of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testifie But that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in Holy Scriptures by God himself that is that they should Rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers So that there is nothing of the Spiritual much less of the Papal and Tyrannical Power given to the King by the Law Fourthly From the power given to the Queen to Authorize such persons as she shall think fit to exercise that Jurisdiction he infers they may be either Clergymen Lawyers Merchants or Coblers since the Statute requires no more but that they be born Subjects of the Realm But this is as well grounded as all the rest for though that Statute does not name the qualification of the persons yet the other Statutes that Enacted the Book of Common-Prayer and the Ordinal do fully specifie what sort of persons these must be and it is not necessary that all things be in every Statute Fifthly He in the end of this Paper pretends that the reason why this present Parliament altered the Ancient Forms was because they were null and invalid The weakness and injustice of which was before shewed so that nothing needs to be repeated And in fine it has been also proved that as both the Greek and Latin Churches have made many alterations in their Rituals so the Church of England which made these Alterations had as good an Authority to do it by as they had To which I shall only add the words of the Council of Trent concerning the power of the Church for making such Changes when they give the reason for taking away the Chalice The Church has power in the Sacraments retaining the substance of them to change or appoint such things which she shall judg more expedient both for the profit of the Receivers and for the Reverence due to the Sacraments according to the variety of things times and places Where by their own confession it is acknowledged the Church may make alterations in the Sacraments So that it is a strange confidence in them to charge on us an annulling of former Orders because of a small addition of a few explanatory words And so much for his Paper Now having sufficiently answered every thing in it I hope I may be allowed to draw a few conclusions in opposition to his And First We having true Priests and true Bishops are a true Church since we believe all that Christ and his Apostles delivered to the World Secondly We being thus a part of the Catholick Church every one that lives according to the Doctrine professed a mong us mayand shall be saved Thirdly We do truly eat the Flesh of Christ and drink his Blood having the Blessed Sacrament administred among us according to our Saviour's Institution Fourthly We have as much power to Consecrate the Holy Sacrament as any that were Ordained in the Church for near a thousand years together Fifthly We have the Ministerial power of giving Absolution and the Ministry of Reconciliation and of forgiving Sins given us by our Orders Sixthly All men may and ought to joyn with us in the profession of the Faith we believe and in the use of the Sacraments we administer which are still preserved among us according to Christ's Institution and that whosoever repents and believes the Gospel shall be Saved Seventhly All and every of the Arguments he has used are found to be weak and frivolous and to have no force in them And thus far I have complied with your desires of answering the Paper you sent me in as short and clear terms as I could But I must add that this ransacking of Records about a succession of Orders though it adds much to the lustre and beauty of the Church yet is not a thing incumbent on every body to look much into nor indeed possible for any to be satisfied about for a great many Ages all those Instruments are lost So that how Ordinations were made in the Primitive Church we cannot certainly know it is a piece of History and very hard to be perfectly known Therefore it cannot be a fit Study for any much less for one that has not much leisure The condition of Christians were very hard if private persons must certainly know how all Ministers have been Ordained since the Apostles days for if we will raise scruples in this matter it is impossible to satisfie them unless the Authentick Registers of all the ages of the Church could be shewed which is impossible for tho we were satisfied that all the Priests of this Age were duly Ordained yet if we be not as sure that all who Ordained them had Orders rightly given them and so upward till the days of the Apostles the doubt will still remain Therefore it is an unjust and unreasonable thing to raise difficulties in this matter And indeed if we go to such nice scruples with it there is one thing in the Church of Rome that gives a much juster ground these than any thing that can be pretended in ours does which is the Doctrine of the Intention of the Minister being necessary to make a Sacrament Secret Intentions are only known to God and not possible to be known by any man Therefore since they make Orders a Sacrament there remains still ground to entertain a scruple whether Orders be truly given And this cannever becleared since none can know other mens thought or intentions Therefore the pursuing nice scruples about this cannot be a thing indispensably necessary otherwise all people must be per plext with endless disquiet and doubtings But the true touchstone of a Church must be the Purity of her Doctrine and the Conformity of her Faith with that which Christ and his Apostles taught In this the Scriptures are clear and plain to every one that will read and consider them sincerely and without prejudice which that you may do and by these may be led and guided into all Truth shall be my constant prayer to God for you AN APPENDIX About the forms of Ordaining Priests and Bishops in the Latin Church BEcause the decision of all the questions that can be made by those of the Church of Rome about the validity of our Orders must be taken from the Ancient Forms of Ordination as hath been fully made out in the foregoing Papers therefore I hope it will not be unpleasant to the Reader to see what the Forms of Ordinations were in the Latin Church for many Ages which he will more clearly understand when he sees them at their full Length then he can do by any Quotations out of them Morinus has published sixteen of the most Ancient Latin Rituals he could find composed from the end of the Fifth Century at which time he judges the most
Pool to have been a righteous Arch-Bishop and so confesses Catholick Ordination and Jurisdiction to be lawful valid and good which was necessary by the Laws of England as appears from her Mandate in which she supplies any Defects they might have been under Now all the Authority the Queen had flowed from the Parliament which annexed all Jurisdiction Spiritual or Temporal over the Ecclesiastical State of this Realm to the Crown by which they made her Pope So that by the very words of the Act Matthew Parker had his Jurisdiction from the Queen and she hers from the Parliament Therefore the Protestant Priests and Bishops are only Parliamentary Priests and Bishops and are not from Christ and his Church but from their Kings Queen and Parliaments Here is such a heap of things so unjustly and weakly said that it must needs grieve all honest men to see a company of Priests going up and down the Kingdom studying to abuse weak and unlearned persons with such disingenuous Stories or Writings Which I hope will appear more fully if you consider the following particulars First It is certain that King and Parliament have the Supream Legislative Authority in this Realm and this they have from the Laws of God Nature and Society confirmed by the Gospel which commands us to be subject to the Higher Powers Therefore whatever they Enact that is within the Limits of their Jurisdiction is Law and if it be not sinful is to be obeyed if it be sinful it is to be submitted to For instance if they set up a false Religion by Law it does not make it a true Religion but adds the sanction of Law and is the civil Warrant and Security for the Subject therefore the Civil Power cannot change the nature of things to make Good Evil or Evil Good but only gives Authority and Security and in this they are restrained in things Civil as well as Spiritual for if they make unjust Laws in Civil things the case is the same with their unjust Laws about Spirituals Therefore it is to be concluded as the Fundamental Maxim of Civil Government that whatever may be done lawfully and without Sin ought to be done when the Supream Civil Authority commands it and that the Subjects ought to obey Secondly Whosoever is empowered by the King and Parliament to execute this their Supream Authority has a full Right and Title to apply that Power so given or committed to him having the execution of that Law put in his hands and if any shall without their Warrant or Authority from them usurp or assume any sort of Power or Jurisdiction within this Kingdom they are Intruders and Usurpers and the success they have in it does no more justifie that Force than a Robber's does his Title to Goods unjustly taken And although some weak Princes in hard times did yield it up to the Pope yet both the Clergy themselves and the Parliaments did often assert their own Authority which was most eminently done by King Edward the First and King Edward the Third So that the Popes power here had no just Title but was a violent Invasion for that they neither had it from Christ nor Saint Peter nor by any Decree of General Councils and that for 800 years after Christ it was never allowed them that they never had it in the Eastern Churches and that what they had in the Western Churches was only extorted by force and fraud from the Princes and States of Europe and that they had no Law for it in England are things so certain that for proof of this I shall refer my self to the Writers of their own Church De Marca Launoy and Balusius with many others And at this very day the Pope has neither more nor less power in the other Kingdoms of Europe than the Connivence of Princes or the Laws give him Therefore the Pope had no power in England but what was unjustly usurped from the King and Parliament Thirdly When the Supream Authority the King and Parliament have long endured an Encroachment upon them that gives no just Title to it nor hinders them from asserting their own Rights when they find a fit opportunity for it and neither devests them of their Authority nor the Subjects of their due Rights and Freedoms Therefore the Government of the Kingdom and all the exercise of coercive Jurisdiction being inseparably annexed to the Supream Authority it was incumbent on them to shake off all Forrein Jurisdict they should have done it sooner but could never do it too soon Fourthly The King and Parliament asserting their Authority in this Particular and condemning the Popes Usurpations they might commit the execution of it to whom they would Therefore they putting it into the Queens hands and her Successors she had a good Right to exercise it having a Law for it This then being annexed to the Imperial Crown of the Realm by the Supream Authority of King and Parliament the King hath the power of exercising it fully and only in his hands and is to be obeyed in all his Injunctions that are not sinful by the Laws of the Supream Authority in this Kingdom which comes from God and is confirmed by the Gospel Fifthly Though the power of the Ministers of the Gospel comes only from Christ yet the exercise of that Power and this or that person being put in this or that Living or Preferment and having the right to the Tythes and all the Jurisdiction of the Spiritual and Prerogative Courts being things not appointed in the Gospel the King having the Supremacy over the Ecclesiastical State does not exceed his Limits when he reserves to himself such power that no person shall be vested with the Legal Authority for those things but by his knowledg or upon his Order It is true he cannot make a man a Bishop or a Priest nor can he take away Orders for if Bishops should Ordain or Consecrate without or against his pleasure he may proceed against both the Ordainers and Ordained and can hinder their exercising any Function in his Dominions by Banishing or Imprisoning them but â—…he cannot destroy or annul their Orders So that the power of Ordination comes from Christ and has a Spiritual Effect whatever opposition the King may make but the exercise of that power must be had from him If the King commands an Heretick or a Scandalous person to be Elected or Ordained Churchmen may well demur and offer their reasons why they cannot give Obedience not for the want of Authority in the King but because the matter is Morally evil As they must also do if the King should command them to commit Theft or Murther So that all Consecrations in this Land are made by Bishops by the power that is inherent in them only the King gives orders for the execution of that their power Therefore all that the Queen did in the Case of Matthew Parker and the Kings do since was to command so many Bishops to exercise a power they
Booksellers Shop authorized and commanded in the Act of Uniformity made 1662. to be only used to St. Bartholomew ' s Day of that Year and that other Enacted to be only used from thenceforward and Printed in the Common-Prayer-Books of Cathedral Churches out of which I have found it hard to be got the Bishops as most think suppressing it for shame and leaving it only in those places where it was necessary to be made use of and not permitting it to be otherwise dispersed abroad although the Act of Uniformity which made it commands upon forfeiture of 3 l. for every Month after St. Bartholomew's Day 1662. that every Church Chappel Collegiate Church College and Hall should have a true printed Copy of it Thus I hope I have fully proved that the Church of England has no true Priest or Bishop for want of Ordination Now I shall also show that they have no Iurisdiction or Authority to Teach Preach exact Tythes inflict Censures to be Pastors or to exercise any Ecclesiastical Function whatsoever from Christ but only from the Parliament and my third Conclusion is That Protestant Ministers and Bishops have no Power to Preach c. from Christ but only from the Parliament This I prove because they have no more Power than the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury Matthew Parker had who was the Chief and from whom as it were the Conduit of all Iurisdiction was derived to the rest That he had no such Power or Iurisdiction I prove first because they that Confirmed and Consecrated him had no such Power to confer upon him of themselves to wit William Barlow late Bishop of Bath and Wells now Elect of Chichester John Scory late of Chichester now Elect of Hereford Miles Coverdale late of Exeter and John Hodgskins Bishop Suffragan who were none of them actual Bishops of any See but two Elect only and another quondam only and so had no actual Iurisdiction at all the fourth only Suffragan to Canterbury and who had no Iurisdiction but what he had from the Arshbishop of Canterbury much less Authority to give him Iurisdiction over himself and all the Bishops in the Land as the other three had no Power at all to give him much less so transcendent an one because none can give what he has not Secondly Because they had their sole Power from the Queen and she besides the incapacity of her Sex had no Power of her self but only according to the Statutes in that case provided as appears by her Letters Patent yet extant and to be seen in the Rolls in these words Elizabetha Regina c. Elizabeth Queen c. To the Reverend Father in Christ William c. Whereas the Archiepiscopal See of Canterbury being lately void by the natural death of my Lord Reginal Pool Cardinal the late and immediate Archbishop and Pastor of it at the humble Petition of the Dean and Chapter of our Cathedral and Metropolitan Church in Canterbury called Christs Church we did by our Letters Patents grant Licence to them to choose to themselves another for Archbishop and Pastor of the See aforesaid and they have chosen Matthew Parker c. We have given our Royal assent and favour to the said Election and we signifie this to you by the tenor of these presents requiring and by the fidelity and love wherein you are bound to us firmly enjoyning commanding you that you or four of you effectually Confirm the said Matthew Parker Archbishop and Pastor Elect of the said Church and Confirm the said Election and Consecrate him Archbishop and Pastor of the said Church and do all other things which in this behalf are incumbent on your Pastoral Office according to the Form of the Statutes in this case made and provided Out of which words first I note that the Queen here and all the Clergy with her acknowledge Cardinal Pool the true and rightful Archbishop of Canterbury by which they own Catholic Ordination and Iurisdiction to be valid lawful and good Secondly I note and confirm the main assertion That the Queen knowing the Common Law and ancient Laws of the Kingdom required the Authority Consent and Commission or Bull of the Pope to empower the Confirmers and Consecrators of the Archbishop of Canterbury as the only Superior of that See and withal that he would not grant and give it to make a Protestant Archbishop she by her Supreme Authority as Head of the Church of England not only authorized them that were to Confirm and Consecrate him but also Pope-like supplied all defects whether in Quality faculty or any other thing wanting and necessary in the Consecrators for that performance by the Laws of the Church or Kingdom for so it followed in the same Patent Supplying nevertheless by our Supreme Regal Authority if any thing in you or any of you or in your condition state or faculty to the performance of the Premisses is wanting of these things that by the Statutes of our Realm or the Ecclesiastical Laws in this behalf are requisite or necessary which she therefore supposed and knew well enough to be necessary and wanting for otherwise it had been in vain for her to supply them the condition of the time and necessity of things requiring it By which you see they could do neither of these Acts of Confirming or Consecrating him Archbishop of Canterbury without her Commission which was not only necessary to empower them but also to dispense with them and make their Acts valid non obstante notwithstanding the Laws of the Land That these Letters Patents Authorized them is clear out of the Instrument of his Confirmation to be seen in the Records at Lambeth in their own words following In the name of the Lord Amen We William Barlow Iohn Miles c. by the Queens Commissional Letters specially and lawfully deputed Commissioners c. by the Supreme Authority of the Queen to us in this behalf committed confirm the said Election of Matthew Parker c. supplying by the Supreme Authority of the Queen to us delegated if any thing be wanting in us or any of us or in our Condition State or Faculty to the performance of the Premisses of these things that by the Statutes of the Realm or the Ecclesiastical Laws in this behalf are requisite or necessary c. as above And whereas the Popes Commission or Bull used to be produced by authority of which all Archbishops of Canterbury were Consecrated and their Election confirmed Now in place of that says the Act of it upon Parker's Records Proferebatur Regium Mandatum pro ejus Consecratione The Queens Mandate or Commission for Consecrating him was produc'd as the Authority for what they did Lastly I prove that the Queen had her Authority from the Parliament First from the Statute 25. Henry 8. cap. 20. where the Parliament repeats out of another Act made that present Parliament That if any Elected by the King and presented to the See of Rome to be Archbishop or
Divines made those Alterations and Changes in the Ordinal and the King and the Parliament who are vested with the Supream Legislative Power added their Authority to them to make them Obligatory on the Subjects Which is all that is imported by the word Lawful in the Act of Parliament the ordinary use whereof among Lawyers is A thing according to Law The â—…th Argument against the Validity of our Priestly Orders is That we have them from those that are not Bishops which carries him to the next Conclusion that our Bishops are not Bishops But before I follow him to that I must desire you would consider with how much disingenuity this Paper is framed that would impose on the easy Reader the belief of our first Reformers not being true Bishops when the Writer cannot but know that Arch Bishop Cranmer was a Bishop as truly Consecrated and Invested as any of the Roman Church were and was confirmed by the Pope who sent him the Pall and to satisfy you that they knew him to be such they degraded him with the usuall Ceremonies before his Martyrdom So that he being the Fountain of our Clergy that succeeded him and being truly Consecrated himself all those he Ordained are by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Bishops or Priests since Orders according to their Doctrine leave an Indelible Character which can never be taken away So that by their Principles no following sentence could deprive him of the power of Ordaining It is true there were many disorderly practices of some Popes in the latter Ages in annulling Orders and re-ordaining those ordained by others for Pope Urban the second appointed those who were ordained Simoniacally to be re-ordained And Stephen the 4th in a Synod Decreed that all the Ordinations his predecessor Pope Constantine had made were null and void because he from a Layman was chosen a Pope and though he passed through the Intermedial degrees of Priest and Deacon yet he stopt not so long in them as was appointy by the Canons and upon the same account it was also judged that Photius the Learned Patriarch of Constantinople who in six days went through all the Ecclesiastical Decrees from a Layman to a Patriarch had no power of Ordaining lawfully and all the Orders he gave were annulled by Pope Nicolaus And to mention no more the Orders given by Pope Formosus were annulled by his Successor Pope Stephen the 6th upon the pretence of some Crimes and Irregularities with which he was charged these practices as they gave great Scandal so they gave occasion to much disputing about the Legality and Canonicalness of these proceedings for the Canonists and Schoolmen being generally very ignorant and prepossessed with an opinion of the Popes Infallibility studied to flatter the Court of Rome all that was possible Yet on the other hand there was so much to be said against these proceedings that as appears by Petrus Damiani Auxilius and other Writers of that time there was great perplexity and many different Opinions about them But the ignorance and passion of those Ages appears evidently in this particular for there is nothing more manifest than that the Ancient Church was of another opinion and as in the debate between Pope Stephen and Saint Cyprian about the re-baptizing of Heretiques the constant opinion and practice of the following Ages was against re-baptizing such as were baptized by those Heretiques who retained the essentials of Baptism So by the same parity of reason and upon the same Arguments they held the Ordinations of Heretiques valid that retained the essentials of Ordination In the case of Heretiques we have these Instances Faelix was consecrated Bishop of Rome by the Arians in the room of Liberius whose banishment they had procured and yet he was acknowledged a righteous Pope and his Ordinations were accounted valid In the General Council of Ephesus the Priests of the Messalian Heresie were appointed to be received into the Church and continue Priests upon renouncing their Heresie The same was also granted to Nestorians Pelagians Eutychians Monothelites and divers other Heretiques as Morinus proves at length And at this day though the Greek Church is condemned by the Roman as Heretical in the point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost yet they are received according to their Orders into their Communion when they renounce their Heresie And their great Vasques says that all the Schoolmen and Summists agree that an heretical Excommunicate or suspended Bishop has still the power of giving Orders for which he cites many Schoolmen and he likewise proves that a Bishop after degradation retains the same power And the case of Schismaticks is no less clear for to wave the Decision of the Council of Nice which seems somewhat dubious in the case of the Novatian Ordinations we find frequently in St. Austins Treatises and Conferences with the Donatists that they offered to them if they would return to the Unity of the Church to receive them according to their Orders So that they did not think Schism did take away the power of giving Orders And in the case of that long and scandalous Schism of the Papacy for fifty years together when the one sat at Rome and the other at Avignon though beside their Schism Depositions Excommunications and Censures of all sorts passed on both sides by each of those Popes against the other and it must be confessed that one of them was the Schismatick and by consequence the Censures fell justly on him Yet both their Ordinations were held valid and when the matter was setled at the Council of Constance the Ordinations on no side were annulled or renewed And though Petrus de Lunay who was called Benedict the 13th refused to submit to them and lay down his pretensions as the others did yet when they gave sentence against him there is not a word in it of annulling Orders given by him From all which it follows that neither the pretence of Heresie Schism nor Censures will according to the practice either of the Primitive Church or of the Church of Rome even in these latter Ages be of any force to invalidate our Orders Which was well seen by Morinus and though he does not write upon this head with so much ingenuity as he does on other points yet he lays this down as a Maxim That all the Ordinations of a Heretiques and Schismatiques made according the forms of the Church and where the Heretiques that gave them were also rightly Ordained according to the forms of the Church are valid as to their Substance and are not to be repeated though they be unlawful and both he that gave and he that received them sinned grievously nor is it in any case lawful for a Catholick to receive Orders from Heretiques or Schismatiques Therefore in those Ordinations if all other things be done according to the form of the Church and only the Crime of Heresie be charged on the Orders given the substance of
Concurrence or Licence should not be thought necessary in the creating of a Pope And from Hadrian the First who dyed Anno 795. till Hadrian the Third there were 89 years and from Vigilius his days who dyed Anno 555. there were 330 years So long were the Popes made upon the Emperors Mandates Nor did the Emperors part easily with this Right but after that the Otho's and the Henry's kept up their Pretension and came oft to Rome and made many Popes and though most of the Popes so made were generally reckoned Anti-Popes and Schismaticks yet some of them as Clement the Second are put in the Catalogue of the Popes by Baronius and Binnius and by the late publishers of the Councils Labbee and Cossartius There was indeed great Opposition made to this at Rome but let even their own Historians be appealed to what a Series of Monsters and not Men those Popes were how infamously they were Elected often by the Whores of Rome and how flagitious they were we refer it to Barronius himself who could not deny this for all his partiality in his great Work But in the end Pope Gregory the Seventh got the better of the Emperors in this particular And now let the ingenuity of those Men be considered who endeavour to Invalidate our Orders and call our Priests and Bishops Parliamentary Priests and Bishops because they are made upon the King's Mandate according to the Act of Parliament When it is clear that for near 500 years together their own Popes were Consecrated for the most part upon the Emperors Mandate And it is certain the Kings of England have as much power to do the same here as the Emperors had to do it at Rome The Emperors were wont also to grant the Investitures into all the Bishopricks by giving the Ring and the Staff which were the Ceremonies of the Investiture and so they both named and invested all the Bishops and Abbots This Pope Gregory the Seventh thought was no more to be suffered than their creating the Popes both being done by the same Authority Therefore he resolved to wring them out of the Emperors hands and take them into his own and it was no wonder he had a great mind to bring this about for the Bishopricks and Abbeys were then so richly endowed that it was the Conquest of almost the third part of the Empire to draw the giving of them into his own hands Therefore he first disgraced these Laical Investitures by an ill name to make them sound odiously and called all so Ordained Simoniacks as he also called the Married Clergy Nicolaitans Now every body knows how much any thing suffers by a scurvy Nick-name raised on it But he went more roundly to work and deposed the Emperor and absolved his Subjects from their obedience What bloody Wars and unnatural Rebellions of the Children against the Father followed by the Popes instigation is well enough known In the end his Son that succeeded him was forced to yield up the matter to the Pope In Spain it appears both from the 12th and 16th Councils of Toledo that the Kings there did choose the Bishops which Baronius does freely confess And Gregory of Tours through his whole History gives so many Instances of the Kings of France of the Merovinian Race choosing and naming the Bishops that it cannot be questioned all the Writers of the Gallicane Church do also assert that their Kings gave the Investitures from the days of Charles the Great But the Popes were still making inroads upon their Authority for securing which Charles the Seventh caused the Pragmatic Sanction to be made It is true afterwards Pope Leo the Tenth got Francis the First to set up the Concordate in its place against which the Assembly of the Clergy at Paris did complain and appealed to a General Council and yet by the Concordate the King retains still the power of naming the Bishops In England there are some Instances of the Saxon Kings choosing Bishops and though so little remains of the Records or Histories of that time that it is no wonder if we meet but few Yet it is clear that King William the Conqueror and both his Sons did give the Investitures to the Bishops and though upon a Contest between King Henry the First and Anselm about them the King did yield them to him yet upon Anselm's death he did re-assume that power I need not say more to shew what were the Rights of the Crown in this matter nor how oft they were asserted in Parliament nor how many Laws were made against the Incroachments and tyrannical Exactions of the Court of Rome these are now so commonly known and have been so oft printed of late that I need add nothing about them Only from all I have said I suppose it is indisputably clear That if Ordinations or Consecrations upon the Kings Mandate be invalid which this Paper drives at then all the Ordinations of the Christian Church are also annulled since for many Ages they were all made upon the Mandates of Emperors and Kings By all which you may see the great weakness of this Argument I shall to this add some Remarks on a few particulars of less weight that are insinuated in this Argument First The Writer of it would infer from the Queens calling Cardinal Pool the late and immediate Arch-Bishop and Pastor of Canterbury that we acknowledg Catholick Ordination valid lawful and good If by Valid Lawful and Good be understood that which retained the Essentials of Ordination and was according to the then Law there is no doubt to be made of it but if he mean that all the Forms and Ceremonies of their Ordination are acknowledged to be Good he will never draw that inference from these words Secondly From the Clause of the Patents that is for supplying all defects considering the necessity of the times he would infer there was somwhat wanting in them which was thereby supplyed If by that Want he means an essential Defect there was none such for they were true Bishops If he means only that some things were not according to what the Law required it is of no Force for whoever makes a Law can also dispense with it Therefore the execution of these Laws being put in the Queens hands she might well dispense with some particulars all which the Parliament did afterwards confirm and any defect in the point of Law might make them liable to the Civil powers but it can by no means be pretended that this should annul the Ordinations though illegally gone about Thirdly He would infer from the Act of Parliament that the Queen is made Pope when he knows that both by one of the Articles of the Church and another Act of Parliament it is declared otherwise express words as follows where we attribute to the Queens Majesty the chief Government by which Titles we understand the minds of some slandrous folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the Ministry either