops in the Prouince of Canterbury Consecrated since our gracious Soueraigne K. Iames did come to the Crowne with a little touch concerning the Prouince of Yorke Pag. 138. CHAP. 8. The Episcopall line of the most reuerend Father in God George Lord Archbishop of Canterbury particularly declaring how he is Canonically descended from such Bishops as were Consecrated in the dayes of King Henry the eight which our aduersaries acknowledge to be Canonicall Pag. 140. ¶ The Contents of the fourth Booke CHAP. 1. WHence the Bishops of England receiue their Iurisdiction Pag. 143. CHAP. 2. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all spirituall Iurisdiction Pag. 147. CHAP. 3. Whether the Pope succeede Saint Peter in all his right by Law Diuine Pag. 155. CHAP. 4. Of the election of Bishops in the Primitiue Church before there were any Christian Princes Pag. 158. CHAP. 5. An answere to certaine obiections against the election of Bishops by Christian Kings and Emperours out of the
conscience that it is a continual tormenting to the soule and conscience PHIL. Howsoeuer you conceiue of our Religion you must giue mee leaue to tell you that it was deriued from God the Father reuealed by Iesus Christ inspired by the Spirit planted by the Apostles watered with the blood of Martyrs and confirmed by miracles being reuerend for antiquitie honourable for vniuersalitie certaine for succession amiable for order and admirable for vnitie ORTHOD. You brag of the Casket but the Iewels are gone For the faith of Rome was sometimes renowned through the world and commended by the voice of the Apostle himselfe But since those dayes Rome hath suffered many and great alterations For as in respect of her Ciuill estate she hath bene powred from vessell to vessell lost her language left her seuen mountaines to plant her selfe in campo Martio changed her face and her fashion and is so intombed in her owne ruines that Iustus Lipsuâ—s one of her louers cannot so much as trace the ancient tract of her walles euen so in respect of her state Ecclesiasticall one might now seeke old Rome in new Rome and not finde it She hath matched traditions with the written Word therein iniurious to the Wisdome of God she hath mingled mans merits with the Merits of Christ therein iniurious to the Grace of God She hath communicated diuine worship to stockes and stones therein iniurious to the glory of God Thus the garden is ouer-growne with weedes and the daughter of Ston is become the whore of Babylon Yet foâ— all this she vanteth herselfe as though she were a Virgine because she was sometimes a Virgin She painteth herselfe with counterfeit colours of Antiquitie Vniuersalitie Succession Vnitie and the like which are nothing else but a little Vernish that will vanish away PHIL. I hope you speake all this onely for disputation sake But howsoeuer for your better resolution I wish you would take betweene your hands the glasse of Experience You haue already had a triall of your English Vniuersities may it please you now to take a taste of our English Seminaries where I dare warrant you you shall receiue ample satisfaction of all your doubts And because I loue you I will vndertake that you shal be bountifully intertained in the English Colledge at Rome and euery vvay respected according to your vvorth But ô how our holy Father wil imbrace you with the armes of compassion and receiue you as the Doue into the Arke Such is his imcomparable loue to our English Nation ORTHOD. How well the Popes haue loued our Nation may appeare by Pope Innocent the fourth who called England his garden of delights And who would not loue such a garden Hee called it also a Well neuer drawne dry And doth not such a Well deserue to be wel loued Now the fruit of his tender affection towards it was witnessed by these his owne words Vbi multa abundant multa extorqueri possunt Where many things abound many things may be extorted The Poets feigne that the riuer Arethusa being swallowed vp in the ground runneth through the Sea and riseth againe in Sicilie but without all feigning from England as from a Well did spring golden Riuers which being suddenly swallowed vp did runne through the Sea and rise againe at Rome in the Popes Exchequer And vvho so readeth the Chronicles of our Kingdome vvritten by Matthew Paris and Thomas Walsingham shall find that the Popes loued our Siluer and our Gold This vvas their loue to the English Nation PHIL. You make mountaines of molehilles for the Popes receipts out of England vvere but as a Gnat to an Elephant and such as his Holines little regarded but onely as tokens of loue to holy Mother Church ORTHOD. Bishop Bonner may teach you That the Popes yeerely pâ—ay out of England did almost equall the reuenues of the Crowne And verily if this had not bene preuented though England had bene an Ocean it would haue bene drawne drie Such Elephants you swallow and yet you count them gnats PHIL. You mistake the matter Hee loueth not your siluer but your soules for since he reaped one penie out of England he hath imployed many thousand crownes in founding and maintaining two English Colledges So pure is his loue to the English Nation ORTHOD. Your English Seminaries were founded if the turning of an Hospitall into a Colledge may be called founding by Gregory the thirteenth But to what end sent he those souldiers mentioned by Genebrard and Campana into Ireland Was it not to assist the Rebels against their soueraigne Lady Queene Elizabeth So pure was his loue to the English Nation PHIL. The loue of his Holinesse is most plainly demonstrated in those noble foundations where wee haue more disputations lessons conferences examinations repetitions instructions catechisings resolutions of cases both of conscience and controuersie methods and maners to proceed to the conuersion of the deceiued and such like exercises in our two Colledges then are in your two Vniuersities containing about thirtie goodly Colledges As for the Masters and Professours of our Colledges specially the Romane Readers we may be bold to say they be in all kind the most choise and cunning men of Christendome Now for that part of education which appertaineth to Christian life and maners our chiefe indeuour is to breed in our Schollers deuotion which is done by diuers spirituall exercises and dayly examinations of their consciences often receiuing the blessed Sacrament much praying continuall hearing and meditation of holy things So by these meanes a number of the best wittes of England are here trained vp most happy in regard of their rare education ORTHOD. What reason you haue to compare your two Colledges with our two Vniuersities let wise men iudge You vaunt of your varietie of exercises God giue vs grace to glory in the simplicitie of his Trueth with the testimonie of a good conscience As for the exercises of our Vniuersities you might know if malice did not blinde you that they are famous throughout the Christian world and that these Campes of Christ haue from time to time trained vp Souldiers able to encounter the proudest Philistines Neither doubt we but they shall alwayes haue a Dauid to cut off the head of Golias with his owne sword Which wee rather hope because of that Treasurie of Learning and Languages lately erected I meane that renowned Library the honour of Oxford the Iewell of England the admiration of strangers and the Phaenix of the world O noble Bodley many Benefactours haue done worthily euen in this kind but thou surmountest them all Blessed is the stocke which brought foorth such a branch and blessed is the branch which yeelds so pleasant fruit Deuonshire was the mother Merton Colledge the nurse to this most gracious plant happie mother happie nurse happy plant Prosper O Lord O prosper thou his handy worke Let it be as an Armorie for defence of thy Church and as
perpetuall line of their Bishops and the lawfull succession of Pastors receiued from the Church for the honor whereof we vse to call the English Caluinists by a milder terme not hereticks but schismaticks Behold he confesseth we haue the Catholick order a perpetuall line of Bishops a lawfull succession of Pastors that deriued from the Church But withal I would haue you to know that though we receiued it froÌ„ the Church of Rome yet with a double difference For first Crâ—nmer and the rest receiued their Orders from Popish Bishops in a Popish manner that is defiled with many Popish pollutions but when it pleased God to open their eyes they pared away the pollutions and retayning onely that which was good deliuered it vnto posteritie So we succeed you in your Orders not simply but so far as they are agreeable to the Scripture for the man of â—in did â—it in the Temple of God and Antichrist had vsurped the chaire of Christ so that now in the Church of Rome good things and bad things were mingled together therefore in that which you receiued from Christ wee willinglie succeed you in that which you haue from Antichrist we renounce and disclaime you Secondly Cranmer and the rest receiued from you a shell of succession without the kernell of Doctrine For though your Church did giue men power to preach the truth yet being bewitched with Antichrist in many things it did not reueale the truth but when God by the Scriptures reuealed it vnto them they both preached it themselues and commended it to posterity Neither was this to leape out of the Church but out of the corruptions in the Church euen as the wheate kernel when it is clensed leapeth not out of the barne but out of the chaffe Moreouer though our Doctrine may seeme to you extraordinarie because it differeth from the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome yet as our calling and function so our Doctrine is the same which the spirit of God hath deliuered in holy Scripture to be ordinary in the Church till the end of the world and therefore you haue no reason to require any Miracles at our hands PHIL. These points shal be further skanned I warrant you In the meane time As Tigellius in Horace had nothing certaine and setled in all the course of his life but was alwaies distracted into contrary affections In respect of his pace some times he ran most swiftly as though hee had fled from his enemie some times hee mooued so slowly as though hee had carried the sacrifices of Iuno In respect of his traine he had many times two hundred attending him againe sometimes he had onely two And in his speech now he imitated Kings and Tetrarches and spake nothing but all bigge words an other time hee would stoope to very meane matters So that nothing was more vnlike and vnequall in the course of life then this poore wretch was to himselfe euen so your Dâ—ctors some times they creepe vpon the ground by and by they catch at the clouds and starres Now they refuse all miracles and â—nock at such at require them on a suddaine they challenge to themselues all the miracles since the beginning of the world ORTHOD. And herein they doe nothing but what may stand with reason For if you speake of our doctrine we professe and are readie to prooue that wee teach the same doctrine for substance which Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles both taught and confirmed by Miracles And in this sence all the Miracles of Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles are ours because they are so many seales and confirmations of that Doctrine which we teach But if the question bee concerning our persons then wee confesse that wee can worke no miracles wee take no such matter vpon vs neither is it necessarie because both our calling and doctrine are Ordinary PHIL. I will proue that you haue no lawfull ordinarie calling in the Church of England And first you challenge to your selues no other ministers but either Bishops or Priests or Deacons for other inferiour orders you haue none But neither your Bishops nor your Priestes nor your Deacons haue any lawfull ordinary calling For first to the ordinarie calling of a Bishop ordination or consecration is requisite by precedent Bishops hauing episcopal power of order and iurisdiction but your Bishops are descended from such progenitours as had neither of these no Episcopall power of Order because either they had no consecration at all or at least such as is not able to abide the touchstone no Episcopall iurisdiction because they are neither elected nor confirmed by our holy Father the successour of Peter to whom onely Christ gaue the Keyes and in them the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power Therefore your Bishops are no Bishops and consequently all ordinations deriued from them are mere nullities SEcondly your ordination of Priestes is most intollerable for according to holy Church this sacred action consisteth of two parts answerable to the two principal functions of Priesthood the former is garnished with these seemely ceremonies First of all the Bishop with all the Priestes present layeth his hands vpon the head of the person to be ordained then he inuesteth him in a sacred stoale so fitted and fashioned that it maketh a Crosse vpon his brest after this he anointeth his hands with holy oile and lastly he deliuereth him the Chalice with wine and the Paten with the hoast saying Accipe potestatem offerre sacrificium Deo Missasque celebraretam pro viuis quam pro defunctis in nomine domini that is take thou power to offer sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses as well for the quicke as for the dead in the name of the Lord. This is the first part of the ordination which graceth him with the principall function of Priesthood whereby he is made interpres mediator dei hominum That is an Interpreter and mediator of God and man Yea higher then a King happier then an Angell creator of his Creator This is that which maketh the holy Priesthood to be honoured because no King nor Emperor no Angel nor Archangel is able to do as we doe that is with pronouncing of a few words to make the body of Christ flesh blood and bone as it was borne of the Virgin Mary Moreouer after Masse the Bishop imposeth hands saying Accipe spirituâ—â— sanctum quorum peccata remiseris remituntur cis quorum retinueris retenta sunt that is Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes thou forgiuest they are forgiuen them and whose thou retainest they are retained This is the second part wherein hee receiueth the second function of Priesthood that is the power of absolution Such are the rites of holy Church wherein you are notoriously defectiue To passe ouer with silence your contempt of the sacred ceremonies of Crossing and anointing which are but accidentall you want the very essentiall
labours to the grace of God which imposition of hands the ancient writers terme Ordination vsing the word largely and improperly But if we should imagine that he was properly ordained what can be collected thereupon PHIL. THat this should be a paterne to all posteritie as appeareth by the authorities before alleadged and consequently that a Bishop should not be ordained by fewer then three ORTHOD. There may be a faire patterne and yet posteritie may sometimes want meanes to imitate that patterne When the number may be had we greatly commend it when it cannot then both this and all other Ecclesiasticall Constitutions must yeeld to necessitie PHIL. The contrary is manifest by the words of Anâ—cletus A Petro Iacobo Iohanne Apostolis est ordinatus successoribus dantibus formam eorum vt non minus quam à tribus Episcopis reliquisque omnibus assensum praebentibus vllatenus ordinetur Episcopus Wherefore a Bishop must not be ordained Vllatenus by any meanes or in any respect by fewer then three and consequently not in case of necessitie Is not this to make the number of three a substantiall point of Episcopall Ordination ORTHOD. The same word in effect is vsed about the Consecration of an Archbishop Archiepiscopus ab omnibus suae Prouinciae Episcopis ordinetur hoc autem nullatenus liceat immutare That is Let an Archbishop be ordained of all the Bishops of his Prouince and let it by no meanes be lawfull to change this Where this word Nullatenus doeth not proue that the consent of all is substantiall as is confessed by Cardinall Turrecremata PHIL. You must marke what followeth Sin aliter praesumptum fuerit viribus carere non dubium est quia irrita erit secus acta ordinatio i. If the action shal be otherwise done through presumption there is no doubt but it wanteth validitie because the Ordination otherwise performed shal be voyd ORTHOD. It shal be void but how Quoad officij executionem saith the Glosse i. According to the execution of the Office Whereupon Hugo saith Episcopus tamen erit licet ab omnibus non consecretur sed repelletur ab Officio Episcopali nisi dispensetur cum illo i. Yet he shal be a Bishop although he be not Consecrated of all but he shal be repelled for his presumption from the Episcopal Office vnlesse he be dispensed withall Wherefore in the iudgment of Hugo the Ordination is not void in respect of the power but the Church may make it void in respect of the execution and yet vpon his repentance he may be admitted to the execution not by a new ordination but by dispensation which proueth that the transgression was not substantial but accidental PHIL. Damasus saith It is apparant to all men that they are no Bishops which are ordained of fewer then three because it is forbidden by the holy Fathers that they which are ordained of one or two Bishops should not so much as be named Bishops If they haue not the name how shall they haue the office Wherefore whatsoeuer they shall doe amongst Bishops Necesse est vt irritum fiat i. It must needes bee voide Quia quod non habent dare non possunt i. because they cannot giue that which they haue not ORTHO Your owne Cardinall shall answere you Wheresoeuer saith hee it can bee found that an ordination is voide and of no validitie because it is performed by fewer then by three it is to be vnderstood Non quantum ad veritatem Sacramenti sed quantum ad executionem officij i. Not in respect of the trueth of the Sacrament but in respect of the execution of the office And truely there is no reason that he should inioy an honorable office in the Church which presumptuously breaketh the Lawes of the Church Therefore the Church may iustly repell them from execution but cannot take away their power which they haue in themselues and haue power to imprint in others Yet while they haue it without the Churches approbation they cannot giue it with the Churches approbation and while they stand in opposition the Church esteemeth the orders they giue as no orders yet are they true orders in the nature of the thing but the Church restraineth the execution of them as though they were none for order and discipline sake Yet as you heard before euen in case of presumption the Church may dispense vpon due consideration and consequently receiue into her bosome such as were ordained in Schisme and let them inioy both their orders and honours But when the defect springeth neither from schisme nor heresie from presumption nor singularitie but onely from vrgent necessitie there being no voluntary violation necessitie it selfe is a sufficient dispensation And this must be the meaning of Damasus or else â—f you vrge from his words an absolute nullity you wil make him condradict both the positions and practise of your owne Church as hereafter shal be declared CHAP. V. Wherein their Argument drawne from the Councels is propounded vrged and answered PHIL. THE contrary may be proued by the Councels and I hope as in all other Controuersies betweene vs and you so in this you shall be presently confounded by them I will beginne with that first famous generall Councell of Nice ORTHO Indeed a vaine Iesuite cryeth Concilia generalia mea sunt primum vltimum media that is All generall Councells are mine the first the last and the middle For tryall whereof let vs take a little viewe of this Nicen Councell wherein you so glory and first concerning that very Canon which you produce against vs as though we did transgresse it we may iustly say that the Church of England hath as well obserued it as euer did any Church vpon the face of the earth But the Church of Rome doth indeed transgresse it In which sometimes one Bishop alone doth consecrate a Bishop two Abbots supplying the place of the other two Bishops as Bellarmine confesseth Secondly according to the Nicen Canons the power to confirme Bishops belongeth to the Metropolitan of the prouince without whose approbation whosoeuer is ordeined a Bishop the Nicen Fathers account for no Bishop but the Church of Rome alloweth him whom the Pope alloweth though he be not allowed by his Metropolitan and disalloweth him whom the Pope disalloweth though he be lawfully allowed by his Metropolitan Thirdly the Nicen Canons forbidde that any Bishop should absolue them which are excommunicate by another Bishop But the Pope will open and shut bind and loose at his pleasure Fourthly the Nicen Canons appoint that old customes should bee kept and namely that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue the preheminence in Egypt Lybya and Pentapolis because such also is the custome of the Bishop of Rome and likewise that in Antioch and other Prouinces the Churches should inioy their dignities and prerogatiues Which words in all reason import that euery Metropolitan should haue preheminence
be made when the number was somewhat increased requireth three at the least and the consent of the rest So the Nicen Canon being made when the Church flourished as also the second at Arles the sixt at Carthage and the second at Brachar besides three present requireth the consent of the absent but the fourth Councell of Carthage contenteth it selfe with the present and maketh no mention at all of the absent wherein it agreeth with the Canon ascribed to the Apostles Whence commeth this variety surely the very consideration of time and persons may teach vs that they thought it a thing in it selfe indifferent to be disposed by the discretion of the Church in sundry maners as sundry occasions and occurrences did leade them This exposition runneth gently and all things doe sweetely agree but if wee followe your rigorous interpretation then your witnesses crosse and discredit one another For your Anacletus requireth three at the least so doe the Councels alledged but doe they require them of simple necessitie if it be so then hee is no Bishop which is ordained by fewer then by three But the Canons of the Apostles allow him for a Bishop which is Consecrated by two Againe the Nicen Fathers and others by you alledged require the consent of the absent which is not required by the fourth Councell of Carthage nor by the Canon ascribed to the Apostles By this it appeareth that reuerend antiquitie did iudge these things to bee onely matters of conueniencie and not of simple and absolute necessitie And being of this nature they are subiect to alteration in case of necessity Neither is this to despise the Commandements of the Church but to yeeld to the countermand of the great tyrant necessitie And this is confessed by your owne Writers concerning all ecclesiasticall constitutions Pope Gelasius saith Priscis pro sui reuerentia manentibus constitutis quae vbi nulla vel rerum vel temporum perurget necessitas regulariter conuenit custodire that is The ancient customes still remaining in force for the reuerence due vnto them it is conuenient regularly to obserue where no necessitie either of things or times doth greatly vrge to the contrary And Pope Leo vbi necessitas non est nullo modo sanctorum patrum instituta violentur that is The decrees of holy Fathers let them by no meanes be broken where there is no necessitie And againe omittendum esse inculpabile iudicandum quod intulit necessitas that which necessitie occasioned to be omitted is to bee omitted and to be iudged blamelesse And Pope Felix saith Aliter tractandam necessitatis rationem aliter voluntatis That a respect of necessitie is otherwise to bee handled then a respect of a voluntary minde Andradius affirmeth That humane lawes made vpon best councell and aduise are varied by the varietie of times and may be inuerted and changed by the necessities of men and so are dispensable whence it commeth so to passe that Saint Austin calleth humane lawes temporall because although they bee iust yet they may iustly bee changed according to the times I will conclude this point with the saying of Binius Pro temporum necessitate rigor Canonum relaxatur that is the rigour of the Canons is released according to the necessitie of the times CHAP. VI. Wherein their arguments pretended to bee drawne from the Scriptures are answered PHIL. THen to leaue the Canons I will prooue it by Scripture ORTH. By Scripture why did you not say it was a tradition PHIL. I saide so ORTH. And do not you define a tradition to bee the word of God vnwritten scripture to be the word of God writtē PHIL. Be it so what then ORTH. Then if it be Scripture it is no tradition if it be tradition it is no Scripture For it is not possible to be the word of God both written and not written PHIL. Though it bee a tradition and therefore not expresly written in Scripture yet it may be collected out of the Scripture ORTH. You change your selfe like a Cameleon into all colours but this will not holde For Bellarmine buildeth vp Babylon by pulling downe the stones of Sion he goeth about to proue the necessitie of traditions by the insufficiencie of Scripture and indeauours to proue the Scripture insufficient because there are many things in his opinion simply necessary to bee knowne and beleeued which cannot possibly bee collected or concluded out of the Scripture Whereby it is cleare that he calleth their traditions vnwritten because they are not at all in the written word neither directly nor by consequence But where doe you find it in Scripture PHIL. SAint Paul saith to Timothy Neglect not the grace that is in thee which Was giuen thee by prophecy per impositionem manuum Presbyterij that is by the imposition of hands of the Presbytery ORTHO This is the onely place which Bellarmine produceth and yet I thinke his conscience tolde him it is not very pregnant for his purpose for whereas his custome is to place Scriptures in the front of the battell and humane authorities after here hee placeth the Canons and Decretals in the front and the Scripture followeth after But let vs heare you dispute from this place PHIL. Thus I dispute Timothy was consecrated Bishop by imposition of hands of the Presbytery But this Presbytery was an assembly of Presbyters Therefore Timothy was consecrated by an assembly of Presbyters Now those Presbyters were not inferiour Priestes but Bishops as appeareth by Chrysostome Theophylact and Oecumenius therefore Timothy was consecrated by an assembly of Bishops But an assembly of Bishops must needes be three at the least Therefore Timothy was consecrated Bishop by three Bishops at the least Now this consecration of Timothy should bee a necessary and perpetuall patterne inuiolable and vnchangeable to all posterities Therefore all Bishops must of necessitie be consecrated by three Bishops at the least which was to be proued ORTHOD. S. Paul in this place exhorteth Timothy to be diligent in his Calling by three Arguments First because in his Ordination he had receiued Grace that is Not onely the gracious gift that he should be Pastour of the Church of Ephesus but also the graces of the Spirit to furnish him for the execution of that holy Calling Secondly because he was designed and pointed out to this Sacred function by the Spirit of Prophecie Thirdly because he was ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Presbyterie What this Presbyterie was I will not take vpon mee to decide and determine It shall be sufficient so farre to discouer the weakenesse of your Argument that it may appeare that you cannot hence conclude your purpose by any sound consequence For what thinke you did S. Paul meane by Presbyterie when hee exhorted Timothy not to neglect the Grace which was in him by the imposition of the hands of the Presbyterie PHIL. O then I know where you are You
Prophets or Bishops which aduanced Saul and Barnabas from the Presbyteral to the Episcopal office ORT. These are doting dreames not worth the answering For seeing the text faith only that there were in the Church which was at Antioch Prophets and Doctors among whom were Barnabas Simeon Lucius Manahen and Saul why should not we thinke Barnabas to be called a Prophet as well as Simeon Lucius and Manahen seeing hee is first named A point so cleere that it is confessed by Lorinus the Iesuite ascribing the titles of Prophets and Doctors as well to Saul and Barnabas as to the rest If these Prophets were Bishops as Turrian imagineth then it will follow that Barnabas was a Bishop before they laid hands vpon him And consequently that he was reordeined which is absurd Moreouer as it cannot bee proued that those three were Bishops so it is certaine that they did not ordaine Paul and Barnabas Bishops For Paul being an Apostle could not receiue any Episcopal grace from man as hath been declared Wherefore this imposition of hands was not to giue them any new power but as the text saith To set them apart for the worke wherevnto the Lord had called them which when they had fulfilled they sayled backe to Antioch whence they had beene commended to the grace of God It is not said they failed to Antioch where they were made Bishops or where they receiued Episcopall grace but whence they had beene commended with fasting and praier to the grace of God To which truth Suarez the Iesuite giueth testimonie affirming that this imposition of hands was onely precaâ—ory and denying that Saul or Barnabas were heere ordained either Priests or Bishops which seemeth also to bee the opinion of Aloysius de Leon and other late writers These are the onely examples which you produce out of the Scripture yet neither of them is pregnant for your purpose and if they were what then An example may not be vrged as an vnchangeable rule when the matter discouereth it selfe to be contingent and variable CHAP. VII That the presence of three Bishops is not required of absolute necessitie NOw that it is no substantiall point of absolute necessitie may be concluded out of your owne positions and practise For the declaration whereof first I demaund whether Episcopall consecration be a Sacrament or no PHIL. That Ordination is a Sacrament truely and properly is rightly defined by the Councel of Trent For there are three things onely required to a Sacrament as your selues confesse an externall signe a promise of grace and a commandement or diuine institution All which are found in ordination as our learned Cardinall hath proued out of the Scripture who hath also declared that those Scriptures whereby Catholickes doe prooue Ordination to bee a Sacrament are vnderstood of Episcopall Ordination Whereupon he affirmeth that if Episcopall Ordination bee not a Sacrament wee cannot proue euidently out of the Scriptures that Ordination is a Sacrament ORTHOD. If the word Sacrament bee taken somewhat largely for any externall signe instituted of God whereto is annexed a promise of grace then wee will grant with Saint Austine that Order may bee called a Sacrament but if it bee taken strictly for such a signe as is a seale of the righteousnesse of faith whereto is annexed a promise of the grace of Iustification and Remission of sinnes in which sense Baptisme and the Lords Supper are Sacraments then wee may not admit it for a Sacrament For in Baptisme and the Lords Supper the sauing grace of Iustification and Remission of sinnes is signified sealed and exhibited to the worthy receiuer but the grace giuen in Ordination is of another nature respecting not so much the good of the receiuer as of the flocke for which hee receiueth it For the Ministers of the Gospell are salt to season others candles to shine vnto others pipes and conduits to conueigh the water of life vnto others But did you not say that though three Bishops were ordinarily required to the Consecration of a Bishop yet the Pope might dispense with two of the three PHIL. I said so out of Cardinall Bellarmine and Binius ORTHOD. What authoritie hath the Pope to dispense in Sacraments PHIL. That may appeare by the Councell of Trent Moreouer the holy Synod declareth that this power hath alwayes beene in the Church that in the Dispensation of Sacraments it might appoint or change such things as it should iudge to bee most expedient for the profit of the receiuers or the reuerence of the Sacraments themselues according to the varietie of things times and places Salua illorum substantia so the substance of the Sacraments be preserued Whereby it appeareth that the Pope can dispense onely with circumstances and not with substance ORTHOD. Why then did the Church of Rome dispense with the Cuppe in the Communion Can you take away one halfe not diminishing the substance But to let this passe doe you not marke the conclusion which floweth from your premises If Episcopall Consecration bee a Sacrament and the Pope may not dispense with the Substance of a Sacrament and yet hee may dispense with two of the three Bishops required in a Consecration then it followeth that two of the three are not of the Substance of Consecration Secondly your owne present practise doeth proue the same For you professe that in your Church sometimes one Bishop alone assisted with two mitred Abbots doth performe it If this bee sufficient then three Bishops are not required of absolute necessitie Now let vs a little looke backe to former times and consider the iudgement of better ages I Will beginne with the fourth Councell of Carthage and the very place which you your selfe alleadged wherein are prescribed the offices to bee performed by the Bishops when one is to bee consecrated to wit how two should holde the Booke of the Gospels ouer his head one powre out the blessing that is pronounce the words whereby the spirituall power grace and blessing is giuen and all the rest touch his heade with their hands When one alone pronounceth the wordes thenone alone ordaineth For the wordes are confessed on all sides to bee the very essentiall forme of Ordination This is agreeable to the collection of your owne Cardinall Tenent librum c. Ergo videtur quod nihil agatur per illos Episcopos quod sit ad substantiam consecrationis pertinens Ergo eorum assistentia non pertinet ad substantiam consecrationis sed magis ad quandam solennitatem i. They hold the booke c. Therefore it seemeth that nothing is done by these two Bishops which is pertaining to the substance of Consecration Therefore their assistance doth not belong to the substance of the consecration but rather to a certaine solemnitie IN the yeere of our Lord 441. there was a Councell holden at Orenge in France where it was thus decreed Duo si presumpserint
ordinare Episcopum in nostris Prouincijs c. If two presume to ordaine a Bishop in our Prouinces it pleaseth vs to decree concerning those presumptuous persons that if it shall any where happen that two Bishops shall make a Bishop against his will the authors being condemned he which suffred violence shal be substituted in the Church of one of them if his life be answerable and that another neuerthelesse be ordeined in the place of the other being cast out If two shall make a Bishop with his consent then he also shall be condemned to the end that those things which were instituted by antiquitie may be obserued more warily Here are two Cases for the ordained was either vnwilling or willing If vnwilling he enioyed the Bishopprick because he was not consenting to the breach of the Canon If he were willing then he also was condemned put from the Bishopprick which was not for want of receiuing the Episcopall power for if two Bishops could confer it to one against his wil vndoubtedly they could giue it to one that was willing But the first is confessed by the Councell in that they allow him and giue him a Bishoppricke where he may exercise his Episcopall function therefore the latter was not then doubted of But though both had receiued alike power in their ordination yet the innocent was allowed the offender reiected for discipline sake PHIL. This Canon is chaffe ORTH. If Gratian meane this then hee hath fouly mangled it but that you may know that this is no chaffe you shall heare your owne famour Baronius Nobilus quidem c. Truely this is to be called a most noble Synod being adorned with a garland of most famous Prelates And againe Florebant quidem c. Truely the said Prouinces of France if any other coasts of the Christian world did flourish at this time with Bishops both most holy and most learned by whose painfull vigilancie the Ecclesiasticall Lawes remained in their strength And againe Tot igitur c. Therefore so many most famous Prelates made the Councel of Orenge famous and glorious in all things although it consisted of a small assemblie of Bishops And least a man should wonder at this rare commendation he rendreth his reason Porro vt tot insignes c. Moreouer that there should be found in the same Prouinces so many men notable for learning and godlinesse the cause may seeme to be the most famous Monasterie of Iusula Lerinensis the land next adioyning being a Seminary of most holy Bishops Which he further extolleth by the verses of Sydonius Apollinarius To Baronius we will adioyne Binius who vseth to gather stickes vnder Baronius his hedge Haec Synodus Clarissimorum c. This was a most noble Synod beautified with a crowne of most noble Prelates In it fifteene Bishops of the Prouince of Lyons Marbona meeting after their maner made 29 Canons concerning the lawes and discipline of the Church Wherefore by the iudgement of this most noble Synod it is apparant that he may be a Bishop which is Consecrated onely by two and therefore three are not required of absolute necessity Hitherto of the Councels Now let vs consider examples of antiquitie DIoscorus Patriarch of Alexandria was consecrated onely by two and yet was acknowledged to haue sufficient Episcopall power The former point is testified by the Bishops of Pontus in a Synodall Epistle Ordinationem suam adamnatis Episcopis hoc duobus accepit i. He receiued his ordination of Bishops condemned and that onely of two The latter may appeare by the Councell of Chalcedon in the Acts whereof he is vsually styled The most Reuerend Bishop of Alexandria yea that title is giuen him by Eusebius Bishop of Doryleum his accuser by the Emperour Theodosius and by the Councell it selfe in a Synodall Epistle And as they acknowledge him for a Bishop so they allow of Anatolius whom he did consecrate as may appeare by the words of Tharasius vttered in the seuenth generall Councell Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said what say you of Anatolius was he not a Prince of the fourth Synod Yet he was created Bishop by Dioscorus and that Eutyches being present therefore let vs also receiue the ordained of Hereticks in like maner as Anatolius was receiued Yea he was approued and receiued into Communion by Pope Leo the first approued in these words Leo Episcopus Anatolio Episcopo receiued into Communion in these words in qua Communionis integritate societatem tuae dilectionis amplectimur i. in which soundnesse of Communion we embrace the fellowship of your loue Now seeing Anatolius was acknowledged for a Bishop by a Pope and two generall Councels you must needes confesse that Dioscorus who ordained him was likewise a Bishop although hee were not consecrated by three NOw let vs crosse the Mediterranean Sea and passe from Alexandria to Rome And here what thinke you of Pelagius the first was not hee a true and lawfull Bishop PHIL. He is commended by Pope Adrian and generally put into the Catalogue ORTHO But Pope Pelagius was not consecrated by three as appeareth by Anastasius whose wordes are registred both by Baronius and Binius Et dum non essent Episcopi qui cum ordinarent inuenti sunt duo Episcopi Iohannes de perusio Bonus de ferentino Andreas presbyter de Ostia eum ordinauerunt Episcopum Vpon which place Binius saith When Pelagius had approued the fift Synod he so greatly offended all the Westerne Bishops that he could not find sufficient Prelates of which he might be ordained according to the Apostolicall constitution and so it was necessary that at the Command of Pelagius a Priest of Ostia which had neuer happened before should performe the office in stead of a Bishop Heere is a cleare confession that a Bishop of Rome in case of necessitie was consecrated only by two Bishops and a Priest And yet it appeareth by the same place of Anastasius that he ordained in his time 26. Priests and 49. Bishops Now if three Bishops be required of absolute necessitie then there was a nullity in his Consecration and consequently in all the Consecrations deriued from him and so there will follow a world of nullities in the Church of Rome or if there be no nullitie in his Consecration then you cannot conclude a nullitie for the want of three HItherto of three Now I will proue that two are not required of absolute necessitie For Euagrius Patriarch of Antioch was ordained by Paulinus alone and yet was allowed for a lawfull Bishop PHIL. I doubt of both branches how proue you the first ORTHOD. Paulinus alone saith Theodoret transgressing many Lawes had created him For the Canons doe not permit one to chuse his successour they command that all the Bishops of the Prouince should be assembled they forbid any man to be created vnlesse three
Land in the time of the Apostles PHIL. OVr Countrie of great Brittaine hath beene three times conuerted to Christianitie by three Bishops of Rome First by Saint Peter Secondly by Eleutherius Thirdlie by Pope Gregory Saint Peter came hither in person Eleutherius and Gregorie by their Legates ORTHOD. The first conuersion may bee considered in generall or in particular In generall it is most cleare that our countrey receiued very anciently the Christian faith Theodoret saith Neither the Aethiopians which border vpon the Egyptian Thebes nor many other nations of the Ismaelites not the Lazi not the Sammi not the Auasgi not many other barbarians hauing yeelded themselues to the dominion of the Romans doe vse in their trafficke any of the Roman Lawes but these our fishermen and Publicans and this our tent maker haue brought the Euangelicall law vpon all nations neither haue they induced the Romans onely and those which liue vnder the Roman Empire but the Scythians Sauromatae also the Indians Persians Seres Hyrcans Britans Cymmery Germans and to speake in one word all kinde of men and all nations to receiue the lawes of Christ crucified not vsing any armour not an infinite number of chosen souldiours not the violence of Persian crueltie but the perswasion of wordes setting before them the commoditie of the Lawes which they preached Thus farre Theodoret. And before him Saint Hierome France and the Brittaines and Affricke and Persia and the East and India and all Barbarous nations adore one Christ and obserue one rule of trueth And before him Saint Chrysostome Whithersoeuer thou shalt goe to the Indians to the Moores to the Brittaines to the Spaniards yea to the furthest end of the world thou shalt finde in the beginning was the word and the word was with God c. And before Chrysostome Athanasius To which Fathers of the Nicen Councell all Churches euery where haue giuen their consent in Spaine Britaine France c. And before Athanasius Tertullian the places of the Britanes whereunto the Romans could not haue accesse are subiect vnto Christ. And before Tertullian Origen When did the land of Britaine consent to the Religion of one God before the comming of Christ when did the land of the Moores when did the whole world at once but now the whole earth prayeth to the Lord of Israel with ioy because of the Churches which are in the vtmost cost of the world To these agreeth that which Polydor Virgil bringeth out of Gyldas the most ancient Writer of our nation That Britaine receiued the faith ab initio orti Euangelij from the first springing of the Gospell So at the very dawning of the day to them that were in darkenesse and in the shadowe of death the euerlasting light appeared and the Sunne of righteousnesse did shine vpon them The barren wildernesse of Britaine became a fruitfull garden and was graciously watered with the dew of heauen Thus it was in part fulfilled which was foretold by the Psalmist I will giue thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the vttermost parts of the earth for thy possession HItherto in generall Now in particular who were the first golden pipes and Conduits to conueigh the water of life vnto them is not so certaine PHIL. Some thinke it to be Saint Peter some Saint Paul some Simon Zelotes some Aristobulus some Ioseph of Arimathea But the best opinion is that it was Saint Peter which father Parsons hath prooued by sundry authorities First by Simeon Metaphrastes ORTHODOX This authoritie deserueth small credit as you may learne of Baronius in these speeches If any credit bee to bee giuen to Metaphrastes And againe In many other things by him set downe it is certaine that he erreth PHIL. This matter seemeth to bee somewhat confirmed by that which Innocentius the first Bishop of Rome hath left written aboue a thousand and two hundred yeeres agoe saying That the first Churches of Italy France Spaine Africa Sicilia and the Ilands that lye betwixt them were founded by Saint Peter or his schollers or successors ORTHOD. Parsons proposeth this very faintly not daring to say it is but it seemeth to bee neither seemeth to bee confirmed but seemeth to bee somewhat confirmed and yet this somewhat is neuer a whit for Innocent saith not that these Churches were all founded by Saint Peter but by Saint Peter or his schollers and successors Neither doth it appeare that hee speaketh of Britaine either expresly or by consequence for though it bee an Iland yet it lyeth neither betweene Italy and France nor Italy and Spaine nor Italy and Africk nor betweene France and Spaine nor France and Africk nor betweene Spaine Africk neither is it neere to Sicily What then is the meaning of Innocent hauing named on the one side of the Mediterranean sea Italy France and Spaine and on the other side Africk hee addeth Sicily and the Ilands that lye betweene them as though hee should haue saide Sicily and the other Ilands in the Mediterranean sea howsoeuer the scituation will not suffer vs to vnderstand it of Britaine PHIL. Gulielmus Eysengrenius in his first Centurie or hundred yeeres doth write also that the first Christian Churches of England were founded by Saint Peter vnder Nero. ORTH. Eysengrenius a man liuing in our owne age for he wrote Anno. â—566 cannot bee of great authoritie especially in a matter of antiquitie and yet hee is of lesse because hee leaneth on such rotten reedes as Metaphrastes saying Metaphrastes affirmeth that many Churches were built by Peter the standard bearer of the Apostles through Britaine PHIL. To this founding of Churches in England by Saint Peter it may bee thought that Gildas had relation when expostulating with the Britaine Priestes of his time for their wickednesse for which the wrath of God brought in the English Saxons vpon them hee obiecteth among other things Quod sedem Petri apostoli inuerecundis pedibus vsurpassent That they had vsurped the seate of Saint Peter with vnshame fast feete meaning thereby either the whole Church of Britanie first founded by him or some particular place of deuotion or Church which hee had erected ORTH. Neither is Parsons peremptory in this point For he saith not it is to be thought but it may be thought wherefore in his owne iudgement it is not a consequence of necessitie but a collection of probabilitie and to any indifferent man it will not appeare so much as probable if hee ponder the place of Gildas Sedem Petri Apostoli inuerecundis pedibus vsurpantes sed merito capiditatis in Iudae traditoris pestilentem Cathedram decidentes they occupy the seate of Peter with vnshame fast feete but by the desert of their couetousnesse they fall into the pestilent chaire of the traitour Iudas If the chaire of Iudas doe not argue that Iudas was in England why should the seate of Peter argue that Peter was in England And the
Gospel And here for our direction we will follow the conduct of a starre I meane of Gildas who for antiquitie is the most ancient Historian of our Nation For his wisdome was surnamed Sapiens and for his deuotion and eloquence may well be termed The zealous and Golden mouthed Gildas This Gildas declareth how these frozen Ilands farre remote from the visible Sunne receiued the glittering beames of Christ Iesus the inuisible Sunne in the time of Tiberius Caesar. Which point is the more remarkable because he professeth in the same place That hee pronounceth it vpon sure grounds and certaine knowledge Now Tiberius died in the yeere of Christ 39. according to Baronius Whereupon it followeth That Britaine receiued the Gospel fiue yeeres at least before either Paul or Peter came to Rome By which it is manifest that the first conuerters of our Nation did not come from Rome PHIL. If they did not come from Rome yet preached they the Romane faith of which S. Paul had written to the Romanes themselues before the going of S. Ioseph into Britaine Fides vestra annuntiatur in vniuerso mundo i Your faith is preached and diuulged throughout the whole world Signifying that the Christian faith planted in Rome by S. Peter was deriued already for a platforme into all other parts of the world round about ORTHOD. Whosoeuer they were or whence soeuer blessed be the Name of God who vouchsafed euen in the morning of the Gospel gratiously to remember vs and to display vnto vs the riches of his mercie in Christ Iesus Now whereas you say they preached the Romane faith Bee it so The Romane yet not yours but the very same which is professed this day in the Church of England Let the present doctrine of Rome bee made conformable to that which Saint Paul deliuered to the Romanes and wee will embrace with you the Roman faith Hitherto of the first conuersion Now let vs come to the second CHAP. III. Of the second Conuersion as some call it or rather of a new supply of Preachers and a further propagation of the Gospell in the time of King Lucius and Pope Eleutherius PHIL. NOw do follow two other more famous and publike conuersions of the said Island vnder two renowned Popes of Rome and by their speciall industry which are acknowledged and registred by the whole Christian world and do so much presse the spleene and moue the gall of our Rome-biters as they leaue no corner of their wits vnsisted to discredit or reiect the same The former of them was vnder Pope Eleutherius and King Lucius ORTHO This is not to be called a conuersion of the Island but rather a new supply of Preachers and further propagation of the Gospell For Iohn Capgraue who is commended by Parsons for a learned man relateth that Eluanus who was brought vp at Glastenbury had dispersed through the wide fields of Britaine those first seeds of the Gospell sowen by Ioseph It is also recorded in your Martyrologe which vsed to bee read in your Churches that Lucius neuer carried himselfe as an enemy to Christian religion but shewed himselfe fauourable in respect of their miracles and integrity of life and that he had imbraced the Christian religion sooner if hee had not seene Christians reproched by the Pagans as infamous persons and despitefully handled by the Romans that were in authority But afterward vnderstanding by the Emperours Ambassadours that some Senatours were become Christians and amongst other Pertinax and Trebellius yea and that Marcus Aurelius the Emperour hauing gotten a victory by the praiers of the Christians had vsed them kindly hee sent an Ambassage to Eleutherius Bishop of Rome by Eluanus and Meduinus Brittans intreating Eleutherius by them that hee would open a passage by himselfe and his Ministers for the fostering and cherishing of Christian religion in Brittaine Iohn Capgraue reporteth that Eleutherius made Eluanus Bishop of Brittaine and Meduinus a Doctour to preach the faith of Christ through the whole Island Which sheweth that when they were sent Ambassadours to Eleutherius they were no nouices but profound Diuines and practised teachers in the schoole of Christ as they are tearmed by one of your owne Historians Thus it appeareth that there were learned Preachers who had sowen the seed of the Gospell through the whole Island and Christians famous for miracles euen at the time of Eleutherius his sending PHIL. PEraduenture some priuate Christians but neither the King nor any induced by the Kings authority For it is manifest by Saint Bede that the King wrote to Eleutherius desiring that by his commandement he might bee made a Christian whereby it is plaine that as yet hee was not made a Christian. ORTH. In that he wrote this Epistle to this purpose you may see the motion proceeded from his owne brest and not from Eleutherius he was already made a Christian by the baptisme of the spirit and therefore was desirous to be made a Christian by the baptisme of water Hee had already entred himselfe into the schoole of Christ and sought meanes that his whole kingdome might follow after Which argueth that his soule was sanctified and seasoned with grace Serenauerant enim eius mentem sanctorum miracula the miracles of the Saints had cleared his minde PHIL. VVHat moued the King to send to Rome when there were Bishops in France and other places nearer then Rome ORTHO First the Church of Rome beeing in the Imperiall City planted by two so great Apostles Peter and Paul and flourishing with store of excellent men was most famous and likely to furnish them Secondly the Romans before this time had spred their golden Eagle ouer a great part of the Island The Emperor Hadrian as Aelius Spartianus reporteth had made a wall fourescore miles long Antoninus Pius as Iulius Capitolinus declareth had made another to diuide the Romans from the Brittans and all that liued within this wall were tributary to the Romans of which number King Lucius is said to bee whose father was brought vp at Rome intertained friendship with the Romans and pâ—ide them tribute In which respects as also for the great intercourse betweene Rome and Brittaine King Lucius had oportunitie to send and might conceiue great hope to preuaile Thirdly it is not vnlâ—â—elie that the Ambassadours which informed him how some of the Senators were become Christians might bee themselues Christians and perswaders of him both to become a Christian and to send to Rome for Preachers PHIL. You haue omitted the principall reason for seeing there was not at that time any face or fashion of a Church in Brittaine to whom should hee seeke for planting of religion and erecting of Bishoprickes but onelie to the Bishop of Rome the fountaine and fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall authoritie A particular Bishop hath iurisdiction onelie ouer his owne Dâ—oces an Arch-bishop onelie ouer his owne Prouince a Patriarch is likewise
confined and circumscribed with in his boundes and limits But the authority of the Bishop of Rome is like vnto the Ocean inuironing the earth or to the highest heauens incompassing all therefore in such cases wee must haue recourse to the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. To whom had Frumentius recourse for the conuerting of India The Story whereof is this A Tyrian Philosopher arriuing in India was slaine by the Barbarians with all his company except two little children which were gone out of the shippe and were learning their lessons vnder a tree These children were brought vp by the King and aduanced by him one of them that is Adesius beeing made his Steward the other that is Frumentius his Secretary Afterward the King dying and leauing his sonne in his nonage the Queene intreated them both but especially Frumentius to assist her in the Gouernement of the kingdome While Frumentius was in this authority hee inquired among the Romane Merchants for Christians hee shewed them all fauour and countenance and admonished them to haue their assembles for praier and the seruice of God When the King came to age they deliuered him the kingdome and departed Adesius to Tyre Frumentius to Alexandria where hee went to Athanaesius and told him what was done intreating him to send some worthy Bishop to those multitudes of Christians and to those Churches which were built in that barbarous place Then Athanasius calling an assembly of Priests said Where shall we finde such a man in whom is the spirit of God to performe these things so hee made Frumentius Bp. sent him into India and the Lord blessed his labours signes and wonders were wrought by him and an infinite company of those barbarous people were conuetted to the faith This Story is recorded by Ruffinus who liued at the same time not out of the rumors of the people but by the relation of Adesius himselfe the companion of Frumentius who was afterward a Priest of Tyre And Socrates Theodoret and Sozomen doe all borrow the same from Ruffinus Thus Athanasius sent a Bishop to conuert India without consulting with the Bishop of Rome which verely he would haue done if hee had thought it necessary But the Pope then did challenge no such thing neither did that age ascribe it to him Wherefore the Kings sending to Eleutherius was not of necessity but because it stood most with his conueniencie PHIL. You are vnthankefull and vnwilling to acknowledge your obligation to Rome ORTHOD. We confesse a singular blessing from thence deriued vnto vs. For Eleâ—therâ—us sent Fugatius and Danatianus otherwise called Damianus by whom ioyning with Eluanus and Meduinus Christian Religion was aduanced Then King Lucius was baptised and many of his people Then the Druides were remoued and in their roomes christian Preachers placed Then the Temples which had beene founded to the honour of their many Gods were dedicated to the one and onely true God thus Idolatry was dispoiled of her pray and Dagon did fall downe before the Arke of Israel For the better vnderstanding whereof it must be obserued that the Romanes before this time had diuided Britaine into three Prouinces one of them was called Maxima Caesariensis the Metropolis wherof was Yorke Another Britannia prima the Metropolis wherof was London the third Britannia secunda the Metropolis wherof was Caerlegion Now in other cities they had their Flamines In these three noble Cities were the seates of the Arch flamines so there were 28. Flamines and three Archiflamines in stead of which so many Bishops Arch-bishops were appointed This is denied by Gultelmus Paruus but Lelandus confuteth him first by Asserius Meneuensis who was schoolemaster to King Alfred secondly by Geraldus in Dialogo Syluestri thirdly by Ptolomeus Lucensis who saith in the life of Eleutherius that the three Protoflamines of Britaine were conuerted into so many Archbishops Concerning their seates Lelandus addeth London of the Trinobantes and Yorke of the Brigantes did vndoubtedly shine with this dignitie therefore where is the third seate where but in Wales in which point though I hold my peace Trithemius is an euident witnesse Hitherto Lelandus Now although Britaine was after the Nicen Councell diuided into fiue Prouinces Valentia and Flauia Caesariensis being added to the former yet there were no new Archbishoprickes erected The reason whereof was because those two new Prouinces were taken out of the former and consequently could not haue Bishoprickes without the diminishing of the authoritie of the former in whose iurisdiction originally they were which was not sufferable because it was against the Canon of the Nicen Councell decreeing that in Antioch and in other Prouinces the dignities prerogatiues and authorities of Churches should be maintained PHIL. Were not all these Bishoprickes erected or at least confirmed by the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. When the King desired to receiue from him the Romane Lawes hee returned this answere That there were already in Britaine the olde and new Testament out of which by the Councell of his kingdome hee might take a Law to gouerne his people For he was the Vicar of Christ in his owne Kingdome And as hee did not interpose himselfe in matters temporall so neither doth it appeare that hee did in matters spirituall or ecclesiasticall Hee sent not one Preacher into Britaine before hee was entreated by the King Neither doe wee finde that hee assumed to himselfe any authoritie in erecting of Bishoprickes Neither did that age ascribe it vnto him as may appeare by the former example of Athanasius but it seemeth that the King being supreme Gouernour euen in religious causes within his owne Kingdome and assisted by learned Preachers established such gouernment and in such places as was most conuenient Yet make we no doubt but Eleutherius both gaue them instructions what hee thought fittest to be done if the Lord should blesse their labours and likewise approued it with ioy of heart when hee heard it was done not by vertue of any iurisdiction but out of a Christian deuotion Their diuersitie of ceremonies and their reiecting of Austin may induce vs to think that they had neuer beene vnder the Romane Patriarch And it is most likely that as the Churches of Cyprus had a gouernment within themselues exempt from the Iurisdiction of all others so the Churches of Britaine a little world without the world might bee gouerned by Primates of their owne and exempt from all forraine Iurisdiction PHIL. DId not the Bishop of Rome deliuer them from Arianisme and Pelagianisme ORTHO If it were so yet this would not argue any Papall Iurisdiction but onely Christian compassion But indeed it was not so We read in Bede that the land was infected with these heresies That Rome did recouer it we reade not He telleth how that at the request of the Britaines the French met in a Synod and sent Germanus and Lupus two reuerend Bishops by whose
or Saxons but in particular were of three nations English Saxons and Iutes Now to passe ouer the rest the Iutes which florished in the kingdome of Kent first receiued the water of life from Austin from whom also the golden streames were deriued vnto the Saxons ORTHOD. We acknowledge to Gods glory that he and his conuerted thousands yet dare we not say that they laid the first foundation in Kent For in Canterbury the regall citie euen when Austin arriued there was a Christian Church built in the time of the Romanes dedicâ—ed to the memorie of Saint Martin whither Berta the Queene descended from the blood royall of France with Lethardus a Bishoppe her Chaplaine vsually resorted to diuine seruice So it is most likely that Lethardus the french man had laid some stones in the foundation before the comming of Austin Therefore if he that first layeth the foundation of Religion in a kingdome bee called an Apostle then Austin was not the Apostle of Kent but rather Lethardus Notwithstanding for as much as Lethardus gathered but a few clusters and the maine vintage was reserued for Austin let vs inlarge the signification of the word Apostle and extend it to Austin and moreouer though improperly to Gregory and Eleutherius and I wish your Romanists would imitate these Apostles Eleutherius did not obtrude any vpon the kingdome but onely sent at the Kings request Austine comming from Gregorie did not steale in secretly but stayed in the Iland of Tennet till such time as hee knewe the Kings will and pleasure neither offered hee to Preach in Kent before the King gaue him and his fellowes licence They came not in disguised they lurked not in corners they brought no Bulles in their bosomes to discharge subiects or depose Princes But their proceedings towards the Prince were Christian honest and orderly They came to plant the faith of Christ you come to supplant it They to preach obedience you to teach rebellion Their Gospell was a Gospel of peace You arme the subiect against his Soueraigne They conuerted people You peruert them They sought to build the Church You seeke the ruine of Church and common wealth And I heartily wish you which are the Popes Emissaries to consider euen vpon your beds what great difference there is betweene you and Austin PHIL. I marueile to heare you so commend S. Austin and to propose him for a patterne It is the custome of your men to detract from him and to blemish his credit ORTHO Concerning patternes we are taught by S. Paul Follow me as I doe follow Christ. That which is good in Austin wee embrace and commend wishing to be decked with those garlands but that which is otherwise let it wither in the roote from whence it sprang His desire to conuert the Pagans and his duetifull respect to the Prince deserue to be written in letters of gold but his superfluitie of Ceremonies might well haue bene spared He was too forward to display the Popes banner and his behauiour towards the Britaines was full of pride and disdaine PHIL. I Thought for all your faire speeches you would come to this at last but you doe not well to reproch so great a Saint by whom your Countrey receiued so great a blessing ORTHO It is no reproch but a trueth let Bede be witnes who declareth that a Synod being appointed the Britaine Bishops came to a certaine holy Anchoret and asked his counsell Whether they should leaue their Traditions at the preaching of Austin Who answered If he be a man of God follow him They said how may we try this He answered The Lord saith Take vp my yoke vpon you and learne of mee for I am meeke and humble of heart Therefore if Austin bee meeke and humble in heart it is credible that both hee himselfe beareth the yoke of Christ and offereth it to be borne of others But if he be churlish and proud it is certaine that he is not of God neither are wee to regard his words Then they enquired of him againe how they might know whether he was proud or no. Prâ—cure saith the Anchoret That he with his company may come first into the Synod And if when you approch neere hee ariseth vnto you then you knowing him to bee the seruant of Christ heare him obediently But if he despise you nor will vouchsafe to rise at your presence which are moe in number let him likewise be despised of you And truely as this Anchoret bad them so did they For it happened that when they came thither Austin was already there and sate in his Chaire Which when they saw straightway waxing wroth they noted him of pride and therefore indeuoured to ouerthwart and gaine say whatsoeuer he proposed His Oration was thus Although in many other points ye doe contrary to our custome or rather contrary to the custome of the Vniuersall Church of Christ Yet notwithstanding if you will in these three things obey me That is In celebrating Easter in due time In accomplishing the Ministerie of Baptisme by which wee are borne againe to God according to the maner of the holy Romane and Apostolicke Church And last of all in preaching with vs to this English Nation the word of our Lord All your other Ceremonies fashions and customes though they be contrary to ours yet wee will willingly suffer and bee content to beare with them But they answered That they would doe none of the things requested neither would accompt him for their Archbishop Saying with themselues Nay if hee would not so much as rise to vs truely the more we should now subiect our selues to him the more would he hereafter despise vs and set vs at nought PHIL. Truely they came to Austin as the Pharises came to Christ that they might tempt him with that signe ORTHOD. Doe you thinke they meant to intangle him Then belike as by his not rising they tooke occasion to reiect him so though he had risen they would haue found some cuasion and not haue yeelded vnto him But is not this an vncharitable iudgement Hee called a Synod of the neerest and greatest Prouince they came vnto it but withall wished that the matter might be debated in a greater Synod That also was agreed vpon and they appeared But before the appearance they asked aduise of him who was thought most godly and wise The aduise was this in effect If hee behaue himselfe humbly accept of him If hee shew himselfe disdainfull reiect him Now what reason is there to thinke but as they followed his counsell in reiecting him because the euent did shew him proud so they would haue accepted of him if in the euent they had found him courteous PHIL. The false prophet gaue a false signe ORTHOD. The signe which he gaue and they made vse of was by the proud and disdainfull gesture of the body to discouer the pride and disdaine of the heart How was this a false signe Vndoubtedly to deny
of Arles But seeing you fetch his succession from the French I must request you to call to remembrance that which was said before concerning the ordination of the first French Bishops to wit that they all were ordained by Dionysius alone and consequently that they were not canonicall And therefore if you turne the edge of your argument against Austin as you doe against the present Bishops of England you must conclude a nullity in his consecration and in all your Popish Bishops deriued from him Thus you haue made ship wrack in the very hauē Now from Austin let vs proceed to those whom Austin did consecrate CHAP. V. Of the Bishops from Austin to Cranmer PHIL. THere can bee no doubt but as Austin himselfe so all that were consecrated by him were consecrated by three ORTH. Yes if you consider the question of Austin and the answere of Gregory The question proposed was this If the Bishops are so farre apart one from the other that they cannot conueniently assemble together whether one may bee ordained a Bishop without the presence of other Bishops Gregory answereth In the Church of England in which thou onely art as yet a Bishop thou canst ordaine none but without other Bishops For when come there any Bishops out of France which might assist thee in ordeyning Bishops We will therefore that thou ordaine Bishops but so that they may not bee farre one from an other that there be no such necessity but that they may hereafter come together to the creation of other The Curats also whose presence may do good should easily come together when then by the helpe of God the Bishops shall bee so made that they shall not be farre asunder one from the other there shall bee no Bishops created without three or foure Bishops assembled together c. PHIL. This place hath diuers readings both in Gregorie and Bede what edition doe you follow ORTHOD. Euen that which you will confesse of all other to bee most excellent For what edition of Bede was that which Stapleton translated PHIL. Doctor Stapleton being a man of such learning wisedome and zeale and purposing to benefite his country in singular manner by turning the story of Saint Bede into English without question did vse all possible diligence to get varietie of copies both printed and manuscript and comparing all together made choice of the best ORTHOD. Then haue I followed the best edition of Bede for I haue not departed one letter from the translation of Stapleton yet you see your owne approued edition which Stapleton made choise of conuinceth that Pope Gregory willed Austin at first to make bishops alone though hee would haue none created afterward without three or foure PHIL. Doe you thinke that there came no Bishops out of France to assist ORTHOD. No such thing can bee collected out of Bede neither is it probable for in the very next Chapter Gregory writeth to the Bishop of Arles to giue kinde entertainement to Austin if hee should come vnto him But of any Bishops to bee sent into England there is not a word And in the Chapter following Gregory writeth to Austin sendeth him a Pall and willeth him to ordaine twelue Bishops But of French Bishops to assist him he saith nothing at all And in the second booke and third Chapter it is declared how that in the yeere of the incarnation of our Lord 604. Austin Archbishop of Britane consecrated two Bishops Mellitus Bishop of London and Iustus Bishop of Rochester but of any French Bishops assisting him there is no mention And for the Brittish Bishops that they should helpe him it is not once to be imagined because they stood at vtter defiance with him Therefore if wee consult with Stapletons Bede and embrace that copy for best which hee followed it will appeare that Austin proceeded to Episcopall consecration and yeelding to necessitie made the first Bishop that is Mellitus alone and the next that is Iustus by the assistance of Mellitus onely and when there was a canonicall number then they obserued the number of three at the least PHIL. Surely in diuerse copies it is otherwise then you haue alleadged as for example in the Parisian edition of Gregory Anno 1586. It is thus Et quidem etiam in Anglorum ecclesia in qua adhuc solus tu Episcopus inueniris ordinare Episcopum non aliter nisi cum Episcopis potes i. Truly euen in the Church of the English wherein thou onely art found as yet to bee a Bishop thou canst not ordaine Bishops otherwise then with other Bishops And because Austin was the onely Bishop then in England therefore in the next sentence he telleth him whence hee shall haue Bishops Nam quando de Gallijs Episcopi veniunt illi in ordinatione Episcopi testes tibi assistant i. For when the Bishops come out of France let them assist thee in the ordination of a Bishop ORTH. For the clearing of this point we must consider both these sentences with their dependencie and connexion In the former there are two readings cum Episcopis and sine Episcopis The latter was followed by Doctour Stapleton and is the true reading For vnderstanding that in Oxford some were appointed for the collation of the printed copies of Gregorie with the manuscripts I enquired how this place was read in the manuscripts and answere was made that these Interrogata were not in the written copies but inserted as it seemeth into the workes of Gregory out of Bede Then I enquired after the manuscripts of Bede and saw diuerse all consenting in this reading sine Episcopis with which concordeth a most worthy copie of venerable antiquitie at Eton Colledge which the learned and iudicious Sir Henry Sauil did shew vnto me With the manuscripts agreeth your own last edition of the workes of Bede printed at Collen in the yeere 1612. As also the Epistles of Gregory both in the Romane edition as they are in the Councels set out by Surius and Binius yea these Interrogata are produced by Iohn Capgraue who readeth precisely in the same manner Wherefore it is as cleare as the noone day that the true reading is sine Episcopis as Stapleton translateth and thus much of the first sentence In the second wee must consider both the reading and the pointing concerning the varietie of reading to passe ouer de gallis and de gallijs veniunt and venient which are of small moment and doe not alter the sense The Parisian and Romane editions read illi which is erronious for the true treading is qui to bee iustified by Capgraue the manuscripts before alleadged and Doctour Stapleton Now the wordes being thus cleared must needes bee read with an interrogation otherwise there will bee no sence and the latter sentence rendreth a reason of the former in this manner Thou must needs make Bishops alone for who should assist thee the Britaines they stand in opposition and are not once to be thought vpon
the English there are none both which branches hee presupposeth as granted the French but when doeth any of them come ouer into England as though hee should say their comming is vncertaine so he concludeth that Austin must make Bishops alone without other Bishops Now from Austin we will proceede to his successours PHIL. They may all be presumed to bee Canonicall ORTH. Yet they came from such as were not canonicall Now from the Saxons wee will proceede to the Normans And here what say you to Lanfranck whom William the Conqueror made Archbishop in stead of Stigandus PHIL. There is no reason to doubt of him or any other till wee come to Cranmer CHAP. VI. Of the Consecration of the most Reuerend Father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie ORTH. THen it remaineth that we consider the Consecration of that most reuerend Father and blessed Martyr Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury concerning whom I expect your iudgement PHIL. My iudgement is that he was a principall cause of all those lamentable alterations which happened in the daies of king Henry the eight and Edward the sixt ORTH. Doe you call them lamentable therein you resemble Enuy in the Poet which lamented because she saw nothing worthy of lamentation For those alterations which ye call lamentable were a gracious beginning of a thousand blessings both to the Church and Common wealth of England But speake directly to the point in question whether Cranmer were a Canonicall Bishoppe Why doe you not answere You are like to one which holdeth a Wolfe by the eares who neither knoweth how to hold him nor how to let him goe faine would you infringe the Consecration of Cranmer but alasâ—e you cannot PHIL. Father Becan directing his speach to the Bishops of England saith thus Legitimè consecrati non estis a quo enim an à rege at is consecrandi potestatem non habet An ab Episcopo Cantuariensi vel aliquo simile ne id quidem Nam Thomas Cranmerus qui sub Henrico 8. Cantuariensem Episcopatum obtinuit non fuit consecratus ab vllo Episcopo sed a solo rege intrusus designatus igitur quotquot ab eo postea consecrati sunt non legitimè sed eâ— presumptione consecrati sunt 1. You are not lawfully consecrated for by whom were you whether by the King but he hath not power to consecrate Or by the Bishop of Canterbury or some like Neither that truly For Thomas Cranmer who vnder K. Henry the 8. obtained the Bishopricke of Canterburie was not consecrated by any Bishop but intruded and designed by the King alone therefore as many as were afterward consecrated by him were not consecrated lawfully but by presumption ORTH. Or rather Becan playeth the part of a presumptuous Iesuite against the Lords annointed in saying that King Henry intruded Cranmer as also in glauncing at his most famous and religious successours as though they themselues had consecrated Bishops For what needed he to moue any such question if it were not to raise a mist and cast a cunning surmise to induce men to thinke that it was so But indeede it was not so for our soueraignes in the aduancing of Bishops do nothing but that which they may lawfully by their Princely right agreeable to the patterne of most religious Kings and Emperours and iustifiable both by the lawes of God and the land as in due place shall appeare And as hee wrongeth the Prince so doth hee traduce Archbishop Cranmer as though he were consecrated either by the King or by none at all and consequently the whole Clergie of England at this day deriuing their consecration from that renowned Martyr But if this accusation were true doe you not marke how it would make a cracke in your golden chaine of succession wherein you so reioyce and glory For if Cranmer were no Bishop then some approoued in Queene Maries time would prooue no Bishops as for example Anthony Kitchen Bishop of Landaff and Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Ely both which deriued their Consecration from Cranmer as may be iustified by records the latter whereof was highly commended by the Pope and made one of his Commissioners in the time of Queene Marie and imploied in the proceedings against that most Reuerend Archbishop If this cannot content the Iesuite I will referre him to Parsons his fellow Iesuite a man who neither loued Archbishop Cranmer nor any other of our Religion and yet clearely confesseth that he was a true Bishop BVt what mislike you in Cranmer was hee not in the order of Priesthood let the Pope be Iudge who in his Bull to Cranmer calleth him Magistrum in Theologia in Presbyteratus ordine constitutum i. Master or Doctor in Diuinitie setled in the order of Priesthood Or was he made Archbishop without the Popes authoritie The Pope himselfe affirmeth the contrary both to the King in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus Henrico Anglorum Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis c. De fratrum eorundem consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus ipsumque illi Ecclesiae Cantuariensi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus c. Bonon 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. Pontif. nostri 10. ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the glorious King of the English We haue made Prouision by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of our said brethren of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury and we haue set him ouer the said Church of Canterbury to be their Archbishop And to Cranmer himselfe in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus dilecto filio Thomae electo Cantuariensi Praefatae Ecclesiae Cantuariensi de eorundem fratrum consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus teque illi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus pastorem curam administrationem ipsius Ecclesiae tibi in spiritualibus temporalibus plenariè committendo ¶ Bon. Anno 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. That is Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We haue prouided by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of the same brethren for the foresaid Church of Canterbury and haue set thee ouer it to be their Archbishop and pastour and fully committing vnto thee the charge and administration of the same Church in things spirituall and temporall Or did the Pope and his Cardinals accept the person of Cranmer vndeseruedly Let your holy Father speake for himselfe ¶ Clemens Episcopus Hâ—n Angl. Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis nobis fratribus nostris ob suorum exigentiam meritorum acceptâ— c. That is ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the most glorious King of England We haue made prouision of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury accepted of vs and our brethren according as his deserts required OR was he Consecrated without the Popes licence Behold the Bull for his Consecration ¶ Clemens Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cant. Tibi vt a quocunque
send mee thither Marry quoth the King and to him will I send you So hee was sent with the Earle of Wiltshier Embassadour to the Pope who thrust out his glorious foote to bee kissed of them which they refusing the Earles spanniell running somewhat too familiarly did catch and bite him by the great toe Then the cause of their Embassage being declared the Earle deliuered Cranmers booke to the Pope and with all tolde him that hee had brought with him learned men out of England which were ready to defend by Scriptures Fathers and Councels whatsoeuer was contained in that booke against all that should contradict it The Pope promised sundry times a day of disputation but dallied out the matter as his Legates had done before in England so giuing them honourable entertainment hee made Cranmer his penitentiarie and dismissed them Then the rest returning Cranmer was sent by the kings appointment Embassadour into Germany to the Emperour where hee drewe many vnto his side and among the rest Cornelius Agrippa Moreouer the King did not onely consult with the most learned Diuines and Lawyers in the whole kingdome but also caused the question to bee publiquely disputed in the Vniuersities of Oxford and Cambridge both which did vtterly condemne the marriage Neither did hee thus rest but sent Bishop Bonner to the Vniuersities of France and Italie which affirmed vnder their seales that the marriage was vnlawfull and that no man might dispense with it Where it is to be obserued that some of these Vniuersities professe that they tooke an oath euery man to deliuer and to study vpon the foresaide questions as should bee to the pleasure of God and according to conscience After these determinations were reade in open Parliament there were shewed aboue an hundred bookes drawne by Doctours of strange regions which all agreed the kings marriage to bee vnlawfull Now to proceed the King considering the Popes dealing forbad all suites to the Court of Rome by proclamation in September 1530. which Sanders calleth the first beginning of the manifest schisme About the same time Cardinall Wolsey was cast in a premunire and all the Bishops of England for maintaining the power Legatine of the Cardinall But the Bishops beeing called into the Kings Bench before the day of their appearance concluded an humble submission offered the King I 18000. pounds to pardon the premunire and withall gaue him the title of Supreme head of the Church of England Yea Archbishop Warham told him that it was his right to haue it before the Pope and that Gods word would beare it Which proceedings in England did so kindle and enflame the Popes choller that neither the bookes of learned men nor the determinations of Vniuersities nor the offering of disputation nor his owne former Bull and Decree could now hinder him from giuing a contrary publick definitiue sentence dated in his consistorie at Rome the twentie third of March Anno 1532. ABout this time dyed Archbishop Warham while Cranmer was Embassadour in Germany and vpon the vacancie of the Archbishopricke the King sent for him home with purpose to aduance him to that great dignitie but he pretended matters of great importance requiring his abode in Germany by which meanes he deferred his comming for halfe a yeeare And being come home and perceiuing that the place was reserued for him hee imployed his greatest friends to shift it off When the King did personally impart his intent vnto him hee disabled himselfe by all possible meanes vsing all perswasions to alter the Kings determination When he saw the Kings constant resolution he humbly crauing pardon of his grace franckly opened his conscience vnto him declaring that if hee accepted that office then hee must receiue it at the Popes hand which he neither would not could doe for that his highnesse was the onely supreme gouernour of this Church of England as well in causes ecclesiasticall as temporall that the donation of Bishoprickes belonged to the King and not to any forraine authoritie whatsoeuer All which proceedings doe not argue any ambitious or aspiring cogitations but rather an humble and lowly minde preferring the sinceritie of a good conscience before all glorious pompe and worldly dignities The King seeing the tendernesse of his conscience consulted with the learned in the law how hee might bestow the Bishopricke vpon him and yet not enforce him to any thing against his conscience In conclusion hee tooke the oath to the Pope but not after the manner of his predecessours as Sanders slanderously affirmeth For then hee should haue taken it simply and absolutely which hee did not but with a protestation expressing the condition and qualification Neither did hee make his protestation priuately in a corner and then take the oath in publicke as Sanders would make the world beleeue for if this could bee proued then had you reason to condemne him of fraud and periurie but it was not so He did not vse his protestation in any secret and concealed manner like to equiuocating Papists which take oaths in absolute words and yet delude them with mentall reseruations but he made it plainely and publickly first in the Chapter house secondly kneeling before the high Altar in the hearing both of the Bishops and people at his consecration Thirdly in the very same place and in the very same forme and tenour of wordes when by commission from the Pope they deliuered him the Pall. And the summe of the protestation was this that hee intended not to binde himselfe to anything which was contrary to the lawe of God or contrary to the king or common wealth of England or the Lawes and prerogatiues of the same nor to restraine his owne libertie to speake consult or consent in all and euery thing concerning the reformation of Christian religion the gouernment of the Church of England and the prerogatiue of the Crowne or the commodity of the Common wealth and euery where to execute and reforme such things which he should thinke fitte to be reformed in the Church of England and according to this interpretation and this sence and no otherwise he professed and protested that he would take the oath Now if you censure Cranmer because he qualified his oath with such a protestation what censure shal be giuen of your Popish Bishops before Cranmer which took two absolute othes to the King and to the Pope containing manifest contradiction as K. Henry himselfe declared causing thē both to be read in open Parliament And Cranmer hath made the point plaine both in his answere to B. Brookes and in his letters to Queene Marie Or if you censure Cranmer for swearing to the Pope with Qualification what censure will you giue of Heath Bonner Thurlby and the rest that in King Henries daies tooke absolutely the oath of Supremacie which euidently excludeth the Popes authoritie BVt to returne to K. Henry who seeing
his former mariage condemned by such a world of witnesses so grounding their iudgements vpon the blessed word of God as was sufficient to settle any mans conscience proceeded the 14. of Nouember in the 24. yeere of his reigne to marrie the Lady Anne Bullen who the seuenth of September following brought forth the Ladie ELIZABETH the Ioy of England the Starre of Europe and the Phoenix of the world a Glasse of Gods prouidence and the Mirrour of his mercie When the Royall infant was yet in her mothers wombe Pope Clement the seuenth the base borne sonne of Iulianus Medices the Florentine fauouring the Lady Katharine Dowager sought by all meanes to dissolue the lawfull mariage of Queene Anne and to make her issue vncapable of the crowne For which purpose being inraged like a Dragon hee disgorged his poyson and spit fiery flames against the king the Queene the Realme the blessed babe before she was borne But death closed vp his eyes with darkenesse while the yong Lady beganne to behold the light of heauen arysing like a luckie starre in the middest of a storme shining to the Church of God with tokens of ioy and deliuerance but to the Pope and his adherents like a blazing or fatall Comet portending the ouerthrow of Antichrist Which in part came to passe about a yeere after that the yong Lady was borne For whereas the Bishop of Rome like the daw in Aesop had decked and adorned himselfe with the faire feathers of other birds and ietted vp and downe with pride and disdaine tyrannizing ouer all the foules that flie in the midle of heauen King Henry the eight the Eagle of England plucked his owne feather out of the Popes wing and resumed to himselfe the rich plume of the Princes supremacy that is the lawful authoritie which God had giuen him Then Paul the third flashed out his excomunications like lightnings and interdicted the kingdome hoping thereby to reduce it to his obedience or at least to disable the yong Lady for the succession of the crowne Yet after a while the angrie old man withered away but the yong Lady did grow vp like the lilly and flourished like the Rose plant of Prouince Now though for extirpating the Popes iurisdiction this renowned King had the honour before and aboue all Christian Princes yet the glorie of abolishing Popish religion was by diuine prouidence reserued to his blessed children Edward and Elizabeth They pulled vp superstition by the very roots whereas their father for God reuealed his truth by degrees did onely hew at a few branches Hitherto of the Popes expulsion NOw for as much as Archbishop Cranmer was a principall meanes thereof the Papists did hate him worse then a scorpion heaping vpon him whatsoeuer wit sharpened with malice could possibly deuise Hee resorted sometimes to the Dolphin in Cambridge where hee placed his wife the mistresse of the house being her cousin therupon they blazed abroad that he was an Hostler and vnlearned He kept his wife secret for feare of the law they reported that she was caried vp and downe in a Chest and that at Graues end the wrong end of the Chest was set vpward And surely King Henry did foresee that one day if they might preuaile they would haue his blood and burne him at a stake Therefore whereas hee gaue the three Cranes the ancient armes of his house the King caused him to change them into three Pelicanes presaging that he should feed the flock of Christ with his deerest blood and dye a Martyr which came to passe in the dayes of Queene Mary when they disgorged all their poisoned malice vpon him They disrobed him of his Episcopall ornaments and put him into a lay mans gowne they cited him to appeare at Rome within eightie dayes and put him to death before twentie of them were expired They caused Alphonso the Spanish Fryer to draw him to a recantation by sweet promises of life yet they had a setled purpose to put him to death They had no intention by Alphonso to do him good but sought a colour by his recantation to iustifie themselues so they clapped their hands and reioyced at his fall But as hee sinned and denyed his Master with Peter so God gaue him grace to repent with Peter And as he lamented all his sinnes so especially he bewailed his subscribing to Popery with his vnworthy right hand Wherefore when he came to the fire for a godly reuenge hee thrust it like another Scaeuola into the flame and did not so much as draw backe his arme till it was wholly consumed thus lifting vp his eyes to heauen in the middest of the furious flames hee said Lord Iesus receiue my spirit and so gaue vp the Ghost When his bodie and the wood were consumed to ashes behold his heart was found whole and perfect as hauing escaped the force of the fire concerning which these verses were written by a learned man Ecce inuicta fides cor inuiolabile seruat Nec medijs flammis corda perire sinit Cranmer amid the fiery flames thy heart vnscorcht was found For why behold vndaunted faith preseru'd it safe and sound CHAP. VIII Whether to renounce the Pope be Schisme and Heresie PHIL. WEll though you and your crew commend Cranmer yet I will proue in spite of all Hereticks that when he reuolted from the Pope both he and all his consorts became notorious Schismaticks ORTHOD. Then you will proue in spite of all Hereticks that Stephen Gardener was a Schismaticke Edmund Bonner a schismatick Cutbert Tunstall a schismaticke Nicholas Heath a schismaticke Iohn Stokesly a schismaticke and in a word that all the Bishops of your Catholicke Church which were in England after the banishing of the Pope till the end of the raigne of King Henry by the space of 12. yeeres were notorious schismatickes For they all reuolted from the Pope Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester onely excepted who was then lately made Cardinall but lost his head before his Hat came ouer What will you proue that there were so many schismaticks at once in your Catholicke Church PHIL. They were not then of the Catholicke Church for that worthy Bishop of Winchester Stephen Gardener affirmed That when K Henry did first take vpon him to be head of the Church it was then no Church at all And Doct. Sanders saith That Bishops were made in Schismate Henriciano extra vel potiùs contra Ecclesiam 1. in the schisme of Henry the 8. without the Church or rather against it ORTHOD. Pope Nicholas defineth the Catholicke Church to be a congregation of Catholicks PHIL. When they renounced the Pope they were no Catholicks ORTHOD. They were Masse-priests and professed that faith which you call Catholicke Why then should you deny them the name of Catholicks PHIL. Because they did not professe it vnder the Bishop of Rome from whose communion whosoeuer renteth himselfe is a schismaticke
ORTHOD. Heresie and schisme saith Thomas Aquinas are distinguished according to those things whereto each of them is opposed properly and directly Now Heresie is opposed properly vnto faith but Schisme is opposed properly to the vnitie of Ecclesiasticall loue Which is agreeable to S. Hierome saying Betweene Schisme and Heresie this I take to be the difference That Heresie hath alwayes a peruerse opinion but Schisme maketh a separation from the Church Out of which words saith Nauarrus We may gather That Schisme taken generally is a sinne whereby one separateth himselfe from due vnitie but taken specially it is a sin whereby he is separated from the vnitie of the Church But what is this to the Pope PHIL. Schismaticks are therefore no members of the Church because they are diuided and rent from the visible head That is the Pope For no man can be vnder Christ and communicate with the Church Coelestiall who is not vnder the Pope and doeth not communicate with the Church Militant Which doth plainely appeare by the decree of Pope Boniface Porro subesse Romano PoÌ„tifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicâ—mus definimus pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis That is Furthermore we declare say define and pronounce That to be vnder the Bishop of Rome is to euery humane creature altogether of the necessitie of saluation ORTHOD. What say you then to Athanasius who was persecuted for the Catholicke faith Pope Liberius consenting and subscribing to the Synodal sentence whereby he was excluded from the communion of the Church as witnesseth Binius saying To the wicked profession whereof that is of the Sirmian Councell he that is Liberius subscribed by violence and feare And againe Liberius Bishop of Rome prouoked by violence and threates as Athanasius Hilarie and Hierome doe testifie subscribed to this first forme of faith of the Sirmian Councell condemned Athanasius communicated with the Arrians and signifying the same by letters written to Valens and others hee intreated to be freed from exile and to be restored to his See Yea Liberius himselfe in his Epistle to the Easterne Churches confesseth so much saying So soone as I knew when it pleased God that you had iustly condemned him that is Athanasius I presently yeelded my consent to your iudgement and gaue Letters to be caried to the Emperour Constantius by our brother Fortunatianus of his name That is concerning the condemning of him therefore Athanasius being remoued concerning whom the Decrees of you all are to be receiued of me with the See Apostolicke I say that I haue peace and vnitie with all you with all the Easterne Bishops or through all Prouinces This Epistle is extant in the Vatican Library and acknowledged for true and proper by Binius who thereupon taketh vp a lamentation That Liberius the Romane Samson deceiued by enuie and vaine glory as it were by Dalila was conquered and lost his golden locks Thus it appeareth that this renowned Patriarch this stout Champion of Iesus Christ this pillar of the Church this hammer of Hereticks was diuided from the communion of the Pope and yet hee was not separated from the blessed communion of Iesus Christ For when the whole world was against him he against the whole world defended the cause of Christ and the Lord gaue him victory Shall now this glorious Athanasius be reputed a Schismaticke I hope you wil not dare to say so If he be not then one may be separated from the communion of the Bishop of Rome and yet bee no Schismaticke PHIL. Schisme as Cardinall Tollet defineth it is a rebellious separation from the head of the Church and the Vicar of Christ which possibly cannot agree to Athanasius ORTHOD. Do not you thinke that this was rebellious The Emperour Constantius affirmed that the whole world had iudged that Athanasius should be separated from the communion of the Church which was done in the Councell at Millan and also at Smirnium the Pope himselfe subscribing thereunâ—o Yet Athanasius stood out stiffely he did not relent but chose rather to remaine excommunicate then to submit and conforme himselfe to your holy father the Pope Now what say you will you accuse him or excuse him Accuse him you cannot because if he should haue yeelded he had rebelled against God and denied the Diuinitie of Christ And if you excuse him then you are forced to confesse That not euery separation from the Bishop of Rome is a Schisme but such onely as separateth from the Church of God and from Christ. Hitherto of Schisme in generall NOw in particular The separation of King Henry was so farre from Schisme that I will proue it lawfull by Bellarmine himselfe who saith As it is lawfull to resist the Pope inuading the body so it is lawfull to resist him inuading the soules or troubling the commonwealth and much more if hee goe about to destroy the Church So there are foure cases wherein Bellarmine holdeth it lawful to resist the Pope Wherefore if King Henries case were any of these foure his resistance was lawfull To passe ouer the first and the last it shal be sufficient if we ponder the other two touching the inuading of the soule and the troubling of the Commonwealth While the King was yet in his nonage hee was dispensed with all by the Pope against the eternall Commandement of God to marry his brothers wife and afterward being informed of the vnlawfullnesse thereof hee intreated the Pope either to iustifie his dispensation by the word of God or to dissolue the marriage yet hee would doe neither but left him long in anguish of minde and perplexitie of conscience and at last gaue finall sentence to binde him to liue in a marriage condemned by his owne Cardinals his owne vniuersities yea and by his owne former Bull wherein hee had pronounced That the King could not continue in it without sin Let any indifferent man iudge whether this were not to inuade the soules of men Now let vs see whether hee did trouble the Commonwealth By meanes of this dispensation the mindes of men were greatly distracted some holding with the Pope others embracing the iudgements of learned men through the famous vniuersities of Christendome Thus the whole world stood in suspence and the inheritance and succession of the Crowne was commonly called in question both by subiects and strangers Was not this euidently notoriously to trouble the Commonwealth So according to Bellarmines positions it was lawfull for K. Henry and his subiects to resist the Pope and therefore this resistance was not schismaticall PHIL. You must consider the manner of resistance set downe by Bellarmine Licet inquam ei resistere non faciendo quod iubet impediendo ne exequatur voluntatem suam non tamen licet eum iudicare vel punire vel deponere quod non est nisi superioris that is It is lawfull I say to resist
Nicolas Heath whom Queene Mary made Archbishop of Yorke and after the death of Gardiner Lord Chancelour of England what shall become of Thurlby whom Queene Mary translated from Norwich to Ely For all these were consecrated at such time when in your iudgement both the consecrators and consecrated were stained with schisme and heresie Did all these receiue nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue If they were no Bishops then what becomes of the Bishops in Queene Maries raigne whom these did consecrate if they all receiued nothing then you must confesse that the Priestes whom they ordained were no Priestes If they were no Priests then though they vsed the words of Consecration they could not Consecrate the hoast If this be true then al that worshipped the hoast which they did Consecrate were idolatours PHIL. Edmond Bonner and the rest of our Bishops and Priests were Reuerend and Canonicall whatsoeuer you esteeme of them ORTH. Can there be a Bishop without effectuall Consecration PHIL. It is impossible ORTHO And other Consecration they had none but that which wee haue mentioned for I hope they were not reordained in Queene Maries time PHIL. Reordained I doe not thinke so for as rebaptizations so reordinations were forbidden in the Councell of Capua And Gregory saith as he which is once baptized ought not to be baptized againe so hee which is once consecrated ought not to be Consecrated againe in the same order Therfore vndoubtedly they were not reordained but Cardinall Poole the Popes legate absolued them from Schisme and heresie so they were confirmed for lawful Bishops ORTHOD. You hold that it is impossible to be a Bishop without effectuall Consecration Therefore seeing they had no other Consecration but that mentioned and yet were Bishops it followeth that their Consecration was effectuall wherefore you are forced to confesse that if a schismatical and hereticall Bishop giue orders the orders are effectuall But least this conclusion should seeme to flowe rather from the affection you beare to your owne Bishops then from any force of reason especially your own allegations standing still to the contrary let vs reuiew the whole matter and proceed by degrees ballancing euery thing with aduice and iudgement And answere I pray you not out of priuate humour and passion but from the publicke and most authenticall recordes of your Church ANd first if a wicked priest as for example a drunkard fornicator or blasphemer baptize a childe I demaund whether the baptisme bee good or no PHIL. If it be performed in the true element of water with Euangelicall words that is In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost according to our Sauiour Christs holy institution it is sound and sufficient and neuer to be iterated as our learned Popes Councels and Fathers alleadged by Cardinall Bellarmine doe testifie For the wickednesse of the Minister cannot pollute the puritie of the mysteries of God they are auaileable to his children though they be ministred by a Iudas For it is well said of our learned Cardinall that he which hath not forgiuenesse of sinnes formally may haue it Ministerially as he that hath not in his purse one halfepeny of his owne may notwithstanding cary many crownes to another from his lord and master ORTHO Very true for that which S. Paul saith of preaching may bee extended to other Ministeriall duties If I doe it willingly I haue a reward but if I doe it against my will notwithstanding the dispensation is committed vnto me As though he should say If I do it willingly that is cheerfully for conscience sake seeking onely the glory of God and the saluation of his people then there is a reward laid vp for me But if I shall performe it vnwillingly that is for feare couetousnesse vaine glory or any other carnall respect though to my selfe it be not profitable because I loose my reward yet it may be auailable to others because the dispensation is committed vnto me The foulnesse of an vnsanctified hand cannot staine the beautie of these glorious mysteries For as Gregory Nazianzen saith A seale of Iron may imprint the Princes image as well as a signet of gold And we know by experience that a garden may as well be watered with an earthen as with a siluer pipe But what if the Priest we speak of be a schismaticke and an hereticke PHIL. Though he be yet if hee baptize according to the institution of Christ the baptisme is effectuall and neuer to be repeated ORTHOD. You say well for in such a case though it be ministred by Hereticks and schismaticks yet it is not the baptisme of heretickes and schismatickes but of Iesus Christ. For it is he that baptiseth and neither is he that planteth any thing nor hee that watereth bâ—â— God which giueth the increase To which purpose it is excellently said of Ausâ—â—n To the baptisme which is Consecrated with Euangelicall words pertaineth not the errour of any man either of the giuer or of the receiuer whether he thinke otherwise then the heauenly doctrine teacheth of the Father or of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost Indeed it was decreed in the great counsell of Nice that the Pauliâ—nistae comming to the Catholicke Church should be rebaptized where by rebaptizing they meane the repeating of that action which was erroniously supposed to be true baptisme but in trueth was not because it wanted the true essentiall forme of words which the Councell iudged necessary to be supplied Therefore there is no repugnancie betweene them and the Affrican Councel which decreed vnder Pope Stephen that the Nouatians returning to the Catholicke Church should not be rebaptized because their former baptisme though giuen by heretickes was according to the true forme of the Church and therefore sufficient It is true that Agrippinus Bishop of Carthage defended rebaptization and he was the first of all mortall men which defended it wherein he was followed by Saint Cyprian and the Bishops of Africke but then they had not seene the point defined by any generall Councels and though they held an errour yet they did not iudge them heretickes which held the contrary neither did they rebaptize those whom the Catholickes had baptized nor make any rent in the Church but kept the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace yea Saint Austin saith some report that Cyprian recalled this errour S. Hierom affirmeth that the Bishops of Africk did the like moued by the authority of Stephen Bishop of Rome But after them came the Donatists stiffely maintaining and increasing this errour euen when the Church had determined the contrary and therefore were iustly iudged hereticks Yea they took vpoÌ„ them to rebaptize such as were baptised in the Catholicke Church which was a diabolicall presumption For which causes Vincentius Lyrinensis saith Of one and the same opinion wee iudge which may seeme strange the authors
Catholicke and the followers hereticall We acquit the Masters and condemne the Schollers they are heires of heauen which haue written those bookes the defendours whereof are troden downe to the pit of hell But now the Church hath long agoe with one voice condemned this Heresie When Praetextatus and Felicianus hauing baptised sundry in schisme returned to vnitie the Church did not rebaptise them whom they had baptised but kept them in that baptisme which they had in Schisme For according to Saint Austin some doe minister baptismum legitimum and that legitimè some neither legitimè nor yet legitimum some legitimum but not legitimè Such as performe it in the true element and forme of wordes being themselues in the bosome and vnitie of the Church doe minister both legitimum and legitimè such as faile in the institution and are themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe neither minister legitimè nor yet legitimum such as doe obserue the substance of institution being themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe minister legitimum but not legitimè And those which receiue it from them haue a lawfull baptisme but not lawfully For it is one thing to haue a lawfull thing vnlawfully and another thing not to haue it at all The Sacraments of the Church may be found without the Church as the riuers of Paradise are found without Paradise Heretickes and Schismatickes may haue rem columbae though they themselues be extra columbam PHIL. The trueth of this Doctrine is so plaine that no common Catholick is ignorant of it ORTH. Then to proceede what if the Priest wee speake of were interdicted suspended excommunicated degraded PHIL. Yet if hee obserue in all points of substance the institution of Christ it is effectuall and neuer to bee repeated This is vndoubtedly the iudgement of our Church And therefore in Queene Maries time though the land had beene interdicted and vnder the Popes curse for Schisme and Heresie by the space of twentie yeeres wee did not rebaptise them who were then baptised but haue kept them with vs in their former baptisme ORTH. COncerning baptisme we agree Now to come to the eucharist shall the vngodly life or wicked opinion of the Minister make his ministration of it vneffectuall to the people of God PHIL. In no case so he obserue the ordinance of Christ. ORTHOD. You answere rightly For the sonnes of Eli were wicked men and procured Gods heauie wrath against themselues yet there is no doubt but the God of all Grace did accept of those Sacrifices which his faithfull children with an honest heart presented according to the Law of the Lord to be offered euen by their hands so long as they inioyed the Office of Priesthood Our Sauiour in the Gospel reproued the Scribes and Pharisees for their false and superstitious doctrine which was so commonly receiued and so anciently continued that there can be no question but many of the Priests were infected with it Yet Christ commanded the Leper to shew himselfe to the Priest Yea he himselfe frequented the Feasts wherein Sacrifices were offered by those Priests But to goe forward Can the Eucharist be ministred by a Priest whom the Pope hath excommunicated and degraded PHIL. Though all Priests haue the power of Order vnder the Pope yet for as much as they haue it not immediatly from the Pope but from God therefore the Pope cannot so take it away but that if they will they may vse it For a Priest though the Pope should ExcoÌ„municate suspend interdict degrade him yet if he will himselfe he shall truely Consecrate For euery Priest hath an indeleble Character which is a certaine spirituall and supernaturall power imprinted in the soule of man in Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders whereby the Baptized Confirmed and Ordered are inabled to giue or receiue the Offices of certaine Sacraments The Character of Confirmation being not greatly to our present purpose may bee passed ouer The Character of Baptisme is a passiue power whereby the Baptized is made â—it to receiue other Sacraments whereof without Baptisme he were vncapable The Character of Order is an actiue power to minister the Sacraments vnto other Now in holy Orders it must be obserued That the Priestly Character doeth differ from the Episcopall For the Episcopall is either an other or the same extended so that it conteineth the Priestly and somewhat else A Priest in respect of his Priestly Character is first of all the publicke and ordinary Minister of Baptisme For a Lay-man may not Baptise publickely but onely priuately Neither priuately in the presence of the Priest or Deacon but onely in their absence Neither alwayes in their absence but onely in case of necessitie for then a Lay-man be he Iew or infidel may Baptize so hee intend to doe that which the Catholicke Church doeth in that kinde of Administration A Deacon may Baptise not onely priuately but publickely so it be at the appointment of the Bishop or Priest But a Priest may suo iure Baptize ex Officio euen in the presence of a Bishop as is declared by Pius Quintus and the Councell of Trent who qualifie the contrary opinion and reduce it to a tollerable sence Secondly a Priest by vertue of his Priestly Character may consecrate the Hoaste which no Lay-man King nor Emperour no Angel nor Archangel can performe because they want this Character Indeed a Deacon may helpe to minister the Eucharist but he cannot Consecrate no not by dispensation If he should take it vpon him he should effect nothing But euery Priest receiueth in his Ordination a Character not from man but from the Eternall God which in respect of the Eucharist is absolute perfect and independent Wheresoeuer it is there God is present ex pacto and coÌ„curreth to the producing of supernaturall effects which he doeth not where this Character is wanting Now the holy Councels of Florence and Trent do teach vs That this Character is indeleble death onely if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting ORTHOD. If by indeleble Character bee meant onely a gracious gift neuer to be reirerated then we may safely confesse that in Baptisme and holy Orders there is imprinted an indeleble Character For a man rightly Baptized becomming a Turke or a Iew and afterward returning to the faith and Church of Christ is in no case to be rebaptized the vertue of his former Baptisme is not spunged out but still remaineth auaileable Likewise when a Priest lawfully ordained becoming a schismaticke or hereticke is iustly censured for his crimes and afterward is reclaimed if the Church shall need his labours and hold it conuenient that he execute the Ministeriall function hee may in no case be reordained but may performe it by vertue of his Orders formerly receiued Hitherto of a Priest NOw to transferre our speech to a Bishop Shall his iniquitie hinder him from giuing Orders PHIL. No verily for there is the
same reason of this and the former ORTHOD. There is so For as Christ is the chiefe Baptizer so hee is the chiefe Ordainer It is hee that giueth d Pastours and teachers vnto the Church therefore the personall iniquitie of the seruant cannot disanull the gracious gift of the master For who conferred Priesthood among the Iewes After the consecration of Aaron and his sonnes which was performed by the hands of Moses and was extraordinary there is no doubt but the honour of it belonged ordinarily to the high Priest But did not Aaron make a golden calfe Did not Eli see his sonnes runne into a slander and stayed them not Yet so long as they liued they did execute the Pontificall office neither were their Ordinations called in question no not the Ordinations of Annas and Caiaphas But is there the same reason here also of Hereticks and schismatiks PHIL. Card. Bell saith Quis ignorat Catholicorum Baptizatos ab Haereticis verè esse Baptizatos similiter Ordinatos verè esse Ordinatos quādo Ordinator Haereticus verè Episcopus fuerat adhuc erat saltem quantum ad Characterem i. Which of the Catholicks is ignorant that the Baptized of Hereticks are truely Baptized and those that are likewise Ordained of Hereticks are truely Ordained when the Hereticall Ordainer had bene truly a Bishop and was still at least in respect of the Character ORTHOD. S. Basill affirmeth That of all the Arch heretickes of the whole world whereof many were then very famous none euer durst reordaine the Ordained except one Eustathius Ancyrogalata whose wicked crime the Councel of Gangren declareth In the 2. Councel at Nice the Monks said According to sixe holy and generall Councels we receiue those that returne from Heresie vnlesse there be some intolerable cause Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said And all we also being instructed of our holy fathers doe so define And againe Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said What say you of Anatolius was not he President of the fourth Synode yet he was Created of that wicked Dioscorus Therefore let vs also receiue the Ordained of Hereticks as Anatolius was receiued And againe Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said Truely very many which were Presidents in the sixt Synod were created of Sergius Pyrrhus Paul and Peter teachers of the Heresie of the Monothelites Yea these likewise diuided the Constantinopolitan Sees among the Clergie From Peter their last teacher vnto the sixth Synode there came betweene no fewer then fifteene yeeres in which space were Thomas Iohn and Constantine ordained of heretikes who notwithstanding were not for this cause reiected The heresie lasted about fiftie yeeres yet the fathers in the sixth Synod condemned onely the forenamed foure whereby it is euident that heresie in their iudgement doth not take away the power of giuing orders which you confesse and must needes because one of your owne Popes was ordained by heretikes if Felix the second were a Pope PHIL. In the time of Gregory the thirteenth the Roman Martyrologe was set out at Rome where there was a great controuersie among learned men concerning Felix whether his name were to bee spunged out and Baronius with many other were of that opinion but it fell out as it were by a diuine miracle the very day before Saint Felix his day that some digging for treasure found a chest wherein was this inscription The body of Felix Pope and Martyre which condemned Constantius so Baronius yeelded to Felix as it were pleading his owne cause especially seeing Pope Gregory himselfe was of that iudgement Therefore we confesse that Felix was a lawfull Pope although his entrance is much to be misliked For according to the common sentence of the Fathers hee was intruded by the Arians and ordained of them therefore at the first while Liberius suffered persecution for the Catholicke Faith hee was a Schismaticall Anti-pope but as Binius saith from such time as hee aduanced the banner of faith by excommunicating Constantius Vrsacius Valens and other Arians and Liberius for his manifest Communion with Hereticks was plainely accounted banished from the Communion of Catholikes omnium Catholicorum iudicio quanquam antea schismaticus fuisset legitimus Ecclesiae Catholicae Pontifex haebericaepit that is Although before he had beene a schismatick yet then he began to bee accounted the lawfull Bishop of the Catholick Church by the iudgement of all Catholickes ORTHOD. Then you confesse that Felix which was ordained of Arians was notwithstanding a lawfull Bishop yea and a lawfull Pope by the iudgement of all Catholicks for if you should say otherwise what would become of those fiue Deacons 21. Priests 19. Bishops which hee ordained If heretikes haue no power to ordaine then Felix was no Bishop and consequently according to your owne positions al ordinations deriued from him were mere nullities PHIL. You heard before out of the councels of Florence and Trent that the Character is indeleble whereupon it followeth that neither schisme nor heresie nor any censure of the Church can take it away wherefore seeing the Episcopall character whether it be a diuerse from the Presbyterall or the same more extended is an absolute perfect and independent power of conferring the Sacraments of Confirmation and Order therefore a Bishop may not onely without any further dispensation confirme and order but hee cannot bee hindered by any superiour power but that hee may trulie confer these Sacraments if it please himselfe as our learned Cardinall affirmeth which is also the common opinion of the schoolemen Heretiks saith Dominicus a Soto whosoeuer they be euen such as are cut off although they were not formerly promoted lawfully by the Church but by heretikes doe verily conferre the Sacrament of order although they bee forbidden by the Church and therefore while they doe conferre it they sinne mortally Gabriel Biel although a Bishop being an heretike and Apostata degraded cut off or publikely excommunicated bee depriued of all iurisdiction by the law it selfe neither can he absolue any man from his sinnes yet hee may actually ordaine any man capable of the order being willing yea though he be not subiect to his iurisdiction notwithstanding that the Church doth iustly prohibit him And Capreolus Bishops although they bee heretikes schismatickes and degraded may confer orders This is agreeable to the Decree of Pope Anastasius concerning those whom Acasius ordained after his condemnation to wit That no harme at al should befal them By al this it appeareth that the orders thus ministred are effectuall ORTHO But doth not degradation depriue a man of the degree PHIL. Non est dubitandum saith Petrus a Soto per haeresim vel excommunicationem siue etiam degradationem non amittipotestatem quae sacramento collata est siue characterem vt dicunt baptismi confirmationis ordinis quanquam vsus illius amittatur that is It is not to bee doubted that the power
which is conferred by the Sacrament or the character as they call it of baptisme confirmation and order is not los◠by heresie excommunication or degradation although the vse of it bee lost With whom agreeth Gregory de Valentia So degradation taketh not away the character and power but only the vse and that only so far as if hee vse it this vse is sinfull yet doth not cease to be effectuall ORTHO THen Pope Stephen was much to blame who vnordained them whom his predecessor Formosus had ordained and he also gaue out a commandement that they should al be Consecrated and ordained a new Yea hee tooke vp his carkasse out of the graue brought it vnto iudgement before a councell of Bishops spoiled it of the papall robes cloathed it in a lay-man gowne endited it arraigned it condemned it cut off those fingers which were principally vsed in consecration and cast it into the streame of Tyber PHIL. Formosus a Cardinall and Bishop of Portua beeing degraded by Iohn the eight went out of the city and swore that hee would neuer returne either to the city or to his bishoprike Soone after Iohn the eight died and Martin the second absoluing Formosus from his rashoth restored him to his dignities Not long after Martin died and Formosus beeing made Pope ordained diuers After him commeth Stephen who either not knowing or not beleeuing that Formosus was absolued caused them whom he had ordained to bee re ordained But his fact as Bellarmine confesseth displeased all men and three Popes following Romanus Theodorus and Iohn the ninth disanulled the sentence of Stephen iudging Formosus a lawfull Pope and his ordinations sound ORTHO Pope Sergius succeeding them reuersed their sentence condemning Formosus and pronouncing all holy orders by him conferred to be voide and frustrate PHIL. I confesse with Bellarmine that Pope Stephen and Sergius erred In quaestione facti non iuris By euill example not by false doctrine For Sigonius saith Omnia Formosi pontificatus acta rescidit atque in primis eos qui initiati ab eo fuerant exautorauit that is Pope Stephen disanulled all the actions done during the Popedome of Formosus and especially he casseered those which he had ordained And Luitprandus cunctos quos ipse ordinauerat gradu depositos iterum ordinauit that is When he had deposed al which Formosus had ordained here-ordained them Thus the fact is apparent but here is no decree ORTHO Sigebert saith Ordinationes eius irritas esse decernit that is Hee decreeth his ordinations to bee voide And Martinus Polonus saith Omnes ordinationes eius irritas debere esse decernit that is Hee decreeth that all his ordinations ought to be voide And Bellarmine himselfe though hee runne counter in the point yet confesseth that Stephen decreed publikelie in a Councell of Bishops that Formosus was neuer a lawfull Pope and consequently that all his acts were voide PHIL. It were no preiudice to the See Apostolicke if wee should grant that an intruder not lawfully chosen but a false Pope thrust in might decree an error ORTHOD. As though Stephen and Sergius were not true Popes For though they were most wicked men and came in by intrusion yet that hindreth not Baronius declareth that Some which got the place by tyrannie did afterward get the consent of the Clergie which thought good rather to tolerate them then to suffer the Church to bee rent with Schisme And hee addeth that hee is constrained of necessitie to say so because the whole Catholicke Church did honour them as lawfull Popes obeyed them acknowledged them for the Vicars of Christ and successours of Peter and frequented them with that reuerence which became a true Pope which had not beene done vnlesse there had beene certaine assurance of their lawfull election afterward made Hitherto Baronius all which hee speaketh by occasion of this Stephen whom notwithstanding his intrusion hee placeth in the rancke of true Popes and so doth Binius likewise The like honour is also afforded to Sergius who sent the Pall to the Archbishops of Colen and Hamborowe and exempted the Church of Breme from the iurisdiction of Colen as Baronius witnesseth And so it appeareth that hee was acknowledged for Pope and quietly enioyed the place Therefore if we be so fauourable to him as Baronius is to Stephen we may iudge that though he entred by intrusion yet he might bee confirmed for the peace of the Church by a newe election PHIL. Whatsoeuer wee iudge of Stephen or Sergius concerning the Popedome wee confesse that they erred touching ordinations For though Formosus had neuer beene Pope yet hee was Bishop of Portua and though hee had beene an Hereticke or Schismaticke though iustly degraded yet his Episcopall character remained and his ordinations were effectuall therefore they dealt iniuriously with him and his innocencie was sufficiently cleared by miracle For when his bodie being found by certaine fishermen in the streame of Tibur was brought into Saint Peters Church the very Images did reuerence vnto it ORTH. Then Pope Stephen and Pope Sergius erred or at least your Images were deceiued PHIL. How oft shall I tell you wee confesse that they erred what will you haue more ORTH. And so erred Pope Stephen 4. who reordained those Bishops which Constantine the Antipope had ordained and that according to a decree of a Roman Councell as appeareth by these wordes of Anastasius alleadged by Baronius In eodem concilio statutum est vt omnia quae idem Constantinus in ecclesiasticis sacramentis ac diuino cultu egit iterari debuissent praeter sacrum Baptisma ac sanctum Chrisma that is It was decreed in the saide Councell that all things which the saide Constantine did in Ecclesiasticall Sacraments and diuine worship ought to be reiterated beside holy Baptisme holy Chrisme That the Pope himselfe did actually reordaine them may appeare by these wordes Huiusmodi promulgatis sententijs illicò Episcopi illi qui ab eodē Constantino ordinati sunt reuertentes iuxta ciusdem Pontificis sententiā in pristino honoris gradu electi denuò a Clero plebe cum solito decreto ad sedem Apostolicam properātes ab eodem sanctissimo Papa Consecrati sunt That is After the promulgation of such sentences presently those Bishops which were ordained of the same Constantine returning according to the sentence of the same Pope being chosen againe in the same degree of honour by the Clergy and people making hast with the accustomed decree to the See Apostolicke were Consecrated of the same most holy Pope PHIL. That place hath diuerse readings For some reade not Consecrati sunt but Conciliati sunt as you may see in Baronius ORTHO Indeede Baronius putteth Conciliati in the margent because he would haue it so but hee putteth Consecrati in the text because in Anastasius hee found it so And g Binius though he be
exceedingly addicted to Baronius yet in this point hee forsakes him and maketh no mention of Conciliati PHIL. You must not thinke that they were consecrated againe but receiued the mysterie of blessing after the manner of their ancestours which the Authour named the Sacrament of blessing ORTHOD. By Sacrament of blessing is meant the Sacrament of order For the Bishop which pronounceth the wordes whereby the mysticall blessing or the spirituall power is giuen is saide in the fourth Councell of Carthage to powre out the blessing PHIL. But the meaneth onely those solemnities which were accustomed to be vsed in the reconciliation of a Schismaticke or Hereticke ORTH. So saith Baronius but I will proue the contrary For as you heard before it was decreed that all which Constantine did in Ecclesiasticall Sacraments and diuine worship should be reiterated excepting onely Baptisme and confirmation but what thinke you did not Pope Stephen and the Romaine Councell account holy orders an Ecclesiasticall Sacrament PHIL. Yes vndoubtedly ORTH. Then vndoubtedly they decreede that the holy orders should be reiterated which were giuen by Constantine And therfore if they were onely reconciled and not reordained then Pope Stephen did contrary to his own decree which is most absurde Wherefore it is a cleare case that Pope Stephen the fourth vsed reordination PHIL. If he did so then he was blame worthy For though Constantine were a Schismaticall Antipope though of a lay man hee was suddenly made Bishop and hudled vp his orders in all hast contrary to the Canons yet wee cannot deny but he receiued those orders and had power in respect of his Episcopall Character to deliuer them vnto others And seeing his Character was indeleble as wee haue proued therefore though he had not onely beene a Schismaticke but also an Hereticke excommunicated and degraded yet he could not haue lost his power of giuen orders ORTHOD. If you continue constant in this opinion then you must at your leasure bethinke yourselfe how it may be reconciled with your former allegations out of Pope Innocent Pope Iohn and Pope Nicolas in the meane time it is sufficient for vs to take that you grant PHIL. I tolde you it was a disputable point and seemed almost insoluble to Peter Lombard Yet now at last by much disputing the trueth is found out learned men are agreed vpon it and vnlesse I be deceiued the holy doctrine of the indeleble character deliuered in the Councels of Florence and Trent was the very needle to direct their course CHAP. X. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Henry the eighth after the abolishing of the Popes Iurisdiction ORTH. THen at last to gather into briefe heads that which hath beene discoursed at large you graunt that Archbishop Cranmer was a Canonicall Bishop PHIL. I grant it for the reasons before alleadged ORTHO And you make no doubt of any of the Bishops of England before Cranmer PHIL. None at all as you heard before ORTHOD. And you say that euery Canonicall Bishop hath an Episcopall Character PHIL. We say so ORTHOD. And that this Character is so indeleble that no schisme no sinne no heresie no censures of the Church no excommunication suspension interdiction degradation nothing nothing at all sauing onely death if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting PHIL. All this was proued out of the most famous Councels of Florence and Trent ORTH. And that euery Bishop by vertue of his Episcopall Character hath power to giue holy orders yea euen the order of a Bishop PHIL. Very true so he be assisted by a sufficient number of Bishops and impose hands vpon a capable person according to the forme of the Church ORTHOD. THen to proceed to the rest of the Bishops consecrated in King Henries daies in the time of the pretended schisme were not they capable of the Episcopall function PHIL. Though King Henry abolished the authoritie of the Pope yet the sacrifice of the Masse continued till the end of his reigne So we make no doubt but the Priesthood then in vse was a sacrificing Priesthood complete in all points and consequently capable of the Episcopal Character notwithstanding the crime of schisme and heresie ORTHOD. Then George Browne Archbishop of Dublin Edmond Bonner whom king Henry preferred to Hereford and thence to London Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Westminster and such like were all capable of the Episcopall office PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTH. If these and such other as returned to the Pope in the dayes of Queene Mary why not William Barlow Rowland Lee Thomas Goodrich Iohn Hodgeskins For in King Henries dayes they were all alike all Masse Priestes and yet all opposite to the Popes Supremacy PHIL. There is one reason of all ORTHOD. If the Consecrated were capable what say you to the Consecrators were not they sufficient If they were not then what will become of Heath Bonner and Thurlby PHIL. They were sufficient ORTHOD. But were the Consecrations performed by a sufficient number of assistants PHIL. Yes verely ORTHOD. Then it seemeth that King Henry did not disanull the Canons of the Church which required that a Bishop should be Consecrated by three PHIL. No truely but rather established them by act of Parliament as Doctor Sanders acknowledgeth speaking of Henry the eight Cum ab Ecclesia sede Apostclica regnum suum diuisisset decreuit ne quisquam electus in Episcopum bullas pontificias vel mandatum Apoâ—â—olicum de consecratione requireret sed regium tantum diploma vt adferret secundum quod a tribus Episcopis cum consensu Metropolitae ordinatus iubebatur lege conâ—itâ—orum facta ad imitationem antiquorum Canonum esse verus Episcopus nec alto modo ordinatum pro Episcopo agnosci oportere That is Henry the eighth when he had diuided his kingdome from the Church and see Apostolicke decreed that no man elected Bishop should require the Popes Buls or mandate Apostolicke concerning his Consecration but that he should bring onely the kings letters patents according to which being ordained of three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane he was enacted to be a true Bishop by the law of Parliament made to the imitation of the ancient Canons and that no man otherwise Consecrated should be acknowledged for a Bishop ORTHOD Then it seemeth that all the Bishops in King Henries time were Consecrated by three PHIL. How could it be otherwise you haue heard out of Doctor Sanders that the Canons required three the act of Parliament required three and it appeareth by the act itselfe that if any Archbishop or Bishops did not within twentie dayes next after that the kings letters patents came to their hands Consecrate the person presented with all due circumstance they incurred the penaltie of a premunire therefore we may presume that the practise of those dayes was continually by three ORTHOD. SVrely it was then practised from time to time as may appeare by recorde whereof I will giue
a taste beginning from Cranmer Anno 1533. Thom. Cran. Cons. Arch. of Cant. 30. Mart. by Iohn Lincoln Iohn Exon. Henry Assaph Anno 1534. Rowland Lee Cons. B. of Lichfield 19. April by Thom Cant. Iohn Lincolne Christ. Sidon Anno 1535. George Browne Cons. Arch. Dublin 19. Mart. by Thom. Cant. Iohn Roff. Nich Sarum Anno 1536. Rob. Warton cons. B. of Assaph 20. Iul. by Tho. Cant. Ioh. Bangor Will. Norwic. An. 1537. Rob. Holgate cons. B. of Landaff 25. Mart. by Ioh. Roffen Nich. Sarum Ioh. Bangor An. 1537. Henr. Holbeck cons. B. of Bristow 24. Mart. by Iohn Roff. Hug. Wigorn. Rob. Assaph An. 1538. Will. Finch cons. Suf. of Taunton 7. April by Iohn Roff. Robert Assaph Will. Colchest An. 1540. Tho. Thurlby cons. B. of Westm. 9. Decemb. by Edm. Lond. Nich. Roff. Ioh. Bedf. An. 1541. Ioh. Wakeman cons. B. of Gloucest 25. Sept. by Thom. Cant. Edm. Land Tho. Westmonast An. 1541. Arth. Buckley cons. B. of Bangor 19. Febr. by Ioh. Sarum Will. Meneuensis Ioh. Glocest. An. 1542. Paul Bush cons. B. of Bristow 25. Iun. by Nich. Roff. Thom. Westmon Ioh. Bedf. An. 1545. Ant. Kitchin cons. B. of Lan. 3. Mat. 37. H. 8. by Thom. Westm. Thom. Sidon Suffrag Salop. NOw from the Consecrators let vs proceed to the forme of Consecration and consider whether the ancient Canons which you approue and vrge were altered in King Henrtes time PHIL. It doth not appeare by the Statute that there was any alteration For it was enacted that the Consecration should be solemnized with all due circumstance And moreouer that the Consecrators should giue to the Consecrated all Benedictions Ceremonies and things requisite for the same And surely if there had bene any alteration in things essentiall Doct. Sanders speaking purposely of this very point would not haue concealed it But he saith plainely It was his will speaking of King H. 8 that the Ceremonie and solemne Vnction should as yet be vsed in Episcopall Consecration after the maner of the Church And againe more plainely Primo loco sancierunt vt cum Episcopi ac Presbyteri Anglicani ritu ferè Catholico excepta R. Pontificis obedientia quam omnes obnegabant ad illud vsque tempus ordinati fuissent in posterum alia omnino forma ab ipsis praescripta Ordinationes fierent authoritate à puero Rege adid accepta That is First they decreed speaking of K. Edwards time That whereas the Bishops and Priests of England had bene ordained euen vnto that time almost after the Catholicke rite excepting the obedience of the Bishop of Rome which they all dented hereafter Ordinations should be made altogether after an other forme by them prescribed by authoritie which they receiued to that purpose from the King being a childe But the Statute of Q. Mary putteth all out of doubt Enacting That all such diuine Seruice and Administration of Sacraments as were most commonly vsed in this Realme of England in the last yeere of King Henry the 8. should be vsed and frequented through the whole Realme of England and all other the Queenes dominions and no other in any other maner forme or degree Now the makers of this Statute were perswaded that holy Order was a Sacrament therefore holy Orders were ministred in Q. Maries time as they were in the last yeere of K. Henry But all good Catholicks will confesse that in Q. Maries time the true essentiall forme of Consecration was obserued Therefore I graunt that it was also vsed all the time of King Henry ORTHOD. If the persons were capable and consecrated by a sufficient number of Canonical consecrators according to the forme of your Church then you must needs iudge their Consecration effectuall and them Canonicall Bishops PHIL. Our Church in Q Maries time did so iudge of them for most of her old Bishops were made in Schismate Henriciano Yet they were allowed and the new euen Cardinall Poole among the rest did all deriue their Consecration from the old yet were they all approued by our holy Father the Bishop of Rome and by name B. Bonner and B. Thurlby to whom he giueth honorable testimony in his Commission for the proceeding against Cranmer ORTHOD. Then if we can deriue our Bishops from any three in King Henries reigne before the banishing of the Pope or after you must acknowledge them to be Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth so ORTHOD. Or else Bonner and his coequals must lie in the dust and all the Bishops made in Q. Maries time must eternally be cancelled out of the Catalogue of Bishops Hitherto of K. Henries time Proceed we now to the Bishops in K. Edwards dayes and consider whether those were Gold or lead CHAP. XI Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Edward the sixt PHIL. THe Bishops in King Edwards time we take for no Bishops ORTHOD. No But you must there is no remedie And for the more perspicuitie let vs distinguish them into certaine ranckes The first of such as were made both Priests and Bishops in K. Henries time and were continued in King Edwards The second of such as were Priests in K. Henries time and made Bishops in K. Edwards To these you may adde a third of such if any such you find as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of K. Edward The first you haue confessed already to be Canonicall therefore let vs come to the second in which are those blessed Saints and glorious Martyrs Ridley Hooper and Ferrar concerning whom first I demaund whether they were in the order of Priesthood or no PHIL. Yes father Parsons graunteth it saying Ridley studied at Cambridge and there was made Priest trauailed ouer the sea to Paris and returning againe became King Henties Chaplaine Likewise Iohn Hooper as may be seene by Fox his relation of him was a Priest in Oxford in the daies of King Henry the eight So Robert Ferrar Priest and Chaplaine to Cranmer in King Henries time Thus I confesse that they were Priests but I deny that they were Bishops for father Parsons speaking of the â—oxian Calendar and Saints of the month of Februarie in which number were Hooper and Ferrar saith Among Foxe his Saints there is neither eremâ—â—icall nor monasâ—icall life noâ— solitude either from the worlde or women nor any one so much as pretending the title of vâ—rginitie in any seâ—e nor any true Bishoppe indeed if their ordination bee examined For beside Cranmer other Bishops or Clergie men were there none of all the packe that was burned ORTHOD. What say you then to father â—atimer who was ordained in the same manner in all respects as Bonner was Though hee had now relinguished his Bishopricke yet still according to your owne principles hee was a true Bishoppe 〈◊〉 respect of the Episcopall character But to prosecute the present point what mislike you in Ridley Hooper and Ferrar you haue already confessed that they were
Priests why should you deny them to be Bishops PHIL. The Popes Commissioners Vnpriested them in Queene Maries time but would not Vnbishop them thereby acknowledging their Priestly function receiued in King Henries time but denying their Episcopall receiued in King Edwards as may appeare by the words of Doctor Brooke Bishop of Glocester the Popes subdelegate to Ridley at his degradation Wee must against our willâ—s proceed according to our Commission to disgrading taking from you the dignitie of Priesthood for we take you for no Bishop as Iohn Fox your owne historian recordeth ORTH. Was not hee and all the rest of them Consecrated by a sufficient number PHIL. Yes vndoubtedly for that law was alwaies obserued in King Edwards time as Doctor Sanders confesseth Câ—remontam autem solennem vnctionem more Ecclesiastico adhuc in consecratione illa adhiberi voluit quam postea profiâ—â—â—ns in pâ—â—â—â— Edouardus Sextus sustulit proea Caluinicas aliquot deprecationes substituit serâ—ata tamen semper priori de numero presenâ—â—um Episcoporum qui â—anuâ— ordinando impoâ—erent lege that is It was his will speaking of King Henry the eight that the ceremony and solemne vnction should as yet be vsed in Episcopall consecration after the manner of the Church which King Edward profiting from better to worse did afterward take away and insteed thereof substitute certaine Caluinicall deprecations yet the former law concerning the number of Bishops which should impose hands vpon the ordained was alwaies obserued ORTHOD If you or any other dare deny it it may bee iustified by authenticall records Out of which behold a true abstract of the consecration of those renowned Martyrs Nich Ridley Cons 5. Septemb. 1547. 1. Ed 6. by Henry Lincoln Iohn Bedford Thom. Sidon Rob. Ferrar Cons 9. Septemb. 1549. 2. Ed 6. by Thom. Canterb Henry Lincoln Nich Roff. Iohn Hooper Cons. 8. Mart. 1550. by Thom. Canterb Nich London Iohn Roff. To which let vs adde those worthy confessours Iohn Poynet Iohn Scory and Miles Couerdale Iohn Poynet Cons. 29. Iune 1550. by Thom. Canterb. Nich London Arthur Bangor Iohn Scory and Miles Couerdale Cons. 30. Aug. 1551. by Thom Canterb. Nich London Iohn Bedford NOw seeing the Consecrated were capable and the Consecrators a sufficient number why should not the Consecration bee effectuall For if Cranmer or any other lawfull Bishop by his Commission with sufficient assistants could make canonicall Bishops in the daies of K. Henry as you haue confessed what reason can you giue why the same Cranmer or the like Bishop with the like assistants should not make the like in the daies of K. Ed PHIL. Because the case was altered for in King Henries time Ordinations were made with ceremony and solemne vnction after the Ecclesiasticall manner which king Edward tooke cleane away and in place thereof appointed certaine Caluinicall deprecations as was before declared ORTHO Those which Sanders calleth Caluinicall deprecations are godly and religious prayers answerable to the Apostolicke practise For whereas the Scripture witnesseth that Matthias the Deacons and others receiued imposition of hands with prayers Salmeron the Iesuite expoundeth the places thus intelligendum est de precibus quibus à deo petebant vt efficeret illos bonos Episcopos Presbyteros Diaconos potestatemque illis ad ca munera prestaret that is It is to be vnderstood of prayers whereby they desired of God that he would make them good Bishops Priests and Deacons and would giue them abilitie to performe those offices Such prayers are vsed in the Church of England As for example in the ordering of Priests ALmighty God giuer of all things which by thy holy spirit hast appointed diuers orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold these thy seruants now called to the office of Priesthood and replenish them so with the trueth of thy doctrine and innocency of life that both by word and good example they may faithfully serue thee in this office to the glory of thy Name and profit of thy congregation through the merits of our Sauiour Iesus Christ c. And in the Consecration of Bishops ALmighty God c. Grant we beseech thee to this thy seruant such grace that hee may euermore bee ready to spread abroad the Gospell and glad tidings of reconcilement to God and to vse the authoritie giuen vnto him not to destroy but to saue not to hurt but to helpe so that hee as a wise and a faithfull seruant giuing to thy family meate in due season may at the last bee receiued into ioy c. These and the like are the praiers which Sanders traduceth Wherefore we may with comfort applie to our selues the saying of Saint Peter If wee bee railed vpon for the name of Christ blessed are wee for the spirit of glory and of God resteth vpon vs which on your part is euill spoken of but on our part is glorified Thus that which you impute to them as a blemish is perfect beautie But what else doe you mislike in their ordinations PHIL. They did not obserue the Ecclesiasticall manner ORTHOD. In the third and fourth yeere of Edward the sixth there was an act made to abolish certaine superstitious bookes and among the rest the Ordinals About the same time was made another acte for the ordering of Ecclesiastiall Ministers the effect whereof was that such forme of consecrating Bishops Priestes and Deacons as by six Prelates and sixe other learned in Gods Law should bee agreed vpon and set out vnder the great Seale of England within a time limited should lawfully bee vsed and none other In the fift and sixt of his raigne was made another acte for the explaining and perfecting of the booke of common prayer and administration of the Sacraments which booke so explained was annexed to the acte or statute with a forme or manner of making and consecrating Archbishops Bishops Priestes and Deacons Which as at this day so then was not esteemed another distinct booke from the booke of common prayer but they were both ioyntly reputed as one booke and so established by acte of Parliament In the first of Queene Mary by the repealing of this acte the booke was disanulled but it was established againe in the first of Q. Elizabeth and confirmed in the eight of her reigne so that all the Ministers of England are ordered according to that booke concerning which I would knowe wherein it transgresseth the Ecclesiasticall manner Sanders saith that King Edward tooke away the Ceremony What Ceremony If hee vnderstand the Ceremony of imposition of hands he slandereth King Edward If hee meane their blessing ofrings and Crosiers the grauitie of that sacred action may well spare them as for the solemne vnction your selues confesse it to bee accidentall Other of your Ceremonies being partly superfluous partly superstitious the wisedome of our Church hath discreetly and religiously pared away establishing
such a forme as is holy and acceptable in the sight of God But whereas you grant that the persons were capable and the consecrators Canonicall it behooueth you to discouer some essentiall defect in our forme or else you must of necessitie approoue our consecration PHIL. DOctour Kellison saith that in King Edwards time neither matter nor forme of ordination was vsed and so none were truely ordained much lesse had they commission to Preach Heresie and so could not send others to Preach whence it followeth that all the superintendents and Ministers are without calling and vocation ORTHOD. What meaneth Kellison by the matter of ordination PHIL. According to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church holy order is a Sacrament and euery Sacrament of the newe Law consisteth of things and wordes as the matter and the forme which are so certaine and determined of God that it is not lawfull to change them Now in ordination the matter is a sensible signe as for example imposition of hands which Bellarmine calleth the matter essentiall ORTHOD. Others of your owne men are of another opinion for Salmeron the Iesuite hauing proposed the question bringeth reasons for both sides but seemeth to incline to the contrary Fabius Incarnatus asketh this question how many things are of the substance of order and answereth that six But imposition of handes is none of the six Nauarrus speaking of imposition of handes saith Illa non est de substantia Sacramenti that is it is not of the substance of the Sacrament For which opinion hee alleadgeth Scotus But if imposition of handes bee the matter of ordination then Kellison is guiltie of lying and slandering when hee saith that in King Edwards dayes the matter of ordination was not vsed For Sanders himselfe though a shamelesse fellow yet confesseth that in the dayes of King Edward the former lawe concerning the number of Bishops which should impose handes vpon the ordained was alwayes obserued A point so cleare that it might bee iustified by many records but what neede wee goe to records seeing it is a plaine case that the very booke of ordination which was made and established in the dayes of King Edward commandeth imposition of hands wherefore if the essentiall matter bee imposition of hands then I must conclude out of your owne principles that in King Edwards dayes the essentiall matter was vsed PHIL. In the ordering of a Deacon there is not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the Gospels so in ordering of a Priest not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the instruments that is of the Patten and Challice and both these Ceremonies are essentiall as Bellarmine proueth Therefore why may we not say that in Episcopall Consecration not only imposition of hands but other ceremonies also belong to the essentiall matter ORTHOD. What other ceremonies I beseech you doe you meane the holy oyle wherewith the head of the consecrated is annointed with these wordes Let thy head bee annointed and consecrated with celestiall benediction or the ring which is blessed with prayer and holy water and put vpon his finger with these wordes Accipe annulum fidei signaculum Receiue the Ring the seale of faith or the Crosier deliuered in these wordes receiue the staffe of the Pastorall office If you meane these or the like and vrge them as essentiall you must giue vs leaue to reiect them because they are only human inuentions You told vs before out of Bellarmine that the matter of ordination is certaine and determined of God now where shall wee finde the determinations of God but in the booke of God we finde in holy Scripture imposition of hands and we imbrace it as Apostolicall as for your rings and Crosiers when you can demonstrate them out of the booke of God we will then accept them as the determinations of God in the meane time we cannot acknowledge them for the essentiall matter of ordination But now from the matter let vs come to the forme 4. PHI. IT is agreed vpon that the forme consisteth in the words which are vttered while the sensible signe is vsed and they are the very same whereby the spirituall power is giuen ORTHOD. I hope you will not say that these words receiue the ring or receiue the staffe concerne the essentiall forme tell vs therfore in what words the true forme coÌ„sisteth that so we may the better examine the speech of Kellison PHIL. The words may be diuers yet the sense the same and this diuersitie of words may seuerally signifie the substance of the Sacrament as for example the Easterne Church baptizeth in these words Let this seruant of Christ be baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost The Latin Church in these words I baptize thee c. Here are two formes of words but each of them containeth the true and substantiall forme of baptisme So in ordination the Easterne Bishops instructed of their ancestours conferre the orders of a Bishop Priest and Deacon Per orationem deprecatoriam By the way of prayer whereas we after the manner of the Romane Church doe conferre them Per modum imperandi in the imperatiue moode by way of command and yet the spirituall power may be conueyed by both For Pope Innocent teacheth that the Scripture mentioneth onely imposition of hands and prayer as for other things vsed in ordination he saith they were inuented by the Church otherwise it had beene sufficient if the ordainer had said onely be thou a Priest or be thou a Deacon but seeing the Church hath inuented other formes they are to be obserued ORTHOD. By what words is the Episcopall power giuen in the Church of Rome PHIL. By these words receiue the holy Ghost because they are vsed when the Bishop imposeth hands And therfore as Priests in their ordination receiue the holy Ghost that is as Bellarmin expounds it out of Chrysostome and Cyrillâ—a ghostly power consisting in forgiuing and retaining of sinnes so a Bishop in his Consecration receiueth the holy Ghost that is A ghostly power consisting in the performance of those things which are reserued properly to Bishops amongst which the power of ordination is most eminent ORTHOD. If you call these words the forme of Consecration then you must acknowledge that not only the matter but also the right forme of Consecration was vsed in the dayes of King Edward for these words were then vsed while the Bishops imposed hands as appeareth by the booke and consequently you must confesse that Ridley Hooper and Ferrar were rightly ordained Bishops and moreouer that Kellison is a notorious slanderer 5. THus much of the second rancke Now come we to the third wherein we may place such if any such be found as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of king Edward PHIL. We thinke that no man can possibly haue the order of a Bishop
which hath not the right order of Priesthood but the Priesthood conferred in King Edwards time was no Priesthood because they wanted the authority to offer the blessed sacrifice of the Masse therefore those Priests were not capable of the Episcopall order ORTHO I answere first that seeing that King Edward rained but sixe yeeres and fiue moneths it is likely that most of them which were aduanced in his time to bee Bishops were before his time in the order of Priesthood Secondly if any be produced which were not yet it shal be iustified God willing when we come to the point that the order of Priesthood conferred in the dayes of King Edward Queene Elizabeth and King Iames is the true ministery of the Gospel and that your sacrificing Priesthood is sacrilegious and abominable In the meane time you must giue vs leaue to holde that the ministery of the Church of England is holy in the sight of God and iustifiable in the sight of man CHAP. XII Of the Bishops Consecrated in the dayes of Queene Marie THe lineall descent hath led vs to the Bishops in Queen Maries time concerning which shal I craue your iudgement PHIL. You know it already they were all Canonical ORTHOD. For the more distinct proceeding let vs diuide them into two ranckes the old Bishops and the new the old I cal such as being cōsecrated before her time were continued in her time the new which were Consecrated in her time PHIL. All which were allowed for Bishops in Queene Maries time whether old or new were Canonicall ORTHO The old Bishops were all made in the dayes of K. Henry the eighth and almost all in those very times which you brand with imputation of schisme and heresie when none could bee Consecrated vnlesse hee did sweare to the king against the Pope Wherefore seeing you iudged both Consecrators and Consecrated schismaticall and hereticall and yet esteeme them Canonicall your obiections of schisme and heresie must eternally bee silenced in the question of Canonicall Bishops For if these crimes can frustrate a Consecration then their Consecration was frustrate and they were no Bishops or if they were Bishops and Canonicall then all the Bishops in King Henries time were likewise Canonicall Moreouer some of them whom you so commend were Bishops in King Edwards time as for example Thomas Thurlby whom King Henrie promoted to be Bishop of Westminster was aduanced by King Edward to the Bishopricke of Norwich and afterward preferred by Queene Mary to the Bishopricke of Ely and moreouer to be one of her priuie Councell Yea some of them had the place of a Bishop in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth Namely Anthony Kitchin who in King Henries time was made Bishop of Landaff kept his dignities and place in the dayes of K. Edward continued the same all the reigne of Queene Mary and so till the day of his death which was in the fift yeere of Queene Elizabeth Wherefore in iustifying the old Bishops you iustifie al generally which were Consecrated in King Henries daies and some which continued in King Edwards and Queene Elizabeths But now from the old let vs come to the new PHIL. QVeene Mary aduanced Holiman bishop of Bristow Coates bishop of Chester Watson bishop of Lincolne Morris bishop of Rochester Morgan bishop of S. Dauis Brooke bishop of Glocester Glin bishop of Bangor Christophorson bishop of Chichester Dauid Poole bishop of Peterborow Cardinall Poole bishop of Canterbury and others ORTHOD. And these reuerend Prelats Bush bishop of Bristow Tailor bishop of Lincolne Scory bishop of Chichester Barlow bishop of Bathe and Wells Couerdale bishop of Exeter and Harly bishop of Hereford with sundry others were at that time forced to leaue their bishopricks For what cause partly for not yeelding to the Pope and Popish Religion partly because they were married which Greg. Martin calleth a polluting of holy Orders though S. Paul saith it is honourable among all men and the bed vndefiled But let vs see the Consecration of your new bishops PHIL. I will begin with that renowned Prelate Cardinall Poole whose Consecration followeth Anno 1555. Reginald Poole cons. Archb. Cant. 22. Mart. by Nichol Arch. Ebor. Thom. Eltens Edmund Lond. Rich. Wigorn. Ioh. Lincoln Mauric Roff. Thom. Asaph Anno 1557. Thom Watson Dauid Pole Cons. B. 15. Aug. by Nich. Ebor. Thom. Eli. Wil. Bangor Anno 1557. Ioh. Christophorson cons. B. 21. No. by Edmund Lond. Tho. Elien Mauric Roff. ORTHOD. All these deriue their Consecration from bishops which were made in the time of the pretended Schisme and some of them from Cranmer himselfe therefore you must either acknowledge all them and namely Cranmer for Canonicall or neither Cardinall Poole nor any of the rest made in Queene Maries time can be Canonicall THE THIRD BOOKE OF THE BISHOPS CONSEcrated in the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth and of our gracious Soueraigne King IAMES CHAP. I. Of the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some Antecedents and Consequents of their Depositions PHIL. THe reuolution of times hath brought vs to the raigne of Queene Elizabeth euen to that blacke and dolefull day wherein all the Bishops of England all I say one onely excepted were deposed from their degrees and dignities For a great penaltie was inflicted vpon such as should after the Feast of S. Iohn Baptis◠1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesiasticall Office whatsoeuer after the old rite or administer any Sacrament after the Romane maner to wit That hee which offended against that Law for the first time should pay 200 Nobles or be in bonds sixe Moneths for the second 400. Nobles or a yeere in bonds for the third he should be in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods By which meanes it came to passe That at the day prescribed the holy and diuine Offices ceased to be performed publikely through the whole Kingdome And because the Bishops would not consent to those impieties nor affirme vpon their Oathes that they beleeued in their consciences That the Queene onely was the Supreame gouernesse of the Church of England vnder Christ they were all saue one shortly after deposed from their Degree and dignitte and committed to certaine prisons and custodies whereupon they are all at this day dead with the long tediousnesse of their miseries The names of which most glorious Confessours I will set downe that the thing may be had in euerlasting remembrance First of all Nicholas Archbishop of Yorke and a little before that time Lord Chancellour of England then Edmund Bonner Bishop of London and Tunstall of Durham Iohn of Winton Thomas of Lincolne Thurlby of Ely Turberuill of Exeter Borne of Bath Pole of Peterborow Baine of Lichfield Cuthbert of Chester Oglethorp of Carlile and Thomas Goldwell of S. Asaph c. ORTH. Here are two things to be discussed The deposing of the old Bishops and aduancing of the new Concerning the first
lay his finger vpon your pulse and easily discerne the trembling of your heart For this speech which you haue borrowed from Sanders doth intimate vnto vs that the Bishops refused to dispute because they were not able to maintaine their opinions by the Scriptures ANd as their behauiour was vndutiful in these two former respects concerning the Queenes Coronation and the disputation So thirdly it was most disloyall in that many of them went about to excommunicate the Queene as is testified both by Sanders and Allen who commended their wicked intention as a point of magnanimitie affirming that therein they did stoutly and worthily as could be wished Now let any indifferent man iudge what these men merited at her highnesse hands and yet haue I said nothing of their refusall of the oath of Supremacy which point is referred to the proper place Hitherto we haue considered how they deserued now let vs see how they were serued PHIL. THat is set downe by Pius Quintus in his sentence declaratory against Queene Elizabeth in these words Catholicos Antistites Ecclesiarum rectores in vincula coniecit vbi multi diuturno languore tristitia confecti extremum vitae diem misere finierunt That is She laid in chaines the Catholicke Bishops and gouernours of Churches where many of them wasted with long languishment and sorrow ended their life miserably ORTHOD. Thirteene of these Bishops are named by Sanders to which we may adde Pates of Worcester so the whole number is fourteene as Cardinall Allen hath it Now of these fourteene foure were of the Prouince of Yorke and 10. of Cant. In the Prouince of Yorke to begin with N. Heath Archb. of that see he being L. Chauncelour of Eng. made open declaration in Parliament of Q. Maries death and the vndoubted title of the Lady Elizabeth Whereupon she was presently proclaimed Queene For which loyalty he was honorably regarded neuer coÌ„mitted to prison or custody but permitted to liue at his owne liberty vpon some lands which he had purchased in quietnes and ease and last of all dying full of yeeres was suffered to bequeath his substance by will testament From Yorke let vs go to Durham the Bishop wherof Cut. Tonstal after his depriuation kept at Lambeth with Matthew Parker Archbishop of Canterbury where he liued so long as he liued with comfort and being 85. yeeres old yeelded to nature and was honourably buried The third was Owen Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill who as he had shewed himselfe more dutiful then the rest in the Coronation of the Queene so there is no doubt but he was accordingly respected who being neither in prison nor custody shortly after paid his debt to nature and dyed of an apoplexy The last of these foure was Cutbert Scot Bishop of Chester who slipped away beyond the seas where he liued in voluntary banishment From the Prouince of Yorke let vs come to the Prouince of Canterbury where we find that Iohn white Bishop of Winchester saluted the prison though not for any of the reasons alleadged by Sanders but for an vndutifull Sermon yet afterward he was set at liberty and died out of prison Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Ely hauing indured a time of imprisonment neither very sharpe nor very long was permitted to liue in the Archbishoppes house where till the day of his death that is for tenne yeeres hee was intreated so kindly that he is supposed to haue taken more pleasure in this time of his restraint then euer he did before in the middest and fullest streame of his highest honours Gilbert Borne Bishop of Bath was committed to the custody of Master Carew his olde acquaintance Deane of Exeter Iames Turberuill Bishop of Exeter enioyed a priuate life a long time liuing and dying in liberty Dauid Pole Bishop of Peterborrow being alwayes vsed with courtesie and vsing his liberty dyed in his owne house in a ripe age Neither doe I finde that Bayne Bishop of Lichfield was in durance who dyed soone after of the stone Richard Pates Bishop of Worcester and Thomas Goldwell of Saint Asaph departed the kingdome not by constraint of law but of their owne accord The Bishop of Lincolne Thomas Watson a churlish and froward man liued after his depriuation 24. yeeres first at more libertie in the houses of the Bishoppes of Ely and Rochester but afterward when your Emissaries from Rome did trouble the Church he was kept somewhat more streightly in the I le of Ely The last of all is Edmund Bonner Bishop of London who in Queene Maries time was the principall Butcher and therefore so odious to the people that as our learned Bishop hath of late truely deliuered It was not safe for him to goe abroad least the people should haue stoned him to death and he indeed liued and dyed in prison but where if you had seene him to vse the wordes of our Reuerend Bishop You would not haue sayd that he had beene pined or starued with hunger hee liued daintily there were Gardens and Orchards if it pleased him to walke Finally this prison was nothing like a prison but onely that therein he was confined Thus it appeareth that of the 14. some were neuer confined at all Others confined onely to the custody of their friends but neuer saluted the prison others saluted it but were soone released and those which stayed longest in prison yet were not layed in fetters as impious Pius Quintus hath blazed to the world All these 14. did liue euen till the glasse of Nature was fully runne and expired and some of them were intertained at the Tables of Bishops Gratis sine sumptu copiosè sine defectu in oâ—io sine molestia omni That is Freely without cost or charges plentifully without want in ease without all trouble or molestation If you will not beleeue me yet beleeue your owne fellow and friend our mortall enemie Philopater the Iesuite who vseth these words vnto the Queene While in the beginning of your raigne you dealt more mildly with the Catholickes while as yet you vrged no man with very great violence while as yet you pressed none very much either to the partaking of your Sect or to the deniall of the ancient faith truely all things seemed to goe with a more calme course neither were there heard any great complaints neither was there seene any great dissention or repugnancie c. Thus malice it selfe conquered with euidence of trueth beareth witnesse that those beginnings were more milde and calme none greatly then vrged or pressed so that in those dayes were not heard any great complaints Thus we see euen by the iudgement of your Iesuit what great cause you had to complaine in such pitifull maner if your little finger do but ake you must be moaned but if you make our very hearts to ake it is nothing your mole-hils of miseries must be made mountaines and our mountaines must be accounted for mole-hilles
Binius out of Baronius Thus much for the prophane title As for the thing it selfe The Scripture witnesseth that Salomon was King ouer all Israel if ouer all Israel then ouer the tribe of Leui and consequently euen ouer Abiathar the high Priest if he be their king why are not they his subiects If they be his subiects and he their Soueraigne how can they bee exempted from his Iurisdiction A point so cleare that sundry of your learned writers haue confessed it IOhannes Parisiensis saith that in the old Testament the Priests which annointed kings without all doubt were subiect vnto kings Your owne Iesuite Salmeron affirmeth that potestas spiritualis legis naturae vel Moisisminor erat Regia potestate in veteri testamento ideo etiam summi Sacerdotes regibus subdebantur that is the spirituall power of the Law of nature and of the law of Moses was lesser then the princely power in the old Testament therefore euen the high Priests were subiect vnto kings Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith Non mirum esset si in veteri Testamento summa potestas fuisset temporalis that is It were no maruell if in the olde Testament the chiefe power were the temporall Dominicus a Soto in veteri Testamento dubio procul Sacerdotes a principibus secularibus iudicati that is In the olde Testament without doubt the Priests were iudged by the secular princes Fryer Paule This doctrine that Ecclesiasticall persons vnlesse they be free by priuiledge and fauour should be subiect to secular Magistrates is demonstrated and confirmed by examples of the old Testament whereby it appeareth that all the kings did command iudge and punish Priests and that this was done not onely of bad kings or indifferent but of the most holy and religious Dauid Salomon Ezechias and Iosias Carerius in veteri Testamento Rex super Sacerdotes potestatem habebat eosque pro crimine occidere multo magis officijs dignitatibus spiritualibus eos priuare poterat that is In the old Testament the king had power ouer the Priests and might for their offences kill them much more depriue them of their offices and spirituall dignities Hitherto Carerius out of Tostatus PHIL. IF the kings of Israel had such authoritie doth it follow that Christian Princes must haue the like ORTHOD. What else You must consider that the new Testament doth yeeld vs no examples of Christian kings therefore when the question is concerning the power of kings in the Church of God wee must goe to the fountaine that is the old Testament where there was both a Church and kings in the Church religiously performing the office of kings and what Princely authoritie they exercised for which they are approoued by the spirit of God the same without all question belongeth in like maner to Christian Princes therefore what authoritie Salomon had ouer Abiathar the same haue Christian Princes by the law of God ouer their owne Clergie CHAP. III. Of the Oath of the Princes Supremacy for denying whereof the old Bishops were depriued PHIL. IS not the deposing of a Bishop a spirituall censure how then can it be performed by the secular powers ORTH. The secular powers doe noâ— depose a Bishop by degradation nor by vtterly debarring him from his Episcopall function but onely by excluding him from the exercise of Episcopallactes vpon their subiects and within their dominions And this godly Princes haue performed from time to time in the best and primatiue ages against the Arrians Nestotians and other heretickes as might be declared by many examples PHIL. Shall a Prince take that from them which he cannot giue them ORTH. Hee cannot giue them an intrinsecall power to minister the word and Sacraments which proceedeth from the key of order but he may giue them an extrinsecall power that is a libertie to execute their function within his dominions This he may doe by vertue of the scepter which God hath giuen him though he meddle not with the keyes which God hath giuen to the Church and as he may giue this libertie so he may take it away vpon iust cause as Salomon did when he deposed Abiathar PHIL. If we should admit that Queene Elizabeth had so much authority as king Salomon yet this would not iustifie her proceedings For it belongeth not to Parliaments or secular Princes to make lawes concerning the depositions of Bishops or to inflict any such punishments ORTHOD. Did not the Emperour Martian make a law that such Bishops as went about to infringe any of those things which were enacted by that holy and generall Councell of Chalcedon should be deposed Did not Iustinian make a constitution that if any Patriarch Metropolitane Bishop or Clerke should violate his decrees made for the preseruation of holy order and estate he should be excluded from the Priestly function Did not Theodosius the yonger likewise make a law that the Nestorian Bishops should be expelled and deposed PHIL. The lawes of these Emperours concerning the deposing of Bishops were not put in execution by laymen as Queene Elizabeths were but by Bishops ORTH. Gratian the Emperour made a lawe against the Arrians commanding them like wilde beastes to be driuen from the Churches and the places to be restored to good pastours the execution whereof he committed to Saporas the most famous captaine of that time If this were allowable in the Emperour Gratian then much more in Queene Elizabeth for he did it when there was plentie of good Bishops within his owne dominon Queene Elizabeth did it onely in case of necessitie Neither did she send a captaine to driue them away by violence as Gratian did but appointed honourable commissioners to tender the oath vnto them vpon the obstinate refusall whereof their places were voyd by vertue of the Statute PHIL. GRatian had for him the determination of Synods which had already coÌ„demned the Arrians therefore in this case it was lawfull for him both to make a Law and to commit the execution of it to Lay-men ORTHOD. So had Q. Elizabeth For a Synod of Bishops professing your owne Religion among whom was Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester gaue to K. Henry the title of Supreame head of the Church of England as may appeare by the Acts of the Synod it selfe About two yeeres after the same was renewed in another Synod and about two yeeres after that the two Vniuersities deliuered their iudgement That the Pope had no more to doe in England by the Law of God then any other Bishop The determination of Cambridge is already extant in print The like of Oxeford remaineth in Record wherein after long deliberation and much disputation with all diligence Zeale and conscience they make this profession Tandem in hanc sententiam vnanimiter omnes conuenimus ac concordâ—s fuimus viz. Romanum Episcopum maiorem aliquam iurisdictionem non habere sibi à Dâ—o collatam in sacra Scriptura in
hoc regno Angliae quam alium quemuis externum Episcopum i. At the length we all agreed with one minde and one heart vpon this conclusion to wit That the Bishop of Rome hath not any greater iurisdiction giuen him of God in holy Scripture ouer this kingdome of England then any other forraine Bishop And Bellarmine himselfe telleth vs out of Cheynie the Carthusian Monke that in the yeere 1535. there was a Parliament wherein it was Enacted That all should renounce the Pope and all other forraine powers and acknowledge the King to be head of the Church vpon their oath Thus it is manifest that the Bishops and Clergie did then both approue the Title and take the oath which Bishops were such as your selues commend to bee inferiour to none in Europe for vertue and learning And truely excepting their opinions in Religion wherein they were caried away with the streame of the time it cannot be denied but that generally they were very well learned Erasmus inuited into England by William Warham Archbishop of Canterbury when he had considered what difference there was betweene the Bishops of England and other Nations he published to the world in Print That onely England had learned Bishops Moreouer most of these learned Bishops did openly in the Pulpit at Pauls-Crosse defend the Kings Title and sundry of them by their published writings maintained the same The selfe-same oath was taken againe in the â—aigne of K. Edward PHIL. They changed their minds in the dayes of Q. Mary ORTHOD. Very true But their inconstancie cannot abolish the soliditie of their former confession and though they recalled their opinions yet they neuer answered their owne Arguments which remaine still in Print as a witnesse to the world that their former iudgement was grounded vpon Gods Veritie and that the Princes Title did stand with right and equitie PHIL. THese were Bishops and Synods of our owne nation onely but was there euer any learned man else-where that did approue this Title was there euer any King or Queene Christian or Heathen Catholicke or Hereticke in all the world beside before our age that did practise challenge or accept it ORTHOD. Looke into the godly Kings of Iuda Looke into the proceedings of Christian Emperours Constantine Gratian Theodosius and such like Looke into the Lawes of Charles and Lodowicke and you shall see that they practised as much as euer we ascribed to the Queene in this oath When the Councell of Ephesus by the packing of Dioscorus had allowed the cursed opinion of Eutyches and deposed Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople Pope Leo vpon this occasion wrote thus vnto the Emperour Theodosius Behold most Christian and reuerend Emperour I with the rest of my fellow Bishops make supplication vnto you That all things may stand in the same state in which they were before any of these Iudgements vntill a greater number of Bishops may be gathered out of the whole world Who made this supplication Pope Leo a holy and learned Pope To whom To the Emperour Theodosius For what That the Emperour would command not intreat but command So this is an action of Royall authoritie What should he command That all things might stand in their former state What things meaneth he The highest mysteries of Religion concerning the Natures and person of Christ. But what is it to stand in the former state That it might be lawfull for all men so to iudge and speake of these holy Mysteries as they did before the springing vp of the Eutychian Heresie for then they held the Trueth according to the Apostolicke faith And this he beseecheth the Emperour to command notwithstanding the contrary determination of the Councell of Ephesus The second Councell of Ephesus which apparantly subuerted the faith cannot rightly bee called a Councell which your Highnes for very loue to the Trueth will make voyd by your Decree to the contrary most glorious Emperour I therefore earnestly request and beseech your Maiestie by our Lord Iesus Christ the founder and guider of your Kingdome That in this Councell of Chalcedon which is presently to be kept you will not suffer the Faith to be called in question which our blessed Fathers preached being deliuered vnto them from the Apostles Neither permit such things as haue bene long since condemned by them to be freshly reuiued againe but that you will rather command That the Constitutions of the ancient Nicene Councell may stand in force the interpretation of Hereticks being remooued Here the Pope ascribeth to the Emperour power to ratifie and establish those Councels which are according to the Scripture and to disanull those whose determinations are contrary to the Scripture Yea he acknowledgeth that the Emperour hath authoritie to inhibite and restraine Generall Councels that they call not the Trueth of God in question Which the Emperour Martian practised entring the Councell of Chalcedon in his owne person and forbidding the Bishops to auouch any thing concerning the birth of our Sauiour otherwise then was contained in the Nicene Creed Moreouer when the Councell of Chalcedon was concluded Pope Leo wrote thus againe to the Emperour Because I must by all meanes obey your pietie and most Religious will I haue willingly giuen my consenting sentence to those Synodall Constitutions which concerning the confirmation of the Catholicke faith and condemnation of Hereticks pleased me very well The Emperour required the Pope to subscribe And he cheerefully did so Protesting that for his part he must by all meanes obey the Princes will in those cases Now tell me whether the Pope did not acknowledge the Emperour and the Emperour shew himselfe to be Supreame gouernour ouer all persons euen in causes Ecclesiasticall AS the Emperour Martian did practise this Supremacie so the Emperour Basill did challenge the Title when he said in the Councel of Constantinople That the gouernment of the vniuersall Ecclesiasticall Ship was committed vnto him by the Diuine prouidence PHIL. The words are thus in Surius In exordio Synodi ita locutus est Basilius Cum diuina benignissima prouidentia nobis gubernacula vniuersalis Nauis commisisset c. that is In the beginning of the Synod thus said Basilius the Emperor when the diuine and most benigne prouidence had committed vnto vs the gouernment of the vniuersall ship c. Where by vniuersall ship is meant ciuill administration not Ecclesiasticall as Surius hath well obserued ORTHO Binius relating the acts of the councell telleth how the Emperours Epainagnosticum was read in the councell in these words Diuina clementique prouidentia gubernacula Ecclesiasticae nâ—uis vobis committente that is The diuine and gracius prouidence of God committing vnto you the gouernment of the Ecclesiasticall ship Where you see that he speaketh of the Ecclesiasticall ship PHIL. To whom was the gouernment of the ship committed Vobis to you that is to the Bishops what is this to the Emperour ORTH. Indeed
hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
declaring that euery thing requisite and materiall was done as precisely in her Maiesties time as euer before Thirdly they confirme againe the booke of Common prayer with the forme thereunto annexed enacting that all persons that then had beene or afterwards should be made ordered or Consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priests and Ministers of Gods holy word and Sacraments or Deacons after the forme and order herein prescribed were by authoritie thereof declared and enacted to be Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers and Deacons rightly made ordered and Consecrated any Statute Law Canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding Whereby it is euident that the Parliament did not make them Bishops but being in very deed true Bishops by lawfull Consecration that honourable court did declare and enact them so to be But what say the Papists to all this When they cannot infringe their Consecration for a poore reuenge they call our Religion Parliament Religion and our Bishops Parliament Bishops PHIL. If you will needs haue your matters seeme to depend of your Parliament let vs not be blamed if we call it Parliament Relgion Parliament Gospel Parliament faith ORTHOD. It is a marueile that you said not a Parliament God and a Parliament Christ. Might not we say as well that in Q. Maries time you had a Parliament Masse and a Parliament Pope Was it lawfull for Q. Mary with her Parliament to subiect the kingdome to the Pope and his Canons and was it not lawfull for Q. Elizabeth with her Parliament to submit themselues to Christ and his Gospel Indeed you haue a spite against the Prince and Parliament because they expelled the Pope aduanced true Religion and defended the Preachers and Ministers thereof neither against the persons onely but against the very place wherein the Banner of Iesus Christ was so gloriously displayed A French Historian speaking of the bloody Massacre saith Wise men which were not addicted to the Protestants part seeking all maner of excuse for that fact did notwithstanding thinke that in all Antiquitie there could not be found an example of like crueltie But the English Powder-plot doeth so farre exceed the French Massacre that there is no degree of comparison this cannot be patternd or paraleld It was of such a transcendencie that all the diuels may seeme to haue holden a blacke conuocation in Hell and there to haue concluded such a sulphurious and Acheronticall deuice as was neuer heard of since the world began But the Lord of Heauen did so strangely reueale it as though the birds of the aire had caried the voyce and that which hath wings had declared the matter As for the chiefe instruments thereof the Rauens of the valleys did plucke out their eyes and the yong Eagles did eate them Wherefore if you will not beleeue vs disputing for Religion yet beleeue God himselfe with his owne right hand and with his holy arme defending our Prince and State our Church and Ministerie and that very House wherein the Standard of the Gospel was aduanced maugre the malice of all the diuels in hell All glory be to thee O Lord for this thy vnspeakeable mercie still protect and defend them that Israel may be glad and thy seruant Iacob reioyce PHIL. IF you can iustifie your Bishops produce their Consecrations make it appeare to the world when by whom and how they were Consecrated beginning with the first which was made in the Queenes time That is with Matthew Parker who did beare the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie ORTHOD. You learned this disdainefull speach of Nicholas Sanders who dedicated his rocke of the Church to that reuerend Archbishop in this vnreuerend maner To the right worshipfull Master Doct. Parker bearing the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie Wherein to let passe that right worshipfull and right scornefull title he doeth not stile him Archbishop but bearing the name of Archbishop As though our Bishops were Bishops onely in name But what can you say against him PHIL. I would faine learne of you the place where he was Consecrated I haue read that Maximus was consecrated in the house of a minstrell and it seemeth that Matthew Parker was Consecrated in a Tauerne For doct Kellison saith That hee heard it credibly reported that some of your new Superintendents were made Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheape A fit Church for such a Consecration and it is most likely that Matthew Parker was one of them because he was the first ORTHOD. This of the Nagge 's head doeth call to my remembrance Pope Iohn the 12. who ordained a Deacon in a stable amongst his horses A fit sanctuary for such a Saint Neither is it a tale or fable as yours is but a story Chronicled by Luitprandus who is and euer will be esteemed a learned Historian notwithstanding that Baronius goeth about to discredit him as hee doeth all other writers that make against him And Luitprandus groundeth himselfe not vpon flying reports as Kellison and you doe but vpon two witnesses the one a Bishop the other a Cardinall Iohn bishop of Narnium in Italy and Iohn Cardinall Deacon who did testifie in a Romane Councell in the presence of Otho the Emperour Se vidisse illum Diaconum ordinasse in equorum stabulo i. That they themselues did see him with their owne eyes ordaine a Deacon in a stable of horses But whereas you say that Kellison heard this credibly reported I must tell you that you are very forward in spreading false reports against the Protestants It is credibly reported at Rome that wee in England haue wrapped some Papists in beares skinnes and baited them with dogges That wee inclose dormise in basons and lay them to the sides of the Catholickes to eate out their bowels That wee binde them to mangers and feed them with hay like horses These are shining lies fit Carbuncles for the Popes Miter Neither doe they report them onely but Print them and paint them and publish them with the Popes priuiledge They need a priuiledge which tell such glorious lies This of the Nagge 's head though it goe currant at Rome and bee blazed for a trueth through the world by men of your rancke is cousine germaine to the former as appeareth by the Records of the Archbishopricke which declare that he was consecrated in Capella infra manerium suum de Lambhith That is in the Chappell within his manor of Lambhith Thus you see the falsehood of this fable which was deuised to no other purpose but onely to make our Ministery and Religion seeme odious to all men Is not this strange dealing for men that make such great ostentation of sinceritie and grauitie But for my owne part I doe not maruaile at it your proceedings are but answerable to your doctrines For you teach That an officious lye is but a veniall sin And againe That the Church of Rome is the holy mother Church Therefore to whom should kinde offices rather be performed
then to the Church of Rome And what office will she take more kindly then the discrediting of those whom she accounteth Heretickes therefore I doe not wonder that you put it in practise I feare nothing but that shortly it shall grow with you a point meritorious Well the Stripe of the rodde maketh markes in the flesh but the stripe of the tongue breaketh the bones But let them remember That the tongue which lyeth slayeth the soule And that all lyers shall haue their portion except they repent in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone PHIL. WHatsoeuer is to be thought of the place yet I will proue by the Lawes of England That neither he nor any of his associats were lawfull Bishops ORTHOD. By the lawes of England how proue you that PHIL. It was ordained by the Parliament in the daies of Henry the eight that no man should be acknowledged a Bishop vnlesse he were Consecrated by three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane which law was reuiued by Queene Elizabeth and in full strength at the time of the Consecration of Mathew Parker but Mathew Parker was not so Consecrate and therefore by the lawes of England he was not to bee acknowledged for a Bishop For what Archbishop was either present at his Consecration or consenting vnto it Cardinall Poole then late Archbishop of Canterbury was dead and Parker elected into his place Nicholas Heath then last Archbishop of Yorke was deposed Indeed there was a certaine Irish Archbishop whō they had in bonds prison at London with whom they dealt very earnestly promising him both liberty and rewards if so be he would bee chiefe in the Consecration But hee good man would by no meanes be brought to lay holy hands vpon heretikes neither to be partaker of other mens sinnes Wherefore hauing neither Archbishop of their owne religion nor being able to procure any other the Consecration was performed without a Metropolitane cleane contrary to the lawes of England ORTHO What if both Sanders and you abuse the lawes of England in this point as indeed you doe For the words are these And if the person bee elected to the office dignity of an Archbishop according to the tenour of this act then after such election certifyed to the kings highnesse in forme aforesaid hee shal be reputed and taken Lord elect of the said office and dignity of Archbishop whereunto hee shal be so elected and after he hath made such oth and fealty onely to the kings Maiesty his heires and successours as shal be limited for the same the kings highnesse by his letters patents vnder the great seale shall signifie the said election to one Archbishop and two other Bishops or else to foure Bishops within this Realme or within any other the kings Dominions to be assigned by the kings highnesse his heires or successours requiring and commaunding the said Archbishop and Bishops with all speed and celerity to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrate the said person so elected to the office and dignity that he is elected vnto and to giue and vse to him such pall benedictions ceremonies and other things requisite for the same without suing procuring or obtayning any Bulls Briefes or any other things at the See of Rome or by authority thereof in any behalfe Where it is cleare that the King his heires and successours might by the statute send letters patents for Consecration of an Archbishop either to an Archbishop and two Bishops or else to foure Bishops therefore it might be performed without an Archbishop and yet not contrary to the lawes of England PHIL. ADmit this were true yet it auaileth you nothing for Math. Parker was Consecrated neither by three nor by two much lesse by foure though by your owne confession the law required foure ORTHOD. How know you that were you present at his Consecration or did you learne it of any that were present PHIL. I cannot say so but it is very likely because the Catholike Bishops being required to crowne Queene Elizabeth refused all except one ORTHO That one was Owen Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill but hee was none of the Consecrators of Archbishop Parker For he continued in your Popish religion refused the oth of the supremacy was therefore depriued PHIL. That was the common case of them all but one For one alone I must confesse was made to breake vnity of whom a right good and Catholike Bishop said to a Noble man wee had but one foole amongst vs and him you haue gotten vnto you little worthy of the name of a Bishop and Lord whose learning was small and honour thereby much stained And hee as it seemeth was the onely Bishop which you had therefore Math. Parker could not be Consecrated by three ORTHO Hee whom you meane was Anth. Kitchin Bishop of Landaffe who was in the commission but was none of the Consecratours therefore you shoot at randome and misse the marke PHIL. Whence then had you your Consecrators Surely you did not goe to the Churches of the Caluinistes and Lutherans if peraduenture they had any ORTHOD. We did not PHIL. Then you must bee glad to runne to your vsuall refuge that you had one from Greece Alas my masters you are narrowly driuen when you are forced to flie to such miserable shifts ORTHOD. This tale proceeded not from Eudaemon but from Cacodaemon the father of lies No Sir wee needed no Grecian though it pleaseth you to play the Cretian PHIL. If you had neither Bishops of your owne nor procured any either from the Catholike Church or from the reformed Churches or from the Greekish Church then it is true which Doctor Kellison reporteth out of Sanders That they made one another Bishops ORTHO Though Sanders in that booke hath almost as many lies as lines yet he hath not this loude lie it is the inuention of Kellison himselfe you promise demonstratiue reasons and when your argument comes to the issue where all your strength should lie you bring nothing but slender surmises flying reportes and detestable lies Doe these goe at Rome for demonstrations But I will answere you with euidence of truth which may be iustified by monuments of publike record QVeene Mary died in the yeere 1558 the 17. of Nouember and the selfe same day died Card nall Poole Archb. of Canterbury the very same day was Queene Elizabeth proclaimed The 15. of Ianuary next following was the day of Queene Elizabeths Coronation when Doctor Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill was so happy as to set the Diadem of the kingdome vpon her royal head Now the See of Canterbury continued voide till December following about which time the Deane and Chapter hauing receiued the congedelier elected maister Doctour Parker for their Archbishop Iuxta morem antiquum laudabilem consuetudinem Ecclesiae praedictae ab antiquo vsitatam inconcusse obseruatam i. proceeding in this
election according to the ancient manner and the laudable custome of the foresaid Church aunciently vsed and inuiolably obserued After which election orderly performed and signified according to the law it pleased her highnesse to send her letters pattents of Commission for his confirmation and consecration to seuen Bishops six whereof were lately returned from exile whose names with so much of the commission as concerneth this present purpose I will here set downe for your better satisfaction Elizabeth Dei gratia c. Reuerendis in Christo patribus Anth. Landauensi Will. Barlow quondam Bath Episcopo nunc Cicestrensi electo Ioh. Scory quondam Cicestrensi Episcopo nunc Herefordensi electo Miloni Couerdale quondam Exoniensi Episcopo Ioh. Suffraganeo Bedford Ioh. Suffraganeo Theâ—ford Ioh. Bale Ossorensi Episcopo Quatenus vos aut ad minus 4. vestrum eundem Math. Parkerum in Archiepiscopum pastorem Ecclesiae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cantuar praedictae sicut praefertur electum electionemque praedictam confirmare eundem Magistrum Math. Parker in Arch Pastorem Ecclesiae praedictae consecrare caeteraque omnia singula peragere quae vestro in hac parte incumbunt pastorali efficio iuxta formam statutorum in ca parte editorum prouisorum velitis cum effectu c. Daâ— 6 Decem. Anno 2. Elizab that is That you or at the least foure of you would effectually confirme the said Matth Parker elected to bee Archbishop and Pastour of the Cathedrall and Metropoliticall Church of Christ at Canterbury aforesaid as is before mentioned and that you would effectually confirme the saide election and consecrate the saide Matthew Parker Archbishop and Pastour of the said Church and performe all and euery thing which belongs to your Pastorall office in this respect according to the forme of the statutes set out and prouided in this behalfe Behold how both the commission and statute concurre with the Canons PHIL. BVt was the consecration accordingly performed ORTH. You neede not doubt of it For first the Bishops to whom the letters patents were directed had reason to set their handes cheerefully to so good a worke so much tending to the aduancing of the true Religion which they all imbraced and for which all of them except one had beene in exile Secondly how durst they doe otherwise seeing it was enacted by a statute made in the 25. yeare of King Henry 8. and still in force that if any Archbishop or Bishop within the Kings dominions after any such election nomination or presentation signified vnto them by the Kings letters patents should refuse and not confirme inuest and consecrate with all due circumstance within twentie dayes after that the Kings letters patents of such signification or presentation should come to their hands then hee or they so offending should runne in the dangers paines and penalties of the statute of prouision and premunire made in the twentie fiue yeare of the raigne of king Edward the third and in the sixteenth of king Richard the second PHIL. This is some probabilitie but yet for all this seeing maister D. Sanders saith that you had neither three nor two Bishops and maister D. Kellison saith you could finde none I will not beleeue the contrary vnlesse you produce the consecration it selfe ORTHOD. Then to take away all scruple I will faithfully deliuer vnto you out of Authenticall records both the day when he was consecrated and the persons by whom Anno 1559. Matt. Park Cant. Cons. 17. Decem. by William Barlow Iohn Scorie Miles Couerdale Iohn Hodgeskins PHIL. IF all this were granted yet it were nothing vnlesse you could iustifie the consecration of his consecratours therefore you must tell me when they were made Bishops ORTHOD. Two of them in the raigne of king Henry 8. and two in the dayes of king Edward the sixt In the raigne of K. Henry B. Barlow and the Suffragan of Bedford Bishop Barlow was a man of singular note who to vse the wordes of Bale ab erudito ingenio famam accepit that is hee had great fame and renowne for a learned wit In regard whereof he was aduanced to be Prior of Bisham and from thence elected to the Bishoprick of Saint Asaph which election was confirmed 23. Febr 1535. and soone after it pleased the King to preferre him to the Bishopricke of Saint Dauids where hee continued all the dayes of King Henry duely discharging all things belonging to the order of a Bishop euen Episcopall consecration as I haue already declared out of authenticall records He was also translated by King Edward to the Bishoprick of Bath and Wels and by Queene Elizabeth promoted to Chichester And as he was generally acknowledged and obeyed as a Bishop in his owne nation so Bucanan relating how King Henry sent him Embassadour into Scotland doth giue him his iust Episcopall title Now you told vs before out of Sanders that in King Henries time none might bee acknowledged for a Bishop vnlesse hee were consecrated by three with the consent of the Metropolitane Wherefore seeing Barlow was so famously and notoriously acknowledged not onely in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth and King Edward but also in the dayes of King Henry it is a cleare case that hee was so consecrated The same is to be said of the Suffragan of Bedford PHIL. What tell you mee of Suffraganes you know how Damasus speaketh against those titulary Bishops called Chorepiscopi ORTHOD. There are two sorts of Chorepiscopi the first had no Episcopall Consecration who are reproued and that iustly for they were onely Priests and not Bishops and of these Damasus speaketh in the iudgement of Bellarmine The second had Episcopall Consecration and these though they had no citie nor diocesse of their owne but onely some countrey towne for their See yet in regard of their Consecration they were true Bishops as Bellarmine confesseth Respondeo Suffraganeos esse veros Episcopos quia ordinationem habent Iurisdictionem licet careant possessione propriae Ecclesia that is I answere that Suffraganes are true Bishops because they haue both ordination and Iurisdiction although they are not possessed of a Church of their owne And of this latter sort are the Suffraganes of England established by act of Parliament in these wordes Be it therefore enacted by authority of this present Parliament that the townes of Thetford Ipswich Colchester Douer Gilsord Southampton Taunton Shaftesbury Molton Marleborrow Bedford Leicester Glocester Shrewsbury Bristow Penreth Bridgwater Nottingham Grantham Hul Huntingdon Cambridge and the townes of Pereth and Barwicke S. Germans in Cornewall and the I le of Wight shall bee taken and accepted for Sees of Bishops Suffraganes to bee made in this Realme and in Wales And the Bishops of such Sees shall bee called Suffraganes of this Realme And for their consecration prouided alwayes that the Bishop that shall nominate the Suffragane to the kings highnesse or the
Suffragane himselfe that shall be nominated shall prouide two B. or Suffrag to Consecrate him with the Archbishop PHIL. Was Iohn Hodgeskins accordingly Consecrated ORTH. He was Consecrated by three as appeareth Iohn Hodgskins Suffrag Bedf. Cons. 9. Dec. 29. Hen. 8. by Iohn Lond. Iohn Roff. Rob. Asaph PHIL. But the Statute produced requireth two Bishops with an Archbishop where is that Archbishop ORTHO Your institutions of the Canon Law recognized at Rome by the Popes Mandat may tell you that an Archbishop may alicui Coepiscoporum vices suas demandare commit his roume to any other of his fellow Bishops And this you must hold for otherwise ye can no wayes defend the Consecrations of your chiefe Bishops namely Bonner Heath Thurlby whom Archbishop Cranmer did not Consecrate in his owne person but by others to whom hee gaue commission To conclude this point your principall Bishops in Queene Maries time descended from this same Ioh. Bedford For Tho. Thurlby who was one of the Consecrators of Cardinall Poole was Consecrated by Ioh. Bedf. The other two were Consecrated in King Edwards time both in one day as hath beene before declared And these also were very learned men Couerdale helped Tindall in the translation of the Bible his fame and renowme caused the King of Denmarke to write earnestly vnto Queene Marie that she would send him vnto him which she did And how learned a man Bishop Scory was may appeare by this that when the disputation was appointed with the Popish Bishops he was the first and principall man named on the Protestants side with whom the aduersaries durst not encounter And thus much of their Consecrations PHIL. ADmit they were truly Consecrated and were Bishops of their seuerall Sees yet they fled away and so dispossessed themselues and therefore could not Consecrate him by vertue of their former Episcopall titles ORTHOD. By what power doth a Bishop Consecrate a Bishop PHIL. By vertue of his Episcopall Character ORTHO But you told vs that the Character is indeleble therefore they could not loose the power of Consecrating by loosing their Bishopriks Againe if a Bishop flying in the time of persecution doth cease to be a Bishop and loose his title then famous Athanasius did cease to bee a Bishop and lost his title for it is plaine that he fled from Alexandria I did saith he withdraw my selfe by stealth frrom the people beeing mindfull of the word of my Sauiour if they persecute you in one City flie into another But Athanasius for all this did not cease to be Bishop of Alexandria For although the Arrian faction preuayling the Councell of Tyre deposed him yea and the Councel of Antioch in the presence and with the consent of the Emperour did institute Gregory in his place yet the councel of Sardica pronounced Athanasius as also Marcellus Asclepas and other Catholike exiled Bishops to be pure and innocent and deny that Gregory the Vsurper of Alexandria Basil of Ancyra Quintianus of Gaza which had entered like Woolues vpon the Churches of these men should be called Bishops So the Councel iudged the Churches to belong to the Catholicke Bishops euen at such time as they were exiled and the Arrians in possession and accordingly they deposed Gregory with such like restored Athanasius and the rest with honour Which act they signified in a Synodall Epistle to the Church of Alexandria in this manner We would haue you to know that Gregory being made Bishop vnlawfully by heretickes and brought by them into your citie is deposed from his Bishopricke by the whole Synode although in very deed hee was neuer Bishop therfore farewell and receiue your Bishop Athanasius Thus you see that though Athanasius fled away in time of persecution though he were deposed by a Councel and another chosen in his place by another Councell with the consent of the Emperour yet for all this he is iudged to be the true Bishop of Alexandria and Gregory neuer to haue beene the Bishop thereof The like is to be said of Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra Asclepas Bishop of Gaza Paulus Bishop of Constantinople and others who were persecuted for the Catholicke Faith as well as Athanasius Wherefore if you wil conforme your iudgement to the Councell of Sardica you must confesse that such as in King Edwards time were lawfully possessed of Bishoprickes though in Queene Maries time being persecuted in one citie they fled into another did still retaine the titles of true Bishops and that those which inuaded their Churches were intruders and vsurpers Thus it appeareth that as Athanasius and the rest returning from exile might ordaine and doe all such things as belonged to their Episcopall Office euen so Bishop Barlow Bishop Couerdale and the rest returning from exile might likewise ordaine and iustifie their proceedings in their Episcopall function PHIL. There is not the same reason for Athanasius and the rest were restored by a Councell yours were not but onely by the Prince ORTHOD. Athanasius was restored sundry times sometimes with a Councell sometimes without When the Councell of Tyre deposed him the Emperour Constantine the Great called them to account for their iudgement But when hee heard him accused by Catholicke Bishops which formerly had bene his owne friends whom the Arrians had now suborned against him for threatning to hinder the carriage of corne from Alexandria to Constantinople hee exiled him into France From whence after the death of Constantine the father he was restored to Alexandria by the Letters of Constantine the sonne with the permission of his brother Constantius and that according to the prescript of their father as appeareth by these wordes of Athanasius Blessed Constantine the yonger being mindfull of the prescripts of his father while hee restored mee to my Countrey wrote an Epistle in these wordes And so he setteth downe Constantines Epistle to the Church of Alexandria Concerning which you shall heare your owne Baronius Constantinus Augustus Athanasium quem viuente patre exceperat Treueris regio diplomate datis ad Alexandrinos litteris in suam Ecclesiam summo cum honore restituit i. Constantine the Emperour restored Athanasius whom he had intertained at Treuers while his father was aliue by his Letters Patents to the people of Alexandria with very great honour Thus you see that though hee was deposed by a Councell and exiled by a Prince yet hee was restored onely by the Princes Letters without a Counsell PHIL. The Councell of Antioch obiected a Canon against him to wit That he which is deposed by a Councell cannot be restored but by a Councell of a greater number And therefore seeing hee was deposed by the Councell of Tyre and restored neither by a Councell of a greater number nor by any Councell at all but onely by the letters of the Emperour they deposed him and put another in his place ORTHOD. First it is
onely carefull that Euery thing requisite and materiall should be made and done as precisely as euer before but also to the end that all men might be satisfied that all doubt scruple and ambiguitie might be taken away and that there should not the least spot of suspition cleaue vnto her Clergie it pleased her Maiestie if peraduenture quicke sighted malice could finde any quirk or quiditie against them by colour of any Canon or Statute graciously to dispense with it Which doth not argue any vnsoundnesse in their consecrations but the godlie care and prouidence of a religious Prince PHIL. You vse to finde fault with the Popes dispensations and will you your selues in an act of Parliament affirme that the Queene dispensed with all causes or doubts of any imperfection or dissabilitie and that in a matter of holie Orders ORTHOD. The Pope taketh vpon him to dispense against the law of God as for example That a brother may marrie his brothers wife So did not Queene Elizabeth but onelie with trespasses against her owne lawes not in essentiall points of ordination but onelie in accidentall not in substance but in circumstance Neither did she giue them leaue to make any voluntarie violatioÌ„ of the law but only dispensed with such omission as necessity it selfe should require as may appeare by the said letters patents And it pleased the Almighty so to dispose that al things were performed in most exquisite manner yet the Papists such was their hatred against the Clergie did blaze abroad the contrarie Whereupon the high Court of Parliament assembled in the eight yeere of that famous Queene hauing deepelie considered and pondered all things pronounced that their speeches were Slanderous not grounded vpon any iust matter or cause For Gods name bee blessed all things were done honestlie and in order euen from her first comming to the crowne ANd verily as Iosua protested I my house wil serue the Lord so Queen Elizabeth resolued with her owne heart I and my kingdomes will serue the Lord. Therefore as Iosias assembled the ancients of Iuda and Ierusalem to make a Couenant with their God so Queene Elizabeth assembled her high Court of Parliament for the same purpose But as when Nehemias went about reformation the Priests and Prophets which should haue bin the principall helpers were principal hinderers so it came to passe in that Parliament that whereas the Prince and Barons and the Commons were great instruments of Gods glorie the Popish Bishops sought by all meanes the glory of their holie father the Pope Notwithstanding God in his mercy gaue a blessing so that the truth preuailed And as Iehoiada required an oth in behalfe of King Ioas so the Parliament did in behalfe of Queene Elizabeth And as Abiathar was iustlie depriued for refusing Salomon and ioyning with Adonia euen so were the Popish Bishops for refusing the oth of the Queenes supremacie which contained nothing else but the Princes lawfull title And as Abiathar beeing displaced Sadok was aduanced so those vndutifull Bishoppes beeing remooued godlie Pastours were preferred THe Bishops depriued were in number fourteene in whose Sees who succeeded may appeare by this table wherein is set downe first the Prouince of Canterbury and then of Yorke   Sees Displaced Placed prouince Cant. London Bonner Grindall Winchester White Horne Ely Thurlby Coxe Lincoln Watson Bullingham Cou. Lichfeild Bane Bentham Bath and Wels. Bourne Barckly Exon. Turberuill Ally Worcester Pates Sandes Peterburrow Poole Scambler Asaph Gouldwell Dauis Yorke Yorke Heath Young Durham Tunstall Pilkinton Carlill Oglethorp Best Chester Scot. Downham ¶ The Consecration of the B. of the Prouince of Cant. Anno 1559. Edm. Grindall Cons. 21. Dec. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Will. Cicester Ioh. Hereford Ioh. Bedford Anno 1560. Robert Horne cons. 16. Feb. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Tho. Meneu Edm. London Tho. Cou. Lich. Anno 1559. Rich. Coxe cons. 21. Decem. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Will. Cicester Ioh. Hereford Ioh. Bedford Anno 1559. Nich. BullinghaÌ„ cons. 21. Ian. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Edm. London Rich. Eliens Ioh. Bedford Anno 1559. Tho. Bentham cons. 24. Mart. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Nich. Lincoln Ioh. Sarum Anno 1559. Gilb. Barckly cons. 24. Mart. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Nich. Lincoln Ioh. Sarum Anno 1560. Will. Ally cons. 14. Iuly by Math. Archbishop Cant. Edm. London Gilbard Bath and Wells Anno 1559. Edwin Sandes cons. 21. Decem. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Will. Cicester Ioh. Hereford Ioh. Bedford Anno 1560. Edm. Scambler cons. 16. Febru by Math. Archbishop Cant. Tho. Meneuens Edm. London Tho. Cou. Lichfield Anno 1559. Rich. Dauis cons. 21. Ianu. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Edm. London Rich. Eliens Ioh. Bedford Of the Cons. of the Bishops of the Prouince of Yorke Thomas Young was translated to Yorke from Saint Dauids whose Consecration was as followeth Anno 1559. Thomas Young cons. 21. Ianuary by Math. Archb. Cant. Edm. London Rich. Eliens Ioh. Bedford The like is to be iudged of the rest which I haue not set downe because as yet I haue not seene the records of Yorke CHAP. VI. A briefe view of all the Bishops of some of the principall Sees during the whole raigne of Queene Elizabeth ORTH. TO the intent that all men may knowe the godly care of the Church of England in obseruing the ancient Canons I will set downe all the Bishops of some of the principall Sees which were consecrated from the first enterance of Queene Elizabeth till the ende of her Raigne Canterbury THe Archbishops of Canterbury in the Queenes time were Math. Parker Edmund Grindal and Iohn Whitgift the consecration of the two former you haue heard already the third remaineth to be declared Anno 1â—77 Ioh. Whitgift cons. 21. April by Edm. Archb. Cant. Ioh. London Rob. Winton Rich. Cicester London THe Bishops of London in the Queenes time were Edmund Grindall Edwin Sandes Iohn Elmer Richard Fletcher and Richard Bancroft The Consecration of the two first were before expressed the rest as followeth Anno 1576. Ioh. Elmer Cons. 24. Mart. by Edm. Archb. Cant. Edw. Archb. Ebor. Ioh. Roff. Anno 1589. Rich. Fletcher Cons. 14. Dec. by Ioh. Archb Cant. Ioh. London Ioh. Roff. Ioh. Glou. Anno 1597. Rich. Bancroft Cons. 8. May by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Ioh Roff. Anton Meneu Rich Bangor Anton. Cicest ¶ Winchester THe Bishops of Winchester in the Queenes time were Robert Horne Iohn Watson Thomas Cooper William Wickham William Day and Thomas Bilson the Consecration of Bishop Horne was before handled the rest were as followeth Anno 1580. Ioh. Watson Cons. 18. Septem by Edm. Archb. Cant. Ioh. London Ioh. Roff. Anno 1570. Thomas Cooper Cons. 24. Febr. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Robert Wint. Nich. Wigorn. Anno 1584. Will. Wickham Cons. 6. Decem. by Iohn Archb Cant. Edm. Wigorn. Ioh. Exon. Mauricius Meneu Anno 1595. William Day Cons.
25. Ianu. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Ioh. Roff. Anno 1596. Thomas Bilson Cons. 13. Ianu. by Ioh. Archb Cant. Rich. Lond. Will. Wint. Rich. Bangor ¶ Ely THe Bishops of Ely in the Queenes time Richard Coxe and Martine Heaton the Consecration of Bishop Coxe was handled before the other followeth Anno 1599. Martin Heaton Cons. 3. Febr. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich Lond. Will. Cou. and Lichf Anton. Cicest ¶ Salisbury THe Bishops of Salisbury were Iohn Iewel Edmund Gueast Iohn Peirs Iohn Goldwell and Henry Cotton Anno 1559. Iohn Iewel Cons. 21. Ianu. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Edmund London Rich. Ely Ioh. Bedford Anno 1559. Edmund Gueast Cons. 24. Mart. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Nich. Lincolne Ioh. Sarum Anno 1576. Iohn Peirs Cons. 15. April by Edm. Archb. Cant. Edw. London Rob. Winton Anno 1591. Iohn Coldwell Cons. 26. Decem. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Ioh. London Tho. Wint. Rich. Bristoll Ioh. Oxon. Anno 1598. Henry Cotton Cons. 12. Nouem by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich. London William Couent Ant. Cicest ¶ Norwich THe Bishops of Norwich were Thomas Parkhurst Edmund Freake Edmund Scambler William Redman and Iohn Iegon Of these Edmund Scamblers Consecration hath already beene declared the rest follow Anno 1560. Thomas Parkhurst Cons. 1. Sep. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Gilbert Bath and Wells William Exon. Anno 1571. Edmund Freake Cons. 9. Mart. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Robert Wint. Edm. Sarum Anno 1594. William Redman Cons. 12. Ianu. by Iohn Archb. Cant. Rich. London Iohn Roff. William Lincoln Anno 1602. Iohn Iegon Cons. 20. Febru by Iohn Archb. Cant. Rich. London Iohn Roff. Ant. Cicest ¶ Rochester THe Bishops of Rochester were Edmund Gueast Edm. Freake Iohn Pierce and Iohn Yong whereof the three first haue bene already handled the fourth followeth Anno 1577. Iohn Yong Cons. 16. Mart. by Edm. Archb. Cant. Iohn Lond. Ioh. Sarum CHAP. VII Of the Bishops in the Prouince of Canterburie consecrated since our gracious Soueraigne King Iames did come to the Crowne with a little touch concerning the Prouince of Yorke ANd that you may know that the same order in Consecration of Bishops is still retained vnder the raigne of our gracious Soueraigne King Iames behold these that follow Anno 1603. Ioh. Bridges Cons. B. of Oxon. 12. Febr. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Tob. Durham Ioh. Roff. Anthon. Cicest Anno 1604. Rich. Parry Cons. B. of Asaph 30. Dec. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Tob. Durham Mart. Eltens Anno 1604. Tho. Rauis Cons. B. of Glouc. 17. Mart. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Tob. Durham Anth. Cicest Anno 1605. Will. Barlow Cons. B. of Roch. 30. Iun. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Rich. London Anth. Cicest Thom. Glouc. Anno 1605. Lanc. Andrewes Cons. B. of Cic. 3. Nou. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Ioh. Norwich Thom. Glouc. Will. Roff. Anno 1607. Henr. Parry Cons. B. of Glouc. 12. Iul. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Thom. Lond. Will. Roff. Lancel Cicest An. 1608. Ia. Mountagu coÌ„s B. of Ba. Wels. 17. Ap. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Thom. Lond. Henr. Sarum Will. Roff. Lanc. Cicest Henr. Glouc. Anno 1608. Rich. Neile Cons. B. of Roch. 9. Octob. by Rich. Arch. Cant. Thom. Lond. Lanc. Cicest Ia. Bath Wells An. 1609. Geor. Abbot Con. B. of Cou. Lich. 3. Dec. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Lanc. Ely Rich. Roff. Samuel Harsnet Cons. B. of Cicest the same day by the same persons Anno 1611. Giles Thomson Cons. B. of Glou. 9. Iul. by Georg. Archb. Cant. Ioh. Oxon. Lanc. Eli. Ia. Bath Wells Rich. Cou. Lichf Iohn Buckridge Cons. B. of Roch. the same day by the same persons Anno 1611. Ioh. King Cons. B. of Lond. 8. Septemb. by Georg. Archb. Cant. Rich. Cou. Lichf Giles Glouc. Ioh. Roff. Anno 1612. Miles Smith Cons. B. of Glou. 20. Sept. by Georg. Cant. Ioh. Lond. Rich. Cou. Lich. Ioh. Roff. The like hath bene continually obserued in the Prouince of Yorke for a taste whereof I will giue you two examples The former in the Queenes time the later in the raigne of our gracious Soueraigne Anno 1598. Hen. Robinson Cons. B. of Carl. 23. Iul. by Rich. Lond. Ioh. Roff. Anth. Cic. Anno 1606. Will. Iames Cons. B. of Durham 6. Sept. by Tob. Ebor. Rich. Lond. Will. Roff. Lanc. Cic. THis which you haue seene may seeme sufficient Yet because I desire to giue ample contentment I haâ—â—â—et downâ— the successiue Ordination and Golden chaine of the most reuerend Father George now L. Archbishop of Canterbury the ioy of the Clergie and Gods great blessing vpoÌ„ this Church ascending lincke by lincke vnto the Bishops in the time of King Henry the 8. which our aduersaries acknowledge to be Canonicall Whereunto that all the Clergie of England may know in particular how to proue their succession I intend when God shall grant me opportunitie to view the Records of the other Prouince to annex the like Episcopal line of the other most reuerend Metropolitane Tobie L. Archbishop of Yorke CHAP. VIII The Episcopall line and succession of the most Reuerend Father in God George now Lord Archb. of Canterbury particularlie declaring how he is Canonically descended from such Bishops as were Consecrated in the daies of King Henry the eight which our Aduersaries acknowledge to bee Canonicall He was Consecrated 3. December 1609. By 1. R. Bancroft Cons. 8. May 1597 by Lancel Eli. Whose Consecrations were before described and may bee deduced in the like manner Richard Rosf Whose Consecrations were before described and may bee deduced in the like manner 2. Ioh. Whitg Cons. 21. Apr. 1577. by Iohn Young See the next page Anthony Rud. See the next page Richard Vaughan See the next page Anthony Watson See the next page 3. Ed. Grindal Cons. 21. Dec. 1559. by 4 Mat. Parker Cons. 17. Dec. 1559 by Wil. Barlow in the time of Henry 8. Ioh. Hodgskins in the time of Henry 8. 5 Miles Couerdale Cons. 30. Aug. 1551. by Thomas Cranmer in the time of Henry 8. Iohn Hodgâ—kins in the time of Henry 8. 7 Nicholas Ridley Cons. 5. Sep. 1547. by Henry Lincolne in the time of Hen. 8. Iohn Bedford in the time of Hen. 8. Thomas Sidon in the time of Hen. 8. 6 Ioh Scory Cons. with Miles Couerdale vide 5. 8 Ioh. Hurly Cons. 26. May 1553. by Thomas Cranmer Christ. Sidon 9 Iohn Taylour Cons. 26. Iuly 1552. by Thomas Cranmer Iohn Scory vide 6. Nich. Ridley vide 7. William Barlow in the time of Henry the 8. Iohn Bedford in the time of Henry the 8. 10. Ioh. Elmer Cons. 24. Mar. 1577 by Edmund Grindall â—ide 3. 11 Edw. Sands Consecrated with Edmund Grindall vide 3. 12 Iohn Piers Cons. 15. Apr. 1576. by Robert Horne vide 13. 19 Ri. Câ—râ—else cons. 21. May 1570. by Mathew Parker vide 4. Robert Horne vide 13 20 Edm. Guest cons. 24. Mar. 1559 by Mathew Parker vide 4 Nicholas BullinghaÌ„ vid. 17 Iohn Iewell
videtur c. It seemeth we may say seeing an Abbot gouerneth his Monastery by ordinary Iurisdiction and an Abbatesse is equall vnto him in freedome of administration that she hath ordinarie Iurisdiction as well as the Abbot Yea the same Stephen striueth to attibute vnto her the power of excommunication which is more then the Church of England ascribeth to Princes For it attributeth vnto them onelie that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwayes to godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed vnto their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuil sword the stubborne euill doers When the B hath vsed his spirituall censures he can proceed no further but as Iosias compelled all that were found in Israel to serue the Lord So may euery Prince by his royall authority compell all his subiects to do their duty and those which refuse to be reformed by the Church he may restraine with the ciuil sword inflicting tēporal punishments as the qualitity of the offence requireth When Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed in the Councell of Antioch he did notwithstanding hold his Church and chaire by violence whereupon the Councell knowing that of themselues they could proceed no further were forced to seeke the aide of Aurelian the Emperour by whose commandement he was expelled PHIL. IF the Iurisdiction of the Prince and the Prelate be so different how then is the Prelates deriued from the Prince ORTHOD. Heere wee must consider the matters handled in the consistories of Bishops and the manner The matters originally and naturally belonging to those Courts are onely such as are originally and naturally Ecclesiasticall the manner to ratifie their iudgements is not properly vnder any corporall mulct but onely by spirituall censures as suspension excommunication and such like In both which respects the Iurisdiction of Bishops hath beene much inlarged by the fauour and indulgence of Christian Princes Concerning the matter Constantine the Great gaue libertie to Clerkes to decline the iudgement of ciuill Iudges and to bee iudged by their owne Bishops By occasion whereof many Ciuill Causes were brought to the cognisance of Ecclesiasticall Courts Hee made also a law to ratifie those iudgements As though they had beene pronounced by the Emperour himselfe Now all the Iurisdiction which Bishops haue in Ciuill Causes is meerely from the Prince Concerning the manner it seemeth sometimes expedient to annex coactiue power to the Episcopall office both for the honour of Prelacie and also to make their spirituall censures the more regarded which also without controuersie must bee acknowledged to proceede from the Prince For as the Lord hath compacted the light into the body of the Sunne that thence it might be communicated to Moone and Starres So hee hath put all ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction into the person of the Prince from whom as from a glorious Sunne or fountaine all other inferiour lampes doe borrow their light But if wee speake of that Episcopall Iurisdiction which both in respect of matter and manner is meerely spirituall the immediate fountaine of it is God himselfe as our most learned and religious King with his royall Penne hath thus witnessed to the world That Bishops ought to bee in the Church I euer maintained it as an Apostolicke institution and so the ordinance of God contrary to the Puritanes and likewise to Bellarmine who denyeth that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction immediately from God If his Maiesties iudgement bee contrary to Bellarmines who holdeth the negatiue then his Princely wisedome embraceth the affirmatiue to wit that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction meerely spirituall immediately from God Notwithstanding for so much as they exercise the same in a Christian Common wealth at the holy direction and command and vnder the gracious protection of a religious King within the kings dominions vpon the Kings subiects according to the Canons and statutes established by the Kings authoritie wee may iustly call those Courts the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts and the Archbishops and Bishops the kings Ecclesiasticall iudges Wherefore though this spirituall power in regard of it selfe be immediately from God yet in these respects it may rightly be said to be deriued from the king So it is a Christo tanquam ab authore conferente a Rege tanquam a iubente dirigente promouente protegente PHIL. If your Bishops haue their spirituall Iurisdiction immediately from God when doe they receiue it ORTHO When they are made Bishops that is in their Consecration For the partie to be Consecrated is presented to the Archbishop in these words Most reuerend Father in God wee present vnto you this godly and well learned man to be Consecrated Bishop Where the word Bishop is taken in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sense for a Timothy or a Titus an Angel or gouernour of the Church And the Archbishop with other Bishops present imposeth hands saying f Take the holy Ghost that is such ghostly and spirituall power as is requisite to aduance a Presbyter to the office of a Bishop so here is giuen him whatsoeuer belongeth to the Episcopall office as the prayers going before the pronouncing of these words and following after doe declare wherein humble petition is made for Gods blessing and grace that hee may dulie execute the office of a Bishoppe faithfullie serue therein and minister Episcopall discipline PHIL. If it be giuen in Episcopall Consecration how then is it giuen immediatly from God ORTHOD. I will answere you if you will answere me a few questions And first I demaund whence is the power of Order PHIL. It is immediatly from God because it requireth a Character and grace which onely God can effect For though it be said to be giuen with Imposition of hands yet the meaning is not that either the Imposer or the Imposition of hands doeth giue it but God himselfe while hands are Imposed To which purpose it is excellently said of S. Ambrose O brother who giueth the Episcopall grace God or man Thou answerest without doubt God but yet God giueth it by man Man imposeth hands God giueth the grace The Priest imposeth an humble hand and God blesseth with a mightie hand ORTHOD. And whence commeth the grace of Baptisme PHIL. This also without question is immediatly from God ORTHOD. And whence commeth faith in the hearing of the Gospel PHIL. It is likewise immediatly from God ORTHOD. And doeth not God in all these vse the ministerie of man PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTHOD. Then you see a thing may be giuen immediatly from God though in giuing it he vse the meanes and ministery of man for in such like speeches the word Immediatly is not so taken as excluding meanes but as distinguishing the action of God from the meanes When the children of Israel were stung of the fierie serpents God in healing them vsed the
both the outward court by excommunications absolutions dispensations calling generall councels c. and the court of conscience by forgiuing and retaining sinnes In a word in these keyes all Ecclesiasticall power was comprehended and giuen vnto Peter ORTHOD. The keyes were giuen to the rest of the Apostles as well as to Peter for the occasion of these words was a question of Christ proposed to al his Apostles whom say you that I am this question was answered by Peter Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Wherupon Saint Austin obserueth that Peter alone made answer for all the Apostles and his obseruation is according to the Scriptures which testifie that Peter before this time had answered in the name of them all VVe beleeue and know that thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Now as Peter answered one for all so Christ said to Peter and in him to them all I will giue you the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen Thus the Fathers in terpret the place Austin Peter receiued the keyes together with them al Ierome they did all receiue the keyes Origen Christs promise of building his Church of giuing the keyes of binding and loosing made as to Peter only was common to all Hilarie They obtained the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Ambrose VVhat is said to Peter is said to the Apostles This consent of Fathers should ouer ballance your opinion by the Councell of Trent And here I might iustly returne Campians flourish vpon you Patres admiseris captus es excluseris nullus es If you admit the Fathers you are catched If you exclude them you are no body Indeed my Masters you make the world beleeue that you will be iudged by the Fathers but when it comes to the tryall you commonly forsake them the Fathers must be pretended for a fashion but the holy Father of Rome is the very needle and compasse whereby you saile PHIL. WE confesse that all receiued the keyes but Christ gaue them to Peter immediatly to the rest by Peter so all power both of order and iurisdiction proceedeth from Peter ORTHO Let Bellarmine himselfe iudge the cause betweene vs who proueth by foure arguments That the Apostles receiued their iurisdiction immediately from Christ. First by these words of Christ himselfe As my Father sent me so send I you which exposition he strengtheneth by the authorities of Chrysostom Theophylact Cyrill and Cyprian by the euidence whereof he affirmeth that the same thing was giuen to the Apostles by these words I send you which was promised to Peter by these words I will giue thee the keyes and afterward deliuered by these words Feed my sheepe and addeth Constat autem per illa tibi dabo claues per illud pasce oues intelligi iurisdictionē plenissimā etiam exteriorē i It is cleare that by these words I will giue thee the keyes and by this saying feede my sheep there is vnderstood a most full iurisdiction euen in the outward Court Secondly hee proueth it because Mathias was neither elected by the Apostles nor receiued any authority by them but beeing elected by God was presently accounted amongst the Apostles And verilie saith hee if all the Apostles had their iurisdiction from Peter that should haue beene manifested most of all in Matthias Thirdly he proueth it by Saint Paul who professeth that he had his iurisdiction from Christ and thence confirmeth his Apostleship for he saith Paul an Apostle not of men or by man but by Iesus Christ And that he might declare that he receiued no authoritie from Peter or any other Apostle he saith VVhen it pleased God which had separated me from my mothers womb called me by his grace to reueale his sonne in mee that I should preach him among the Gentiles immediatly I cōmunicated not with flesh and bloud Neither came I againe to Ierusalem to thē which were Apostles before mee but I went into Arabia and turned againe into Damascus Then after three yeeres I came againe to Ierusalem to visite Peter And againe To mee those that seemed to bee something conferred nothing Fourthly because the Apostles were made onely by Christ and yet had Iurisdiction as appeareth First by Paul excommunicating the Corinthian Secondly by the same Paul making Ecclesiasticall lawes Thirdly because the Apostolick dignitie is the highest dignitie in the Church Wherefore it is euident that the rest of the Apostles receiued not their Iurisdiction from Peter but from Christ. PHIL. CHrist promised the keyes to Peter onely therefore in this respect he must haue a preheminence aboue the rest ORTH. Whatsoeuer Christ promised that hee performed but he performed not the keyes to Peter with any preheminence aboue his fellows but alike to all therefore hee did not promise them to Peter by way of preheminence but to him with the rest PHIL. Did he not say I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose c. So they were promised to Peter in the singular number ORTHO Though these wordes bee of the singular number yet they were not spoken to Peter as he was Peter or a singular person but to Peter representing the person of the Church as the Fathers say according to the Scripture For when he said I will giue thee the keyes he added immediately by way of explication and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon earth it shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon earth it shall bee loosed in heauen Vpon which wordes Bellarmine saith thus The plaine sence of these wordes I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose is this that first there is promised an authoritie or a power signified by the keyes and then the actions or office is explained by these wordes to bind and to loose So that to loose and to open to shut and to bind is altogether the same But the Lord expressed the actions of the keyes by loosing and binding not by shutting and opening that we might vnderstand that all these speeches are metaphoricall and that heauen is then opened vnto men when they are loosed from their sinnes which hindered their entrance into heauen But the power of binding and loosing was giuen to all the Apostles by Christ in these wordes whatsoeuer you shall bind on earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heauen PHIL. Cardinall Caietan thinketh that to open and to shut is of a larger extent then to bind and to loose ORTHOD. Bellarmine thinketh this more subtill then sound because there are no keyes in the Church sauing onely of Order and Iurisdiction both which are signified by the actions of binding and loosing as Caietan confesseth and Bellarmine proued before both by Fathers and Scripture PHIL. The power of binding and loosing is
lesse then the keyes in the iudgement of the Schoolemen ORTHOD. You cry antiquitie antiquitie Fathers Fathers yet you forsake both antiquitie and Fathers and leane to the Schoolmen But what if the Schoolemen be against you Alexander of Hales saith that to bind and to loose is as much as to open and to shut Thomas maketh the power of binding and loosing the substance of the keyes And so doth Scotus But what if we should admit that the keyes contained more then the power of binding and loosing yet seeing this power includeth Iurisdiction as Bellarmine proueth by the Fathers and this was giuen by Christ to the rest of the Apostles therfore it followeth that they all had their Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ. A point so cleare that not onely Bellar. but Franciscus de victoria Alphonsus de castro and Cardinall Caietan as Bellarmine recordeth acknowledge the same beside many others PHIL. IF all this were granted yet Peter shall be the fountaine of Iurisdiction because the rest receiued it onely as delegates Hee as the ordinarie pastour of the Church from whom and his successours all posteritie must deriue it ORTHOD. You coine distinctions of your owne braine whereof you haue no warrant in the Scripture For whose delegates shall they bee Not S. Peters 1. because I haue prooued that they receiued not any Iurisdiction from him 2. If they were S. Peters delegates why did S. Paul alwayes call himselfe an Apostle of Iesus Christ and neuer the Legaâ—â— latere of S. Peter 3. If they were S. Peters Delegates then all their Iurisdiction died with him So belike S. Iohn who outliued S. Peter lost his iurisdiction and was glad to light his candle againe from Linus and after his death from Cletus and after his from Clemens For he liued as S. Ierome witnesseth 68. yeeres after the Passion of Christ and consequently died in the yeere 101. which according to Baronius was the 9. yeere of Clemens If this be so then there was after the death of Christ while an Apostle liued a greater iurisdiction in the Church then the iurisdiction of an Apostle which cannot be because the Scripture saith that God hath set in his Church first Apostles secondly Prophets c. and Bell. confesseth that the authoritie of the Apostles is Iurisdictio plenissima If S. Iohn had this then he was not Legat a latere to Linus nor Cletus nor Clemens neither so long as he liued could they be called the fountaine of all spirituall iurisdiction If you say they were Christs delegates it is true and so was Saint Peter therefore in this there is no difference But in what respect was he the ordinarie pastor of the Church As an Apostle then they should bee all ordinarie because they were all Apostles If in regard of any other authoritie what should that bee Was it greater theÌ„ the Apostleship or no if it were not how could it giue him iurisdiction ouer the Apostles and greater it cannot bee for the Apostleship is the greatest iurisdiction which Christ left vnto his Church as was proued both by the Scripture and your owne confession But when was he made an ordinarie pastor PHIL. When Christ said vnto him feed my sheepe ORTHO As Christ said to Peter feed my sheepe so hee said to them all goe teach all nations as my father sent me so send I you Doe not these comprehend as much as feede my sheepe PHIL. No. For Christ gaue commission to Peter to feed his sheep euen all his sheepe none excepted but the Apostles were his sheepe so the Apostles themselues were committed to S. Peter Therefore hee was the pastour of the Apostles and consequently the ordinarie pastour of the whole world ORTH. And Christ gaue commission to them all and among the rest to S. Andrew to preach the Gospel to euery creature euen to euery creature none excepted But S. Peter was a creature therefore S. Peter himselfe was committed to S. Andrew What thinke you was S. Andrew S. Peters pastour or the ordinarie pastour of the whole world PHIL. There is not the like reason For the wordes which you alleadge were spoken to them all The commission which I vrge was giuen particularly by name to S. Peter ORTHOD. These words feed my sheepe haue beene so much vexed that now for pitty you should let them alone but to answere you though our Sauiour when he said Feed my sheep directed his speech to Peter yet he did not therein giue any new office or speciall commission to Peter but willed him to looke to his charge alreadie receiued For Peter had bewrayed great want of loue in a threefold denyall of his master therefore Christ to kindle his loue did aske him three times Peter doest thou loue me Whereupon as hee had formerly denyed him thrice so now he protested his loue and confessed him thrice then Christ hauing as it were blowne the fire by a threefold question which began to kindle in Peter by a threefold confession did presently strike while the yron was hot vsing this exhortatioÌ„ Feed my lambs to make the more impression he redoubled the stroake saying Feed my sheepe Feede my sheepe As though he should say if thou loue me deny me no more in word nor deed but shew thy loue by keeping thy station and by feeding the flock which I haue purchased with my precious blood Feed them by doctrine Feed them by example thou shalt meet and encounter with many Beares and lyons yet forsake not thy function for feare but if thou loue me feed my flock As if a Pilot should say to his mariners here is like to be a great storme but if you loue me looke well to your tacklings or a Captaine to his souldiers here may be a hard battaile yet if you loue me be of a good courage or a husband being to goe a farre iourney and leauing at home his yong sonne the hope of his house with his wife which had sometimes shewed herselfe somewhat vnkind should say wife if thou loue me looke well to my child which is not to giue her any new commission or office but to put her in mind to discharge that office which God had formerly committed vnto her And what if Christ said to Peter Feed my sheepe shall he therefore bee the master shepheard and the rest of the Apostles his vnderlings shall hee bee a Bishop and they his Chaplaines Saint Paul denyeth this proclaiming himselfe in nothing inferiour to the chiefe Apostles The Church of Rome denyeth this I meane the ancient Church in the time of S. Cyprian in their Epistle to the Church of Carthage For hauing mentioned these words Feed my sheepe they adde Et caeteri discipuli similiter fecerunt i. the rest of the disciples performed this office of feeding the sheepe in the like manner that Peter did it So S. Ambrose quas oues quem gregem non solum tunc
beatus suscepit Petrus sed nobiscum eas cum illo nos suscepimus omnes i. which sheepe and which flocke not onely blessed Peter did then vndertake but both he hath vndertaken them with vs and all we haue vndertaken them with him And S. Austin Cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur amas me pasce oues me as i. when it is saia to Peter it is said to al louest thou me Feed my sheepe I will conclude this point with a memorable saying of one of your owne friends Non me latet recentiores vt sua priuâ—legia expeditius propugnent obtendere dominum hac voce pasce oues meas vni soli Petro totam detulisse Iurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam quo â—am deinceps pro animi sui arbitrio quibuscunque vellet dispartiretur At sacrae scripturae oraculis omnium antiquoruâ—i doctorum monumentis nec non etiam praxi veteris Ecclesiae tam plane atque aperte confutantur vt mirum sit illos tam absurda comminisci audere i. I am not ignorant that late writers that they may defend their priuileges with greater expedition doe pretend that the Lord by these wordes Feed my sheepe did giue all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to Peter alone that he might afterward bestow it vpon whomsoeuer he would according to his owne discretion But they are confuted so plainely and so openly by the oracles of the holy Scripture by the monuments of all ancient learnedmen yea also by the very practise of the old Church that it is a marueile they dare imagine such absurd things PHIL. I will prooue it by the practise ORTH. BY the practise Nay the practise doth proue the contrary For as Christ did not erect any peculiar tribunall in a singular maner to Peter Neither said he Dic Petro tell it to Peter but he established a tribunall for the Church and said Dic Ecclesiae i. make thy complaints and tell thy grieuances to the Church so other Apostles did exercise the Iurisdiction belonging to this tribunall as well as Peter whether we consider them assembled in Synodes or seuerally by themselues PHIL. Not so for in the Synode holden at Ierusalem in the yeere 34. immediatly after the ascension of Christ S. Peter was president For his act in prescribing to the Apostles and the rest this election of Matthias and the maner thereof is so euident for his Supremacie that our aduersaries confesse that he was Antistes the chiefe of the whole Colleage and company ORTHOD. His proposing the matter argueth a primacie of place not of Iurisdiction or power For though he alone proposeth the matter yet he alone had not the appointment the text saith plainely they appointed two and of the two God himselfe made choice and elected Matthias as appeareth by these words they prayed saying thou Lord which knowest the hearts of all men shew whether of these two thou hast chosen and when the lot fell vpon Matthias S. Peter gaue him no Iurisdiction neither did they expect till S. Peter sent him a Pall but he was presently counted among the Apostles therefore his authoritie was not from man or by man but from Iesus Christ. Moreouer that the Scripture ascribeth no more to him in elections then to the rest may appeare by the second Synod as Binius calleth it wherein the Deacons were chosen For who called the multitude together the text saith the twelue not S. Peter alone but the twelue and who chose them Not S. Peter but the multitude as the Scripture witnesseth The saying pleased the whole multitude and they chose Stephen a man full of faith and the holy Ghost and Philip and Prochorus and Nicanor and Timon and Parmenas and Nicholas a proselyte of Antiochia which they set before the Apostles and they prayed and laid their hands on them So it is euident that though the Apostles ordained them yet the whole multitude chose them PHIL. The election of Deacons was giuen to the people ex concessione Apostolorum by the grant of the Apostles as Luke himselfe doth testifie ORT. Then it seemeth there is great difference betweene the Apostles and the Pope for the Apostles did not challenge their owne right they did gratifie the people and grant it vnto them but the Pope will rake all vnto himselfe though hee rob Prince Priest and people Now whereas you say they did that by the grant of the Apostles it is true if by grant you meane the consent and counsel of the Apostles For they exhorted the multitude to looke out seuen men of honest report but if you meane that the whole right belonged so absolutely to the Apostles that they might totally haue excluded the people you must consider that in this case the consent of the people depended vpon the grounds of humane society For there was then speciall reason why the whole Church should haue interest in the choice of Deacons because the treasure of the whole Church was coÌ„mitted to their trust But admit it were absolutely by the grant of the Apostles yet marke what you say by the grant of the Apostles not of Peter alone but of the Apostles Thus it doth not appeare that Peter had any prerogatiue more then other Apostles no not so much as in the choice of a Deacon PHIL. That he had Iurisdiction more then they is manifest by the third Synod holden at Ierusalem in the yeere of Christ 51. where indeed S. Peter shewed himselfe for he spake first and last and S. Iames and all the rest yeelded to his sentence ORTHOD. Not one of all these points is true That S. Peter spake not first is cleare by these words When there had bene much disputation Peter rose vp and said c. That he spake not last appeareth also for the Text mentioneth no speach of his but one After him spake Paul and Barnabas after them S. Iames and the Councell concluded the matter according to the words of S. Iames yea according to a speciall point not mentioned by S. Peter Neither were the Actes of the Counsell set out in the name of S. Peter but a Synodall Epistle was sent in the names of them all Neither did S. Peter subscribe vnto it I Peter the Vicâ—r of Christ the Prince of the Apostles the visible head and ordinarie Pastour of the Church but he was only put in among the rest It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and vs. Where is now his super-eminent authoritie If euer hee should haue shewed it this was the time this was the place especially seeing he was present not by his Legate but in his owne person If now he had chalenged it his successours might for euer quietly haue enioyed it What did he meane thus to forget himselfe and to preiudice posteritie And as the Apostolicall Synods receiued not their authoritie from him so neither did the Apostles themselues seuerally considered As is euident in S. Paul
Laodicea in their Synodall Epistle to the Church of Alexandria and to the beloued brethren of Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis If peraduenture any prelate of the Church doe fall asleepe let it bee lawfull for such as haue beene receiued into the Communion of the Church a litle before to succeed into the place of him that is dead if so bee that they shall seeme to be worthy and if the people shall choose them yet so notwithstanding that the voyce and as it were the seale of the Bishop of the Catholicke Church of Alexandria bee added thereunto And that they inioyed the same libertie before the Nicen Councell is cleare by Saint Cyprian saying The people obeying the Lords commandements and fearing God ought to separate themselues from a sinfull ruler and not to intermingle themselues with the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest seeing they especially haue power either to elect worthy Priests or to reiect vnworthy PHIL. I answere with Pamelius that the people are saide to haue power to elect or reiect because they gaue testimonie of the conuersation of the parties A thing so notoriously knowen that the Emperour Alexander Seuerus as Lampridius reporteth when he would send any rulers to the prouinces or make gouernours proposed their names exhorting the people that if they could obiect any crime they should make iust proofe and vsed to say that it were a shame not to doe that in the rulers of the Prouinces which Christians did in proclaming their Priests that were to be ordained ORTHOD. Was their testimony onely required and not their consent why then saith Leo Teneatur subscriptio clericorum honoratorum testimonium ac ordinis consensus plebis that is let the subscription of the Clergie be obtained the testimony of the honourable and consent of order and people PHIL. It is one thing if the consent of the people bee required in ordination and another if their proper suffrages ORTHOD. But Saint Cyprian calleth it a iust and lawfull ordination which hath beene examined Omnium suffragio by the suffrage or voyce of all that is both of Clergie and people which he exemplifieth in the ordination of Cornelius Bishop of Rome in these wordes Cornelius was made Bishop by the iudgement of God and his Christ by the testimonie of almost all the Clergy by the suffrage of the people which was then present and by the Colledge of ancient Priestes and good men Yea the suffrages of the people are a thing so clearly set downe in antiquitie that Pamelius himselfe cannot deny them wee deny not saith hee the olde rite of electing Bishops by which they are wont to bee chosen the people being present yea rather by the voyces of the people for that it was obserued in Africk is euident by the election of Eradius the successour of S. Austin Concerning which there is extant his 110. Epistle In Grecce in the age of Chrysostome as appeareth by his third booke of Priesthood In Spaine by this place of Cyprian and Isidor in his booke of offices In France by the epistle of Celestinus At Rome by those things which were spoken before vpon the epistle to Antonianus yea euery where else by the 87. epistle of Leo and that this custome continued vntill Gregory the first appeareth by his epistle yea euen vnto the times of the Emperours Charles and Lodowick as it is manifest enough out of the first booke of their chapters and the same Pamelius in another place saith the manner of chusing the Bishop of Rome was often changed first Saint Peter chose his successours Linus Cletus and Clemens then Anacletus and the rest vnto the second Schisme betweene Damasus and Vrsicinus were created by the suffrages of the Clergie the people behold how Pamelius who a litle before interpreted the peoples elections in Cyprian as though they elected onely by way of testimonie a colde and a hungry interpretation is now forced to confesse ô the euidence of trueth that they elected by way of suffrage yea and that the Roman Bishops from Anacletus to Damasus that is from the yeere 103. to the yeere 307. were so elected Wherefore it is most true which is affirmed by our learned Bishop Presentia plebis apud Cyprianum includit testimonium de vita nec excludit suffragium de persona i. The presence of the people in Cyprian includeth a testimonie of their life and excludeth not a suffrage of their person PHIL. There are two kinds of Suffrages the former of petition consent or testimony the latter of power or authoritie the former belonges to the people the latter doth not ORTHO If one make petition giue consent or testimony is this to giue a voice or Suffrage surely this is a deluding distinction PHIL. It is said of Lucius who was intruded into the place of Peter Patriarch of Alexandria Not an assembly of Orthodox Bishops not the Suffrages of true Clergie men nor the desire of the people made him Bishop as it is commanded in the Ecclesiasticall sanctions where you see that Suffrages are ascribed to Clergy men and onely desire or petition to the people ORTHOD. In a Roman Councell holden vnder Syluester it is said that a Priest may be ordained Bishop Sâ— vota populi Cleri concurrerint if the desires of the people and Clergie concurre where you see that desires or requests are ascribed to the Clergie as well as to the people Moreouer you heard out of Cyprian that Cornelius Bishop of Rome was chosen by the testimonie of the Clergie and the Suffrages of the people PHIL. The Clergie gaue Suffrages of power and authoritie so did not the people for the Bishops were not bound to admit whomsoeuer the people required ORTHOD. Neither were the people compelled to receiue whomsoeuer the Bishops elected Pope Leo coÌ„mandeth vt nullus inuitis non petentiâ—us ordinetur that no B. be ordained to the people against their wills and not requiring it PHIL. PAmelius saith It is euident that the Suffrages onely were granted to the people and not the election which vseth to be by subscription ORTHOD. In the dayes of Gregory the great when a Bishopricke was void he vsed to admonish the Clergie and people of that citie to agree in the election which being done there was made a solemne decree strengthened with subscriptions of all and sent to the Consecrators where we must obserue these words the subscriptions of all not of the Clergie alone but of all that is of all the electours both Clergie and people wherefore the people did then chuse with the Clergie euen by Suffrages of subscription PHIL. True but this was by the Popes permission ORTH. What permission had S. Aust. from the Pope in electing Eradius his successor when he desired the people so many as could to subscribe and the people cryed fiat fiat 25. times or the people Romane armie which subscribed
Of the Election of the Bishops of Rome vnder Christian Emperours before the diuision of the Empire PHIL. THe authoritie of Emperours began to bee interposed in the election of Damasus and first of all verely onely in Schisme to pacifie vproares and so the matter was composed by Valentintan betweene Damasus and Vrsicinus By Honorius betweene Boniface and Eulalius And by King Theodoricke betweene Symmachus and Laurentius Afterward Emperours intermedled euen when there was no Schisme to preuent least peraduenture there should be vprores Yea and the matter came by little and little to that passe that Bishops elected durst not receiue Consecration without their assent ORTHOD. The first Christian Emperour was Constantine the Great conuerted according to the calculation of Baronius in the yeere of Christ 312. the second yeere of Pope Melchtades and the 7. yeere of his sitting in the Imperiall Throne In his time succeeded three Bishops of Rome Siluester Marcus and Iulius whose elections Constantine dwelling farre of permitted to be performed as in ancient maner by the Suffrages of the Clergie and people Yet what authoritie he thought himselfe to haue in such matters may appeare by these his words to Athanasius If I shall vnderstand that any man which is desirous to be partaker of the Church shal be hindered or excluded by thee I will presently send one who by my commandement shall cast thee out and giue thy place to another After Iulius succeeded Liberius Anno 352 Constantius being sole Emperour who though he intermeddled not with this Election in the West yet he interposed himselfe before that time in the East For when the people had slaine Hermogenes the Captaine in defence of Proclus he came himselfe in person to Constantinople and cast Proclus out of the Church yet he deferred saith Socrates to pronounce Macedonius Bishop because he was wonderfully incensed against him as for other reasons so because he was chosen without his aduice and counsell notwithstanding hee gaue him licence to execute his function in that Church onely wherein hee was chosen but afterward vnderstanding that Paulus was placed againe he sent one Philip to cast out Paulus and to place Macedonius Thus you see how both Constantine and Constantius interposed their authoritie before the time of Damasus And had not Valentinian done the like Damasus could hardly haue obtained the Popedome because the contrary faction was so strong AFter Damasus who continued vnder fiue Emperours Valentinian Valens Gratian Valentinian the yonger and Theodosius succeeded Siricius in the yeere of Christ 385. being the tenth yeere of Valentinian and the seuenth of Theodosius whose election was confirmed by the Emperour Valentinian as may appeare by his Epistle to Pinianus extant in the Vatican and published by Baronius PHIL. This was extraordinary by reason of Schisme but it was no ordinary matter till the dayes of Iustinian For then as Onuphrius saith After the Gothes were driuen out of Italy which happened in the yeere 553. there grew a custome by the authoritie of Pope Vigilius to wit That so soone as the Pope was dead a new election should presently be made after the ancient maner by the Clergie the Senate and people of Rome but the elected might not bee Consecrated before the Emperour of Constantinople confirmed the election and gaue licence to the Pope elected that he might be ordained and Consecrated Now if this grew by the authoritie of the Pope it doeth not argue any right originally in the Emperour but onely deriued from the Pope ORTHO A constitution was made at that time That the new elected Pope should not onely craue licence of the Emperour to be ordained but also pay him a certaine summe of money which was done to this end as Onuphrius witnesseth That the Emperour might be assured of the behauiour and conditions of the new Popes least any turbulent spirit or enemy to the Emperour beeing ordained the City of Rome and the country of Italy might reuolt from the Easterne Empire for now the authority of the Pope began to bee great by reason that the Emperour liued farre off at Constantinople But though this paying of money begun in the time of Vigilius yet the authority of the Emperor in elections was before his time as witnesseth Platina in the life of Siluerius the Predecessor of Vigilius Siluerius saith he borne in Campania hauing for his father Hormisda a Bishop was created Pope by the commandement of Theodohatus cum antea non regum sed imperatorum authoritas interueniret whereas before that time the authority not of Kings but of Emperours was interposed So hee speaketh of it as a knowne ordinary and vsuall matter Yea and Iustinian tooke it so hainously to be robbed of this right that as Platina declareth this was one of the causes why hee sent Belisarius with an army into Italy Moreouer as it was the custome of the Emperor before Vigilius so it remained long after PHIL. Indeed this Tyranny continued til the daies of Benedict the second at which time Constantine moued with the holinesse of the man sent a Sanction that from thenceforth whomsoeuer the Clergie people and Roman army should choose him they should all presently beleeue to be the true Vicar of Christ not expecting the authority either of the Emperour or of the Exarch of Italy ORTHOD. This is your fashion If the Emperor doe any thing against the Pope it is mere tyranny if the Pope doe any thing against the Emperor it is cleere libertie But you confesse that this custome preuailed from Vigilius to Benedict the second in which space were 21. Popes of thereabout all created by Imperiall authority except Pelagius the second of whoÌ„ Platina reporteth it as a strange accident that he was made Pope iniussu Principis without the Emperours commaund whereof he rendreth this reason That they could not send any man because the City was besieged and withall he affirmeth That whatsoeuer the Clergie then had done were nothing if the Emperor should not approue it wherefore Gregory the Deacon was sent to Constantinople to pacifie the Emperour Afterward when Gregory himselfe was chosen Pope Hee sent letters to the Emperor Mauritius earnestly intreating him to make voide the election of the Clergie and people but his letters being intercepted by the Gouernor of the City were torne in peeces other written to intreate the Emperour to confirme him Moreouer Platina hauing said that Seâ—erinus was confirmed in the Popedome by Isaatius the Exarch giueth this reason For then the election of the Clergie and people was counted vaine vnlesse the Emperours or their Exarehes had confirmed them And this you grant continued till Benedict the 2. but did it then cease Constantine did not absolutely refer it to the Clergy people but ioyned with them the Roman army which being for the gard of the Empire was at the Emperours command And his sonne Iustinian the yonger who presently
time of the Emperour Iustinian vsed to pay for their ordination yet he added this clause vt non debeat ordinari qui electus fuerit nisi prius decretum generale introducatur in regiam vrbem secundum antiquam Consuetudinē vt cum eorum conscientia iussione debeat ordinatio prosperari i. that the party elected ought not to be ordained vnlesse first the generall decree of his election strenthned with the subscriptions of the electors were brought into the imperial city according to the ancient custome that so the ordination might prosperously proceed with the knowledge and commandement of the Emperours Wherefore if we imbrace this sence of the Canon we may iustly say Decretum hoc iuris veteris vel restitutio vel continuatio non concessio noui 1. this decree to speak properly is either a restoring or a continuing of an ancient right not a grant of a new and consequently this was no priuiledge proceeding frō the grace and bounty of the Pope but a voluntary and ingenuous confession of the Princes right But some do follow the other sense extending the decree euen to a sole and plenare power of electing at his owne pleasure without the Clergie and people For Duarenus saith thus In ancient time the Bishop of Rome vsed not to be ordained without the consent and authoritie of the Roman Emperour and all kings vsed in a maner the same power in the Churches of their owne kingdomes yet the right of Electing was not therfore taken away from the Clergie but afterward the right of the electing the Romane Bishops was of their owne accord altogether granted and permitted to the Emperours Charles and Otho And a little after a full power of electing at his owne pleasure was granted to Charles which seemeth more probable because Theodoricke de Niem sayth the Romane people granted to him and translated vpon him all their right and power and according to their example Pope Adrian with all the Clergie people and the whole sacred Synod granted to the Emperour Charles all their right and power of electing the Pope Howsoeuer this is certaine that the Pope and Councell did ascribe vnto him if not a sole and plenary yet at least a principall and preuailing power in electing the high Bishop If we imbrace the first then so farre as they confered vpon him their owne former right it may be called a gift or grant If the latter it was no gift nor grant but an acknowledgement of the ancient right and prerogatiue of the Empire PHIL. Charles in his Chapters appointeth that elections should be free ORTHOD. This may seeme to argue that Adrian and the Councel did yeeld vnto him a plenary power yet notwithstanding hee like a gracious Prince permitted that elections should be free as in former times But what if they were free must the Prince therefore bee excluded Before the diuision of the Empire the Romanes might freely elect whom they list and yet the elected could not be Consecrated till he were approued of the Emperour so Charles might grant freedome of elections and yet reserue to himselfe his royall assent PHIL. If hee had any such power why did not he and his successours put it in practise ORTHOD. To this I will answere first in generall and then descend to some particulars In generall it appeareth that they did by these words of Nauclerus Imperator volens vti consuetudine authoritate praedecessorum suorum petebat sibi seruari ea quae priuilegijs Carolo Magno successoribus in Imperto iam per 300 annos amplius concessa obseruata fuerunt ex quibus priuilegijs licitè per inuestituram annuli virgae Episcopatus Abbatias conferebant i. The Emperour Henr. desirous to vse the custome and authoritie of his predecessors required that those priuiledges should be reserued for him which were granted to Charles the Great and to his successours in the Empire and obserued now for 300. yeeres and more By which priuiledges it was lawfull for the Emperours to conferre Bishopricks and Abbacies by inuestiture of a ring and a staffe And Matthew Paris saith That the Emperour was desirous to vse the priuiledge of his predecessours which they hadenioyed 300. yeeres vnder 60. Popes Thus much in generall PHIL. Anastasius who wrote the liues of 12. Popes succeeding Adrian deliuereth onely that they were chosen by the people and Clergie but saith nothing of the Emperours ORTHOD. Yes by your leaue he saith somewhat But if hee were silent what then Are not other Authors sufficient to witnesse it The next Pope after Adrian and the onely Pope elected in the time of Charles was Leo the third who as Gillius saith so soone as he was Consecrated sent to Charles the Great the keyes of S. Peters Church with the banner of the Citie of Rome and admonished him to send certaine selected persons which might exact the Oath of obedience of the people Was not this a resignation both of the Citie and Church into the Emperours hands Was not this an ingenuous acknowledgement that he would not hold the possession of S. Peters Church that is of the Church of Rome without his Royall assent Which he vndoubtedly obtained For afterwards when a strong faction had deposed Leo hee fled into France to Charles Who sent him back to Rome and restored him againe with great honour AFter Charles reigned his sonne Lodowick in whose time Leo died and Steuen the 4. had the place who as Baronius sheweth out of Aimonius went in person to the Emperour within two moneths of his Consecration To what end Wee may collect that out of his decree in Gratian wherein hee complaineth that the Church of Rome at the death of the Popes suffered great violence because the new Popes were Consecrated without the knowledge of the Emperour neither were the Emperours Ambassadours present as both the Canons and custome required Whereupon he decreeth that the Consecration should be praesentibus Legatis Imperialibus i. The Emperours Ambassadors being present And withall forbiddeth all men to extort any new Oathes whereby the Church may bee scandalized and the Imperiall honour diminished Wherefore it is probable that his hasty going was to excuse the matter because as it seemeth he was Consecrated without the Emperours knowledge Which is yet more likely because the next Pope Paschall being created without Imperiall authoritie sent presently to the Emperour Lodowick to excuse the matter by laying the blame vpon the Clergie and people Whereto he answered That the Clergie and people must keepe the decrees of their ancestours and admonished them hereafter to take heed not to offend the Imperiall Maiestie PHIL. If Lodowick had any such authoritie therein surely he resigned it in his Constitution concerning his donation to the Church of Rome which is partly in Gratian but fully set downe by Baronius out of the Vatican Monuments the summe whereof is that it
of excluding Emperours periury cruelty abominable lust and all manner of villany CHAP. VIII Of the election of Popes from the time of the Emperour Otho to Henry 4. WHen the race of Charles fayling the Westerne Empire was translated to Otho the Romans ashamed to see such a snake in the seat of Peter earnestly Intreated the Emperor to prouide for the Church by remoouing the monster Whereupon Iohn the 12. was deposed and Leo the 8 made Pope in his place PHIL. Leo was no Pope but a schismaticall Antipope ORTHOD. Hee was chosen in a great Romane councell by the voice of all in the presence and with consent of the Emperour Hee is acknowledged for a lawful Pope and put into the Catalogue of Popes by an infinite number of writers as Binius confesseth And therefore you must giue mee leaue so to call and account him Now to proceed This Pope Leo in a Synod with the whole Clergie and people of Rome decreed that from hence forth no man of what dignity or religion soeuer should haue any power to elect either Patricius or Bishop of the high See Apostolike or to ordaine any other Bishop without the consent of the Emperour PHIL. This Canon is counterfeit which may appeare because Leo is heere said to propose vnto himselfe The example of Adrian who graunted Inuestitures to Charles whereas the name of Inuerstitures was not in vse in the time of Charles ORTHOD. Baronius from whom you borrow this argument should haue done wel to haue cast the natiuity of Inuestitures that so we might haue known vnder what constellation they had bin borne Is it enough for him to say they were after Charles not to proue it I need not here dispute whether they came from the Lumbards or no the testimony of the Canon law is sufficient to ouerballance the bare coniecture of Baronius PHIL. It is said in the Canon That this grant was made to Otho in the Church of our Sauiour Now what author maketh mention of any such councel wherin any such grant was made to Otho ORT. Luitprandus maketh mention of this councell at which hee was present and Gratian hath recorded and enrolled this very Canon what would you more we cite the Popes own CanoÌ„ out of the Popes Canon-law notoriously known to all the Canonists the pillars of Popery acknowledged by Genebrard a most partiall parasite and related by Sigonâ—us the Popes owne chronicler The noble men of Rome saith hee to aduance their owne priuate power corrupted them to whoÌ„ the Popes election belonged thereby filled the Church almost 200 yeres together with grieuous seditions scandalous euils and disorders These were the Marques Albert Alberike his sonne a Consul the Earles of Thusculum and they who were of their kinne or by their meanes had growne to wealth Who either bribing the people and Clergy with money or spoiling them of the ancient libertie of the Election by whatsoeuer other meanes preferred at their lust their kinsmen or friendes men commonly nothing like to the former Popes in holinesse and good order For the repressing of whose outrage Pope Leo the eight reuiued the law which had beene made by Adrian the first and repealed by the third that no Pope elected should vndertake the Popedome without the Emperours consent Which law being taken away the state of the Church was put againe in great danger through the priuate lustes of the same factions Thus hee acknowledgeth that Leo was a Pope that Pope Leo reuiued this Canon and likewise that this Canon was profitable to represse sinne and that the abrogation of it had brought the Church into great danger But though this Canon were so good made by the approbation of the Romanes which had sworne before vnto Otho that they would neuer chuse a Pope without the consent of him and his sonne yet they went about presently to plucke their neckes out of the coller Otho was no sooner departed then they put out Leo and restored Iohn after whom dying within a fewe dayes they put in Benedict whom the Emperour comming with fire and sword compelled them to deliuer vp vnto him and to admit of Leo. AFter the death of Leo the Romanes sent Embassadours into Saxonie to the Emperour to know his pleasure at whose returne Iohn the thirteenth was chosen whom after a while the Romanes banished When the Emperour heard this hee came to Rome Banished the consuls hanged the tribunes and caused Peter the gouernour of the citie being the cause of all these broiles to be stripped and whipped and carried through the streets vpon a horse with his face backward Thus Otho put a bit in their mouthes and kept the bridle in his hand while hee liued but after his decease the former faction preuailed For Boniface the seuenth who came in by villanie robbed his Church and being cast out by violence recouered it againe by money got with sacriledge was chosen by the Romanes of whom Baronius saith that hee was a most cruell murderer of two Popes and had not one haire of a Roman Bishop deseruing to bee reckoned among most famous thieues and ransakers of their countrey in which he went beyond Sylla and Catiline Yet after this the Emperours had againe a hand in the election For Otho the third aduanced his cosen Gregory the fifth whom Crescentius a rich Romane expelled and put another in his place which when the Emperour heard hee came to Rome with a great armie hee caused the Antipope to bee apprehended commanded his hands and eares to bee cut off and his eyes to bee pulled out Then hee besieged Crescentius and hanged him vp aloft in the sight of the citie Thus Gregory was restored vnto his place PHIL. PRoceed vnto the next Pope Syluester the second was not hee also chosen by the Emperour you tell vs of monsters but if wee may beleeue Platina this was a monster of monsters For hee is said to haue beene a Nicromancer and for the Popedome to haue sold his soule to the diuell such were the elections of the Emperours ORTHOD. If hee were a Coniurer then I beseech you make a stand a while looke backe and take a view of your golden succession wherein are so many monsters villaines and rakehels But what if hee were not Baronius thinketh that this is a slander arising from his sodaine promotion and beleeued among the ignorant because he was an excellent Astronomer Onuphrius wondreth that Platina and some others were so negligent and credulous as not onely to suffer without reproofe such imputations to be laid vpon the best and most learned men by the writers of those times but also to follow their ignorance Thus in stead of a Coniurer hee is become a most holy and learned man But whatsoeuer he was if the Emperour did chuse him it was at the request of the people as may appeare by
according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Moreouer his noble successours what did they When the rebell Rodolph was slaine in the field they armed the sonnes against their owne father First Conrade the◠Henry who tooke his owne father prisoner and brought him to such misery that hee was glad to begge for victuals in a Church which he himselfe had founded promising to earne them by doing the dutie of a Clerke in seruing the quier which not obtaining he pined away and dyed for sorrow Was this according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Neither did the Popes malice stay here their successour Pope Paschall the second caused him to be digged out of his graue and to lye vnburied by the space of fiue yeeres Was this according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Yet after all these exploits so valiantly performed Pope Paschall was glad to restore againe the priuiledge of inuestitures to his sonne Henry being the fift King and the 4 Emperour of that name PHIL. This priuiledge may be called a prauiledge For the Emperour tooke him prisoner and constrained him to it by force and violence but when he was inlarged he cursed both the priuiledge and the Emperour in two Romane Councells the one holden in the yeere 1112. the other in the yeere 1116. ORTHO The Emperour inforced him not to any thing vnlawfull but to obserue the ancient Canons acording to the custome both of the Church and Empire this the Emperour might iustly require and the Pope might yeeld vnto with a good conscience so Paschal with sixeteene of his Bishops and Cardinals whose names Baronius setteth downe out of Petrus Diaconus bound themselues by a solemne oath sub anathemate to performe it Notwithstanding when he was once set at libertie the Pope played the Pope cursed the Emperour and reuoked his grant with open periurie PHIL. The Emperour himselfe had no great confidence in this grant and therefore he relinquished it to Calixtus the second ORTH. What should he do It was now commonly taught that Inuestitures belonged not to lay men It was imbraced as an article of faith that the Pope might depose Princes for denying whereof Vecilo Archbish. of Mentz was condemned for an Hereticke He saw his fathers example fresh bleeding before his eies he was in danger euery day to be turned out of his kingdome the Popes were continually flashing their excommunications in his face first Pope Paschall then Gelasius after him Calixtus So at last wearied and tired out hee was compelled to redeeme his peace and rather to loose Inuestitures then the Empire it selfe Thus the authoritie which was for many hundreds of yeeres practised by the Greeke Romane and Germaine Emperours ratified by Clement the 2. with a councel by Leo the 8. with a councel by Adrian the 1. with a councel and before them all by Pope Vigilius and before him by the approbation of those ancient and better times was now wrested and extorted from him by periury cursing and banning And as they excluded the Emperour reducing elections to the Clergie and people so afterward they excluded the people and brought them onely to the Clergie after that they excluded the Clergie and brought them onely to the Cardinalls Since which time they haue beene as monstrous Popes as euer were before namely Boniface the eighth who entred like a fox raigned like a lyon and dyed like a dogge Iohn the 23. who was called a diuell incarnate and Alexander the sixt who was worse then they both Of all the Schismes which were in the Church of Rome the 29. saith Onuphrius was the worst and the longest continuing 50. yeares sometimes two Popes sometimes three raigning at once which proceeded frō the ambition of the Cardinals the Emperor being excluded who should haue repressed them and if at last the Emperour Sigismund had not interposed his authoritie calling the Councell of Constance and putting downe 3. Popes by this time as a learned man saith your Church might haue had as many Popes at once as the scarlet coloured beast hath heads Hitherto of Rome CHAP. IX Of the Election of the Bishops of Constantinople WHen Nazianzen had refused the Bishopricke of Constantinople Theodosius the elder commaunded the Bishops to giue him in writing the names of such as they thought fit for the place reseruing to himselfe the power of Electing one out of all It fell out that there was at that time at Constantinople an ancient and reuerend old man Nectarius by name who being about to returne to Tarsus came to Diodorus the Bishop thereof to know whether he would haue any thing thither Diodorus on a sudden liking the behauiour of the man though a stranger vnto him shewed him to the Bishop of Antioch praying him to remember him in the catalogue of names The Bishop of Antioch smiled at the conceit of Diodorus because many men of eminent note were nominated for this Election yet for fashion sake to please Diodorus he put Nectarius in among the rest and placed him last The Emperour hauing read ouer the catalogue made a pause at the name of Nectarius and making a marke with his finger he read them ouer againe and chose Nectarius And when euery man inquired who this Nectarius was it appeared that he was not as yet baptized a thing which was vnknowne to the Emperour vnknowne to the Bishop of Antioch vnknowne to Diodorus Yet the Emperour hauing made his choice would not be remoued and the Councell then assembled pronounced him Bishop of Constantinople euen while he was yet in his Christening vesture After the death of Nectarius the Clergie and people chose Chrysostome the Emperour approued the Election and sent to fetch him from Antioch After the death of Sisinnius though many made sute for Philip and many for Proclus yet it was the Emperours pleasure because of some vain glorious persons to choose none of that Church but to send for a stranger Nestorius from Antioch After the death of Maximianus Theodosius the Emperour lest any tumult should be raised in the Church procured the Bishops then present to install Proclus in the Bishops seat euen while the corps of Maximianus was as yet aboue ground which Socrates commendeth in the Emperour as a point of wisdome PHIL. You should marke what followeth in Socrates to wit that Celestinus Bishop of Rome did consent to these proceedings ORTHOD. When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople was deposed and Proclus in faire possibilitie to obtaine the place some stood vp alledging against him that it was not lawfull to be translated from one See to another whereupon Proclus was repelled and Maximianus chosen Wherefore after the death of Maximianus when Celestine heard that Proclus was installed he wrote to Cyrill and others signifying that translations of Bishops was lawful and not against the Canons So Celestine onely giueth his iudgement but assumeth no authoritie in the Election which was
already performed by Imperiall authoritie Thus you see the practise of the Emperours in the Church of Constantinople no man contradicting them and the very last of these examples was aboue 300. yeeres before the grant of Adrian yea aboue 100. yeeres before Vigilius Now from the Imperiall Cities let vs come to the kingdome of Spaine CHAP. X. Of the Election of the Bishops of Spaine IN the 16. Councell at Tolledo it was concluded That if a Bishop did not set his helping hand to the extirpation of Idolatrie he should be deposed Alio ibidem Principali Electione constituto Another being appointed there by the Princes Election This Councell was holden in the yeere 693. fourescore yeeres before Inuestitures were granted to the Emperour Charles by Pope Adrian And before that it was decreed in the 12. Councel of Tolledo as followeth It hath pleased all the Bishops of Spaine and Galicia That sauing the priuiledge of euery Prouince it shall hencefoorth be lawfull for the Bishops of Tolledo to set vp such Prelates in the Sees of their predecessours and to choose such successours for Bishops departed as the Princely power shall Elect and finde worthy by the iudgement of the foresaid Bishops of Tolledo This Councell was holden in the yeere 681. almost an 100. yeeres before Pope Adrian And yet the Kings of Spaine had authoritie to Elect before this Councel which may appeare by these wordes of Baronius Wee must not be ignorant of this point that the Kings of the Gothes in Spaine did challenge to themselues the nomination of such Bishops as were to bee made which nomination of them made by the King was referred to a Councell that they might iudge of the qualitie of the person whether he were worthy of a Bishoprick These things are euident by the Monuments of ancient writers Now because much time passed before they could be dispatched by reason whereof the Sees were long vacant therefore the Councell made the decree Thus it is euident that the authoritie of the Councell was translated to the Archbishop but the Kings authoritie was the same as before and had so bene from the time of the Gothes PHIL. Indeed in the time of the Gothes it was in the Kings and so hath continued in the Kings of Spaine to this present age by the indulgence of the Popes ORTHOD. The ancient Kings of the Gothes were Arrians and enemies to Christ did they elect Bishops by indulgence of Popes PHIL. They did it by tyrannie will you take a paterne from Arrians and Tyrants ORTHOD. The Arrians of Spaine were conuerted in the yeere 589. and professed the faith in the third Councell of Toledo Yet the Orthodox Kings continued their authoritie in Elections Shall we say that they tooke a patterne from Tyrants and Arrians Neither did the Arrian Kings offend in that they elected Bishops but in that they elected Arrian Bishops Neither is an Orthodox Prince bound to relinquish his owne right because it hath bene abused by hereticall Princes For the right of Princes is most ancient deriued neither from Pope nor Arrian but from the patterne of Salomon who chose Sadok high Priest aboue 1000 yeeres before either Arrian or Papist was borne Hitherto of Spaine CHAP. XI Of the Election of the Bishops of France IN France the Kings had the choise of Bishops almost 300. yeeres before the Empire came to their hands For their first Christian King Clodoueus conuerted in the yeere 499 elected Dinifius Bishop of Turone After him succeeded Childibertus who made his brethren Clodomer Theodorick and Clotharius partakers of his Kingdome all which vsed the same authority for by the commandement of Clodomer Omasius was made Bishop of Turone after Dinifius by the commandement of Theodorick Quintianus was made Bishop of Aruerne by the commandement of Clotharius Cato was appointed to be Bishop of Turone which when he refused and afterward would haue had it the King repelled him After the death of Clotharius raigned his sonne Cheribert who made Pascentius Bishop of Poictiers But why should I reckon vp any moe There is a world of examples recorded by Gregorius Turonensis collected from him by one of our learned Bishops all which were aboue a thousand yeeres agoe Afterward when the French Kings became Roman Emperours Pope Adrian decreed and defined that they should haue not only Inuestitures but also the disposing of the Roman See as hath beene declared And although Lodowick the sonne of Charles bee said to haue renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet as the Court of Paris affirmeth He alwaies retained Inuestitures Neither had the Kings of France of ancient time authority in Bishopricks onely but in benefices also Si ad priscorum institutorum normam saith Duarenus omnia exigere velimus nullum est in Gallia beneficium nullum Ecclesiae ministerium quod absque regis consensu cuiquam deferri possit if wee will examine all things according to the rule of ancient constitutions there is in France no benefice no ministry of any Church which can bee conferred vpon any man without the consent of the King Notwithstanding it came to passe in processe of time that the Pope by his prouisions reseruations and expectatiue graces made lamentable desolation in the Church of God for redresse whereof when the councell of Basill had published most worthy decrees Pope Eugenius went about to disanull them VVherefore Charles the 7. king of France at the supplication of the councell and by the aduice of his owne Bishops assembled in Synod vndertooke to protect them to which purpose hee set out that noble constitution called the pragmaticall sanction which was receiued with such an applause of all good men that the like was neuer heard of in the kingdome of France This pragmatical sanction was fitly called by a great learned man the Palladium of France for as the image of Pallas was said to fall downe from heauen among the Troianes so this sanction seemed to be sent from heauen by diuine prouidence among the Frenchmen And as Apollo did prophesie that the remouing of the Palladium would be the destruction of Troy so wise men presaged that the taking away of this Sanction would portend great calamity to the Church of France Yet for al this the Popes would neuer be quiet till they had if not wholly vanquished yet wonderfully weakened it especially Pius the 2. who was one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil but now beeing Pope hee is become another man neither wanted there some which to please the Pope opposed themselues against it whose subtilties and Sophismes are answered by that famous Canonist Archbishop Panormitan who was himselfe also one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil. Yea the court of Paris offered a booke to Lodowick the eleuenth wherein they declared how by the abrogation of the Sanction foure mischiefs would follow the first A confusion of the
whole Ecclesiasticall order the 2. a desolation of their country the 3. the impouerishing of the kingdome by wasting their treasure the 4. the ruine and subuersion of Churches The consideration of which things so preuailed with the King that Pope Pius was disapointed of his purpose PHIL. That which Pius could not performe in the daies of Lewis videlicet that the pragmaticall Sanction should be taken cleane away was afterward effected by Leo the 10. in the reigne of King Francis the first therefore in the councell of Lateran the pragmaticall Sanction was abrogated by a publique Decree ORTH. King Francis to vse the words of Duarenus made choice rather to serue the stage and the time with his owne profit as hee himselfe confesseth and remit somewhat of the publique right then to striue so oft with the Popes about this Helena especially seeing he perceiued that some danger from them did hang ouer his head Yet for al this the Sanction cannot be said to bee cleane taken away For the vniuersity of Paris did interpose an appeale to the next general councell which appeale stood with iustice equity for 3. reasons first because the fact of the king was not voluntary but by compulsion Secondly because the Parisians whom it must concerned were neither called nor heard Thirdly because there is no reason that the councell of Lateran and constitution of Leo should derogate from the authority of the councel of Basil. And if we should suppose that it did not onelie derogate from it but also abrogate it yet the verie constitution of Pope Leo yeeldeth to the King the power of nomination in these wordes VVhen a Cathedrall or Metropoliticall Church is vacant let not the Bishoppe bee chosen by the Colledge of Canons but let the King within sixe monethes offer and nominate a graue and fit man to the Pope Thus it is euident that the French Kings retained their right and authoritie in making of Bishoppes euer since their first embracing of the Christian faith And had they this by the indulgence of the Pope Let the Councell of Basill be witnesse let Charles the seuenth bee witnesse let the Court of Paris bee witnesse yea let King Francis himselfe who confessed that when hee went against the sanction hee remitted of the publique right be witnesse And thus much for France CHAP. XII Of the Election of the Bishops of England PHILOD COncerning England King Henry the first did pretend to challenge Inuestitures as vsed by his father and brother before him whereof yet notwithstanding wee finde no expresse proofe or example in any of our histories that they vsed them much lesse that they were lawfully granted vnto them ORTHOD. I will prooue both that they vsed them and that they vsed them lawfully That his brother William Rufus vsed them may appeare by William of Malmesbury who declareth that the King being sicke made mention of the Archbishopricke of Canterbury which was then voide and willed the Bishops to consider of it who answered that whom the King should thinke worthy they all would accept willingly Itaille cubito se attollens hunc ait sanctum virum Anselmum eligo ingenti subsecuto fragore fauentium so he raising himselfe vp vpon his elbowe saide I elect this holy man Anselmus whereupon followed a great applause Now that Bishoprickes in those dayes were giuen by deliuering of a ring and a staffe may appeare by Rafe Bishop of the South Saxons who being threatened by the same King baculum protendit annulum exuit vt si vellet acciperet held out his Crosier put off his ring that the King might take them if hee would intending thereby to resigne his Bishoprick That William the Conquerour vsed the like authoritie is also manifest by the same authour saying Nondum ille efflauerat cum a Gulielmo Rege Lanfrancus Cadomensis Abbas ad Archiepiscopatum electus est Stigandus had not yet breathed out his Ghost when Lanfranck Abbot of Saint Steuens in Cane was elected by King William the Conquerour to the Archbishoprick The like may be shewed before the Conquest where by the way let me tell you that wee stand not so much vpon the ring and the staffe as vpon the thing it selfe that is the Princes power and authoritie for which I will produce some examples as it were a few clusters of a great vintage beginning with Edward the Confessour of whom Malmsbury faith Rex Robertum quem ex Monacho Gemiticensi Londoniae fecerat Episcopum Archiepiscopum creauit the King Edward the Confessour created Robert Archbishop whom before of a Monke he had made Bishop of London And before that King Alfred made Asserio Bishop of Shierburne and Denewulfus Bishop of Winchester and more then two hundred yeeres before that Edelwalke King of the South Saxons promoted Wilfrid to an Episcopall See Thus it is euident that as in other Kingdomes so in England Inuestitures were anciently practised by Princes Wherefore King Henrie the first might haue challenged them not onely as vsed by his father and brother but also as the ancient custome of the Kingdome in the time of the Saxons Wherein onely this was the difference that in ancient time Princes vsed them without contradiction but now the Popes perceiuing that if Princes should haue the bestowing of them after the olde custome it would abate that power to which they themselues aspired beganne to spurne excommunicating both the giuers and takers This was done in the fifth and seuenth Romane Councels vnder Gregory the seuenth but Pope Vrban went further decreeing that not onely the giuers and takers but also all such as consecrated any man so promoted should bee excommunicate At this Councell Anselmus was present by whose aduise and perswasion the decree was made Whereupon when after the death of William Rufus King Henry the first not knowing of this decree much lesse imagining that it was concluded by the meanes of Anselmus had called him home hee well rewarded the kindnesse of so gracious a Prince for first hee would not bee induced to doe his homage to his Lord and Soueraigne was not this a good subiect did hee not well deserue to be canonized for a Saint then he refused to consecrate those whom the King did inuest to Bishoprickes by a staffe and a ring so the King commanded Gerard Archbishop of Yorke to performe that office as Malmsbury Matthew Paris and Roger Houeden doe testifie PHIL. But what followeth in the same authours William Gifford Elect of Winchester refused to receiue Consecration from him and was therefore by the king banished the land Rinelmus Elect of Hereford resigned his Bishopricke into the kings hands being troubled in conscience because hee receiued inuestiture from a lay Prince by occasion of which broiles the rest to whom the king had giuen inuestitures remained vnconsecrated ORTHOD. Whose fault was that not the kings who required no more then was confirmed
to the Emperours by 3. Popes with 3. Roman Councels practised commonly and anciently by all kings through the whole Christian world yeelded to his predecessours in the time of the Saxons vsed by his own father and brother and neuer denied in England before Anselmus began to broach the Hildebrandicall Doctrine PHIL. This cause was handled at Rome where the kings Proctour boldly affirmed that his master the king would not loose inuestitures for the losse of his kingdome to whom Pope Paschall answered if as thou saiest thy king will not indure to lose the donations of Churches for the losse of his kingdome knowe thou precisely I speake it before God that I would not suffer him to obtaine them without punishment for the redemption of my head Thus the cause was determined against the King ORTH. No maruell for the Pope was Iudge in his owne cause such a cause as was not a litle both for his pride and profit such a Pope as within 8. yeeres after periured himselfe in the like matter But notwithstanding the Popes determination the king disdaining to bee so deluded sent to Anselmus forbidding him to enter the land vnlesse he would obserue the customes of William the Conquerour and William Rufus so he was absent three yeeres PHIL. Yet at his returne he got a glorious victory for Edinerus writeth thus rex antecessorum suorum vsu relicto nec personas quae in regimen Ecclesiae sumebantur per se elegit nec eas per dationem virgae pastoralis Ecclesijs quibus praeficiebantur inuestiuit the king leauing the vse of his predecessours did neither himselfe elect such persons as were assumed to the gouernment of the Church nor inuested them to the Churches ouer which they were set by the deliuering of the pastorall staffe ORTHOD. Here is a cleare confession that inuestitures belonged to the king by the vse of his predecessours yet such was the violence and fury both of the Pope and the Archbishop that he thought good to redeeme his quiet by releasing of his ancient right PHIL. If he had any right he did yeeld it vp for Malmsbury saith Venit Rex sublimi trophaeo splendidus triumphali gloria Angliam inuectus inuestiturasque Ecclesiarum Anselmo in perpetuum in manum remisit The king came out of France glistering with a stately trophee entred England with triumphall glory and released the inuestitures of Churches to Anselmus into his hands for euer ORTHOD. True to Anselmus here was a finall and perpetuall end betweene them two neither did the king intermeddle any more in the matter while Anselmus liued but after his death Anno 1113. hee gaue the Archbishopricke to Rodolph Bishop of London and inuested him with a Ring and a Staffe and Anno 1123. he gaue the said Archbishopricke to William Corboll he gaue also the Bishopricke of Lincolne to Alexander the Bishopricke of Bath to Godfrid the Bishopricke of Worcester to Simon the Bishopricke of Cicester to Sifrid After the raigne of Henry the first though the Popes were still busie especially when the state was troubled or the king out of the Realme yet the succeeding Princes would not suffer themselues to bee robbed of this right and royaltie but from time to time put it in practise and maintained their prerogatiue King Edward the third told Pope Clement the fift That his progenitors and other noble and faithfull men had founded and indowed Churches and placed Ministers in them euer since the first planting of religion in the Realme of England and that the kings did of ancient time freely conferre Cathedrall Churches iure suo Regio by their Princely right so oft as they were vacant he doth not say by the Popes permission but by their princely right so the collation of Bishopricks is the ancient right of the kings of England Moreouer he told him that whereas now Deanes and Chapters elect this proceeded from the graunt of the kings at the request and instance of the Pope he doth not say from the graunt of the Pope but from the grant of the kings at the request of the Pope with which concordeth that famous act of Parliament made in the 25. of Edw. the third Our Soueraigne Lord the king and his heires shall haue and inioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which be of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted Sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitors vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund license of the King to chuse and after choice made to haue his royall assent And in the dayes of Richard the second statutum est saith Thomas Walsingam in eodem insuper Parliamento vt de caetero nullus transfreâ—aret ad obtinendum prouisiones in Ecclesijs vel Ecclesiam si quis contrarium faceret si posset apprehendi caperetur vt Regi rebellis incarceraretur A statute was made in the same Parliament that from henceforth none should passe the seas to obtaine prouisions in Churches or to obtaine any Church and if any should do contrary if he could be catched he should be apprehended as a rebell to the king and cast in prison The next yeere the same king set out a Proclamation that all such as were resident in the Court of Rome and had benefices in England should returne by the feast of S. Nicholas vnder paine of forfeiting all their benefices When the Pope heard all this thundering he sent a Nuncio with great complaints for answere wherof the king referred him to the Parliament following which would by no meanes consent that Rome-runners should get their benefices as in former time In the dayes of Henry the fift when the Pope by his bulles translated Richard of Lincolne to Yorke the Deane and Chapter standing vpon the lawes of the land refused to admit him as hereafter shall be declared Shall wee now say that the kings of England conferre spiritual promotions by the Popes indulgence let king Edward the first be witnesse let the Parliament in the raigne of Edward the third be witnesse let the like Parliament in the time of Richard the second be witnesse let the Deane and Chapter of Yorke be witnesse all which were of the Popish religion and yet referred this to the king and not to the Pope Hitherto that the kings of England vsed Inuestitures NOw I will prooue that they vsed them lawfully by a double right as Princes as Patrons As Princes for many reasons First if we looke into the old Testament we find that Salomon set Sadock in the roume of Abiathar by what authoritie Verely by the same by which he cast out Abiathar Which I haue already prooued to be done by the lawful and ordinary power of a Prince If this be a perpetuall patterne for all posteritie then the collation of spirituall dignities is the Princes right Secondly it was prophesied of
conscience are suerties for the freedome of their choice These are the sayings of the learned Bishop among which he interlaced a memorable example of Guntchrannus King of France who when one offered him money for a Bishoprick returned this answere It is not our Princely maner to sell Bishopricks for money neither is it your part to get them with rewards lest wee be infamed for silthy gaine and you compared to Simon Magus A fit Embleame for a Prince and worthy to be written in letters of Gold Most safely for how dangerous a thing it is to commit such matters to popular Elections the Primitiue Church had lamentable experience What vprores also followed the Elections by the Clergie alone let the longest Schisme that euer was in the Church of Rome testifie And for the Popes prouisions whereby hee hath incroached vpon the Princes right they haue bene such as haue giuen both Kings Nobles Clergie and people iust cause of lamentation But since the nomination rested in the Princes hands all tumults and grieuances Gods Name be blessed are vtterly extinguished Now I will adde a word or two of their singular moderation in this behalfe In ancient time our Kings had the collation before free Election was granted as was declared out of the Statute of Edward the 3. whereby it is manifest that they had then in themselues a plenarie power And though this were not without presidents of former ages yet as Charles the Great granted freedome of Elections vnto the Church so haue our Princes established the like by the Lawes of the land according to which they proceed most mildly and graciously doing all things agreeably to the patterne of famous Princes and laudable Canons of ancient Councels With vs the King hath the nomination of Bishops and so had good Theodosius as was plainely to bee seene in the aduancing of Nectarius With vs the Deane and Chapter make the election of their Bishop and so did the Presbyters of Alexandria in Saint Ieroms time which custome had continued there euer since the time of Saint Marke the Euangelist With vs the Deane and Chapter elect him whom the king hath nominated So the Clergie of Constantinople with the whole generall Councell there assembled did thinke it their duetie solemnely to elect Nectarius whom the Emperour had nominated With vs the electours signifie their election to the king humbly crauing his royall assent so the Romane Clergie 1000. yeeres agoe did vse to signifie their election to the Emperour that he might ratifie it by his Imperiall authority And because the ancient Canons giue the power of confirmation to the Metropolitane therefore our King granteth him a commission to confirme the election according to the Canon Finally with vs none can bee consecrated before the king giue commission by his letters pattents neither might the Bishops of Rome in ancient time till the Emperour gaue license and that as Onuphrius saith by his letters pattents Where yet I will confesse there was a difference because the Popes gaue money vnto the Emperour but our Bishops giue none vnto the King Thus much of elections CHAP. XIII How lamentable the State of England was when Bishopricks and Benefices were giuen by the Popes prouisions PHIL. WEE referre all men to the pondering of this one point specially amongst many concerning the nominations and elections of Bishops Abbats and other Prelats whether the world went not as well when such things passed by Canonicall election or the Popes prouision as it hath don since or euer hereafter is like to doe ORTHOD. Concerning the Popes prouisions this is most certaine that howsoeuer the Church of God was prouided for hee prouided for himselfe and licked his owne fingers For the demonstration whereof I will beginne with king Canutus who about the yeere of grace 1031. Returning from Rome wrote thus to the Archbishops Bishops and States of the Realme Conquestus sum iterum coram domino papa mihi valde displicere dixi quod mei Archiepiscopi in tantum angariebantur immensitate pecuniarum quae ab eis expetâ—bantur dum pro pallio accipiâ—ndo secundum morem sedem Apostolicam expeterent decretumque ne id deinceps fiat that is I complained againe before the Lord the Pope and told him that it displeased me much that my Archbishops were so much vexed with huge sums of money which were demaunded of them while for receiuing the palle they went according to custome to the See Apostolike and it was decreed that it should be so no more Here by the way you must vnderstand that a Palle is a little â—yppet three fingers broad made of the wool of two white Lambs which are offered vpoÌ„ the Altar of Saint Agnes while Agnus dei is sung in the solemn Masse and laied all night vpon the bodies of Peter and Paul vnder the great Altar from whence receiuing this vertue to containe the fulnesse of all pontificall power it becommeth the Ensigne of a Patriarch or Archbishop Which glorious ensigne who will weare Must fetch it farre and buy it deare In the daies of Henry the first when Anselmus was at Rome he made supplication to Pope Paschall the second for certaine Bishops and Abbats deposed whereupon saith Mathew Paris The most gentle See which vseth to bee wanting to none so they bring either white or red did mercifullie recall the said Bishops and Abbats and sent them with ioy to their owne Sees In the daies of Richard the first Hugh Bishop of Durham who of an old Bishop was become a young Earle hauing made a voluntary vow to goe to Ierusalem procured a dispensation from the Pope for which hee paied an infinit summe of money In the daies of the same king William Bishop of Ely was made Legat by a gentle Pope vpon the gentle consideration of a thousand pounds In the daies of king Iohn Pope Innocent the third went about to swallow all England and Ireland at a morsell For Hubertus Archbishop of Canterbury being dead the Monkes elected first Reinold their subprior and afterward at the kings request Iohn Gray Bishop of Norwich by means of which double election the Pope tooke occasion to disanull both charging the Canterb. Monkes then at Rome vnder paine of a curse to chuse Steuen Langton a Cardinal which they did and brought him vnto the Altar with a Te deum The king proclamed those Monkes traytors the rest that lurked at Canterb hee prescribed and banished he forbad Steuen Langton to come into England and confiscated the goods and lands both of the Archbishoprik of the Church of Canterb whereupon the Pope authorised certaine Bishops to interdict the kingdome excommunicated the king set out a sentence declaratory to depriue him and committed the execution of it to Philip the French king By which papall meanes bereaft of the loue of his people abandoned of his nobles hated of his Clergie forsaken of his friends behold hee
hoped for some comfort at the Popes hand but finding none hee was forced so much as in him lay to resigne his kingdoms to Pope Innocent such is the innocency of Popes and to farme theÌ„ again at a 1000. marks by the yere Thus the Pope had caught a pretty morsel but it was too hot for him therefore he was glad presently to disgorge it In the time of the said king came into England one Iohannes Florentinus the Popes Legate hauing but 3. men and 3. horses whereof one was lame who gathered great heapes of money hoysted vp saile and bad England adew Likewise Pandulphus when hee came to make a bargaine with the king for his master the Pope prouided and carried away with him 8000. pounds About the same time the Pope called a generall councell at Rome where the Bishops being weary with doing of nothing desired leaue to depart which they could not obtaine without a great sum of mony that they were forced to borrow of the Romane Merchants and pay to the Pope In the reign of Henry 3. The Pope sent a bul that no English man should be preferred til prouision were made for â— Romans for each of theÌ„ 100. pouÌ„ds by the yere neither did he expresse their names but described them in a confused maner The sonne of Bumphred of such such that if any of them should die he might foist another into the place At this time the Romans were posessed of so many benifices withall were so insolent that the whole body of the nobles coÌ„mons ioyning together did stile theÌ„selues in the subscriptions of their letters The whole coÌ„pany of theÌ„ which had rather die then be confouÌ„ded of the Romans In the reigne of the same King The Roman Helluo sent a Nuntio called Otto into England with letters vnto the king signifying What a great scandall and reproch was brought vpon the Church of Rome because no man could dispatch his affaires in that Court without great summes of money and the cause which constrained them vnto this was their pouertie therefore hee desired that the English men like naturall Children would releeue the pouerty of their Mother and the meanes thereof which hee with the Councell of his Brethren the Cardinalls had deuised was this that euery Cathedrall Church in England should bestow vpon him two Prebendes the one of them to bee giuen by the Bishop the other by the Chapter And likewise that euery Abbey should bestow vpon him so much as belonged to the maintenance of two Monkes one portion whereof to bee giuen by the Abbot and the other by the Couent But the English men deluded him of his purpose for the king went out of the Councell and the Bishops departed to their own home without the leaue of the Legate and the rest that remained said they could doe nothing in the absence of them whom it most concerned The like suite was commensed in France by another of the Popes Legates to whom the Proctour of the Archbishop of Lions answered That it was not possible that this grant should fill the gulfe of the Romane couetousnesse because plenty of riches did alwaies make the Romans madde And the councell of France did thus answere the Legate Let the zeale of the whole Church and of the holy Romane See mooue you because if there should bee a generall oppression of all men it might bee feared least there should houer ouer our heads a generall departure which God forbid In the yeere 1231. there was set out a prohibition that none which farmed any benefice of any Romane should from henceforth pay them any Rent Anno 1232. a sort of armed men with their faces couered set vpon the barnes of a certaine Romane and sold out the corne to the country and gaue much of it to the poore For which the Bishop of London with other tenne Bishops did strike the authours with an anathema Notwithstanding the same yeere the barnes of the Romanes almost through all England were robbed the authour whereof was one Sir Robert Twinge a Yorkeshier Knight who had beene defeated of the bestowing of his Benefiee by the Popes prouision In the yeere 1234. the Pope sent his nuntioes into England with power legatine which by preaching begging commanding threatning and excommunicating got infinite summes of money vnder colour of the holy Land neither was it known in what gulfe that money was drowned In the yeere 1237. base and vnlearned persons came daily armed with the Popes Bulles If any resisted they would procure hee should bee excommunicated so it came to passe that where noble and daintie Clergy men Gardians and Patrons of Churches did vse with their riches to honour the countrey round about them to entertaine passengers to refresh the poore these base persons voide of good manners and full of subtiltie Proctors and Farmers of the Romanes scraping whatsoeuer was precious and profitable in the land sent it into farre countries to their Lords liuing delicately of Christes patrimonie and proud with other mens goods Therefore a man might see sorrow of heart water the eye-lids of holy men complaints breake out and groanes multiplied many saying with bloody sighes It is better for vs to die then to see the miseries of our countrie and of holy men VVoe to England which once was the Prince of Prouinces the ladie of nations the glasse of the Church a patterne of Religion but now is become vnder tribute In the yeere 1239. Sir Robert Twinge the Yorkeshier Knight before mentioned a Romane being thrust by a Popes Bull of prouision into a benefice whereof he was Patron went to Rome and made a grieuous complaint vnto the Pope so that the Pope reuoked his Bull of prouision By the said Sir Robert Twinge the h Nobles and Barons of England wrot vnto the Pope complaining that they were robbed of their presentations of their Ecclesiasticall liuings which their noble progenitours had enioyned from the first planting of Christianitie and were in danger to lose their patronages affirming that though the Pope had taken order by his Apostolicall letters that after the decease of any Italian or Romane promoted by the Popes prouision it should be lawfull for them to present a fit Clerke yet they did daily see the contrary put in practise which they called a common plague Anno 1240. Otho the Popes Legate required a procuration of foure Markes and where one Church did not suffice to the paâ—ment two should ioyne together to one procuration The same yeere the Pope extorted the fift part of the goodes of all strangers beneficed in England and the same was demanded of Archbishops Bishops Abbots and the rest of the Clergie but the Bishops answered they could not vndergoe so vnsupportable a burden which concerned the whole Church without diligent deliberation of a synode But the Archbishop afterward did grant vnto it The same yeere Pope
in fewe moneths got great summes of money which so soone as the couragious Captaine Pope Alexander had receiued he let the warres alone and followed his pleasures This yeere of Iubile was indeede to England a yeere of Iubile for it brought to Englishmen so often vexed an end of Papal exactions and robberies Yet there remained a tribute of smoke for him that had fed them so long with smoke In the yeere 1532. inquisition was made of Papall expilations and it was found that in the foure yeeres last past the Romane Court had receiued for inuestitures of Bishops 160000. pounds In the yeere 1533. the Pope had of Cranmer for his Bulles concerning his Consecration and his Pall 900. duckets and the same yeere his vsurped authoritie was banished out of England Thus haue I set before you some part of the fruits of Papall prouisions now I refer it to any indifferent man to ponder how well the world went CHAP. XIIII Whether it belongeth to the Pope to confirme all the Metropolitanes of the world and namely the Metropolitanes of England PHIL. THree things concurre in making of a Bishop by Diuine and Canon Law to wit Election Confirmation and Consecration Now howsoeuer Bishops were elected the confirmation must proceede from the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane vnder him which hath commission from him or else they can haue no iurisdiction ORTHOD. The confirmation of Bishops was a godly constitution for the auoyding of Schisme concerning which the Fathers of the famous Nicen Councel haue ordained that through all Prouinces it shall belong to the Metropolitane they say not to the Pope but to the Metropolitane but all the Bishops of England are confirmed by their Metropolitanes And that by most lawfull and orderly proceeding For when the Deane and Chapter by licence from the King haue made the election certified it vnder their common seale and thereunto haue obtained the royall assent the Metropolitane with other Bishops by commission from the King proceedeth to confirme it according to the Canons sending out a publicke and peremptorie citation to summon all personally to appeare which can obiect any thing either against the partie elected or the forme of election And when after due examination and iudiciall processe they are both found consonant to the ancient Canons he confirmeth the election Thus it is cleare that all the Bishops of England haue Canonicall confirmation and withall that the Pope in challenging this vnto himselfe transgresseth the Canon and vsurpeth the right of the Metropolitane PHIL. Your Metropolitanes haue no such power because they are not confirmed themselues by the Bishop of Rome ORTHO They are not I grant neither is it necessary For what confirmation had Frumētius from him whom Athanasius sent to be Bishop in India What confirmation had Flauianus from him against whom three Bishops of Rome opposed themselues yet he kept his Chaire many yeeres and all the Bishops of the East communicated with him What confirmation had the Bishops of Cyprus from him which were not vnder the Iurisdiction of any Patriarch but gouerned by a Synod of their owne PHIL. THat all the Bishops in the world should deriue their confirmation frō him may appeare by this that the Patriarches themselues were not exempted but did shew their faith vnto him and were confirmed by him as for example Nectarius Patriarch of Constantinople though chosen by a whole Councell yet was he to be confirmed by Damasus as appeareth by Sozomen and Theodoret. ORTHOD. The Bishops o◠the second Councell of Constantinople being summoned to the Councell of Rome by the letters of Theodosius the Emperour wrote to Damasus Ambrose and the rest of the Bishops assembled at Rome to excuse their not comming in respect of the state of their Churches whch had so lately beene pestered with Heresies and stood stil in such termes that the Bishops could not leaue them without extreme danger Yet they thought good to send three Bishops in the name of the rest and withall they make relation both of their doctrine discipline Concerning their doctrine they declare their faith of the Vnitie Trinitie and natures of Christ. Concerning discipline they declare that they choose their Bishops Patriarches according to the Canons of the Nicen Councell and so speake of the election of Nectarius Patriarch of Constantinople Flauianus Patriarch of Antioch and Cyrill Patriarch of Ierusalem Concerning Nectarius whose example you vrge they say that he being a most reuerend and zealous man was chosen in their generall Councell in the presence of the Emperour with the generall applause of all both Clergie and people And this they write not to Damasus alone as though it were in his power to make or to marre the election they were farre from any such cogitation but to him with the rest to reioyce him and the rest by relating their consent in faith and loue So they desire not Damasus onely but Ambrose and all the rest to reioyce with them and to giue their cheerefull assent that the Christian faith being agreed vpon and loue confirmed among them they might keepe the Church from schismes and dissensions Thus though they name Damasus first and giue him preeminence of place yet they giue no more preeminence of power to the Bishop of Rome then to the Bishop of Millen PHIL. What say you then to Proterius Patriarch of Alexandria to Sophronius Patriarch of Ierusalem To Anatolius Nicephorus and Peter Patriarches of Constantinople Did not euery one of them send to the Pope his Synodall letters wherein they declared their faith and consent with the Church of Rome before he confirmed or alowed them for lawfull Patriarches Doth not this prooue the singular and soueraigne power of the Pope in confirming the other Patriarches ORTHOD. As the Patriarch of Rome did not allow the other Patriarches for lawfull till they had signified by letters their soundnesse in faith so the other Patriarches did not acknowledge the Patriarch of Rome till they were likewise informed of his faith And therefore the Patriarches of Rome did vse to send the like Synodall letters to the other Patriarches as may appeare by Gregory who wrote to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople Iohn Patriarch of Ierusalem Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria Gregory and Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch and this was done saith Diaconus according to the ancient custome of his predecessours Doth not this proue the singular and soueraigne power of the other Patriarches in confirming the Patriarch of Rome And as the Romane Patriarch sent his Synodicall letters to the rest and the rest to him so the rest did likewise send one to another As for example Tharasius Patriarch of Constantinople to the Patriarches of Antioch Alexandria and Ierusalem vsing these words For as much as a certaine obseruation or rather an Apostolicall tradition hath long preuailed in the Churches that those which had newly beene taken into the degree of
some eminent Priesthood should declare their faith to them which had obtained the like degree of eminent Priesthood long time before them Therefore it seemeth good to me both to submit myselfe vnto you and to declare manifestly before you the confession of my faith Wherefore this practise doth not mount one Patriarch aboue the rest but rather leuell all of them in an equalitie and consequenly the Bishop of Rome had no more power ouer the Metropolitanes of other Patriarches then other Patriarches ouer his PHIL. The contrary is euident by the decree of Pope Pelagius Placuit vt quisque Metropolitanus c. It is my pleasure that euery Metropolitan which shall not send within three moneths of his Consecration to shew his faith and receiue the Pall shall be depriued of his place and dignitte Wherefore all Metropolitans are bound to performe this office to the Bishop of Rome euen all in the whole world For he that saith euery one excepteth none ORTHO Pelagius meaneth euery one within his owne Iurisdiction PHIL. But all the world was his Iurisdiction ORTHOD. Then belike the Pope was acknowledged Vniuersall Patriarch in the dayes of Pelagius PHIL. Yea and before Pelagius that title was offered to Pope Leo by the Councell of Chalcedon as S. Gregory witnesseth ORTHOD. The whole Councell is extant and we find no such matter PHIL. In the third action there are three Epistles of three sundry Grecians all which begin thus To the most holy and blessed Leo the vniuersall Archbishop and Patriarch of Rome ORTHOD. You might haue said foure But what if a few poore suiters hungry Grecians put a flattering title in their supplications doth this prooue that it was offered by a Councell one of them was a Prâ—est two were Deacons and one a lay man not one of them was a Bishop nor yet in your owne iudgement had a voyce in the Councell PHIL. Paschasinus the Popes legate in his subscription calleth Leo the Pope of the vniuersall Church ORTHOD. If that title were aequiualent to this which may be doubted yet it was onely giuen by the Popes parasite and not by the Councell PHIL. It was giuen audiente probante vniuersali Synodo i. The generall Councell hearing and approuing it ORTHOD. This I heare you say but I would heare you proue it PHIL. Although the Councell decreed nothing concerning that matter yet it is euident enough that the giuing of the title to the Bishop of Rome was not displeasing to the Councell seeing no man reprehended it ORTHO They did not reprehend it but did they therefore commend it In the Councell of Lateran in the presence of the Pope an Archbishop in a Sermon speaking of a Pope said He had power aboue all power in heauen and in earth What say you Did the Pope and Councell approue this blasphemie for they did not reproue it If their silence was no argument of approbation then neither was the silence of the Councell of Chalcedon Yea it is most certaine that they neither did vse it nor approue it In the sixteenth Action they write a Synodall Epistle to Pope Leo at which time if euer it was fit that they should adorne him with this title which notwithstanding they vsed not but stiled him the most holy and most blessed Archbishop of the Romanes Neither could they approoue it in that sence which you giue it vnlesse they should crosse and contradict themselues For you intend by that title to aduance him aboue other Patriarches whereas the Councel of Chalcedon giueth no greater priuiledges to the Church of Rome then to the Church of Constantinople And as the Councell did neuer giue the title so Pope Leo did neuer vse it PHIL. Yes in his Epistle to the Emperour Martian against Anatolius in the very inscription of the Epistle he vseth the title of Vniuersall ORTH. He vseth it thus Leo episc Romanae vniuersalis ecclesiae i. Leo B. of the Romane vniuersal Church so he applieth it not to himselfe but to the church PHIL. If he be Bishop of the vniuersal church then he is an vniuersal Bishop ORTHOD. That doeth not follow for the Councell of Sardica in their Synodall Epistle to all Bishops calleth them Bishops and Colleagues of the Catholicke and Apostolicke Church Is not Catholicke the same with Vniuersall and yet their meaning was not to call them vniuersall Bishops neither was it the meaning of Pope Leo to call himselfe so if we beleeue Pope Gregorie affirming that neuer any of his predecessours did vse so prophane a title PHIL. It is to be vnderstood that not any of the Romane Bishops did vse the title of oecumenicall of a solemne custome and continually in all their subscriptions yet some of them sometimes vsed it ORTHOD. Then some of them sometimes vsed a prophane title PHIL. Vniuersall Bishop may be taken two wayes First for him which is the onely Bishop of the whole world excluding all other in which sence S. Gregorie saith If one be an Vniuersall Bishop it remaineth that you are no Bishops Secondly for him that hath a generall care of he whole Church yet so that other Bishops retaine their place and dignitie In the first sence S. Gregory calleth it prophane In the second it belongeth to the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. Concerning the first Gregorie hauing said that the name of Vniuersalitie was offered by the Councell addeth immediatly That neuer any of his predecessours did vse so prophane a title So it is cleare that he calleth that very title prophane which as he saith was offered by the Councell Which iustifieth my former answere For vnlesse you will accuse the Councell of prophanenesse you must needs say that Gregory speaketh improperly ascribing that to the Councell which was onely done by the Popes Legate and a few supplicants in the Councell Moreouer if this prophane title exclude all other from being Bishops then the Councel consisting of 630. Bishops in giuing this title should exclude themselues from being Bishops which is absurd seeing in their subscriptions they intitled themselues Bishops Concerning the second If he be an vniuersall Bishop which hath care of the whole Church then S. Paul was Vniuersall Bishop as well as S. Peter for he had care of all the Churches Then Athanasius was an Vniuersall Bishop for S. Basill saith He caried the care of all Churches PHIL. Peraduenture he meaneth that he caried the care of all within the Patriarchdome of Alexandria ORTHOD. Nor of them onely but of others also For S. Basill saith The whole state of the Church of Antioch dependeth vpon thee So though his iurisdiction was confined within the Patriarchdome of Alexandria yet he caried a tender care ouer the whole Church of Christ. Wherefore in this sence the title of Vniuersall Bishop belongeth as well to the Patriarch of Alexandria as to the Patriarch of Rome Moreouer the very title of
this forsooth is the Catholick faith the profession whereof is now required to bee made of all Bishops Thirdly the Popes of latter times will haue Metropolitanes sworne to their obedience yea and Pius the fourth did cunningly conuey this oth into his new coyned creed but we find no such thing exacted in the time of Pelagius PHIL. There is yet extant an Epistle of a Bishop which tooke the oth to Saint Gregory who liued not long after Pelagius Vnde iurans dico per Deum omnipotentem per haec quatuor Euangelia quae in manibus teneo per salutē gentium atque illustrium dominorum nostrorum remp gubernantium me in vnitate sicut dixi Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Rom pontificis sēper sine dubio permanere i. Whereupon I affirme swearing by God Almighty and by the 4. Gospels which I hould in my hands and by the saluation of the Gentiles of our glorious Lords which gouerne the commonwealth that I will remaine alwaies and without doubt as I haue said in the unity of the Catholike Church in the communion of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. You intend to proue that Metropolitanes should sweare to the Pope before their confirmation or receiuing of the palle the example you bring concernes no such matter For first he was only a Bishop not a Metropolitan Secondly this oth was voluntary not exacted Thirdly it was not vpon a confirmation or receiuing of a palle but vpon an abiuration of his heresie Neither doth it appeare that this oth was in the time of Gregory though some haue gone about to ascribe it to the time of Pope Pelagius wherein behold and you shal see the cunning of Popish proctors For whereas Pelagius reproued some Metropolitanes because they did delay fidem suam exponere and thereupon made this decree that those which did not send within three monthes ad fidem suam exponendam should be depriued Remundus Rufus a Popish Lawier of Paris writing for the honor of the Pope doth change these words ad exponendam fidem i. To make profession of their faith into dandae fidei causa i. To make a faithfull promise or oth so the profession of the faith of Iesus Christ was by a strange Metamorphosis transformed into an oth of the Popes supremacy Now least the Spanish Lawiers should come short of the French in shewing their zeale for their Lord the Pope Franciscus Vargas king Philips Councellor and Ambassador to Pope Pius the fourth affirmeth that Pelagius declared the Popes supremacy by this decree in that he would haue all Metropolitanes sworne vnto him Marke what he saith sworne vnto him whether deceiued by Rufus or purposing to make an officious lie for his holy Fathers aduantage I cannot tell Howsoeuer this oth cannot bee referred to Pope Pelagius but rather to Pope Paschall the second who would haue forced Archbishop Panormitane to take it and vpon his refusal set out the decret all Epistle recorded by Gregory the ninth in the Canon-law the title whereof is this Electo in Archiepiscopum sedes Apostolica Pallium non tradet nisi Prius Praestet fidelitatis obedientiae iuramentum 1. The Apostolicall See shall not deliuer the Pall to an Archbishop Elect before he performe the oath of Allegeance and obedience PHIL. Though Pope Paschall made this decree yet it followeth not that he was the author of the oath it might be more anciēt though he renewed it ORTHOD. It appeareth by the Contents of the Decree that he was the authour For first he declareth that Panormitane had signified vnto him that Kings and Nobles were striken with admiration that the Pall should be offered vnder the condition of an oath and the same Pope did write in the same wordes vpon the like occasion to an Archbishop of Polonia who had signified vnto him the like admiration of the King and Nobles of Polonia This deniall of the Archbishops admiration of Princes states doth argue a noueltie 2. Whereas some did obiect that it was not decreed in the councels he reiecteth all Councels with scorn disdaine Aiunt in Concilijs statutū non inueniri quasi Romanae Ecclesiaelegē cōctlia vlla prefixerint cum omnia concilia per Romanae Ecclesiae auctoritatē facta sint robur acceperint in eorū Statutis Romani Pontificis patenter excipiatur auctoritas i. They say that it was not found decreed in Councels as though any Councels could prefix a law to the Church of Rome seeing al Councels are both made and receiue strength by the authoritie of the Church of Rome and the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is manifestly excepted in their constitutions Thus he doth not refer the oath to former Popes and Councels but relyeth onely vpon his owne authoritie So it seemeth that this weede did spring 1100. yeeres after Christ. Neither did they stay in Metropolitanes but Innocent the third in the Councell of Lateran imposed the like oath of allegeance and obedience vpon the foure Patriarches Yea all Bishops are bound by solemne oath to promise obedience and faith to Saint Peter the Church of Rome and their Lord the Pope and to put to their helping hand which is an essentiall point of their obedience to defend and maintaine the Papacy By which pollicie it came to passe that the soueraign was defeated of his subiect the bramble did mount aloft aboue the cedars of Libanus So he which was first admitted among vs of curtesie continued by custome that is by right humane began now to challenge of dutie and by lawe diuine And not content with the honour of a Patriarch he tooke vpon him to domineer through the Christian world as Pope Parramount flashing out his excommunications like lightning interdicting kingdomes trampling Princes and Emperours vnder his feete yea and dispensing with vowes oaths and the euerlasting Commandements of God himselfe Is not this to sit in the Temple of God as though he were God Wherefore by all right reason equitie and law of God and man he was to be banished I will conclude this point with the saying of a reuerend Bishop As for his Patriarchship by Gods law he hath none In this realme for 600. yeeres after Christ he had none for the last six hundred as looking to greater matters he would haue none aboue or against the sword which God hath ordained he can haue none to the subuersion of the faith and oppression of his brethren in reason right and equitie he should haue none you must seeke further for subiection to his tribunall this landoweth him none THE FIFTH BOOKE OF THE SECOND AND third controuersie concerning Priests and Deacons CHAP. I. Wherein the second controuersie is proposed diuided into two questions the former about Sacrificing the latter about Absolution the state of the former is set downe and the methode of proceeding PHIL. WHatsoeuer you haue as
the essence of the sacrifice therefore there is no sacrifice but improperly and consequently you are no Priests but improperly PHILO The bodie of Christ is eaten properlie and truely euen with the mouth in the Eucharist for to the essence of eating attrition is not necessarie but it is sufficient If it bee taken and conueied from the mouth to the stomacke by humane and naturall instruments that is the tongue and the pallat ORTHOD. If your Priests eate Christ properly with their bodie then are you not men but monsters of mankinde For is not this to make the Priest a Cyclops or a Caniball or rather worse then a Caniball for a Caniball deuours the flesh onely of a meere man but this is to deuoure and consume the flesh and blood of the Sonne of God PHIL. The Canibals doe it in bloody manner so doe not wee ORTHOD. But Saint Austin thinketh that to eate the flesh and drinke the blood of Christ properly is a wicked deede and therefore concludeth that when Christ willeth vs to eate his flesh and drinke his blood the words must bee taken figuratiuely and not properly whereby it is euident that hee condemneth all eating of Christ properly whether it bee in a bloody manner or an vnbloody But to proceede how can the body of Christ bee consumed with eating if it cannot then by your confession there is no Sacrifice PHIL. Wee must consider in the body of Christ a double being a naturall and a sacramentall When it is eaten it looseth not the naturall but the sacramentall ORTHOD. The destruction required in a sacrifice must bee reall for it must cease really to bee that which it was as for example the lambes which were daily offered first they were slaine and so ceased formally to be lambes then the flesh was burned so it ceased materially to bee flesh and when any part of the sacrifice was eaten and by eating turned into the substance of man then it ceased to bee that flesh which it was before Now if in the Eucharist the body of Christ bee not really consumed then according to your positions it is not really sacrified and yet for mine owne part I doe not see but that it followeth according to your principles that the very naturall essence and being of Christ is properly destroyed which is horrible blasphemie PHIL. How can you conclude any such things from our principles ORTHOD. You teach that the very naturall body and blood of Christ and that onely is contained vnder the formes of Bread and Wine but I will proue inuincibly out of your principles that the thing which is contained vnder the formes of Bread and Wine is substantially destroyed and loseth the natural essence that it had before But first let me aske you a question Doe not the consecrated elements nourish after Consecration PHIL. Nourish yes ORTHO If you doubt of it it may be prooued by experience for there is no question but the Priest or any man else may liue a long time though he haue no other sustenance but such Bread and Wine And therefore it is certaine that it nourisheth But nourishment is when the substance of the meate is changed into the substance of the nourished therefore if the consecrated elements doe nourish they must needes haue a substance which must bee changed into the substance of the nourished What substance is this Bread you say it is not for that is vanished by Consecration And therefore it can bee nothing but the Body and Blood of Christ whereupon it wil follow that the naturall Body and Blood of Christ are substantially changed into the substance of the nourished be it man bird or beast which is out ragious blasphemie And if it bee so changed then it hath lost the naturall being and essence which it had before and consequently the Body and Blood of Christ is substantially consumed and destroyed If you bee ashamed of this then bee ashamed of the fountaine from whence it floweth PHIL. It is not the Body and Blood of Christ that nourisheth but the species ORTH. The species are accidents can accidents nourish then a substance shall bee made of accidents and then wee shall haue a world of absurdities PHIL. They nourish by diuine miracle ORTHOD. When yee haue nothing to answere then yee flie to miracles So if the Priest drinke too much of the wine hee shall be drunke by a miracle if the mouse find the way into the box it shall growe fat by a miracle Surely this is a miraculous answere For are not all miracles immediately from God therefore if your answere be true God should prouide miracles for fatting of mice and concurre with a miracle to make the Priest druncke If these things be absurde then your carnall presence your sacrifice and your Priesthood are all absurde CHAP. VII Of their argument drawn from the practise of the Church in the time of the Apostles PHIL. THE practise of the Church doth shewe the contrary for it is saide as they were ministring to our Lord and fasting the holy Ghost c. In which place for ministring we might haue translated sacrificing for so the Greeke doth signifie and so Erasmus translated Yea we might haue translated saying Masse for so they did and the Greeke Fathers hereof had the name Liturgie which Erasmus translateth Masse saying Missa Chrysostomi ORTH. This ministring will not prooue your Massing For the Greeke word is applied to the Angels which I hope you will not call Masse Priestes It is likewise applied to the ciuil magistrate and shall their ministring also be Massing and though Erasmus translate it sacrificing yet there is no necessitie to expound it of your Massing sacrifice Neither doth the word Masse inferre any such thing for it is not from an Hebrew or Chaldee originall as Baronius would haue it that thereupon hee might ground an oblation but it is deriued from the latin as Binius prooueth calling the defendours of the contrary opinion Nouellistes and Bellarmine confesseth that the word Missa is not mentioned of the Grecians which vse in stead thereof the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which hee interpreteth munus seu ministerium publicum a publicke office or ministry So the meaning of the place is that they were publickely performing their ministeriall function which is plainely set downe by Saint Chrysostome what is ministring preaching PHIL. This cannot bee for the text saith they did minister to the Lord but you cannot say they preached to the Lord or ministred Sacraments to the Lord. ORTHOD. Very true But in performing these things to the Church they did minister to the Lord because they did them to the honour of God PHIL. This word when it is applied to sacred things and put absolutely is euery where taken for the ministery of Sacrifice ORTHOD. The contrary may appeare because the same word put absolutely without any addition is applied in holy
though Christ saith S. Gregorie liuing immortally now dieth not yet hee dieth in this mysterie and his flesh suffereth for the saluation of the people That is saith the Glosse his death and Passion is represented And you heard before out of the Master of the Sentences that that which is offered and Consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a memoriall and representation of the true sacrifice and holy oblation made vpon the Altar of the Crosse. And Bellarmine granteth that Thomas and other Schoolemen doe commonly answere that it is called an oblation because it is a representation of the oblation PHIL. Peter Lombard when he asketh the question whether that which the Priest doth be properly called a sacrifice or an oblation taketh the name of sacrifice or oblation for occision or killing as though he had asked Whether that which the Priest doth be a killing of Christ and answereth most rightly that Christ was truely offered that is slaine but once and that now he is not properly offered that is slaine but only in a Sacrament and representation ORTHOD. First I referre it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether this answere of Bellarmine be not a meere shift and cauill Secondly neither will this shift serue his turne for if the Priest doe not so he cannot be said properly to sacrifice him because in a sacrifice there must be the destruction of the thing sacrificed as is before declared out of Bellarmine PHIL. THe Councell of Trent pronounceth a curse against all those which deny that a true and proper sacrifice is offered in the Masse And they haue reason for as the Apostles so all the Fathers of the Primitiue Church were Masse-Priests For S. Ambrose testifieth That imposition of hands is certaine mysticall words whereby hee that is elected into the Priesthood is confirmed receiuing authoritie his conscience bearing him witnesse that he may bee bold to offer sacrifice to God in the Lords stead ORTHOD. S. Ambrose elsewhere expoundeth himselfe saying Quid ergo nos nonne per singulos dies offerimus offerimus quidem sed recordationem facientes mortis eius That is What therefore doe we doe we not offer dayly truely wee offer but so that wee make a remembrance of his death And againe Ipsum semper offerimus magis autem recordationem sacrificij operamur That is Wee offer him alwayes or rather we worke a remembrance of his sacrifice PHIL. S. Chrysostome saith In many places there is offered not many Christs but one Christ euery where being full and perfect both here and there ORTHOD. S. Chrysostome expoundeth himselfe in the same place Wee offer him saith he or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is We worke a remembrance of the sacrifice Where by the way you may see that S. Ambrose did borrow his former speech from this place of Chrysostome PHIL. S. Augustine saith That Christ commaunded the Leper to offer a sacrifice according to the Law of Moses Quia nondum institutum erat hoc sacrificium sanctum sanctorum quod corpus eius est That is Because this Sacrifice the Holy of holies which is his body was not yet instituted And elsewhere Quid gratius offerri aut suscipi posset quà m caro sacrificij nostri corpus effectum sacerdotis nostri That is What can be offered or accepted more gratefully then the body of our Priest being made the flesh of our Sacrifice And Cyrill Leo Fulgentius and other Fathers haue commonly the like ORTHOD. Then the answering of Austine will be the answering of all Now what his meaning was let himselfe declare Was not Christ once offered or sacrificed in himselfe And yet he is offered in a sacrament not onely at all the solemnities at Easter but euery day to the people Neither doth he lye that being asked doth answere that he is offered For if sacraments haue not a certaine resemblance of those things whereof they are sacraments they should not be sacraments at all And for this resemblance they take the names commonly of the things themselues therefore as after a certaine maner the sacrament of the Body of Christ is the Body of Christ the sacrament of the Blood of Christ is the Blood of Christ so the sacrament of faith is faith And elsewhere The flesh and blood of the sacrifice of Christ was promised by sacrifices of resemblance before hee came was performed in trueth and in deed when he suffered is celebrated by a sacrament of remembrance since he ascâ—nded PHIL. YOu cannot so delude the ancient Fathers of the Church For the Nicen Councell in that Canon which Caluine and all other receiue saith plainely That the Lambe of God offered vnbloodily is layde vpon the holy Table ORTHOD. The Lambe Christ Iesus which was offered vpon the Crosse for the sinnes of the world is layd vpon the holy Table not substantially but Sacramentally PHIL. But the Councell meaneth substantially for they say It is come by relation to the holy Councell that in certaine places and Cities the Deacons do reach the sacraments to the Priests Neither the Canon nor the custome hath deliuered this That those which haue not the power to offer sacrifice should reach the body of Christ to those that offer it Where you may see that they doe not onely call it the body of Christ but they plainely describe a Priest by hauing a power and authoritie to offer it and distinguish him from the Deacons which haue no such power ORTHOD. Who can better tell the meaning of the Councel then those which were present and subscribed vnto it One whereof was Eusebius PHIL. Very true and hee telleth how when Constantine dedicated the Temple at Ierusalem some did pacifie the diuine Maiestie with vnbloody sacrifices and mysticall Consecrations Who were these but Masse-priests and what were the vnbloody sacrifices but the sacrifice of the Masse for the Body and Blood of Christ are there offered vnbloodily ORTHOD. Let Eusebius expound Eusebius Christ hauing offered himselfe for a soueraigne sacrifice vnto his Father ordained that we should offer a remembrance thereof vnto God in stead of a sacrifice Is not this a plaine demonstration that in the iudgement of Eusebius there is not in the Lords Supper a sacrifice properly so called but onely a remembrance in stead of a sacrifice And this remembrance hee thus describeth VVhich remembrance wee celebrate by the signes of his Body and Blood vpon his Table He calleth it not a sacrifice but a remembrance celebrated not by the substance of his Body and Blood but by the signes and that not vpon an Altar but vpon a Table and this he calleth an vnbloodie sacrifice as appeareth by his owne words And pleasing God well wee offer vnbloodie sacrifices and reasonable and acceptable to him So it is as cleere as the noone day that Eusebius knew not your Massing sacrifice but expoundeth the
matter of the Sacrament in all respects as wee doe and he being a part of the Nicen councell and one that helped to make the Canons and subscribed vnto them must needs be holden for a sufficient and faithfull interpreter of his owne and their meaning So in him wee haue 318. Bishops the most reuerent sages and Senate of the Christian world after the Apostles daies al denying your sacrifice maintayning a remembrance in stead of a sacrifice Wherefore when they describe a Priest by offering of sacrifice they doe not meane a sacrifice in substance but in signification and representation Neither can it bee proued that euer any of the ancient Fathers thought otherwise nor that any one of them was a Masse Priest as may further appeare by our learned diuines which haue handled this point to whom I referre you Wherefore seeing your sacrifising neither can be proued by the scriptures nor by the Fathers rightly vnderstood but is contrary to both we detest it to the bottome of hell as a most blasphemous abhomination derogating from the soueraigne and all sufficient sacrifice offered once for all by that one Priest which with one oblation entred the holy place and hath purchased an eternall redemption for vs. Hitherto of the first function of Popish Priesthood Now let vs come to the second CHAP. IX Of the second question which concerneth the power of absolution PHIL. THe second function of Priest-hood is the power of absolution which God hath giuen neither to King nor Emperour to Angell nor Archangell but onely to the Priest and in this also you are defectiue in the Church of England ORT. What absolution doe you meane and in what manner is it giuen PHIL. There is an absolution in the Consistory and an absolution in the Court of Conscience the former is from excommunication and other spirituall censures the latter which we meane is from sinne and is giuen in Priestly ordination euen by the words of Christ himselfe For the Bishop imposeth hands saying whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen and whose sinnes you retaine they are retained c. ORTHOD. The very same words are vsed in the Church of England as may appeare by the booke The Bishop with the Priests present shall lay there hands seuerally vpon the head of euery one that receiueth Orders The receiuers humbly kneeling vpon their knees and the Bishop saying Receiue the holy ghost whose sinnes thou dost forgiue they are forgiuen and whose sinnes thou dost retaine they are retained and therefore if the power of absolution bee giuen by these words then it is giuen and receiued in the Church of England PHIL. Not so for though you haue the words yet you haue not the true sence of the words and therefore neither doe your Bishops giue it nor you receiue it ORTHOD. Then let vs without all partiallity examine the true sence meaning of them For as much therefore as our Sauiour did represent a reall donation both by breathing and saying receiue without all controuersie somewhat was really giuen actually received but what was that vndoubtedly the holy Ghost for he said receiue the holy Ghost But what is meant by the holy Ghost It cannot be denied that they receiued the presence of the spirit for their direction support and assistance and the Lord hath promised the same spirit to all faithfull ministers when he said Behold I am with you that is with you and your successors vntill the end of the world To this purpose it is well spoken of Leo Qui mihioneris est author ipse fiet administrationis adiutor that is He that is author of my burthen will be the helper in my administration and againe Dabit virtutem qui contulit dignitatem i. Hee that gaue me the dignity will giue me strength to performe it But seeing it is euident that in the booke of God the holy Ghost doth many times signifie the gifts of the holy Ghost to point out the fountaine and welspring of those heauenly graces the interpretation of Saint Ierome may seeme most consonant to reason who by the holy Ghost vnderstandeth in this place a grace of the holy Ghost in these words acceperunt spiritus sancti gratiam that is they receiued a grace of the holy Ghost It remaineth therefore that we consider what grace that was It was not the grace of adoption or regeneration because they had receiued that already as appeared by the fruits thereof We beleeue know that thou art the Christ the son of the liuing God nor the grace of miracles because they receiued not that till afterward Behold I wil send the promise of my Father vpon you but tarry in the city of Ierusalem vntil you be induced with power from aboue which promise was fulfilled in the fiery tongues it seemeth therefore to be some ordinary grace which should continue with them their successors in the Church for euer as is confessed on both sides what can this be but that which Christ himself doth mētion in the words following as it were of set purpose to take away al ambiguous construction whose sins you remit they are remitted c. And this is expressed likewise by S. Ierome who calleth it gratiam qua peccata remitterent i. a grace whereby they might forgiue sins This is also the iudgement of S. Chrysostome saying a man should not erre if hee should say that they then receiued a certaine power and spirituall grace not that they should raise againe the dead or worke miracles but that they might forgiue sinnes To these we may ioyne Saint Ambrose who saith Hee that hath receiued the holy Ghost hath receiued power both to loose sinne and to bind it and a little after Munus spiritus sancti est officium Sacerdotis that is the guift of the holy Ghost is the Priests office Wherefore by holy Ghost is meant a ghostly ministeriall grace or power to forgiue sinnes PHIL. Thus far we agree as may appeare by our learned writers Cardinal Bellarmine Palacius and others but all the question is in what manner the Minister forgiueth sinnes ORTHOD. Saint Paul saith All things are of God which hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe by Iesus Christ and hath giuen vnto vs the Ministery of reconciliation For God was in Christ and reconciled the world vnto himselfe not imputing their sinnes vnto them and hath committed vnto vs the word of reconciliation Whereby it appeareth that God reconcileth the world properlie by not imputing their sinnes the Apostles and other Ministers of the Gospell ministerially as Embassadours of Christ to whom is committed the word and ministery of reconciliation For what other thing is our forgiuenesse of sinnes then a reconciling of men to God but we reconcile men to God by preaching and declaring the word of the Gospell therefore by preaching and declaring the word of the Gospell we forgiue sinnes PHIL. There is
it is granted to our Priests not to purge the leprosie of the body but the spots of the soule I doe not say to examine them being purged but altogether to purge them In this place to vse the words of Cardinall Bellarmine Saint Chrysostome doth so plainely condemne the opinion of our aduersaries that nothing at all can be answered for them ORTHOD. Doth the Priest altogether purge the spots of the soule then it seemeth when the penitent is presented before the Priest his soule is spotted but by vertue of the Priestes absolution the spots are presently washed away but I pray you tel me whom doth the Priest forgiue and absolue him whom the Lord hath absolued or him whom the Lord hath not absolued if the Priest absolue him whom the Lord hath absolued then hee doth not altogether purge the spot of the soule no nor properly purge them at all but onely declare that the Lord hath purged them If you say that the Priest absolueth him whom the Lord hath not absolued then hee shall bee forgiuen whom the Lord hath not forgiuen which is most absurd Againe doeth the Priest before hee pronounce absolution see any tokens of faith and repentance If hee see none then how dare he pronounce absolution and if hee see any then the party is already purged Whereby it appeareth that the absolution of the ministerie is onely declaratorie Therefore the speech of Chrysostome cannot bee taken properly but his meaning must bee this that the Priest seeing him brought by the ministery of the Gospell to faith and repentance and consequently purged certifieth his conscience that he is altogether purged and his sinnes washed away by the blood of Iesus Christ. PHIL. GRegorie Nazianzen saith that the law of Christ hath subiected temporall gouernours to his authoritie and throne and that his power is more ample and perfect then theirs ORTHOD. The Prince as supreame gouernour may by his royall authoritie establish true religion command both Priest and people to doe their dutie and punish those which doe otherwise by temporall punishments but the ministration of the Word Sacraments and the exercising of spirituall censures belong to the Bishop and as the prelate ought to bee subiect to the sword in the hand of the Prince so a vertuous Prince submitteth himselfe to the word of God in the mouth of the prelate But doth this prooue that the Priest forgiueth sinnes properly PHIL. SAint Ambrose proueth that Christ gaue to the Priests power to forgiue sinnes and it is plaine that he speaketh of true power and not of the ministerie of preaching both because the Nouatians did not denie that the Gospell might be preached to all men but they denied that the Priest might forgiue sinnes by authoritie and also because Saint Ambrose saith that Christ hath communicated to the Priests that power which he himselfe hath ORTHOD. The Nouatians did thinke that the Church had authoritie to bind but not to loose as may appeare by S. Ambrose in the same place And S. Cyprian being requested by Antonianus to vnfould the heresie of Nouatian sheweth that hee denied that such as were fallen should be admitted any more into the Church Baronius saith that he grew to such rashnesse as to deny that the remission of sinnes which is in the Apostles Creed was to be found in the Church Therfore as they denied that Priests might forgiue sinnes by authoritie so they denied that they might forgiue sinnes by way of declaration for they denied that there was any forgiuenesse of sinnes in the Church Wherefore Saint Ambrose in confuting the Nouatians hath no more confuted our opinion then hee hath confuted yours PHIL. SAint Ierom speaking of Priests saith Claues regni caelorum habentes quodam modo ante diem iudicij iudicant i. hauing the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen they iudge after a sort before the day of iudgement S. Austin expounding these wordes I saw seates and them that sate vpon them and iudgement was giuen them saith thus Wee must not thinke that this is spoken of the last iudgement but the seates of prelates and prelates themselues by whom the Church is now gouerned are to be vnderstood neither can we better apply it to any iudgement giuen then to that of which it is said whatsoeuer you bind in earth shall be bound in heauen Whereupon the Apostle saith what is it to me to iudge of them that are without doe not you iudge of them that are within ORTHOD. According to Saint Ierom the Bishop or Priest doth bind or loose as the Leuitical Priests did make the lepers cleane and vncleane Which in his iudgement was not properly but because they had the knowledge of leprous and not leprous and should discerne who was cleane and vncleane This is that which Saint Ierom meaneth when hee saith they iudge after a sort before the day of iudgement which kind of iudgement wee acknowledge PHIL. In iudgement there are two things causae cognitio sententiae dictio the knowledge of the cause and the pronouncing of the sentence Haue you these two ORTHOD. Wee haue for first the partie maketh a profession of his faith and repentance vnto the Minister here is causae cognitio and then the Minister by the authoritie which Christ hath committed vnto him pronounceth forgiuenesse of his sinnes here is sententiae dictio This is the practise of the Church of England agreeable to the law of God and the ancient Fathers But if by causae cognitio you meane a particular enumeration of all their sinnes as a matter necessarie to saluation and by sententiae dictio vnderstand such a sentence as imposeth workes of penance satisfactorie to God when you can proue them out of the Scripture we will embrace them in the meane time wee knowe them not Hitherto of Saint Ierom. The same answere also may serue for the place of Saint Austin if he meane the same iudgement PHIL. POpe Innocent the first saith De pondere aestimando delictorum sacerdotis est iudicare c. 1. It is the office of the Priest to iudge what sinnes are to be esteemed heauiest ORTHOD. He must discerne the deepenesse of the wound before hee can apply the medicine But how doth this prooue the point in question to wit that the Priest forgiueth sinnes properly PHIL. SAint Gregorie saith principatum superni iudicij sortiuntur vt vice Dei quibusdam peccata retineant quibusdam relaxent i. the Disciples obtaine a principalitie of iudgement from aboue that they may in Gods stead retaine the sinnes of some and release the sinnes of others ORTHOD. They are iudges to discerne sinne that so they may applie the medicine according to the qualitie of the offenders yea wee doe not deny but the Church may enioyne an outward penance for the further mortifying of sinne testifying their inward remorse and for the more ample satisfaction both of
order of a Deacon is not essentiall to the order of Priesthood and therefore though wee had bene ordained per saltum yet you could not deny vs the true order of Priesthood But we are not ordained per saltum Our Church hath decreed that there may be euer some time of triall of their behauiour in the office of Deacons before they be admitted to the order of Priesthood And for the Ordination after due knowledge of the vertuous conuersation and examination of the sufficiencie of the person it is performed with religious praier by a Bishop vpon a Sunday or holy day in the face of the Church in these words Take thou authority to execute the office of a Deacon c. PHIL. The office of a Deacon is to assist the Priest in saying of Masse Do your Deacons so ORTHOD. That the Deacon should assist the Priest in the administration of holy things concerning his office is graunted on both sides but for your Popish massing and sacrifising we haue proued that it is a profaning of Christs ordinance and that it is neither lawfull for you to do it nor for the Deacons to assist you wherefore seeing wee haue already iustified both our Bishops which ordaine the office or function of our Presbyters or Priests wee conclude that as our Bishops and Presbyters so our Deacons also are lawfull in the Church of England Thus haue we examined your obiections against the ministery of the Church of England and find them to be meere cauilles Neither can you proue that our calling is in any thing contrarie to the Scripture or to the practise of reuerend antiquity but your sacrifising Priesthood appeareth not onely to bee the inuention of man but also sacrilegious and abominable in the sight of God Wherefore I beseech you repent of your sinnes renounce your Antichristian practise returne to your deare Country cease to bee Philodox and become an Orthodox CHAP. XII Wherein is declared that though wee deriue our calling from such Bishops as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull and theirs vnlawfull PHIL. WEll I perceiue one thing that howsoeuer you speake against Popish Priests calling them sacrilegious and abominable yet when your owne calling is put to the trial you are glad to deriue it from such Bishops as were Popish Priests which you so disdainefully call sacrilegious and abominable ORTHOD. And I perceiue another thing that howsoeuer you exclaimed against Cranmer as a Schismaticke and burned him for an Heriticke yet when the glorious succession of your Bishops in Queene Maries time is put to the trial you are forced to deriue it from him whom you so scornefully call a Schismatike and an Hereticke But if our forefathers deriued their orders from such Bishops as were Popish Priests what inconuenience will follow PHIL. Then either confesse your calling to bee vnlawfull or accknowledge ours to be lawfull from whence you deriue it You cannot gather figges of thornes nor grapes of thistles neither is it possible for a rose to spring out of a nettle ORTHOD. But a garden of Roses may be ouergrowne with nettles For the Ministery planted by Christ was a sweete rose without any nettle and so it continued in the Church for certaine ages but when Antichrist began to reueale himselfe in the Temple of God as though hee were God the Romish Priesthood became a monstrous birth strangely compounded halfe rose halfe nettle the Church of England in the beginning of reformation did borrow from the Church of Rome the rose but left the nettle PHIL. What will you make of vs are we Ministers or lay men if we bee Ministers then so acknowledge vs. If wee be lay men then I pray you what was Cranmer who had no Cousecration but in our Church what were all the Bishops in Kings Edwards time which were Consecrated by Cranmer what was Mathew Parker Grindall Sands Horne which were all ordained Priests in our Church were they all lay men what are all the Ministers of England at this day which deriue their orders from the former are they all lay-men ORTHOD. Your Popish Priests are neither the true ministers of the Gospel nor merely lay-men For your ordination consisteth of two parts the former in these words take thou power to offer sacrifice and to celebrate masse for the quick and the dead which you account the principall function of Christian Priesthood but in truth it maketh you not the Ministers of Christ but of Antichrist the latter in these words receiue the holy ghost whose sins thou forgiuest they are forgiuen whose thou retainest they are retained in which Euangelicall words there is deliuered a ghostly ministeriall power to forgiue sinnes which according to the true meaning of Christ is performed by the ministery of reconciliation therefore whosoeuer hath receiued this power hath withall receiued the ministery of reconcilation consisting as was before declared in the due administration of the word and sacraments PHIL. If it be so then you must confesse that the Priesthood of the Church of Rome hath the ministeriall function because these words are vsed in our ordination ORTHOD. Though these words as they were spoken by Christ practised in the primitiue Church and are vsed at this day in the Church of England imply the substance of this holy function yet as you abuse them in the Church of Rome to maintaine Popish shrift the gold is couered with drosse and the sweet flower ouershadowed with noysome weeds Wherefore if we consider your Priesthood as it is a totum aggregatum consisting of sacrifising and absoluing it is vnlawfull and contrary to the Scripture If wee come to the parts thereof your massing and sacrifising is simply abominable the other part so farre as it relieth vpon the words of Christ taken in their true sense and meaning is holy and implieth a ministerial power which notwithstanding by your construction and practise is greatly depraued PHIL. I will proue our Priesthood to be lawfull by the practise of your owne Church which against you is as good as a thousand witnesses For when any of our Priests forsake the Catholike Church ioyne themselues with you you do not giue thē new orders but presently receiue thē into the bosome of your Church suffering them to execute the ministeriall function by vertue of those orders which they receiued in the Church of Rome ORTH. None can bee admitted with vs to execute the office of a minister before he subscribe to the articles of religion as may appeare by this act of Parliament That the Churches of the Queens Maiesties dominions may be serued with pastours of soūd religion be it enacted by the authority of this present Parliament that euery person vnder the degree of a Bishop which doth or shal pretend to be a Priest or Minister of Gods holy word and Sacraments by reason of any other forme of institution Consecration or ordering then the forme set foorth by Parliament in the time
some pernicious errour as for example If they deny the Godhead of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost shall this hinder the validitie of the Baptisme PHIL. No for you must consider that there is a visible Priest and an inuisible It is required to the substance of Baptisme that the visible Priest apply water to the baptized In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost If he faile in any of these points the Baptisme is frustrate And therefore it was decreed in the great Councell of Nice that the Paulianists should be rebaptized where they take the word rebaptised improperly meaning that the former was not performed in the true wordes and therefore was in deed no Baptisme But if it were duely performed in water with such words as Christ hath appointed their priuate opinions and misconstruction cannot hinder the validitie of the Baptisme Satis ostendimus saith S. Austin ad Baptismum qui verbis Euangelicis consecratur non pertinere cuiusquam vel dantis vel accipientis errorem siue de Patre siue de Filio siue de Spiritu sancto aliter sentiat quam coelesiis doctrina insinuat i. We haue sufficiently declared that to the Baptisme which is consecrated with Euangelicall words pertaineth not the errour of any man either of the giuer or of the receiuer whether he thinke otherwise then the heauenly doctrine teacheth of the Father or of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost For whosoeuer be the Minister Christ the inuisible Priest is the principall Baptizer and therefore if the right Element and forme of words be vsed we regard not the erronious sense of the seruant but the true sense of the Lord and Master ORTHOD. So I say to you there is a visible Bishop and an inuisible if the visible shall impose hands vpon a capable person vsing those Euangelicall words which Christ hath sanctified his owne priuate opinions cannot hinder the validitie of the Ordination for so that right and sufficient words be vsed we will not respect the erronious construction of the seruant but the true sense and meaning of the Lord and Master Therefore though Cranmer and Parker were ordained in the rite of the Church of Rome though both the ordainers gaue the power and the ordained receiued it in the erronious sense of the Church of Rome yet neither the error of the ordainers nor of the ordained pertaineth to the Ordination As Christ is the chiefe Baptizer so he is the chiefe Ordainer for hee giueth Pastours and teachers for the consummation of the Saints Wherefore when God vouchsafed to take away the scales of ignorance from the eyes of his blessed instruments which he vsed in the reformation of Religion it was their duetie not to follow the erronious sense of the visible Bishop but the true meaning of the inuisible Bishop who was the authour of these holy and admirable words Receiue the holy Ghost c. In which words of Christ that was accomplished which was promised by the keyes which keyes the Fathers call the knowledge of the Scripture the interpretation of the Law the word of God And Pope Adrian the key of ministery so whosoeuer is ordained by these words receiueth the keyes and may open the kingdome of heauen by the Word and Sacraments Wherfore seeing these words were retained in the Ordination of Priests euen in the darkenesse of Poperie it followeth that the Church of Rome had power by these words rightly vnderstood according to the Scripture to minister the word and Sacraments But that which in it selfe was lawfull to them was made vnlawfull by adding the abhomination of sacrifising and by wresting the words of Christ to their Popish shrift Thus though the Church of Rome gaue her Priests authority to preach the truth yet she did not reueale the truth vnto them but plunged them in ignorance and errors Therefore whereas those words of Christ in themselues a Rose by corruption of time were ouergrowne with nettles those heroicall spirits which reformed religion did weede away the Romane nettles and so there remained onely the sweet Rose of Iesus Christ. Thus it came to passe that that which was practised in the Church of Rome vnlawfully as beeing polluted with wicked humane inuentions was by the goodnesse of God purged and restored to the orient colour and natiue purity To conclude in the primitiue Church the ministeriall power was receiued purely and deliuered purely In the beginning of Popery it was receiued purely and deliuered corruptly During the sway of Popery it was receiued corruptly and deliuered corruptly In the beginning of the reformation it was receiued corruptly and deliuered purely Now in the sun shine of the Gospell it is receiued purely and deliuered purely Thus it appeareth that although we receiued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull which was to be declared Now the Lord of his mercy so blesse his owne ordinance that we may vse this holy function to his glory and the winning of many thousand soules Amen LAVS DEO ¶ AN APPENDIX WHen this worke had almost passed the Presse there came to my hands certaine scandalous Bookes made by our Popish aduersaries reproching the Consecrations of some Bishops of blessed memory Who in their life time powred out such precious ointment as still filleth the Church with the sweetnes of the odour Among which Iewels Bishop Iewell is first produced who like another Shammah stood in the middest of the field and defended it and slew the Philistims so the Lord gaue great victory In regard wherof they being filled with malice and enuie and not beeing able with dint of Argument to encounter him and the rest of his fellow Souldiers those worthies of Dauid which fought the Lords battels haue sought by all meanes to disgrace their Calling disgorging their poison against them without any respect of conscience or truth in these opprobrious and scurrilous words Of M. Iewels being Bishop we haue not so much certaintie yea we haue no certaintie at all For who I pray you made him who gaue him his Iurisdiction who imposed hands vpon him what Orders had they what Bishops were they 136. True it is that both he Sands Scory Horne Grindall and others if I mistake not their names in the beginning of the Reigne of Queene Elizabeth met at the Horse-head in Cheape side a fit signe for such a Sacrament and being disappointed of the Catholicke Bishop of Landaffe who should there haue bene to Consecrate them they vsed the like art that the Lollards once did in another matter who being desirous to eate flesh on Good-Friday and yet fearing the penalties of the Lawes in such cases appointed tooke a Pigge and diuâ—ng him vnder the water said Downe Pigge and vp Pike And then after constantly auouched that they had eaten no flesh but fish So I say these graue Prelates assembled as afore said seeing the Bishop whom they expected
came not to consecrate them they dealt with Scory of Hereford to doe it who when they were all on their knees caused him who kneeled downe Iohn Iewell to rise vp Bishop of Salisburie And him that was Robert Horne before to rise vp Bishop of Winchester and so foorth with all the rest Which Horse-head Ordering was after confirmed Synodically by Parliament wherein they were acknowledged for true Bishops And it was further Enacted That none should make any doubt or call in question that Ordination 137. This was the first ordering of Master Iewell and the rest as I haue beene informed by one that heard it from Master Neale reader of the Hebrew Lecture in Oxford who was there present and an eye witnesse of what was done and past c. Now the place of Sacrobosco which he câ—teth in the Margent is this Principio regni Elizabeth aecreandi erant Episcopi sectarij Candidatâ— conuenerunt Londini in quodam Hospitio plateae Anglicè dictae heapside ad insigne capitis Manni vna ordines collaturus Lâ—ndauensis Episcopus homo senex simplex quod vt intellexit Bonâ—rus tunc decanus EpiscoporuÌ„ in Anglia misit è turri Londinensi vbi religionis causa detinebatur capellanum suum qui Landauensi proposita excommunicationis paena prohiberet nouos candidatos ordinare ea autem denuntiatione territus Landauensis pâ—dâ—m retulit multiplicique tergiuersatione vsus sacrilâ—gam vitauit ordinationem Hîc furere Candidati Landauensem contemnere noua quaerere consilia quid plura Scoreus Monachus post Herefordensis Pseudo-Episcopus caeteris excaeteris quidam Scoreo manus imponunt fiuntque sine Patre Filij Pater a Filijs procreatur res saeculis omnibus inaudita Quod D. Thomas Neale Hebraicus Oxoniae lector qui interfuit antiquis confessoribus illi mihi narrarunt fidem astruit quod in comitijs postea sancitum fuit vt pro legitimis Episcopis haberentur Parlamentarij isti These imputations I found first in generall cunningly cast forth by Kellison who said He heard credibly reported that some of our new superintendents were made Bishops at the Nagges-head in Cheape Whereupon because I would deale candidè with my aduersary and propose his obiection with most probability I brought it against the first Bishop consecrated in the Queenes time that is Archbishop Parker and cleered him from this reproach For can any man of reason imagine that they would goe to consecrate one another in a Tauâ—rne and so incurre the danger of the Law after that they had according to their hearts desire an Archbishop of their owne religion quietly possessed of his Church and Chaire But now the Authour of the Preface affirmeth in particular that Iewell Sands Horne and Grindal were there then and in that maner Consecrated by Scory and Scory by some of them saith Sacroboscus To answere briefly for the glasse is almost runne First it is a sillie surmise that Bishop Scory should be Consecrated by them seeing he was Consecrated by Archbishop Cranmer and other Bishops in the time of King Edward Secondly those reuerend Prelates Grindall and Sands were both Consecrated vpon one day by Matthew Archbishop of Canterbury assisted by three other Bishops as you haue heard out of the Records To which I adde moreouer vpon a reuiew of the same Records that the place of their Consecration was the Chappell at Lambehith the time the Sabboth day in the forenoone after Morning prayer the maner with imposition of hands and such forme of words and Praiers as are vsed in the Church For the better performance whereof there was a Sermon Preached by Master Alexander No well then the Archbishops Chaplaine vpon this Text Take heed vnto your selues and to all the flocke whereof the holy Ghost hath made you ouerseers And a Communion reuerently ministred by the Archbishop Thirdly Bishop Iewell was Consecrated the 21. of Ianuary following by Matthew Archbishop of Canterbury Edmund London Richard Ely and Iohn Bedford in the foresaid Chappel at Lambehith vpon the Sabboth in the forenoone with Common praiers Communion and a Sermon preached by Master Andrew Peirson the Archbishops Chaplaine vpon this Text Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorifie your Father which is in Heauen Lastly Bishop Horne was Consecrated the yeere following by Mathew Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Bishop of Saint Dauids Edmund Bishop of London and Thomas Bishop of Couâ—ntry and Lichfield as was before related The place of his Consecration was likewise the Chappell at Lambehith the time the Sabbath day in the fore-noone and the maner in all respects as the former Thus all things were most orderly and reuerently performed Now let the world iudge what is to bee thought of these men which dare so confidently blaze such vntruthes and are not ashamed to produce an eye witnesse for that which was neuer seene by the eye of man As for their downe Pigge and vp Pike and such other of the same stampe I may say with the Prophet On whomhaue you iested vpon whom haue you gaped and thrust out the tongue And I aduise you to remember the saying of Salomon As the noise or crackling of the thornes vnder the pot so is the laughter of a foole As also that of Dauid Blessed is the man that hath not sit in the seat of the scornefull I will conclude this point with this saying of Salomon The lying lips are an abomination to the Lord but they that deale truely are his delight ¶ A note of the Editions of some Bookes cited by page ACTES and Monu Lond. 1610. Antiquit. Britt Hannou 1605. Antisand Cantabr 1593. Anglicar rerum Scriptor Francof 1601. Bellarm. apol resp Colon. 1610. Binius Colon. 1606. Brist Motiu Antih Atrebat 1608. Eliens Episc. Resp. adapol Bell. Lond. 1610. Georg. Princ. Anhalt Wittenb 1570. Hollinsh Lond. 1587. Ioh. de Turrecrem in Gâ—at decr Venet. 1578. Kellison Replie 1608. Lelandus Lond. 1545. Matth. Paris Tigur 1589. Nauar. Manualâ— Mogunt 1603. Pars. 3. Conuers 1603. Pollinus Romae 1594. Pontificale Romae 1595. Sand. de Schism Ingolst 1587. Tortura Torti Lond. 1609. Turr. de Eccles. Colon. 1674. Vargas de Episc. Iurisd Romae 1563. Walfingham Francof 1603. GEntle Readers the most materiall mistakings which I haue obserued are these some wherof notwithstanding are amended in most Copies for other which escaped me I craue your courteous pardons Hanc veniam petimúsque damúsque vicissim ERRATA Page 57. line 12. Northumb. Read Part of Northumb. Pag. 119. line 2. Marco Read Mario Ibid. line 5. Marke Read Marius Ibid. line 10. from the law Read in the Law Pag. 126. line 33. stattorum Read statutorum Pag. 135. line 36. Anno 1677. Read Anno 1577. Pag. 178. line 1. Clement 5. Read Clement 2. P. 213. l. 23 ni the Eucharistim properly Read in the Eucharist improperly Pag. 238. line 40. subance Read substance In the Margent
Gregory the ninth sent a mandate to the Bishops of Canterbury Lincolne and Sarum that they should prouide for three hundred Romanes in benefices next vacant and that they should giue no benefices till those were prouided for Anno 1241. Pope Gregory sent to the Couent of Burge an Apostolicke mandate with armed prayers that they should conferre vpon the Pope the reuenue of some Church worth 100. markes by the yeere and if it were 200. it should please him the better and that they should farme it of the Pope paying him his 100. markes and take to themselues the ouerplus The Abbot signified the matter to the King who detesting the couetousnesse of the Romane Court did strictly forbid it least so foule a fact should pollute the ayer The same yeere two Italians Petrus Rubeus and Petrus de Supino keeping the Popes authenticall mandate of exacting procurations extorted much money and Rubeus taking vpon him as the Popes Legate gaue himselfe this title Magister Petrus Rubeus Domino Papae familiaris consanguineus Master Peter Rubeus the familiar friend and cousin of the Lord the Pope Supinus extorted in Ireland 1500. markes Rubeus much more out of England and hearing that the Pope was sicke vnto death they fled away priuily with the money but were taken by the Emperour Anno 1244 Innocent the fourth the new Pope sent Martin a new prouler into England armed with the Popes authenticall instrument and power to suspend and excommunicate all that gaine said him Hee disdaining trifles would haue no benefice vnder thirtie Markes by the yeere Hee exacted goodly Palfryes very imperiously and suspended the Abbot of Malmesbury and the Prior of Marton for denying him and when a rich Prebend of Salisbury belonging to the Chanter was vacant he presently layed violent hands vpon it and by the commandement of the Pope conferred it vpon a child the Popes nephew Yea Matthew Paris saith Romana curia rubore deposito tempore noui Papae nostri Innocentij quarti non desinebat per prouisiones quotidianas redditus impudenter extorquere that is The Romane Court without all blushing in the time of our new Pope Innocent the fourth ceased not impudently to extort reuenues by daily prouisions Wherevpon the king writ to the Pope but little good came of it For Martin the Legate required at least of the Prelates 10000. markes but they did not grant it Then he vsed vnheard of extortions of money and reuenewes to be bestowed of the kinsmen of his lord the Pope for hee was supposed to haue bulles with blankes to serue for all purposes Moreouer he would send to such an Abbot or such a Prior for goodly Palfreys and presents for the furnishing of his table and prouision for his robes and when he had them hee would send them backe againe and send for other and for better pretending that the former were not sufficient and suspended all from the Collations of benefices of thirtie markes and vpward till hee was satisfied Whereupon saith Matthew Paris Miseri Anglici acerbiorem quà m olim subierunt filij Israel se doluerunt in Aegypto Britannica tolerare seruitutem that is The miserable English men lamented that they suffered a bondage in the Brittish Aegypt more cruell then the children of Israel did in times past Anno 1245. The Nobles and Canons sent a supplication which was red openly before Pope Innocent in the Councell at Lyons wherein they complained that an infinite number of Italians had benefices in England which knew not their flocke but onely receiued the fruites and caryed them out of the Realme and that the yeerely rents of Italians in England amounted to threescore thousand markes vpward which was more then the reuenewes of the Crowne and that after the Creation of Innocentius they hoped for reliefe but were now vnmeasurably oppressed by Martin the Legate who entred the land without the kings licence with greater power then euer did Legate and did exceed excessiuely Some benefices now voide he gaue to Italians who dying the Patrons not knowing he thrusteth other Italians into their places others he assigneth before hand to Italians others he reserueth to the See Apostolicke wresting from religious persons immoderate pensions excommunicating and suspending those that contradict him Anno 1246. Pope Innocent sent priuiledges from the Councel at Lyons that if Englishmen would be studious especially the sonnes of Noble men he would dispence with them honourably for pluralitie of benefices Promising that Martin the Clerke of his Exchequer should prouide but for twelue more and that then it should be lawfull for Patrons to present fit persons and that no Italian should immediately succeed an Italian This the Pope promised but performed nothing insomuch that the king did shew in open Parliament articles of grieuances as in other points so euen in these which the Pope had promised for Italians still succeeded Italians the Popes factor prouided for more then twelue neither were the Patrons permitted to present Whereupon letters of grieuances were sent vnto the Pope first from the Bishops secondly from the Abbots thirdly from the Nobles with the whole Clergy and people fourthly from the King himselfe the copies of all which are in Matthew Paris and still there came to the king complaints vpon complaints of iniuries receiued from the Court of Rome Yea and there came fresh letters from the Pope that the English Clergie should find him souldiers with horse and armour some fiue some tenne some fifteene and pay them their wages for one whole yeere The same yeare the Pope espying certaine aurifrisia beautifull to be hold among the Ecclesiasticall ornaments of some English men being then at Rome asked where they were made they answered in England Then the Pope said Vere hortus noster deliciarum est Anglia veré puteus inexhaustus est vbi multa abundant multa possunt extorqueri that is England is truely our garden of delights it is truely a Well neuer drawne drie where many things abound many things may be wrested from thē So the Pope intised with the concupiscence of his eyes sent to almost all the Abbots of the Cistercian order in England to send him some of them as though they should haue cost them no money which disliked not the Londoners who made and sold them at their owne pleasures Whereupon many detested the open couetousnes of the Church of Rome Yet this same yeere by the industry of the kin̄gs Proctours in the Court of Rome it was brought to passe that whereas before the Pope made his prouisions indefinitely of Ecclesiasticall liuings to the vse of Italians Now by the grace of God the tempest was so calmed that if henceforth the Pope would prouide for his Nephewes or Cardinalles Hee or his Cardinals should intreate the King that it would please him to prouide for such About the same time the Pope hearing that Robert de