Church of England which was taught by the Primitive Church first called Catholic and Apostolic and consequently is a Church truly Catholic and Apostolic according to the foresaid rule given us by Suarez and laid for a foundation of his argument to prove the Roman Church to be Catholic And truly it cannot but appear strange that any Christian not blinded with partiality or prejudice should imagine that the sacred Apostles intrusted to preach saving Doctrine to all the World should not have given a sufficient notice of it in the system of Articles they left to us That those venerable Fathers of the purer ages of Christianity congregated in the four first general Councils should give us but a diminute account of Catholic and Apostolic belief that the Popes Infallibility Supremacy and other articles of latter impression in the Roman Church should be so essential to Christian Faith as none may be saved without a belief of them This argument may be confirmed by the testimony of Athanasius related by Suarez in the chapter above mentioned num 2. saying that the collection of Articles contained in his Creed is the Catholic Faith haec est Fides Catholica c. this is the Catholic Faith which except a Man believe he cannot be saved but in the Church of England that Faith called Catholic and contained in the Creed of Athanasius is believed and professed therefore if any Church professing the Catholic Faith is Catholic it self the Church of England professing this Catholic Faith is truly Catholic The second foundation laid by Suarez in the same chapter n. 6. to prove that his Church is Catholic is to say that it did in all times profess the Faith of that Creed wherein the Church is called Catholic But the Church of England does and alwaies did profess the Faith of the same Creed therefore it has the same right to the like calling The third foundation laid by Suarez from the 15. num of the said chapter is a sign or distinctive used by ancient Fathers for to know a Church or Congregation truly Catholic and to distinguish it from another not Catholic That whensoever any Sect takes its name from the master or teacher of such a Doctrine and the followers of it do call themselves by such a name neither the Doctrine nor the followers of it are Catholic For which he alledg'd the testimony of Athanasius Chrysostom Lactantius and Others And the reason or cause of this distinctive is that every Heresie brings in some novelty against the ancient Faith and new things must have new names whereby to be known and distinguished from others But it is very remarkable how this subtil disputant otherwise very exact and formal in his discourses pretending to rob the Church of England of the name of Catholic by the principle now mentioned comes to confirm the same name upon it not finding it capable of the foresaid note of a Sect not Catholic For pretending to name it from Calvin he finds an obstacle in it because Calvin do's not approve a chief Doctrine of it Then he passes to call it Henrician from King Henry the Eigth because from him the Church of England did learn to acknowledg the King for Head or supreme Governour of the Church in his own dominions Against this also he meets with several obstacles to which I will add this other very considerable that this practice of the Church of England is by many ages more ancient then the time of Henry the Eight whereas it allows no other Supremacy to our King over the Church then such as the Godly Kings of Israel and the Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church did exercise in their respective Dominions as is declared in the 37. Article and in the second Canon of the Church of England Since Suarez can not find the name of Lutheran Calvinist Henrician or any other taken from any particular Author or teacher to be agreeable to this Church it must follow from the above mentioned note of a Catholic Church delivered by him and taken out of ancient Fathers that it is a Church truly Catholic that being the only name it self own 's And the Preachers of it praying for our King do stile him Defender of the Faith truly Catholic and Apostolic and King James in his Monitory to the Emperor and other Christian Princes stiles himself Defender of the Faith truly Christian Catholic and Apostolic of the ancient and Primitive Church and we do all pray heartily that our Kings may never defend any other Faith then this CHAP. II. Suarez his argument taken from the propriety of the word Catholic applied to prove that the Church of England is truly Catholic THe fourth foundation laid by Suarez in the 14th Chap. of his foresaid Book to prove that the Church of England is not Catholic he takes from the propriety meaning of the word Catholic He supposes that according to the etymology of the word in Greek Catholic is the same as Vniversal or Common which Universality he saies is fourfold in relation to the present purpose First as to the matter or object of our belief that it be entire comprehending all points belonging to Christian and saving Faith Secondly that it have an Universal or common reason of belief which common reason or rule must be Divine truth or the Word of God whereby he gives testimony to truth according to that expression of Saint Paul 1 Thess 2.13 When ye received the word of God which ye heard of us ye received it not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God Thirdly Universality is required in relation to the degrees and orders of persons according to that description of a Church given by Optatus Milevitanus Lib. 2. contra Parmenianum Certa membra sua habet Ecclesia Episcopos Presbyteros Diaconos Ministres turbam fidelium that the Church has its certain members Bishops Priests Deacons Ministers and a Congregation of the faithful The fourth and chief universality required for the propriety of the name Catholic is that a Church to be such be extended over all the parts of the Earth according to the declaration of the said Optatus Lib. 2. Contra Donatistas ubi ergo erit proprietas Catholici nominis quod sit rationabilis ubique diffusat that the propriety of the name Catholic requires it should be a Church rational and diffused over all places Suarez endeavours to prove that all these proprieties of Universality belonging to a Catholic Church are wanting to this of England that it may be called Catholic First as to the material universality or integrity of Articles necessary to a Catholic Faith he pretends that the Church of England is deficient in several Articles as he promises to prove elsewhere but at present singles out as chief that of the Popes Supremacy which the Church of England denies and he promises to prove that it belongs to a Catholic Faith I commend Suarez his ingenuity and
as were most commonly used in this Realm of England in the last Year of King Henry 8. should be used and frequented through the whole Realm of England and all other the Queens Dominions and no other in any other manner form or degree The makers of this statute were of opinion that Holy order was a Sacrament and therefore was administred in Queen Mary's time as in King Henry's They will not pretend that any form essential was omitted in Queen Mary's time and consequently must say the same of Orders given in King Henry's reign What Bishops when and by whom they were consecrated during King Henry the 8. his time Mr. Mason relates out of the public Records as Thomas Cranmer in the Year 1533. as above mentioned next after Rowland Lee Conse B. of Lichfield 14. of Apr. 1534. by Thom. Canterb. John Lincoln Christ Sidon George Brown Con. Arch-Bish of Dub. 19. Mar. 1535. by Thom. Canterb. John Roffens Nichol. Sarum And so of the rest until the year 1545. every one being consecrated by three Bishops and with the usual ceremonies and the great penalty of premunire being denounced by Act of * 2 5. Henr. 8. c. 20. Parliament against any Bishop consecrating or consecrated otherwise CHAP. VI. The ordination of Bishops Priests and Dâ—acons in King Edward the Sixth his time and after proved to be legal and valid THe greatest opposition is against the ordination of our Clergy since the Reformation of the ordinal a Vasquez to 3. in 3. p. disp 240. c. 5. or ceremonies of ordination in time of King Edward the sixth of which Kellison speaks thus in King Edwards time neither matter nor form of ordination was used and so none were truly ordained Against this rash and slanderous censure of Kellison I will produce the testimony of Vasquez and Bellarmine men of greater credit and knowledg touching the matter and form of ordination Vasqu declares the matter of Episcopal ordination to be only the imposition of hands and the form those words receive the â—oly Ghost which are said by three Bishops together relates Major and Armilla for the same opinion proving it first out of Scripture 1 Timot. IV. 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee which was given thee by Prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Out of which place b Kellis reply to Dr. Sutlif fol 31. Vasquez thus argues solidly unde sequitur manifeste eam mannum impositionem esse materiam ac proinde verba quae simul cum eâ proferuntur esse formam Nam gratia Sacramentalis in ipsa applicatione materiae formae per ipsam confertur Whence followeth manifestly that such imposition of hands is the matter and consequently the words pronounced with it the form for Sacramental grace is conferred in the very application of the matter and form and by it Then he proceeds to prove by testimonies of Fathers that three Bishops ought to concur in the Ordination of a Bishop that what is not performed by all three belongs not to the essential matter or forme But in all the Roman Pontifical saies he no other ceremony is appointed to be performed by three Bishops but only the imposition of hands therefore that alone must be the matter and consequently only the words pronounced with it the form of Episcopal Ordination That three Bishops are necessary for ordaining a Bishop which was a foundation laid by him for the former argument he proves first by the the testimony of Pope Anacletus * Anaclet in Epist 2 decretali c 2. Anicetus Damas. alnapod Valgoez 243. c. 6. an 63. affirming that the first Arch-Bishop of Jerusalem James called the just Brother of the Lord according to the flesh was ordained by Peter James and John Apostles giving therein a rule to successors that a Bishop should not be ordained by less then three Bishops Anacletus adds that he learned so much from St. Peter by whom he was himself Priested Secondly Pope Anicetus delivers the same adding it was so practiced instituente Domino by the institution of Christ Thirdly he alledges the first Council of Nice with several other Councils and Fathers to the same purpose If you oppose that the foresaid words Receïve the Holy Ghost are too general for a form to ordain a Bishop he answers that being pronounced by three Bishops laying their hands upon the Person ordained they specify the degree of a Bishop since thereby they signifie that they receive him to their own proper order and degree the conjunction of three Bishops laying their hands upon the person ordained being only proper to the ordaining of a Bishop as he proves Disp 243. c. 6. Thus much a Vasquez Disp 246. n. 60. Vasquez touching the matter and form of Episcopal ordination b Pellar de Sacra in Gen. lib. 1. c. 18. Bellarmine contributes not little to the proof of this verity tho with less coherence to another Doctrine he supposes as I will declare after For speaking of Sacraments in general he saies that all Sacraments of the new Law are composed of visible things as matter and of words as form And c Idem de Sacra ordinis c. 9. coming to speak of Holy Order which he supposes to be a Sacrament he saies that there is no mention in Scripture of any visible sign that may be a matter of it but only the imposition of hands Whence it follows that holy Order being of Divine institution and declared in Scripture as he proves well the essential constitutes of it must be likewise in Scripture And therefore no other visible sign or matter proportionable for it being in Scripture it followeth that only the imposition of hands must be the matter of it How well this agrees with what Bellarmine in the same place supposes but proves not that in the Ordination of a Priest not only the imposition of hands but also the delivering of the chalice and patin belong to the essential matter let him consider He quotes Dominic Soto and others saying that the delivering the chalice with Wine and the patin with Bread is the only matter and the words pronounced by the Bishop delivering them is the form of Ordination of the Priest the words are these accipe potestatem offerendi Sacrificium take power of offering a Sacrifice Bellarmine proves efficaciously that the imposition of hands is a matter essential to Ordination but supposes without exhibiting any proof of it that the delivering of the chalice and patin is also a part essential of the matter saying against Sotus that not only the delivering of the Instruments but also the imposition of hands is a matter essential in the ordination This I say seems not to agree well with what he said before that in Scripture no mention was made of any Symbol that could be taken for a matter of Ordination but only the imposition of hands And truly the proof he alledges out of Sotus or others
one passionatly bent to extol St. John the Evangelist above St. John Baptist the other preferring with no less animosity the Baptist before the Evangelist Our preacher before mentioned to pleasure the Nuns of the Evangelist delivers that prodigious Paradox which in English may be turned thus exceeding great is the excellency of John upon the account of being the Beloved It is greater then that of a Redeemer even in God it is so great as to be God in trinity and unity nay for this cause the word was made flesh Go now and compare this piece of Doctrine with any of those you related of the Protestant writers and if it has not out gon them all add to it what follows Being advertised by the inquisitor general of Spain at the second time he sent me a licence for reading prohibited Books that I had not given him account of what censureable propositions I might have lighted upon in my readings as he had charged me to do in the instrument of such a Licence which he had sent me the year before I sent to him a list of some perverse Doctrines I saw in Books approved and in much use among themselves for Protestant Books I could find none to give account of among which were the three propositions following prefixed for titles to so many moral discourses of Leander de Murcia in his Commentaries on the book of Esther The first of which goes thus Adeo essicax est mortis memoria ad reducendos in meliorem frugem homines ut non solum ipsi sed etiam Deus op Max. proposita ante oculos morte in meliora contendat The memory of Death is so powerful to reduce Men unto a better life that not only they but even God Almighty himself laying death before his eies becomes better The second runs thus Etiam daemon morte ante oculos constituta contendit in meliora even the Devil looking upon death mends himself The third proposition is this Tanta dilectione prosecutus est filius Dei homines vt pro ipsis quasi insanire videatur The Son of God his love to men has bin so great that he seems to be mad for them And if thus it goes even in Books current and approved among you what if I did relate the Doctrines of others censured and prohibited by your inquisitions as you and your party frequently do upbraid our Church with erroneous Doctrines of particular Men which we do utterly detest and our learned Men do vigorously oppose by word and pen in Pulpits Books and Scholes CHAP. XVII The Reformation of the Church of England vindicated from the slanderous aspersions of N. N. and other Romanists IT is very usual with the Zelots of the Romish Church to make Henry the Eight sole Author of the Reformation of the English Church loading that Prince with bitter invectives and odious reports thereby to render the reformation contemtible to which N. N. in the 14. chapter of his Book adds a slanderous relation of the lives and behaviour of some Monks and Friers come out of Germany which he pretends to have bin the authors and contrivers of the 39. Articles of the Church of England I will not repete the many idle stories he tells of them more fit to divertise simple persons of his own credulity in a Winter night at the fire then to work on serious and knowing Men. I have chosen for a more short and solid way rather to justify our cause with positive arguments then to follow our adversaries in sifting fopperies To this purpose I will lay for foundation of my present discourse that the whole frame of the Reformation standeth upon two points whereof the first and more resented at Rome is the denying of the Popes supremacy and the withdrawing of the Church of England from subjection to him The second is the Reformation of the Liturgy and Doctrine of the said Church from errors and corruptions introduced in it As for the first it is clear and evident that neither Henry the 8. nor Luther nor Calvin nor any of those strangers mentioned by N. N. were authors or causers of the freedom of the Church of England from subjection to the Pope of Rome This freedom being by its own right inherent in it from the beginning of its Christianity however King Henry his valour and resolution broke off effectually the Tyrannical usurpations of Rome which long time did oppress the English Church and Nation notwithstanding their continual reluctancy and complaint against those Romish extortions Far were those good Christians that inhabited England before the time of Gregory the Great from giving or owning obedience to the Bishop of Rome and so when Augustin came hither about the year 590 and demanded their obedience to the Church of Rome the Abbot of Bangor returned him answer * Concil Spelm. P. 108. That they were obedient to the Church of God to the Pope of Rome and to every godly Christian to love every one in his degree in charity to help them in word and deed to be the Children of God and other obedience then this they did not know due to him whom he named to be Pope nor to be Father of Fathers And if Augustin did pretend to such a subjection from England to Rome as the Popes of it now would have certainly he exceeded his commission for St. Gregory that sent him never pretended to that supremacy which his successors do aspire to as we shall demonstrate in the 15 chapter of the second part of this treatise and how far he was from pretending England to be of his jurisdiction may appear by what is related of him that being told certain children were de Britannica Insula he did not know whether the Country were Christian or Pagan The siliâ—â— and voluntary respect and obedience which the holiness and learning of Gregory and some other good Popes gain'd among the English gave occasion to others following of less merit to pretend to a right to such obedience which being perceived by the Kings they prohibited all appeals to Rome and the coming of Legats thence and so much as the receiving of letters without the Kings licence as may appear by Paschalis the Second his letter to Henry the first expostulating with him about this particular in these words Sedis Apostolicae nuncii vel literae praeter jussum regiae Majestatis nullam in potestate tua susceptionem aut aditum promerentur nullus inde clamor nullum inde judicium ad sedem Apostolicam destinantur c. This happened in an 1114. notwithstanding the King stood upon his resolution so as in the year following 1119 sending his Bishops to a Council held by Callixtus the 2. at Rhemes at their departing he gave them instructions not to complain of each other because himself would right each of them at home that they * Joh Diacon l. 1. c. 21. vita Greg. should a Orderi Vital is p. 857. Ite Dominum
Papam de parte mea salutate Apostolica praecepta humiliter audite sed superfluas adinventiones regno meo adinferre nolite salute the Pope from him hear his precepts but bring no superfluous devices or innovations into his kingdom True it is That several of our Godly Kings did permit appeals should be made to Rome in matters wherein our own Bishops could not agree and directions to be sought from thence as from a flourishing and learned Church not as a superior Judicature And when the Roman Bishops did pretend to any such superiority our Kings did protest against it So Henry the fifth having demanded of Martin the fourth some particulars to which his Embassadors not finding him ready to assent they b Arthur Duc. in vita Henrici Chichly p. 56. 57. told him That they had orders to protest before him that the King would use his own right in those particulars as things which he demanded not out of necessity but for the honour respect he was willing to shew to that Sea that they should make a public protestation thereof before the whole Colledg of Cardinals And to this purpose are sundry examples remaining on c Rot. parliam 17 Edward 3. n. 59. 25. Edw. 3. oct purif n. 13. 7. Hen. 4. n. 114. 13. Hen. 6. n. 38. record where the King at the Petition of the Commons for redress of some things amiss belonging to Ecclesiastic cognizance first chuses to write to the Pope but on his delay or failing to give satisfaction doth either himself by statute redress the inconveniency or command the Archbishop to see it don For certain it is by the course of all our Chronicles and histories that our Kings together with the convocation of their Bishops and Clergy had in themselves absolute and entire power of governing and reforming the Church of this kingdom without any dependency uppon any forreign authority It was never doubted neither could it be denied upon any warrantable ground that they had within their own dominions the same power which Constantine had in the Empire and that our Bishops had the same which St. Peter had in the Church For which since the Erection of Canterbury into an Archbishoprick the Bishops of that Sea were held * Malms de Pontif. lib. 1. in Ansel fol. 127.15 Quasi alterius orbis Papae as Vrban the Second styled them and did exercise vices Apostolicas in Anglia that is they used the same power within this Island which the a Eadmer p. 27. Pope did in other parts And in our writers the Archbishop of Canterbury is frequently called Princeps Episcoporum Angliae b ib. p. 107. 33. Pontifex summus c Gervas Boro ber col 1663. 54. Patriacha King Edgar asserted this power to be in himself and in his Clergy in his memorable speech made to them d Apud Ailred col 361.16 Ego Constantini vos Petri gladium habetis in manibus I bear in my hand the sword of Constantin and you that of Peter And therefore as the affairs of most concerns in the Church had their dependance on the Emperor and the holy men of those times did not doubt to continue to him the style of Pontifex maximus as e Tom. 3. an 312. n. 106. Baronius notes sine ulla christianitatis labe So f Regularis Concordia c. Not. Seldeni ad Eadmerum p. 146. 16. King Edgar was solicito is of the Church of his Kingdom veluti domini sedulus Agricola pastorum pastor And wrote himself the Vicar of Christ and by his g Concil Spelm. Ã p. 444. aâ— p. 476. laws and Canons he made known that he did not assume those titles in vain King h Leg. Edw. Confes c. 17. p. 142. Rex quia vicartus summi Regis est ad hocest constitutus ut regnum terrenum populum domâ—ni sâ—per omnia sanctam veneretur Ecclesiam ejus regat ab injurtis defendat Edward the Confessor a canonized Saint did declare the same and practised accordingly The King saies he being vicar of the supream King his duty is to govern and defend the earthly Kingdom and the people of the Lord from injuries and over all to reverence govern and defend his Church The same was declared and practised by i Leg. Inae in pras p. 1. Ina whom Baronius styles a most pious King by k Leg. fol. 11. p. 109. Canutus acknowledged for a most bountiful benefactour of Churches and of the servants of God Erga Ecclesias atque Dei servos benignissimus largitor as l Epist 97. fol. 93. Canut c Furbertus Carnotensis relates of him and several other godly Kings of England whose several laws touching Ecclesiastic affaires you may see related by Jorvalens c. 2. col 761. c. 5. col 830. c. 23. col 921. as also the laws of Emperors to the same purpose in the books of m Codex Theodos de seriis de nuptiis c. de sâ—de Catholica de Episcopis Ecclesiis clericis de monachis de haereticit de Apost de Religione de Episcopali judicio cod Jast l. 1. Tit. 1 2 3 4 5. passim in co Theodosius and Justinian The Emperors did employ their Bishops and Divines in resolving upon wholsome decrees touching Church affaires and these decrees they espoused themselves for Laws so as the transgressors of them should be subject to penalties This same course our Kings have taken as well in former ages as in this latter of the Reformation of our Church Henry the Eighth haveing those occasions of discontent with Pope Clement the Seventh which as too much known I omit to relate and being urged by the States of the Kingdom to execute at last what long time was desired and often attemted in England viz. to throw off the usurped power and jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome over this Kingdom to proceed with due legality and consideration in so weighty a matter he wrote to the Universities and great Monasteries and Churches of the Kingdom in the year 1534. and the eighteenth of May of the same year to the University of Oxford requiring them like men of vertue and profound Literature diligently to intreat examine and discuss a certain question viz. An Romanus Episcopus habeat majorem aliquam Jurisdictionem sibi collatam in Sacra Scriptura in hoc Regno Angliae quam alius quivis Externus Episcopus Whether the Bishop of Rome had any greater jurisdiction given to him in holy Scripture over this Kingdom of England then any other foreign Bishop and to return their opinion in writing under their common Seal according to the meer and sincere truth of the same To which after mature deliberation and examination they returned answer That he hath no such jurisdiction in this land The words of the University of Oxford returning their answer to the King upon this subject the 27. of June of the aforesaid 1534.
If any such thing there be I humbly beg of you to acquaint me therewith by your Letter commended to the post Office in Dundalk and do engage my word to you that you shall have all satisfaction imaginable that lieth in my power and that you shall find me alwaies ready to render you any service that may be expected from Loving Sir Your ever assured JOHN FREE alias S. R. To this Letter I answered immediatly in terms of no less kindness and sincere amity that I did and would declare wheresoever he was concerned that neither he nor any other of his Society did ever give me any discontent which might be the cause of the Resolution I was upon that my dissatisfaction was of a higher nature and that it was a great error to imagine that any dislike of particular Persons should work in me an alteration of this kind it being well known how easily I might remedy any discontents in Ireland by repairing to the place of my former habitation and emploiments in Spain and how good a reception I was to expect there even in that season as to him was well known This Letter being miscarried or not reaching to him as he signified before my declaration made at Câ—shel after many days retirement and serious consideration of the matter and no hope appearing of receiving satisfaction to my scruples he wrot another to me of the 16. of June following repeting the same expressions of fear that either he or some of his brethren might have given me some discontent to occasion my change and desiring if any such did happen I might give him notice thereof that I may give you said he any satisfaction possible and that union at least of Christianity if not of Religion may remain entire among us He desired further that I would consider seriously unde quo whence and whither I was going and what great inconveniencies might follow To this Letter also I answered immediatly repeting my former assurances given to him of no injury or discontent received from him or any of his Society as a cause or occasion of my change and that I did heartily embrace his offer of maintaining union of Christianity among us if not of Religion which was my own constant inclination and hearty desire As for considering unde quo whence and whither I went that I did consider it with Prayer and Study of many years and the grounds of my resolution thereupon would soon appear in public and I desired he should prevail with some able men of his Fraternity to reply to them with that gravity and modesty which becometh learned and religious men that on both sides we might concur with our studies to the Glory of God and manifestation of his truth setting a side all wonted acerbities which if used would confirm me and all men of good judgment in a dislike of their way and spirit Soon after at my arrival in Dublin he sent another Letter to me of the 24. of June with a message by word of mouth by a Gentleman of my Relation earnestly craving an opportunity of a privat conference with me with an offer made by the said Gentleman of all favor and assistance if I did desist even then from proceeding in my resolution and desired I would signify either in privat or in public the reasons of my discontent with them To this I answered that I conceived some inconveniencies in privat Conferences in that occasion and expected no quiet of mind by them that the case being already public I judged the handling of it in public to be more expedient both for the Service of God and my particular satisfaction the matter going through a more exact Trial that way and consequently I did proceed declaring in a Sermon preached a few daies after to a very great and noble Auditory in Christs Church of Dublin the reasons of my discontent with the present practice of the Roman Church in such moderate terms as may be seen in the same Sermon printed and extant in the hands of many desiring to be answered with the like moderation and formal Style setting aside satyrical and scurrilous Libels to which I was not to afford any either reading or answer And long it was before I heard of any serious reply made to my proposals but silly Libels of this latter kind which the sober sort of their own party thought unworthy to be published and I thought them to be as little worthy of my regard In the mean time having taken my dwelling since my coming to Dublin in Trinity Colledg near it and that University being pleased to have me incorporated with it in the quality of Doctor in Divinity at the performance of Acts usual to such a degree I published a Divinity Thesis directly intended for a Justification of my resolution taken by a strict enquiry and examen of it in a public dispute and containing to that purpose two conclusions touching the main points of our Controversy and to which all the rest may be reduced The first was That out of the Roman Church there is a safe way for Salvation The Second that the way of the Church of England is safer to Salvation then that of the Church of Rome By the former I intended to justify my constant and continual aversion to that horrid and arrogant position of the Romanists that out of their Communion there is no Salvation the fountain of so many bloody Tragedies and unchristian animosities which have bin the disgrace and destruction of the Christian Church these many years By the Second I proposed to justify the election I made of the Church of England as the more sure way to Salvation each one being obliged by the law of that Charity which every one ows to himself to take the way he conceives to be most secure in a matter of so high a consequence To these conclusions I invited seriously and eaâ—nestly all manner of persons having obtained free licence for them to come and argue from the Lorâ— Primate our Vice-Chancellor and from the other Heads of the University concern'd as may appeaâ— by the Letter following which I wrot with the Theâ—â— enclosed to a certain Learned Doctor of the Romisâ— Communion Honoured Doctor In pursuance of my earnest desire to discover the truth in the matter of greatest concern by all thâ— waies I could think expedient for it I am to defenâ— by public dispute next Thursday in the Chappel 〈◊〉 this Colledg the Thesis I send to you enclosed herâ— in performance of my promise I signified to my Lorâ— Primat to the Provost of the Colledg and the Moderator of the disputes my desire that any learneâ— man of whatsoever condition might be permitted 〈◊〉 oppose and they all granted my request it being no the custom of the Church and Vniversities of England and Ireland to keep their people from reaâ—ing and hearing the reasons of their adversaries a else where you know t is And as Suarez Bellarmin and others
made betwixt the Ecclesaâ—ic and Secular We have for the same practice the examples of the Godly Kings of â—srael and of Christian Emperours in the Primitâ—â—e Church as will be declared hereafter Chap. XV. 1. And our Doctrine herein being built thus on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets appears thereby to be Catholic and Apostolic And if any Doctrine of ours be not found grounded upon the same foundation of the Apostles and Prophets we are all reaâ—y to make that pious confession of our great King James related by Suarez Chapter XVII n. 15. Ego vero id ingenuè spondeo quoties Religionis quam profiteor ullum caput ostendetur non antiquum Catholicum Apostolicum sed novitium esse ac recens in rebus sc spectantibus ad sidem me statim ab eo dâ—sâ—essurum I do faithfully promise that whensoever any point of the Religion I profess shall be found not to be ancient Catholic and Apostolic but new and modern as to things belonging to Faith I will presently depart from it This much those of the Roman Church cannot say with sincerity and truth since several of their tenents are not built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets but are contrary to them as is declared in the second part of this Treatise Therefore our Church and the Faith of it rather then that of Rome is truly Catholic and Apostolic CHAP. V. Of the Succession and lawful Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons in the Reformed Church of England NOthing is affirmed more confidently nothing more blindly believed by most of the Romish party then the nullity of the Protestant Clergy that our Bishops Priests and Deacons are not such effectively but nominally or by title and therefore unable to give Orders they have not or administer Sacraments depending upon such Orders This I find by experience to be the greatest stop many of the more sober and serious of them have in embracing the Communion of the Church of England They see cleerly nothing is asserted by it which may be thought Heretical or erroneous And what it denies of superstructures added in latter Ages by the Roman Church they easily perceive them not to be essential to Salvation Their main scruple is whether in this separation of the reformed Churches from the Roman a lawful succession of Bishops and Ministers was retained and a legal ordination of them continued whether they may live and die confidently relying upon the Ministery of the reformed Ministers for consecrating absolving c. without recourse to a Romish Priest This point I find to be so necessary for setling the minds of many in this wavering age that I thought convenient to examine it exactly as far as may consist with the brevity and clearness I aim at in this writing To relate the reproches and calumnies of Romish Writers against our Ministery were endless and impertinent The shorter and readiest way will be to shew the truth and right of our cause by positive undeniable arguments touching the lawful succession and due Ordination of our Clergy This being established old stories and slanders will fall of themselves Who would not think it impertinent in me to take notice of that very rude and ridiculous fable of the Ordination of Parker and others at the Naggs-head in Cheapside most vigorously and demonstratively refuted many years ago by Mr. Mason and unhappily revived of late by a certain Gentleman to his own great shame and discredit of his cause being evidently convicted of Impostures by the Lord Bishop Bramhal in a separate Treatise printed upon that Subject Such base stuff as this if suitable to ears possessed with fury and blind passion is unworthy of any mention or regard among serious and sober Men. Now coming to the point after much reading and serious consideration upon the matter I wish heartily I could find the succession of lawful Bishops so cleer and not interrupted in the Roman Church from the Apostles times to the Reformation as we are able to shew it in ours from the beginning of the Reformation to our own daies It shall not be my present work to take notice of doubts occurring touching the former It will suffice for my purpose to demonstrate that from the beginning of Henry the Eight his reign when no doubt was of the legality of our Clergy to this day there has bin a lawful uninterrupted succession and due Ordination of Bishops and other Inferiour Clergy in the Churches of England and Ireland If the testimony of an adversary will avail we have that of * Cudsem de desper Calvini causa Cap. 11. pag. 108. Cudsemius who came into England the year 1608. to observe the state of our Church and the order of our Universities Concerning the state of the Calvinian Sect in England saith he it so standeth that either it may endure long or be changed suddainly or in a trice in regard of the Catholic order there in a perpetual line of their Bishops and the lawful succession of Pastors received from the Church for the honour whereof we use to call the English Calvinists by a milder term not Heretics but Schismatics Bellarmin is peremtory upon the contrary saying of all the Reformed Churches nostri temporis haeretici neutrum habent id est nec ordinationem nec successionem the Heretics of our times have neither ordination nor succession Whatsoever be said of other reformed Churches which I leave to speak for themselves upon this point we have cleer evidences to shew the falsity of the Cardinals assertion as relating to the Reformed Church of England and the more criminal as more wilful calumny of * Bristow Harding Sanders Kellison apud Masonliâ— 1. cap. 2. Vindiciae Eccleâ—ae Anglicanae Bristow Harding Sanders Howlet Kellison and other English Romanists whose malice must be Diabolical or their ignorance supine and unexcusable in slandering their Country with what they knew or easily might know to be an untruth as that stranger Cudsemius with due inquiry came to know For evidencing this point of so great importance * Papists Prisoners in Framblingham Castle in Queen Elizabeths time related by Mr. Mason 1 Book 3. Chap. of his English Edition that it was the cry of Papists to the Protestant Clergy in Queen Elizabeths time and is still the challenge of many among them if you can justify our calling we will come to your Church and be of your Religion I am to premise first as to matter of fact that in all prudence I am to rely with more satisfaction upon the public authentic records of the Church and state of England touching the transactions of both then upon the report of declared bitter Enemies such as those of the Romish faction are known to be Whereas it cannot but appear morally impossible in any impartial judgment that in so grave and wise a Nation as England is known to be the Lords and Officers of Church and State should conspire and agree in deluding
the Canons and rites of the Catholic Church With Thomas Cranmer Arch-Bishop of Canterbury they begin their quarrel Against him the Kings and Clergy of England Becan insults thus Legitimè consecrati non estis A quo enim an à Rege at is consecrandi potestatem non habet An ab Episcopo Cantuariensi vel aliquo simili ne id quidem Nam Thomas Cranmerus qui sub Hemico 8º Cantuariensem Episcopatum obtinuit non fuit consecratus ab ullo Episcopo sed à solo Rege intrusus designatus igitur quotquot ab eo postea consceratisunt non legitime sed ex praesumtione consecrati sunt You are not lawfully consecrated for by whom were you Whether by the King but he has not power to consecrate or by the Bishop of Canterbury or some other such neither that truly for Thomas Cranmer who under King Henry the Eighth obtained the Bishopric of Canterbury 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 presumtion I cannot but note Becan's disingenuity in deluding thus his Reader as if he would have him believe that the Kings of England did take upon them to consecrate Bishops themselveâ— or to thrust into the Government of Churches men not consecrated contrary to what he knew well or might easily know to be true having Popes Cardinals Priests and Jesuits to aâ—â—ertain him of it such as were Clement the seventh Paul the fourth Cardinal Allen Parsons Kellison whose manifold testimonies of Cranmer to have been a true Bishop Mason relates lib. 2. cap. 7. adding for farther evidence this following testimony of the time place and persons ordaining him out of the public Records Thomas Cranmerus consecratus 30. Martij 1533. 24. Hen. à Joh. Lincolniensi Joh. Exoniensi Hen. Asaphensi Against all these evidences Henry Fitz Symonâ— takes up the cudgils in defence of Becan's assertion that Cranmer was not consecrated by any Bishop but a meer Layman intruded upon that see of Canterbury by Henry the Eighth his sole will This he promises to demonstrate à gravissimorum totius gentis authorum monumentis consularibus actis by the testimonies of the most grave Authors of the Nation and public Act of Parliament Seeing these big words and knowing upon what subject I could not but sigh and grieve remembring how these Rhetoricians do delude poor credulous People with such swelling phrases founding high in the eares of Boies and Women and of Womanish weak Men whereas being touched close they are found to be no better than a bubble floating pompously and containing nought but wind Where he promises the testimonies of the gravest Authors of the Nation in favour of his pretension he only brings one testimony and of whom of some impartial writer No but of * Sander de Schism lib. 3. pag. 296. Sanders the most passionate and bitter Enemy of the reformed Clergy that could be named But even his testimony how much to Fitz Simons purpose he relates these words of him Henricus 8. radix peccati cum ab Ecclesia sede Apostolica Regnum suum divisisset decrevit ne quisquam electus in Episcopum bullas Pontificias vel mandatum Apostolicum de consecratione requireret sed regium tantum diploma afferret Henry the Eâ—ghth the source of evil having separated his Kingdom from the Church and from the See Apostolic hath decreed that no Bishop elect should look for Bulls from the Pope for his consecration but only should bring the Kings Patent And here Fitz Symons stops fraudulently pretending his unskilful Reader should understand by those words that the King did give the title of Bishops without any consecration But the words following of Sanders do overthrow his purpose which run thus Sed Regium tantum diploma afferret secundum quod à tribus Episcopis cum consensu metropolitae ordinatus jubebatur lege comitiorum facta ad imitationem antiquorum canonum esse verus Episcopus nec alio modo ordinatum pro Episcopo agnosci oportere That he should bring the Kings mandat according to which the person ordained by three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitan was by Act of Parliament made in imitation of ancient Canons declared to be a true Bishop and that any person otherwise ordain'd should not be taken for a Bishop And is this to say that Henry the Eighth should give the title of Bishops to and intrude upon Churches Persons without any consecration Truly this defence of Becan by Fitz Symons is like the cause defended both guilty of fraud and disingenuity so as we may call it malae causae pejus patrocinium of a bad cause a worse defence * Keâ—lison in replic contra Doct. Sut. p. 30. Kellison is more ingenious saying thus Cranmerum verè ordinatum non nego quia ab Episcopis Catholicis munus consecrationis accepit ita vixisse eum mortuum esse verum Episcopum fateor I do not deny that Cranmer was truly ordained having received his ordination from Catholic Bishops so as I confess he lived and died a true Bishop Let now the Author of Britonomachy I mean Fitz Symons come and reconcile this piece of Romanomachy In the mean time be it concluded that their testimonies against Cranmer are like those of the false witnesses against Christ which did not agree together Mark XIV 56. And let that blessed Martyr canonized by Christ for such where he declared blessed them that suffer persecution for justice as Cranmer did for doing justice to his King and Country in maintaining their right against the tyrannical usurpations of the Court of Rome let him I say enjoy in glory the indelible character of Bishop which all the malice of his adversaries will never be able to take from him And let their calumny against the Church of England be confounded wherewith they pretend the ordination of our Clergy to have been vitiated in that of Cranmer By this it appears that all Bishops made in King Henry the Eighth his reign were true and lawful Bishops as being consecrated by three Bishops and according to the accustomed rites of the Catholic Church it being a 25. Henr. 8. c. 20. enacted then that the Consecrations should be solemnized with all due circumstance and moreover that the Consecrators should give to the consecrated all benedictions ceremonies and things requisit for the same And if thing essential were abolished or omitted certainly Sanders speaking purposely of this point would not have concealed it But he rather saies plainly b Sanders de Schism lib. 3. p. 29â— it was King Henry's will that the ceremony and solemn unction should as yet be used in Episcopal Consecration after the manner of the Church But the c â— Mariae sess 2. c. 2. Statute of Qu. Mary putteth the matter out of all doubt enacting that all such Divine service and administration of Sacraments
in the Library of Dublin University where it is ordered that the Bishop consecrating together with the Bishops assisting to help him do place the Book over the neck and the shoulders of the Bishop consecrated without saying any word one of the Chaplains of the Bishop elect kneeling behind him and holding the Book until it be given to his hands and then the Bishop consecrating and the other Bishops assisting him do touch with both their hands the head of the Bishop elect saying Accipe Spiritum Sanctum Receive the Holy Ghost And in supposition that the mode of placeing the Book is not essential to this Ordination certainly the form prescribed by the Church of England in this particular is very decent and apposite to the purpose of this action the Arch-Bishop or other Bishop consecrating delivering the Bible to the Bishop consecrated saying give heed unto reading exhortation and Doctrine with other wholesome admonitions touching his pastoral duty Now touching the essential parts of this ordination which do consist in the imposition of hands as matter and the benediction or words pronounced by the Bishop consecrating as form the Church of England is exact in observing the form prescrib'd by the foresaid Council of Carthage since it orders that all the Bishops present should lay their hands upon the Bishop elect and only the Arch-Bishop or Bishop consecrating should bless or pronounce the words of the form saying Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Châ—st Here the Roman Pontifical deviates from the foresaid form prescribed by the Council of Carthage ordering that both the Bishop consecrating and the Bishops assisting should pronounce the words of the form saying Accipe Spiritum Sanctum By this we see how exact the Church of England is in observing all the essential and necessary parts and ceremonies prescrib'd by that renowned Council of Carthage for the ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons As for other ceremonies not essential the Council of Trent it self declares that even in the administration of Sacraments whereof they will have Orders to be a part they may be altered by the Church as the condition of matters times and places may require Neither is this to be understood of the Church Universal congregated in a general Council only but also of each particular Church whence proceeded the great variety of Rites in things indifferent amongst the ancient and even modern Christians of several places and orders approved by that grave sentence of a Lib. 1. Epist 41. Gregory the Great in una fide nihil ossicit Sanctae Ecclesiae consuetudo diversa And as the Roman Church upon this account introduces new rites why may not that of England abolish others especially such as are found to be superstitious for which the b Distinct 63. Quia Canon law giveth this warrant Docemur exemplo Ezechiae frangentis serpontem aeneum quae in superstitionem vertuntur illa sine tarditate aliqua cum magna autoritate à posteris destrui posse We are taught by example of Hezechias that such things as turn to superstition may be without delay and with autority extirpated in after ages As a good husband cuts off not only rotten but superfluous branches that may suck away the sap from the main tree so any Church that is free and independent such as this of England is may cut off superstitious and superfluous rites and ceremonies which by their multiplicity may distract both the Ministers and Congregation and take their attention from the main object of their devotion And certainly who ever considers the vast number of ceremonies used now by the Roman Church and prescribed in their Pontifical will find it a task not easie for even a good capacity to comprehend and practice them all and very hard to think of elevating the mind withall to praier or meditation CHAP. VIII How far the Church of England do's agree with the Romish in matter of Ordination wherein they differ and how absur'd the pretention of Romanists is that our difference herein with them should annul our orders AS the Church of England did not think convenient to follow that of Rome in all their superfluous ceremonies especially such of them as are noxious and opposite to the sincerity of Christian discipline so it do's not grudg to go along and conform with them in what they retain of ancient integrity In many things we agree with them First that only Bishops are to give Orders Secondly that none be promoted to Orders without the title of a benefice or sufficient patrimony which is far more exactly observed in the English then in the Romish Church Thirdly that the persons to be Ordained be examined as to behaviour and ability Fourthly that certain times and daies are appointed for Ordination Fifthly that the persons to be ordained ought to appear in the Church Sixthly that they receive their Orders on their knees Seventhly that they receive the Communion All this is commonly observ'd in both Churches but more exactly and indispensibly in the English as to Orders in general Now as to particular Orders we agree in the following points as to Deacons First that the Arch-Deacon presents them to the Bishop Secondly that the Bishop enquires of the Arch-Deacon whether he knows them to be worthy of that Order Thirdly that the Bishop admonishes the Congregation that if any person has any thing to say against them he should declare it Fourthly that the Bishop instructs them in the duty they are to perform Fifthly that litanies are said and the Bishop exhorts the Congregation to pray for the Persons to be ordained that they may be fit Ministers in that sacred Order Sixthy that the Bishop gives them the Book of the Gospels and power to read them in the Church of God Seventhly that one of the Deacons newly ordained should read the Gospel Herein we agree But we differ from the Roman Church First where they add to the litanies the invocation of Saints and Angels Secondly where power is given to the Deacons to read the Gospels for the dead Thirdly that what is not expresly delivered by the Roman formulary is more clearly expressed by the English As for example the Order of Deacons in the former is given by these words Receive the Holy Ghost for power to resist the Devil and his temtations in the Name of the Lord which being too general and common to all Christians is made more proper and apposite to the function of Deacons by these other words used in the English ordinal Receive autority to exercise the work of a Deacon in the Church of God committed to thee in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Fourthly that we redâ—ce the tedious variety of vestments and ceremonies used in the Roman Church to
posterity with false records And on the other side the Romish party is found guilty by uncessant experiences of aspersing without measure or regard of truth the protestant cause and all defenders of it Whereof the story of Ordination at the Nags-head confidently revived of late by one of a great calling and confuted to his shame and confusion by the Lord Primate Bramhall may be a conspicuous evidence To which I could add not a few more of my own experience and certain knowledg They got a great Person to relate in Dublin that I was struck Dumb at making of my Declaration in the Church of Cashel and that I fell suddainly Dead soon after going in the Street A miracle I suppose is put by this time into the annual letters of Rome and Indies to terrify others from following my Example An other Person of like quality was emploied to testifie that after my foresaid Declaration made at Cashel an extraordinary concourse of People being present at it I went to a Noble-Mans House where my habitation was formerly and said Mass in it whereas I was not out of the Arch-Bishops company from that day until I came to Dublin with a considerable number of Men and Arms to guard me And after some Months constant retirement in the Colledg of Dublin without ever lying out of it or going abroad but seldom to the Castle and few houses of the chief Prelates and Nobility an Irish Papist told confidently to one of my Lord Chancellors Gentlemen who related it to me after that he saw me few daies before saying Mass at Kilkullen Bridg where I was not in some years before that time after my public Sermon of Recantation at Dublin and the Gentleman asking how that could possibly be so I being in their sight and company and never out of Dublin all that time he took a Book into his hand and swore by it that what he said was true At this very instant it hapned that I should come out of Christ-Church from Praiers in company of an other Gentleman of the Colledg and my Lord Chancellors Gentleman seeing me asked of the swearer whether he did know me if he saw me he answered yea and asking whether I was of those two that went by he said no. But being told I was one of them he confessed that he never saw me before So punctual as this are their reports of us If they were but seldom we might take them for mistakes but seeing them so frequent and continual we have too much ground for suspecting a set purpose of imposing upon us especially their most creditable Doctors teaching them that t is lawful to raise false testimonies in defence of their credit that their opposers may not be believed The authors of this godly Doctrine confessors and Preachers to Emperours and Princes you may see quoted by John Caramuel Titular Bishop of Misia in Theologia fundamentali fundamento 55. n. 1589. This being so it appears how little credit is due to their testimonies against our cause and persons I premise secondly that by sacred orders a character indelible is given to the person ordained whether Bishop Priest or Deacon that is to say a spiritual sign or ability to certain functions uncapable of being taken away by humane power or accident So t is defined in the Council of Trent sess 7. can 9. Si quis dixerit in tribus sacramentis Baptismo sc Confirmatione Ordine non imprimi characterem in anima hoc est signum quoddam spirituale indelibile unde ea iterari non possunt anathema esto If any shall say that in these three Sacraments Baptism Confirmation and Order a character is not left in the Soul viz. a spiritual and undelible sign which is the cause they may not be repeted let him be anathema It is not my present business to dispute with the Council upon what account it calls Confirmation and Order Sacraments but to note that by it is defined that sacred orders do leave a character indelible and that they ought not to be reiterated upon the same person The same Doctrine is delivered again in the 23. sess 3. can of the same Council adding that who was once a Priest can never be made a Layman And in the eighth Council of Toledo cap. 7. and in the Council of Florence under Eugenius the 4th in decre de unione Hence follows saies Bellarmine that no superiour power can hinder a Bishop from confirming and ordaining if he pleases to do it And Peter Sotus saies that doubtless no Heresie excommunication or even degradation takes away the power of Orders tho the use of them may be unlawful so as tho a Heretic excommunicated or degraded person sin in giving Orders or administring Sacraments yet the actions are valid for where such a character is saies Bellarmine God in force of a Covenant doth concur to produce a supernatural effect to wit to give an other Character even Episcopal * Bellarmine de confir cap. 12. * Peter Soto lect 5. de inst Sacer. lin 5 fol. 279. edit diling an 1560. * Ubicunque est talis character Deus ex pacto concurrit ad effectum supernaturalem producendum Bellar. de Sacramentorum effectu lib. 2. c. 19. These two premises supposed for examining the matters of fact which is the ground and foundation of this work we are to rely upon the public authentic Records of the Church of England faithfully produced by Mr. Francis Mason and truly examined at the request of Mr. Fitz Herbert who seeing a mortal wound given to the Romish calumnies against the lawful ordination of English Clergy by this narrative of Mr. Mason desired that those Records related by Mr. Mason should be shown to some learned persons of the Romish communion which was accordingly don by the most Reverend Father in God George Arch-Bishop of Canterbury who having read this challenge in Fitz. Herberts Book called to him Mr. Collington then reputed Archipresbyter Mr. Laithwait and Mr. Faircloath Jesuits and Mr. Leagume a secular Priest All these being brought before the Arch-Bishop the 12. of May 1614. in presence of the Right Reverend Bishops of London Dunelm Ely Bath and Wells Lincolne and Rochester the said Records were given to them to see feel read and turn and having considered all exactly they declared that no exception could be taken against that Book in their opinion and the Arch-Bishop desiring them to signify so much by letters to Fitz Herbert they promised to do it as Mr. Champney relates the story And the same Records are at this day and alwaies to be seen if men will not be satisfied otherwise then by eye-sight Fitz Herbert Append. n. 13. The Records produced by Mr. Mason being thus justified we will take our measures by them to cleer this point First our adversaries allow us that the Bishops ruling in England at the beginning of Henry the Eighth his Reign were lawful Bishops and legally ordained according to