hitherto God be thanked he hath missed the Chesnut PHIL. NOw I plainely perceiue That you are deepely ingaged in the schisme and heresie of England O England England thou wast sometimes a most famous and flourishing Church thy faith and Religion shining like a Diamond of true lustre thy zeale and deuotion burning like the flaming fire the sparkling Starres in the firmament were not so glorious but now alas since Caluinisme came in thou hast lost thy lustre thy glory is eclipsed there remaineth no sparkle of thy ancient loue no faith no Religion no Church ORTHOD. You tread in the steps of your foâ—efathers and helpe to fill vp the measure of their iniquitie For it hath bene alwayes their custome to lay odious imputations vpon our Religion that by this stratageme they might win Proselytes vnto their owne Rich. Bristow affirmed that our Religion is proued by experience to be indeed no Religion Cardinall Allen speaking of our Sacraments Seruice and Sermons calleth them things which assuredly procure damnation William Reinolds hath blazed to the world that our Religion is worse then the Turkish The bookes of Sanders and Parsons haue bene as full of slanders as a serpent is of poison To passe ouer Harding Stapleton and others the latter brood is as venemous as the former One example for all may be that lewd Libeller which exclaimeth That the Protestants haue no faith no hope no charitie no repentance no Iustification no Church no Altar no sacrifice no Priest no Religion no Christ. What shall we say to these intemperate spirits If they speake of malice then I say with Michael the Archangel The Lord rebuke them but if they speake of ignorance as I hope they do then I say with the holy Martyr S. Stephen Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Or with our blessed Sauiour Father forgiue them they wote not what they do For that faith and Religion which is agreeable to the Scripture is true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke But the faith and Religion publickly professed at this day in England is in euery Article and branch thereof agreeable to the Scripture therefore it is in euery Article and branch thereof true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke Moreouer where the Gospel is truely preached and the holy Sacraments rightly administred there is a true Christian visible Church but both these dueties are religiously performed in England what reason haue you then to say that we haue no Church PHIL. BEcause you haue no Ministerie for there cannot be a Church without Pastors and bishops as S. Cyprian teacheth who defineth the Church to be a people vnited to a Bishop And S Hierome when he saith That it is no Church which hath not Priests This doeth appeare euidently by S. Paul who declareth that Christ gaue Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints the worke of the Ministerie and the edification of the body of Christ vntill we meet all in the vnitie of faith into a perfect man and the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ. In which place as our learned Cardinall hath obserued the Apostle teacheth That there shall be Pastours in the Church till the day of Iudgement for then we shall meet the Lord in the vnitie of faith Behold saith father Hessius till the number of the Elect bee accomplished in the end of the world the Church shall alwayes haue Pastors and teachers Neither doeth Luther deny this but rather put it among the Notes of the Church And Caluin affirmeth That the Church can neuer want Pastors and teachers From this plaine approued principle thus I dispute Where there is no true Ministerie there is no true Church but among the Protestants in England there is no true Ministerie therefore among them there is no true Church CHAP. II. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministerie is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops the second of Presbyters The third of Deacons ORTHODOX WHat mislike you in our Ministerie PHIL. Not one thing or two but the whole frame of it absolutely and altogether for to deale plainly your Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay men Neither is this my priuate opinion but the generall iudgement of our learned diuines which affirme the same As for example Ri. Bristow Consider what Church that is whose Ministers are but very Lay men vnsent vncalled vnconsecrated and therefore executing their pretended Office without benefit or spirituall comfort of any man yea to the certaine and great damnation of themselues and others vnfit and vnworthy by this onely that they bee called to that fond function of any seruice in the Church of God holding therefore amongst vs when they repent and come againe no other place but the place of Lay-men in no case admitted no nor looking to minister in any Office vnlesse they take our Orders which before they had not M Harding In this your new Church Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons or any inferior Order you haue none D. Sanders The new Clergie in England is composed partly of our Apostataes partly of meerely Lay-men M. Houlet That either all or the most part of the Ministers of England be meerely Lay men and no Priests and consequently haue no authoritie in these things it is euident Cardinall Allen with our learned diuines at Rhemes All your new Euangelists which haue intruded themselues into Church and Pulpit be euery one from the highest to the lowest false prophets running and vsurping being neuer lawfully called D. Stapleton They being sent of no man nor hauing Ordination haue inuaded the Ecclesiastical Chaires D. Kellison Forasmuch as the inferior Ministers are made by those Bishops and are children of those fathers they also are no true Priests hauing neither Order nor Iurisdiction William Reinolds There is no feeder of sheepe or oxen in all Turkie which doeth not vndertake the gouernment of his flocke or droue vpon better reason and greater right order and authoritie then these your magnificent Apostles and Euangelists can shew for this their Propheticall and Apostolicall and most diuine and most high Office of gouerning soules reforming Churches teaching heauenly Trueth and declaring the minde and will of God to men And finally the Catholicke Priests in their supplication to King Iames Neither is any of your Protestant Ministers comming to our Catholicke fraternity reputed other then meerely Lay-men without Orders Thus you see how we all agree in this point Neither is this the opinion of vs English Exiles onely but other Catholicke doctors are of the same minde The Hereticks of our age saith Bellarmine haue neither Ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and Office of a Bishop more
perpetuall line of their Bishops and the lawfull succession of Pastors receiued from the Church for the honor whereof we vse to call the English Caluinists by a milder terme not hereticks but schismaticks Behold he confesseth we haue the Catholick order a perpetuall line of Bishops a lawfull succession of Pastors that deriued from the Church But withal I would haue you to know that though we receiued it froÌ„ the Church of Rome yet with a double difference For first Crâ—nmer and the rest receiued their Orders from Popish Bishops in a Popish manner that is defiled with many Popish pollutions but when it pleased God to open their eyes they pared away the pollutions and retayning onely that which was good deliuered it vnto posteritie So we succeed you in your Orders not simply but so far as they are agreeable to the Scripture for the man of â—in did â—it in the Temple of God and Antichrist had vsurped the chaire of Christ so that now in the Church of Rome good things and bad things were mingled together therefore in that which you receiued from Christ wee willinglie succeed you in that which you haue from Antichrist we renounce and disclaime you Secondly Cranmer and the rest receiued from you a shell of succession without the kernell of Doctrine For though your Church did giue men power to preach the truth yet being bewitched with Antichrist in many things it did not reueale the truth but when God by the Scriptures reuealed it vnto them they both preached it themselues and commended it to posterity Neither was this to leape out of the Church but out of the corruptions in the Church euen as the wheate kernel when it is clensed leapeth not out of the barne but out of the chaffe Moreouer though our Doctrine may seeme to you extraordinarie because it differeth from the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome yet as our calling and function so our Doctrine is the same which the spirit of God hath deliuered in holy Scripture to be ordinary in the Church till the end of the world and therefore you haue no reason to require any Miracles at our hands PHIL. These points shal be further skanned I warrant you In the meane time As Tigellius in Horace had nothing certaine and setled in all the course of his life but was alwaies distracted into contrary affections In respect of his pace some times he ran most swiftly as though hee had fled from his enemie some times hee mooued so slowly as though hee had carried the sacrifices of Iuno In respect of his traine he had many times two hundred attending him againe sometimes he had onely two And in his speech now he imitated Kings and Tetrarches and spake nothing but all bigge words an other time hee would stoope to very meane matters So that nothing was more vnlike and vnequall in the course of life then this poore wretch was to himselfe euen so your Dâ—ctors some times they creepe vpon the ground by and by they catch at the clouds and starres Now they refuse all miracles and â—nock at such at require them on a suddaine they challenge to themselues all the miracles since the beginning of the world ORTHOD. And herein they doe nothing but what may stand with reason For if you speake of our doctrine we professe and are readie to prooue that wee teach the same doctrine for substance which Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles both taught and confirmed by Miracles And in this sence all the Miracles of Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles are ours because they are so many seales and confirmations of that Doctrine which we teach But if the question bee concerning our persons then wee confesse that wee can worke no miracles wee take no such matter vpon vs neither is it necessarie because both our calling and doctrine are Ordinary PHIL. I will proue that you haue no lawfull ordinarie calling in the Church of England And first you challenge to your selues no other ministers but either Bishops or Priests or Deacons for other inferiour orders you haue none But neither your Bishops nor your Priestes nor your Deacons haue any lawfull ordinary calling For first to the ordinarie calling of a Bishop ordination or consecration is requisite by precedent Bishops hauing episcopal power of order and iurisdiction but your Bishops are descended from such progenitours as had neither of these no Episcopall power of Order because either they had no consecration at all or at least such as is not able to abide the touchstone no Episcopall iurisdiction because they are neither elected nor confirmed by our holy Father the successour of Peter to whom onely Christ gaue the Keyes and in them the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power Therefore your Bishops are no Bishops and consequently all ordinations deriued from them are mere nullities SEcondly your ordination of Priestes is most intollerable for according to holy Church this sacred action consisteth of two parts answerable to the two principal functions of Priesthood the former is garnished with these seemely ceremonies First of all the Bishop with all the Priestes present layeth his hands vpon the head of the person to be ordained then he inuesteth him in a sacred stoale so fitted and fashioned that it maketh a Crosse vpon his brest after this he anointeth his hands with holy oile and lastly he deliuereth him the Chalice with wine and the Paten with the hoast saying Accipe potestatem offerre sacrificium Deo Missasque celebraretam pro viuis quam pro defunctis in nomine domini that is take thou power to offer sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses as well for the quicke as for the dead in the name of the Lord. This is the first part of the ordination which graceth him with the principall function of Priesthood whereby he is made interpres mediator dei hominum That is an Interpreter and mediator of God and man Yea higher then a King happier then an Angell creator of his Creator This is that which maketh the holy Priesthood to be honoured because no King nor Emperor no Angel nor Archangel is able to do as we doe that is with pronouncing of a few words to make the body of Christ flesh blood and bone as it was borne of the Virgin Mary Moreouer after Masse the Bishop imposeth hands saying Accipe spirituâ—â— sanctum quorum peccata remiseris remituntur cis quorum retinueris retenta sunt that is Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes thou forgiuest they are forgiuen them and whose thou retainest they are retained This is the second part wherein hee receiueth the second function of Priesthood that is the power of absolution Such are the rites of holy Church wherein you are notoriously defectiue To passe ouer with silence your contempt of the sacred ceremonies of Crossing and anointing which are but accidentall you want the very essentiall
Priests why should you deny them to be Bishops PHIL. The Popes Commissioners Vnpriested them in Queene Maries time but would not Vnbishop them thereby acknowledging their Priestly function receiued in King Henries time but denying their Episcopall receiued in King Edwards as may appeare by the words of Doctor Brooke Bishop of Glocester the Popes subdelegate to Ridley at his degradation Wee must against our willâ—s proceed according to our Commission to disgrading taking from you the dignitie of Priesthood for we take you for no Bishop as Iohn Fox your owne historian recordeth ORTH. Was not hee and all the rest of them Consecrated by a sufficient number PHIL. Yes vndoubtedly for that law was alwaies obserued in King Edwards time as Doctor Sanders confesseth Câ—remontam autem solennem vnctionem more Ecclesiastico adhuc in consecratione illa adhiberi voluit quam postea profiâ—â—â—ns in pâ—â—â—â— Edouardus Sextus sustulit proea Caluinicas aliquot deprecationes substituit serâ—ata tamen semper priori de numero presenâ—â—um Episcoporum qui â—anuâ— ordinando impoâ—erent lege that is It was his will speaking of King Henry the eight that the ceremony and solemne vnction should as yet be vsed in Episcopall consecration after the manner of the Church which King Edward profiting from better to worse did afterward take away and insteed thereof substitute certaine Caluinicall deprecations yet the former law concerning the number of Bishops which should impose hands vpon the ordained was alwaies obserued ORTHOD If you or any other dare deny it it may bee iustified by authenticall records Out of which behold a true abstract of the consecration of those renowned Martyrs Nich Ridley Cons 5. Septemb. 1547. 1. Ed 6. by Henry Lincoln Iohn Bedford Thom. Sidon Rob. Ferrar Cons 9. Septemb. 1549. 2. Ed 6. by Thom. Canterb Henry Lincoln Nich Roff. Iohn Hooper Cons. 8. Mart. 1550. by Thom. Canterb Nich London Iohn Roff. To which let vs adde those worthy confessours Iohn Poynet Iohn Scory and Miles Couerdale Iohn Poynet Cons. 29. Iune 1550. by Thom. Canterb. Nich London Arthur Bangor Iohn Scory and Miles Couerdale Cons. 30. Aug. 1551. by Thom Canterb. Nich London Iohn Bedford NOw seeing the Consecrated were capable and the Consecrators a sufficient number why should not the Consecration bee effectuall For if Cranmer or any other lawfull Bishop by his Commission with sufficient assistants could make canonicall Bishops in the daies of K. Henry as you haue confessed what reason can you giue why the same Cranmer or the like Bishop with the like assistants should not make the like in the daies of K. Ed PHIL. Because the case was altered for in King Henries time Ordinations were made with ceremony and solemne vnction after the Ecclesiasticall manner which king Edward tooke cleane away and in place thereof appointed certaine Caluinicall deprecations as was before declared ORTHO Those which Sanders calleth Caluinicall deprecations are godly and religious prayers answerable to the Apostolicke practise For whereas the Scripture witnesseth that Matthias the Deacons and others receiued imposition of hands with prayers Salmeron the Iesuite expoundeth the places thus intelligendum est de precibus quibus à deo petebant vt efficeret illos bonos Episcopos Presbyteros Diaconos potestatemque illis ad ca munera prestaret that is It is to be vnderstood of prayers whereby they desired of God that he would make them good Bishops Priests and Deacons and would giue them abilitie to performe those offices Such prayers are vsed in the Church of England As for example in the ordering of Priests ALmighty God giuer of all things which by thy holy spirit hast appointed diuers orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold these thy seruants now called to the office of Priesthood and replenish them so with the trueth of thy doctrine and innocency of life that both by word and good example they may faithfully serue thee in this office to the glory of thy Name and profit of thy congregation through the merits of our Sauiour Iesus Christ c. And in the Consecration of Bishops ALmighty God c. Grant we beseech thee to this thy seruant such grace that hee may euermore bee ready to spread abroad the Gospell and glad tidings of reconcilement to God and to vse the authoritie giuen vnto him not to destroy but to saue not to hurt but to helpe so that hee as a wise and a faithfull seruant giuing to thy family meate in due season may at the last bee receiued into ioy c. These and the like are the praiers which Sanders traduceth Wherefore we may with comfort applie to our selues the saying of Saint Peter If wee bee railed vpon for the name of Christ blessed are wee for the spirit of glory and of God resteth vpon vs which on your part is euill spoken of but on our part is glorified Thus that which you impute to them as a blemish is perfect beautie But what else doe you mislike in their ordinations PHIL. They did not obserue the Ecclesiasticall manner ORTHOD. In the third and fourth yeere of Edward the sixth there was an act made to abolish certaine superstitious bookes and among the rest the Ordinals About the same time was made another acte for the ordering of Ecclesiastiall Ministers the effect whereof was that such forme of consecrating Bishops Priestes and Deacons as by six Prelates and sixe other learned in Gods Law should bee agreed vpon and set out vnder the great Seale of England within a time limited should lawfully bee vsed and none other In the fift and sixt of his raigne was made another acte for the explaining and perfecting of the booke of common prayer and administration of the Sacraments which booke so explained was annexed to the acte or statute with a forme or manner of making and consecrating Archbishops Bishops Priestes and Deacons Which as at this day so then was not esteemed another distinct booke from the booke of common prayer but they were both ioyntly reputed as one booke and so established by acte of Parliament In the first of Queene Mary by the repealing of this acte the booke was disanulled but it was established againe in the first of Q. Elizabeth and confirmed in the eight of her reigne so that all the Ministers of England are ordered according to that booke concerning which I would knowe wherein it transgresseth the Ecclesiasticall manner Sanders saith that King Edward tooke away the Ceremony What Ceremony If hee vnderstand the Ceremony of imposition of hands he slandereth King Edward If hee meane their blessing ofrings and Crosiers the grauitie of that sacred action may well spare them as for the solemne vnction your selues confesse it to bee accidentall Other of your Ceremonies being partly superfluous partly superstitious the wisedome of our Church hath discreetly and religiously pared away establishing
such a forme as is holy and acceptable in the sight of God But whereas you grant that the persons were capable and the consecrators Canonicall it behooueth you to discouer some essentiall defect in our forme or else you must of necessitie approoue our consecration PHIL. DOctour Kellison saith that in King Edwards time neither matter nor forme of ordination was vsed and so none were truely ordained much lesse had they commission to Preach Heresie and so could not send others to Preach whence it followeth that all the superintendents and Ministers are without calling and vocation ORTHOD. What meaneth Kellison by the matter of ordination PHIL. According to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church holy order is a Sacrament and euery Sacrament of the newe Law consisteth of things and wordes as the matter and the forme which are so certaine and determined of God that it is not lawfull to change them Now in ordination the matter is a sensible signe as for example imposition of hands which Bellarmine calleth the matter essentiall ORTHOD. Others of your owne men are of another opinion for Salmeron the Iesuite hauing proposed the question bringeth reasons for both sides but seemeth to incline to the contrary Fabius Incarnatus asketh this question how many things are of the substance of order and answereth that six But imposition of handes is none of the six Nauarrus speaking of imposition of handes saith Illa non est de substantia Sacramenti that is it is not of the substance of the Sacrament For which opinion hee alleadgeth Scotus But if imposition of handes bee the matter of ordination then Kellison is guiltie of lying and slandering when hee saith that in King Edwards dayes the matter of ordination was not vsed For Sanders himselfe though a shamelesse fellow yet confesseth that in the dayes of King Edward the former lawe concerning the number of Bishops which should impose handes vpon the ordained was alwayes obserued A point so cleare that it might bee iustified by many records but what neede wee goe to records seeing it is a plaine case that the very booke of ordination which was made and established in the dayes of King Edward commandeth imposition of hands wherefore if the essentiall matter bee imposition of hands then I must conclude out of your owne principles that in King Edwards dayes the essentiall matter was vsed PHIL. In the ordering of a Deacon there is not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the Gospels so in ordering of a Priest not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the instruments that is of the Patten and Challice and both these Ceremonies are essentiall as Bellarmine proueth Therefore why may we not say that in Episcopall Consecration not only imposition of hands but other ceremonies also belong to the essentiall matter ORTHOD. What other ceremonies I beseech you doe you meane the holy oyle wherewith the head of the consecrated is annointed with these wordes Let thy head bee annointed and consecrated with celestiall benediction or the ring which is blessed with prayer and holy water and put vpon his finger with these wordes Accipe annulum fidei signaculum Receiue the Ring the seale of faith or the Crosier deliuered in these wordes receiue the staffe of the Pastorall office If you meane these or the like and vrge them as essentiall you must giue vs leaue to reiect them because they are only human inuentions You told vs before out of Bellarmine that the matter of ordination is certaine and determined of God now where shall wee finde the determinations of God but in the booke of God we finde in holy Scripture imposition of hands and we imbrace it as Apostolicall as for your rings and Crosiers when you can demonstrate them out of the booke of God we will then accept them as the determinations of God in the meane time we cannot acknowledge them for the essentiall matter of ordination But now from the matter let vs come to the forme 4. PHI. IT is agreed vpon that the forme consisteth in the words which are vttered while the sensible signe is vsed and they are the very same whereby the spirituall power is giuen ORTHOD. I hope you will not say that these words receiue the ring or receiue the staffe concerne the essentiall forme tell vs therfore in what words the true forme coÌ„sisteth that so we may the better examine the speech of Kellison PHIL. The words may be diuers yet the sense the same and this diuersitie of words may seuerally signifie the substance of the Sacrament as for example the Easterne Church baptizeth in these words Let this seruant of Christ be baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost The Latin Church in these words I baptize thee c. Here are two formes of words but each of them containeth the true and substantiall forme of baptisme So in ordination the Easterne Bishops instructed of their ancestours conferre the orders of a Bishop Priest and Deacon Per orationem deprecatoriam By the way of prayer whereas we after the manner of the Romane Church doe conferre them Per modum imperandi in the imperatiue moode by way of command and yet the spirituall power may be conueyed by both For Pope Innocent teacheth that the Scripture mentioneth onely imposition of hands and prayer as for other things vsed in ordination he saith they were inuented by the Church otherwise it had beene sufficient if the ordainer had said onely be thou a Priest or be thou a Deacon but seeing the Church hath inuented other formes they are to be obserued ORTHOD. By what words is the Episcopall power giuen in the Church of Rome PHIL. By these words receiue the holy Ghost because they are vsed when the Bishop imposeth hands And therfore as Priests in their ordination receiue the holy Ghost that is as Bellarmin expounds it out of Chrysostome and Cyrillâ—a ghostly power consisting in forgiuing and retaining of sinnes so a Bishop in his Consecration receiueth the holy Ghost that is A ghostly power consisting in the performance of those things which are reserued properly to Bishops amongst which the power of ordination is most eminent ORTHOD. If you call these words the forme of Consecration then you must acknowledge that not only the matter but also the right forme of Consecration was vsed in the dayes of King Edward for these words were then vsed while the Bishops imposed hands as appeareth by the booke and consequently you must confesse that Ridley Hooper and Ferrar were rightly ordained Bishops and moreouer that Kellison is a notorious slanderer 5. THus much of the second rancke Now come we to the third wherein we may place such if any such be found as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of king Edward PHIL. We thinke that no man can possibly haue the order of a Bishop
order of a Deacon is not essentiall to the order of Priesthood and therefore though wee had bene ordained per saltum yet you could not deny vs the true order of Priesthood But we are not ordained per saltum Our Church hath decreed that there may be euer some time of triall of their behauiour in the office of Deacons before they be admitted to the order of Priesthood And for the Ordination after due knowledge of the vertuous conuersation and examination of the sufficiencie of the person it is performed with religious praier by a Bishop vpon a Sunday or holy day in the face of the Church in these words Take thou authority to execute the office of a Deacon c. PHIL. The office of a Deacon is to assist the Priest in saying of Masse Do your Deacons so ORTHOD. That the Deacon should assist the Priest in the administration of holy things concerning his office is graunted on both sides but for your Popish massing and sacrifising we haue proued that it is a profaning of Christs ordinance and that it is neither lawfull for you to do it nor for the Deacons to assist you wherefore seeing wee haue already iustified both our Bishops which ordaine the office or function of our Presbyters or Priests wee conclude that as our Bishops and Presbyters so our Deacons also are lawfull in the Church of England Thus haue we examined your obiections against the ministery of the Church of England and find them to be meere cauilles Neither can you proue that our calling is in any thing contrarie to the Scripture or to the practise of reuerend antiquity but your sacrifising Priesthood appeareth not onely to bee the inuention of man but also sacrilegious and abominable in the sight of God Wherefore I beseech you repent of your sinnes renounce your Antichristian practise returne to your deare Country cease to bee Philodox and become an Orthodox CHAP. XII Wherein is declared that though wee deriue our calling from such Bishops as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull and theirs vnlawfull PHIL. WEll I perceiue one thing that howsoeuer you speake against Popish Priests calling them sacrilegious and abominable yet when your owne calling is put to the trial you are glad to deriue it from such Bishops as were Popish Priests which you so disdainefully call sacrilegious and abominable ORTHOD. And I perceiue another thing that howsoeuer you exclaimed against Cranmer as a Schismaticke and burned him for an Heriticke yet when the glorious succession of your Bishops in Queene Maries time is put to the trial you are forced to deriue it from him whom you so scornefully call a Schismatike and an Hereticke But if our forefathers deriued their orders from such Bishops as were Popish Priests what inconuenience will follow PHIL. Then either confesse your calling to bee vnlawfull or accknowledge ours to be lawfull from whence you deriue it You cannot gather figges of thornes nor grapes of thistles neither is it possible for a rose to spring out of a nettle ORTHOD. But a garden of Roses may be ouergrowne with nettles For the Ministery planted by Christ was a sweete rose without any nettle and so it continued in the Church for certaine ages but when Antichrist began to reueale himselfe in the Temple of God as though hee were God the Romish Priesthood became a monstrous birth strangely compounded halfe rose halfe nettle the Church of England in the beginning of reformation did borrow from the Church of Rome the rose but left the nettle PHIL. What will you make of vs are we Ministers or lay men if we bee Ministers then so acknowledge vs. If wee be lay men then I pray you what was Cranmer who had no Cousecration but in our Church what were all the Bishops in Kings Edwards time which were Consecrated by Cranmer what was Mathew Parker Grindall Sands Horne which were all ordained Priests in our Church were they all lay men what are all the Ministers of England at this day which deriue their orders from the former are they all lay-men ORTHOD. Your Popish Priests are neither the true ministers of the Gospel nor merely lay-men For your ordination consisteth of two parts the former in these words take thou power to offer sacrifice and to celebrate masse for the quick and the dead which you account the principall function of Christian Priesthood but in truth it maketh you not the Ministers of Christ but of Antichrist the latter in these words receiue the holy ghost whose sins thou forgiuest they are forgiuen whose thou retainest they are retained in which Euangelicall words there is deliuered a ghostly ministeriall power to forgiue sinnes which according to the true meaning of Christ is performed by the ministery of reconciliation therefore whosoeuer hath receiued this power hath withall receiued the ministery of reconcilation consisting as was before declared in the due administration of the word and sacraments PHIL. If it be so then you must confesse that the Priesthood of the Church of Rome hath the ministeriall function because these words are vsed in our ordination ORTHOD. Though these words as they were spoken by Christ practised in the primitiue Church and are vsed at this day in the Church of England imply the substance of this holy function yet as you abuse them in the Church of Rome to maintaine Popish shrift the gold is couered with drosse and the sweet flower ouershadowed with noysome weeds Wherefore if we consider your Priesthood as it is a totum aggregatum consisting of sacrifising and absoluing it is vnlawfull and contrary to the Scripture If wee come to the parts thereof your massing and sacrifising is simply abominable the other part so farre as it relieth vpon the words of Christ taken in their true sense and meaning is holy and implieth a ministerial power which notwithstanding by your construction and practise is greatly depraued PHIL. I will proue our Priesthood to be lawfull by the practise of your owne Church which against you is as good as a thousand witnesses For when any of our Priests forsake the Catholike Church ioyne themselues with you you do not giue thē new orders but presently receiue thē into the bosome of your Church suffering them to execute the ministeriall function by vertue of those orders which they receiued in the Church of Rome ORTH. None can bee admitted with vs to execute the office of a minister before he subscribe to the articles of religion as may appeare by this act of Parliament That the Churches of the Queens Maiesties dominions may be serued with pastours of soūd religion be it enacted by the authority of this present Parliament that euery person vnder the degree of a Bishop which doth or shal pretend to be a Priest or Minister of Gods holy word and Sacraments by reason of any other forme of institution Consecration or ordering then the forme set foorth by Parliament in the time
OF THE CONSECRATION OF THE BISHOPS IN THE CHVRCH OF ENGLAND With their Succession Jurisdiction and other things incident to their calling AS ALSO OF THE ORDINATION of Priests and Deacons FIVE BOOKES Wherein they are cleared from the slanders and odious imputations of BELLARMINE SANDERS BRISTOW HARDING ALLEN STAPLETON PARSONS KELLISON EVDEMON BECANVS And other Romanists And iustified to containe nothing contrary to the Scriptures Councels Fathers or approued examples of Primitiue Antiquitie ¶ By FRANCIS MASON Batchelour of Diuinitie and sometimes Fellow of Merton Colledge in Oxeford Hebr. 5. 4. No man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but he that is called of God as was Aaron ¶ IMPRINTED AT LONDON by ROBERT BARKER Printer to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie Anno 1613. TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD GEORGE LORD ARCHbishop of Canterburie his Grace Primate of all England and Metropolitane And one of his Maiesties most Honourable Priuie Counsell AS in the Romane triumphes the worthy Conquerour gloriously ascending vnto the Capitoll did shew his magnificence by giuing ample gifts vnto the people euen so most reuerend father our victorious Sauiour and noble Redeemer hauing conquered Hell Death Diuell and damnation Triumphantly ascending to the Capitoll of Heauen did shew his vnspeakeable bountie in giuing admirable and incommparable gifts vnto men That is some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastours and Teachers For what hath the Church of God of so precious account as the holy ministery of the Word and Sacraments whereby CHRIST IESVS with all his blessings is reuealed and applied to the soule and conscience It may well be resembled to the Riuers of Paradise which did water and fructifie the Garden of God to the Golden pipes whereby the two Oliue branches replenished the seuen Lampes in the golden Candlesticke to the Crowne which the woman in the Reuelation cloathed with the Sunne and hauing the Moone vnder her feete had vpon her head being richly beset not with stones but with Starres Which holy function flowing from CHRIST as from the fountaine to his blessed Apostles was by thē deriued to posterity But as the water which neere the spring is cleare and chrystalline in further passages may be polluted so in processe of time by the subtiltie of Satan the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments being the ordinance of God was mingled with sacrifising and other humane inuentions Yet such was the goodnesse of God that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministeriall function notwithstanding the abominations cleauing thereunto was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods speciall prouidence in her Ordination of Priests reteined such Euangelicall words as in their true and natiue sense include a ghostly Ministeriall power to forgiue sinnes by the Ministery of Reconciliation consisting in the due administration of the Word and Sacraments So remission of sinnes is ascribed to the Minister as to Gods instrument in effecting it and Ambassadour in pronouncing it Wherefore in that they haue authority to forgiue sinnes they haue also authority to vse the meanes thereof that is the Word and Sacraments Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth although it did not reueale the truth vnto them Now when it pleased him which causeth the Light to shine out of darkenesse in the riches of his Mercie to remember his distressed Church those blessed instruments which hee first vsed in the Reformation were such as had receiued their Calling corruptly in the Church of Rome But when their eyes were opened they disclaimed the sacrifising abomination and other impurities which by the iniquitie of the time were incorporated into their calling Thus the pollution of Poperie by the Grace of God was drained and drawn away the Ministeriall function restored to the original beautie And here let vs admire and magnifie the Mercy of God who did not forget this remote Iland situate in a corner of the world but did most graciously shine vpon it with his Golden beames from the Sphere of Heauen For whereas in other Countreys the Bishops which should be starres and Angels of the Church did resist the Reformation and persecuted such as sought it It pleased God that in England among other Bishops Archbishop Cranmer the chiefest Prelate of the Kingdome was Gods chiefest instrument to restore the Gospel which afterward he sealed with his blood The euent whereof was That whereas other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessity to admit extraordinary fathers That is to receiue Ordination from Presbyters which are but inferior Ministers rather then to suffer the Fabrick of the Lord IESVS to be dissolued the Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre sacred Orders according to the ordinary and most warrantable custome of the Church of CHRIST And although in Queene Maries time fiue blessed Bishops were burned to ashes yet God reserued to himselfe a number which being then forced to take the wings of the Doue and fly beyond the Seas or to hide themselues in the clefts of the rocke when the tempest was ouerblowne the cloudes cleared and the Sunne of Righteousnes began to display himselfe in the happy raigne of Queene Elizabeth returned againe clapped their wings for ioy praised God preached the Gospel and with holy imposition of hands ordained Bishops Presbyters and Deacons in the Church of England These are the Ordinations which reprochfull Papists doe most traduce and slander as though they were no Ordinations at all but onely Nullities thence perswading their Proselytes That our present Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay-men and thereupon inferring that wee haue no Church no saluation In which point some Popish Recusants haue beene so confident that they haue professed That if we could iustifie our Calling they would come to our Churches and bee of our Religion The consideration whereof most Reuerend father gaue me occasion to made into this Controuersie being desirous next the assurance of mine owne saluation as I am a Christian to bee fully and clearely assured of my Calling as I am a Minister In prosecuting whereof I did euidently find That their chiefest Obiections are nothing but slanders confutable by Authenticall monuments of publique Record Whereupon I wished from the bottome of my heart That some learned man would haue vouchsafed for the glory of God and the good of the Church to scatter these Popish mistes and to set the Trueth in the cleare light A worke in my opinion very important First in respect of vs of the Ministerie and secondly in regard of the people committed to our charge For how chearefully and with what ioy of heart may we preach and they heare vs when the lawfulnesse of our Calling is made manifest to all men Thirdly If any haue formerly made scruple to enter our Orders out of ignorance how these odious and scandalous imputations blazed in Popish Bookes might bee truely answered and the point soundly cleared by Record it is verely to bee
be present but they not willing to take knowledge of any of these things admitted the Communion of Euagrius and exasperated the eares of the Emperour against Flauianus PHIL. I will answere with Baronius Those things which Theodoret saith concerning the Ordination of Euagrius performed during the life of Paulinus are altogether repugnant to those things which are spoken by Socrates and Sozomen affirming that the auditors of Paulinus did not attempt to substitute Euagrius into his place till after the death of Paulinus ORTHO It is a shameful course of Baronius to reiect in Histories whatsoeuer doth not fit his fancie In this present point he pretendeth repugnancie where there is none at all For Theodoret speaketh of ordination Socrates and Sozomen of installation PHIL. How proue you the other Branch that Euagrius was allowed for a lawfull Bishop ORTHO Baronius saith Pro Euagrio Syricius Theodosium interpellauit Syricius the Pope did solicite Theodosius the Emperour in the behalfe of Euagrius And Binius Pontifex c. The Pope and with him almost all the Bishops of the West being against Flauianus as before they stood for Paulinus so now they tooke part with Euagrius and animated the Emperour against Flauianus Moreouer Innocent the first granted the Communion of the Roman Church to Alexander Bishop of Alexandria vpon this condition amongst others that he should receiue those that were ordained of Euagrius the successour of Paulinus with their orders and honours as is likewise confessed by Binius Here is a plaine example of a Bishop ordained by one Bishop alone and yet allowed both by the Bishops of the West and by two Popes Hitherto the examples of three Patriarches NOw let vs consider our neighbours of France concerning whom Iohannes Maior a Doctour of Paris saith Rusticus Eleutherius qui cum beato Dionysio ad Gallias venerunt non erant Episcopi sed Galliae Episcopos solus Dionysius ordinauit Rusticus and Eleutherus which came into France with S. Denys were no Bishops but Denys alone ordained the Bishops of France FInally I will adde some testimonies of your owne writers Iohannes Maior Dico esse constitutionem humanaâ— quod Episcopus ordinetur a tribus â— I say that it is a humane constitution that a Bishop should be ordained of three Petrus de palude In Ecclesia vnus Episcopus sufficit ad alium Consecrandum nec est nisi propter solennitatem ab Ecclesia inuentum vt tres concurrant i. In the Church one Bishop is sufficient to Consecrate another and it is nothing else but for the solemnitie of the matter that the Church hath deuised that three Bishops should meete together Cardinall Turrecremata is plentifull in this point and proueth it by foureteene Arguments PHIL. Yet other Doctours as you haue heard are of another opinion THE SECOND BOOKE WHEREIN THE CONSEcrations of the Bishops of England from the first planting of Christianitie till the last yeere of Queene Mary are examined CHAP. I. Wherein they descend to the second Question whether the Consecrations of the Bishops of England be Canonicall ORTH. SVppose I should admit that three Bishops were euerlastingly and vnchangeably required to the Consecration of a new Bishop and that of such absolute necessitie that the defect should make a nullitie what would this aduantage you or disaduantage vs PHIL. Very much For then it would follow that your Bishops are no Bishops ORTHO Why so There is not a Bishop in England at this day liuing which was not Consecrated by three Our booke of Consecrating may informe you That in the Church of England two Bishops doe alwayes present the person to be Consecrated and the Archbishop or some other Bishop appointed by his Commission pronounceth the Blessing as principall Consecratour Is not this Canonicall PHIL. No because your Consecrating Bishops are not themselues Canonicall For to a Canonicall Bishop it is required That he haue three such Bishops for his Consecrators as were euery one of them Consecrated by three And againe each of them by three And so by continuall succession till we come to the Apostles For as Doct. Stapleton saith Christi Ecclesia illa sola est quae suos Pastores Episcopos perpetua successione potest ostendere i. That onely is Christs Church which can shew her Pastors and Bishops in a perpetuall succession And againe Vbicunque talis perpetuâ— successio non in eisdem locis sed in eadem legitima successiua vocatione missione Ordinatione ostendi potest ibi sit vera Christi Ecclesia Catholica id est Ecclesiae Catholicae pars membrum i. Wheresoeuer such a perpetuall succession of Pastors can be shewed not in the same places but in the same lawfull and successiue vocation mission and Ordination there is a true Catholicke Church That is A part and member of the Catholicke Church Now If you can shew any succession of Bishops in England or elsewhere you can shew it no otherwise then could the Donatists of whom Optatus thus writeth Missus est Victor c. Victor was sent of the Donatists to Rome There was a sonne without a father a seruant without a ruler a scholler without a master a successour without a predecessour Igitur quia Claudianus c. i. Therefore because Claudian seemeth to succeed to Lucian Lucian to Macrobius Macrobius to Encolpius Encolpius to Boniface Boniface to Victor If now we should aske Victor in whose place hee sate and to whom hee succeeded Hee could not shew any other Chaire or See but the See and Chaire of pestilence Thus I say That as Victor among the Donatists so Luther among the Protestants of Wittenberge so Zuinglius among the Sacramentaries of Zurich so Caluin among those of Geneua so Bernard Rotman among the Anabaptists so M. Iewell Grindall and Horne and such other false Bishops among vs haue risen and started vp suddenly without fathers without predecessours without masters in any right and lineall succession Or if they haue any let them search their Records turne their Registers produce their Euidences vnfold their Monuments of Antiquitie and witnesse to the world their Canonicall succession which they neither doe nor can doe But we can shew you Bishops of Rome euen from S. Peter to our holy father Paulus Quintus who now liueth Antonius Democharis hath described the Bishops of France or rather of all the Prouinces of the Christian world Doct. Stapleton wrote with his owne hand a Catologue found in a Monasterie containing the Bishops of all the Westerne Church Histories Registers publique Tables the very Temples and most ancient Monuments of Ecclesiastical Colledges are euident Arguments of our succession Yea we haue a Catalogue in Polydor Virgil of all the Bishops of our Nation for almost a thousand yeeres Then was the Church of England like a Golden chaine whose Sacred linckes had such a mutuall connexion and dependencie that from the blessed Apostles we
Monastery which haue onely set downe the names of such as succeeded such persons in such places but haue not described their successiue ordination if you could shew vs this also yet it would not proue the Church of Rome to be a true Catholike Church For why should wee not thinke that Constantinople and Alexandria might haue this as well as Rome Moreouer your owne former example doth confute you For Manasses the high Priest of the Temple in mount Garizim was brother to Iaddi the high Priest in Ierusalem and had the like succession from Aaron yet the Samaritans were not a true but schismaticall Church in regard whereof their Temple was called Templum transgressorum Finally suppose that into the place of a Catholike and Canonicall Bishop deceased a capable and Catholike man were canonically chosen and consecrated yet it is very possible that hee may become an heretike as for example an Arrian and may draw his flocke after him Will you now say that this flocke so poysoned with Arrianisme are the true members of your Catholike Church Yet here is locall and personall succession yea euen the golden chaine of successiue ordination Therefore that assertion of Stapletons to with that wheresoeuer this succession is there is also a true Catholike Church cannot bee defended but Bellarmine saith farre more truely It is not necessarily gathered that the Church is alwaies where there is succession For besides this outward succession there must likewise bee the inward succession of doctrine to make a true Church Irenaeus describeth those which haue true succession from the Apostles to bee such as with the succession of the Episcopall office haue receiued the certaine grace of truth And this kind of succession hee calleth the principall succession so Gregory Nazianzen hauing said that Athanasius succeeded Saint Marke in godlinesse addeth that this succession in godlinesse is properly to be accounted succession For hee that holdeth the same Doctrine is also partaker of the same throne but he that is against the Doctrine must bee reputed an aduersary euen while hee sitteth in the throne for the latter hath the name of succession but the former hath the thing it selfe and the truth Therefore you must proue your succession in doctrine otherwise you must bee holden for aduersaries euen while you sit in the throne PHIL. Wee can proue it when occasion requireth In the meane time though we cannot conclude affirmatiuely that where successiue Ordination is there is a Church yet we may conclude negatiuely that that where it is not there is no Church ORTHO Had not Pope Pelagius this ordination you speake of PHIL. He had no doubt and so succeeded the blessed Apostles ORTHOD. But he was consecrated onely by two as I haue proued So Euagrius was a lawfull Bishop approued by the Pope and Church of Rome and consequently in your owne iudgement had succession from the Apostles Yet as hath beene declared he was consecrated onely by one therefore you must confesse that one may be a lawfull Bishop and haue succession from the Apostles although he were consecrated onely by one Yet mistake me not I speake not this as though any of our English Protestant Bishops since the time of reformation were so consecrated We are readie to iustifie that their Orders are not onely sufficient in the nature of the thing but also exact according to the strictnesse of the Canon PHIL. Or if they be not then as those which could not shew their pedegree from Aaron were put from the Priest-hood so you must be content to be serued in like manner ORTHODOX SEeing you accuse vs for breaking the golden chaine behold take it in your hand examine it from end to end looke vpon euery lincke let vs see those breaches those ruptures those dissolutions you speake of and let it appeare to the world whether you or wee haue broken the Canon And because you so bragge and blaze your owne Armes let vs first see how you can proue your glorious succession PHIL. We can name the Bishops which succeeded one another in their seuerall Sees euen till the time of Schisme ORTHOD. What is this to the purpose It is one thing to make a Catalogue of Bishops succeeding one another and another thing to plot out the whole chaine of their successiue ordination This is the thing you require at our hands can you performe it if not by your owne sentence you must bee put from your Priest-hood PHIL. We can if you will grant that vnto vs which is reason should bee graunted For you must vnderstand that our English Catholicke Bishops deriue their succession from the Saxons the Saxons from the French some of both from the Romane and the Romane from all Nations therefore an infinite number of Recordes must bee searched if wee will particularly deduce the successiue ordination of any one Bishop of later times Now although the Church in all ages hath beene carefull to record the Consecrations yet it is possible that some may bee omitted by negligence of Registers it is possible that some formerly recorded may bee perished by iniury of time it is possible that some yet remayning vpon record cannot by vs bee attained because they are in the hands of our enemies But what of all this seeing the law of the Church in all ages and kingdomes required three seeing the constant practise of the Christian world was continuallie by three therefore when wee reade of any Bishop generally reputed a Bishop performing the office of a Bishop by giuing holy orders subscribing to generall Councels executing without any checke or controulement the duties belonging to a Bishoppe wee may in all reason presume that he was made canonically by three if there be neither publike fame nor probable reason nor suspition to the contrary For wanton wittes must not bee suffered vpon their owne fancy to call reuerend antiquity into question Otherwise seeing none can bee a Bishop vnlesse hee bee first a Priest a peeuish man might denie them to bee Bishops vnlesse hee did see their letters of orders Againe seeing no man can bee a Priest except hee bee baptised a froward fellow might deny their Priesthood vnlesse it could bee produced by whom and where they were baptised No Sir wee may not admit of such dealing neither must wee bee put to prooue these things but when there is nothing to the contrary wee may presume them to bee done according to the lawes of the Church and the generall practise of all Christian nations ORTHODOX You speake reason Onely this I require at your hands that the same libertie which you assume to your selues you will according to equity allow to others and seeing you chalenge all the Bishops before Cranmer for your owne may it please you to let vs see the seuerall linckes of your golden chaine from the first conuersion vntill his time and we will extend them to this present day CHAP. II. Of the first Conuersion of this
same reason of this and the former ORTHOD. There is so For as Christ is the chiefe Baptizer so hee is the chiefe Ordainer It is hee that giueth d Pastours and teachers vnto the Church therefore the personall iniquitie of the seruant cannot disanull the gracious gift of the master For who conferred Priesthood among the Iewes After the consecration of Aaron and his sonnes which was performed by the hands of Moses and was extraordinary there is no doubt but the honour of it belonged ordinarily to the high Priest But did not Aaron make a golden calfe Did not Eli see his sonnes runne into a slander and stayed them not Yet so long as they liued they did execute the Pontificall office neither were their Ordinations called in question no not the Ordinations of Annas and Caiaphas But is there the same reason here also of Hereticks and schismatiks PHIL. Card. Bell saith Quis ignorat Catholicorum Baptizatos ab Haereticis verè esse Baptizatos similiter Ordinatos verè esse Ordinatos quādo Ordinator Haereticus verè Episcopus fuerat adhuc erat saltem quantum ad Characterem i. Which of the Catholicks is ignorant that the Baptized of Hereticks are truely Baptized and those that are likewise Ordained of Hereticks are truely Ordained when the Hereticall Ordainer had bene truly a Bishop and was still at least in respect of the Character ORTHOD. S. Basill affirmeth That of all the Arch heretickes of the whole world whereof many were then very famous none euer durst reordaine the Ordained except one Eustathius Ancyrogalata whose wicked crime the Councel of Gangren declareth In the 2. Councel at Nice the Monks said According to sixe holy and generall Councels we receiue those that returne from Heresie vnlesse there be some intolerable cause Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said And all we also being instructed of our holy fathers doe so define And againe Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said What say you of Anatolius was not he President of the fourth Synode yet he was Created of that wicked Dioscorus Therefore let vs also receiue the Ordained of Hereticks as Anatolius was receiued And againe Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said Truely very many which were Presidents in the sixt Synod were created of Sergius Pyrrhus Paul and Peter teachers of the Heresie of the Monothelites Yea these likewise diuided the Constantinopolitan Sees among the Clergie From Peter their last teacher vnto the sixth Synode there came betweene no fewer then fifteene yeeres in which space were Thomas Iohn and Constantine ordained of heretikes who notwithstanding were not for this cause reiected The heresie lasted about fiftie yeeres yet the fathers in the sixth Synod condemned onely the forenamed foure whereby it is euident that heresie in their iudgement doth not take away the power of giuing orders which you confesse and must needes because one of your owne Popes was ordained by heretikes if Felix the second were a Pope PHIL. In the time of Gregory the thirteenth the Roman Martyrologe was set out at Rome where there was a great controuersie among learned men concerning Felix whether his name were to bee spunged out and Baronius with many other were of that opinion but it fell out as it were by a diuine miracle the very day before Saint Felix his day that some digging for treasure found a chest wherein was this inscription The body of Felix Pope and Martyre which condemned Constantius so Baronius yeelded to Felix as it were pleading his owne cause especially seeing Pope Gregory himselfe was of that iudgement Therefore we confesse that Felix was a lawfull Pope although his entrance is much to be misliked For according to the common sentence of the Fathers hee was intruded by the Arians and ordained of them therefore at the first while Liberius suffered persecution for the Catholicke Faith hee was a Schismaticall Anti-pope but as Binius saith from such time as hee aduanced the banner of faith by excommunicating Constantius Vrsacius Valens and other Arians and Liberius for his manifest Communion with Hereticks was plainely accounted banished from the Communion of Catholikes omnium Catholicorum iudicio quanquam antea schismaticus fuisset legitimus Ecclesiae Catholicae Pontifex haebericaepit that is Although before he had beene a schismatick yet then he began to bee accounted the lawfull Bishop of the Catholick Church by the iudgement of all Catholickes ORTHOD. Then you confesse that Felix which was ordained of Arians was notwithstanding a lawfull Bishop yea and a lawfull Pope by the iudgement of all Catholicks for if you should say otherwise what would become of those fiue Deacons 21. Priests 19. Bishops which hee ordained If heretikes haue no power to ordaine then Felix was no Bishop and consequently according to your owne positions al ordinations deriued from him were mere nullities PHIL. You heard before out of the councels of Florence and Trent that the Character is indeleble whereupon it followeth that neither schisme nor heresie nor any censure of the Church can take it away wherefore seeing the Episcopall character whether it be a diuerse from the Presbyterall or the same more extended is an absolute perfect and independent power of conferring the Sacraments of Confirmation and Order therefore a Bishop may not onely without any further dispensation confirme and order but hee cannot bee hindered by any superiour power but that hee may trulie confer these Sacraments if it please himselfe as our learned Cardinall affirmeth which is also the common opinion of the schoolemen Heretiks saith Dominicus a Soto whosoeuer they be euen such as are cut off although they were not formerly promoted lawfully by the Church but by heretikes doe verily conferre the Sacrament of order although they bee forbidden by the Church and therefore while they doe conferre it they sinne mortally Gabriel Biel although a Bishop being an heretike and Apostata degraded cut off or publikely excommunicated bee depriued of all iurisdiction by the law it selfe neither can he absolue any man from his sinnes yet hee may actually ordaine any man capable of the order being willing yea though he be not subiect to his iurisdiction notwithstanding that the Church doth iustly prohibit him And Capreolus Bishops although they bee heretikes schismatickes and degraded may confer orders This is agreeable to the Decree of Pope Anastasius concerning those whom Acasius ordained after his condemnation to wit That no harme at al should befal them By al this it appeareth that the orders thus ministred are effectuall ORTHO But doth not degradation depriue a man of the degree PHIL. Non est dubitandum saith Petrus a Soto per haeresim vel excommunicationem siue etiam degradationem non amittipotestatem quae sacramento collata est siue characterem vt dicunt baptismi confirmationis ordinis quanquam vsus illius amittatur that is It is not to bee doubted that the power
declaring that euery thing requisite and materiall was done as precisely in her Maiesties time as euer before Thirdly they confirme againe the booke of Common prayer with the forme thereunto annexed enacting that all persons that then had beene or afterwards should be made ordered or Consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priests and Ministers of Gods holy word and Sacraments or Deacons after the forme and order herein prescribed were by authoritie thereof declared and enacted to be Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers and Deacons rightly made ordered and Consecrated any Statute Law Canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding Whereby it is euident that the Parliament did not make them Bishops but being in very deed true Bishops by lawfull Consecration that honourable court did declare and enact them so to be But what say the Papists to all this When they cannot infringe their Consecration for a poore reuenge they call our Religion Parliament Religion and our Bishops Parliament Bishops PHIL. If you will needs haue your matters seeme to depend of your Parliament let vs not be blamed if we call it Parliament Relgion Parliament Gospel Parliament faith ORTHOD. It is a marueile that you said not a Parliament God and a Parliament Christ. Might not we say as well that in Q. Maries time you had a Parliament Masse and a Parliament Pope Was it lawfull for Q. Mary with her Parliament to subiect the kingdome to the Pope and his Canons and was it not lawfull for Q. Elizabeth with her Parliament to submit themselues to Christ and his Gospel Indeed you haue a spite against the Prince and Parliament because they expelled the Pope aduanced true Religion and defended the Preachers and Ministers thereof neither against the persons onely but against the very place wherein the Banner of Iesus Christ was so gloriously displayed A French Historian speaking of the bloody Massacre saith Wise men which were not addicted to the Protestants part seeking all maner of excuse for that fact did notwithstanding thinke that in all Antiquitie there could not be found an example of like crueltie But the English Powder-plot doeth so farre exceed the French Massacre that there is no degree of comparison this cannot be patternd or paraleld It was of such a transcendencie that all the diuels may seeme to haue holden a blacke conuocation in Hell and there to haue concluded such a sulphurious and Acheronticall deuice as was neuer heard of since the world began But the Lord of Heauen did so strangely reueale it as though the birds of the aire had caried the voyce and that which hath wings had declared the matter As for the chiefe instruments thereof the Rauens of the valleys did plucke out their eyes and the yong Eagles did eate them Wherefore if you will not beleeue vs disputing for Religion yet beleeue God himselfe with his owne right hand and with his holy arme defending our Prince and State our Church and Ministerie and that very House wherein the Standard of the Gospel was aduanced maugre the malice of all the diuels in hell All glory be to thee O Lord for this thy vnspeakeable mercie still protect and defend them that Israel may be glad and thy seruant Iacob reioyce PHIL. IF you can iustifie your Bishops produce their Consecrations make it appeare to the world when by whom and how they were Consecrated beginning with the first which was made in the Queenes time That is with Matthew Parker who did beare the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie ORTHOD. You learned this disdainefull speach of Nicholas Sanders who dedicated his rocke of the Church to that reuerend Archbishop in this vnreuerend maner To the right worshipfull Master Doct. Parker bearing the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie Wherein to let passe that right worshipfull and right scornefull title he doeth not stile him Archbishop but bearing the name of Archbishop As though our Bishops were Bishops onely in name But what can you say against him PHIL. I would faine learne of you the place where he was Consecrated I haue read that Maximus was consecrated in the house of a minstrell and it seemeth that Matthew Parker was Consecrated in a Tauerne For doct Kellison saith That hee heard it credibly reported that some of your new Superintendents were made Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheape A fit Church for such a Consecration and it is most likely that Matthew Parker was one of them because he was the first ORTHOD. This of the Nagge 's head doeth call to my remembrance Pope Iohn the 12. who ordained a Deacon in a stable amongst his horses A fit sanctuary for such a Saint Neither is it a tale or fable as yours is but a story Chronicled by Luitprandus who is and euer will be esteemed a learned Historian notwithstanding that Baronius goeth about to discredit him as hee doeth all other writers that make against him And Luitprandus groundeth himselfe not vpon flying reports as Kellison and you doe but vpon two witnesses the one a Bishop the other a Cardinall Iohn bishop of Narnium in Italy and Iohn Cardinall Deacon who did testifie in a Romane Councell in the presence of Otho the Emperour Se vidisse illum Diaconum ordinasse in equorum stabulo i. That they themselues did see him with their owne eyes ordaine a Deacon in a stable of horses But whereas you say that Kellison heard this credibly reported I must tell you that you are very forward in spreading false reports against the Protestants It is credibly reported at Rome that wee in England haue wrapped some Papists in beares skinnes and baited them with dogges That wee inclose dormise in basons and lay them to the sides of the Catholickes to eate out their bowels That wee binde them to mangers and feed them with hay like horses These are shining lies fit Carbuncles for the Popes Miter Neither doe they report them onely but Print them and paint them and publish them with the Popes priuiledge They need a priuiledge which tell such glorious lies This of the Nagge 's head though it goe currant at Rome and bee blazed for a trueth through the world by men of your rancke is cousine germaine to the former as appeareth by the Records of the Archbishopricke which declare that he was consecrated in Capella infra manerium suum de Lambhith That is in the Chappell within his manor of Lambhith Thus you see the falsehood of this fable which was deuised to no other purpose but onely to make our Ministery and Religion seeme odious to all men Is not this strange dealing for men that make such great ostentation of sinceritie and grauitie But for my owne part I doe not maruaile at it your proceedings are but answerable to your doctrines For you teach That an officious lye is but a veniall sin And againe That the Church of Rome is the holy mother Church Therefore to whom should kinde offices rather be performed
meanes of the brasen serpent yet the vertue of healing proceeded not from the brasen serpent but immediatly from himselfe For â—e that turned towards it was not healed by the thing that he saw but by thee O Sautour of all Euen so though God in giuing this Spirituall power vse the ministerie of man yet the power it selfe is immediatly from God For whereas S. Paul among the gifts of God to the Church nameth gouernments And S. Peter saith If any man minister let him doe it as of the abilitie which God ministreth Your Iesuit Salmeron though striuing to deriue it from the Pope as it is actuall yet considering it in it selfe being conuicted with the euidence of trueth saith thus Ministrationes quoque Domino ascribuntur sicut gubernationes à Paulo quia quicquid est supernaturale in ministerio gubernatione Deus per se fecit id autem ad quod creatura potest concurrere sinit eam agere etsi ipse praecipuè id operetur Gratia igitur gratis data administrandi gubernandi à Deo est immediatè i. Ministrations are ascribed to the Lord by S. Paul as also gouernments because whatsoeuer is supernaturall in ministerâ—â— and gouernment God hath wrought that by himselfe but he suffereth the creature to worke that vnto which it can concurre although himselfe in that bee the 〈…〉 pall agent Therefore the freely giuen grace of administring and gouerning is 〈…〉 tly from God And againe â— Si sâ—matur pro gratia gratis data gubernandi vel administrandi iurisdictionem vt sumunt Petrus Paulus procul dubio donumest quod ab homine procedere non potest i. If Iurisdiction or gouernment be taken for the freely giuen grace of gouerning or administring Iurisdiction as Peter and Paul take it without doubt it is a gift which cannot proceed from man Wherefore when S. Paul willeth Timothie To stirre vp the grace which is giuen him it is to be expounded not onely of the grace of Order but of all Episcopall grace And S. Ambrose when hee saith God giueth the grace doeth vndoubtedly meane all Episcopall grace For who can giue any grace to the Pastours of the Church but onely the God of all grace which giueth Pastours to the Church and appointeth them to be rulers ouer his family To Salmeron we may adde Henr. Gandauensis affirming that Bishops haue their power both of Order and Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ As also Gottifredus de Fontibus and Iohannes de Poliaco all alleadged by Salmeron Whose opinions he controuleth without reason seeing before in effect he affirmed the same I will conclude this point with the Vniuersitie of Paris which ratified this position with a Decree and caused one Iohannes Sarazim a Frier to recant the contrary PHIL. If Iurisdiction be giuen in Consecration then it should be equall in all Bishops ORTHOD. The power it selfe is equall in all though the determination of the power which is from the Church be vnequall When a Bishop is translated to another See hee doeth not lose his former habituall power no more then the Sunne doeth lose his light when hee passeth to the other Hemisphere When a Bishop of a smaller Circuit is aduanced to a greater he getteth not a greater power but a larger subiect whereupon he may exercise his power And when a Bishop is deposed hee is not absolutely depriued of his power but the matter is taken away vpon which his power should worke This is confessed by Vargas to be the opinion of Alphonsus and others If it happen that a Bishop for any crime bee depriued of his Bishopricke then he shall bee depriued of his subiects vpon whom hee ought to exercise his power of Iurisdiction but hee shall not be depriued of the power of Iurisdiction it selfe receiued in his Consecration CHAP. II. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all Spirituall Iurisdiction PHIL. THe giuing of Iurisdiction must onely proceed from him that is the fountaine of all Spirituall Iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane or Bishop vnder him that hath authoritie and commission from him For the Church of God is like vnto a Citie which hath one onely fountaine from whence there issue diuers great floods which are branched out againe into sundry goodly streames whence the water is conueyed by pipes and conduits to serue the whole Citie This fountaine is the Bishop of Rome the great floods are the Patriarches Archbishops and Metropolitanes the streames are the rest of the Bishops the pipes and conduits are all those which deriue their Iurisdiction from the Bishops Now the Church of England was sometimes flourishing like the Paradice of God but since it was cut off from the liuely spring alas for woe it is like to a barren and forsaken wildernesse ORTHOD. The Church of England God be thanked is in such a case that all her friends haue cause to reioyce and all her enemies to gnash their teeth And as for the fountaine you speake of it is not a well of liuing water made by the King of heauen but a puddle or pit of poyson digged by the Prince of darkenesse The Bishop of Rome wee graunt hath of ancient time beene reuerently regarded and had though not a generall iurisdiction yet a large extent yea hee had precedencie of dignity and place before all other Bishops but this was onely by law humane because he was the Bishop of the Imperiall Citie but now hee is like a furious floud which ouerfloweth the bankes he will be no more confined with bounds and limits hee chalengeth a generallity of iurisdiction ouer the Christian world and that by law diuine PHIL. I Will proue That he is the fountaine of al spirituall iurisdiction by law diuine for Saint Peter was so and the Pope succeeded him in this right ORTHOD. There is more required to inferre this conclusion then al the Seminaries Iesuites in the world are able to performe but first how proue you that Peter was inuested in this right by law diuine PHIL. The Scripture is full of testimonies declaring both his lawfull authority and his due execution thereof his authority might appeare by many arguments but I will make choice of two which proue the point in question most directly the promise of the keyes the coÌ„mission of feeding the sheep To begin with the first Christ said to Peter I wil giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen Christ gaue him not one keye only but 2. the key of knowledge the key of power by the key of knowledge he was able to open all Scriptures controuersies of religion The key of power is of order or of iurisdiction by the key of order he was able to ordaine Bishops and Pastours of the Church and againe to lock them out of the ministery by deposing degrading as occasion required by the key of iurisdiction hee might open and shut
yet saide is nothing because to the very being of a Bishop the order of Priesthood is essentially required which is not to be found in the Church of England For there are two principall functions of Priesthood the first is the power of Sacrificing the second of Absolution but you haue neither as I will prooue in order to beginne with the first it is giuen in holy Church by these wordes Accipe potestatem offerre sacrificium deo missasque celebrare tam pro viuis quam pro defunctis in nomine domini that is Receiue power to offer Sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masse as well for the quicke as for the dead in the name of the Lord. But you vse neither these wordes nor any aequiualent in your ordination of Priestes as may appeare by the Booke therefore you want the principall function of Priesthood ORTHOD. If you meane no more by Priest then the holy Ghost doeth by Presbyter that is a Minister of the new Testament then we professe and are ready to prooue that we are Priestes as we are called in the booke of common prayers and the forme of ordering because we receiue in our ordination authoritie to Preach the word of God and to minister his holy Sacraments Secondly by Priestes you meane Sacrificing Priestes and would expound your selues of spirituall Sacrifices then as this name belongeth to all Christians so it may bee applied by an excellencie to the Ministers of the Gospell Thirdly although in this name you haue a relation to bodily Sacrifices yet euen so we may bee called Priestes by way of allusion For as Deacons are not of the tribe of Leui yet the ancient fathers doe coÌ„monly call them Leuites alluding to their office because they come in place of Leuites so the ministers of the new Testament may be called Sacrificers because they suceed the sons of Aaron and come in place of Leuites so the Ministers of the new Testament may be called sacrificers because they succeed the sonnes of Aaron and come in place of sacrificers Fourthly for as much as we haue authoritie to minister the Sacraments and consequently the Eucharist which is a representation of the sacrifice of Christ therefore we may be said to offer Christ in a mystery and to sacrifice him by way of commemoration Is not this sufficient if it be not what other sacrificing is required PHIL. THere is required sacrificing properly so called which is an externall oblation made onely to God by a lawfull Minister wherby some sensible and permanent thing is Consecrated and changed with Mysticall rite for the acknowledgement of humane infirmitie and for the profession of the Diuine Maiestie ORTHOD. What is the sensible and permanent thing you offer PHIL. It is the very body and blood of Christ. ORTHOD. The Church of England teacheth thus according to the Scripture The offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption propitiation and satisfaction for all the sinnes of the whole world both originall and actuall and there is no other satisfaction for sinne but that alone and consequently it condemneth your masses for the quicke and the dead as blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits PHIL. But the Councell of Trent teacheth that in the masse there is offered to God a true and proper Sacrifice propitiatory for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead and curseth all those that thinke otherwise ORTHOD. HOw doe you prooue that the Sacrificing Priesthood which offereth as you say the very body and blood of Christ is the true Ministery of the Gospel PHIL. That Ministery which was typed in the old Testament foretold by the Prophets instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles is the true Ministery of the Gospel But our sacrificing Priesthood which offereth the very body and blood of Christ is such therefore it is the true Ministery of the Gospel The proposition of it self is plaine euident the parts of the assumption shall be prooued in order ORTHOD. Then first let vs heare where your Priesthood was typed CHAP. II. Of their argument drawne from Melchisedec PHIL. THe Sacrifice of Melchisedec was a type of that which Christ offered at his last Supper with his owne hands shal offer by the hands of the Priests vntil the end of the world For the vnderstanding wherof we must consider that Melchisedec was a type of Christ in a more excellent maner then Aaron insomuch that Christ is called a Priest after the order of Melchisedec and not after the order of Aaron For betweene these two Priesthoods there are two differences the first consisteth in the externall forme of the Sacrifice For the Sacrifices of Aaron were bloodie and represented the death of Christ vnder the forme of liuing things that were sâ—aine The sacrifice of Melchisedec was vnbloody and did figure the body and blood of Christ vnder the forme of Bread and Wine From which property of the order of Melchisedec we may draw this argument If Melchisedec did offer an vnbloody sacrifice vnder the forme of Bread and Wine then seeing Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedec he also must offer an vnbloody Sacrifice vnder the formes and shapes of Bread and Wine but the Sacrifice of the Crosse was bloody therefore he offered another Sacrifice besides the Sacrifice of the Crosse and what can this be but the Sacrifice of the Supper But he commaded his Apostles and in them vs to doe as hee did saying doe this in remembrance of me therfore Christ commanded that we should sacrifice him in an vnbloody manner in the formes of Bread and Wine consequently the Ministers of the Gospel are Sacrificers by Christs owne institution ORTH. We graunt first that Melchisedec was a type of Christ because the Scripture saith he was likened to the sonne of God Secondly that Christ was a Priest not after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchisedec because God hath not only said it but sworne it The Lord hath sworne and will not repent thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedec but wee deny that Melchisedec did offer any Bread and Wine for a Sacrifice to God wee deny that Christ euer offered any such or euer gaue any such commission to his Apostles Therefore this is so farre from prouing your pretended Priesthood that it will quite ouerthrowe it PHIL. THat Melchisedec Sacrificed Bread and Wine is plaine in Genesis ORTHOD. In Genesis Why there is no such thing the wordes are these And Melchisedec king of Salem brought foorth Bread and Wine and he was a Priest of the most high God Where your owne vulgar translation readeth proferens not offerens hee brought forth Bread and Wine and not hee offered it PHIL. True he brought it forth but the end why he brought it foorth was to Sacrifice vnto God ORTHOD. That is more then you can gather out of the text Iosephus sayth
matter of the Sacrament in all respects as wee doe and he being a part of the Nicen councell and one that helped to make the Canons and subscribed vnto them must needs be holden for a sufficient and faithfull interpreter of his owne and their meaning So in him wee haue 318. Bishops the most reuerent sages and Senate of the Christian world after the Apostles daies al denying your sacrifice maintayning a remembrance in stead of a sacrifice Wherefore when they describe a Priest by offering of sacrifice they doe not meane a sacrifice in substance but in signification and representation Neither can it bee proued that euer any of the ancient Fathers thought otherwise nor that any one of them was a Masse Priest as may further appeare by our learned diuines which haue handled this point to whom I referre you Wherefore seeing your sacrifising neither can be proued by the scriptures nor by the Fathers rightly vnderstood but is contrary to both we detest it to the bottome of hell as a most blasphemous abhomination derogating from the soueraigne and all sufficient sacrifice offered once for all by that one Priest which with one oblation entred the holy place and hath purchased an eternall redemption for vs. Hitherto of the first function of Popish Priesthood Now let vs come to the second CHAP. IX Of the second question which concerneth the power of absolution PHIL. THe second function of Priest-hood is the power of absolution which God hath giuen neither to King nor Emperour to Angell nor Archangell but onely to the Priest and in this also you are defectiue in the Church of England ORT. What absolution doe you meane and in what manner is it giuen PHIL. There is an absolution in the Consistory and an absolution in the Court of Conscience the former is from excommunication and other spirituall censures the latter which we meane is from sinne and is giuen in Priestly ordination euen by the words of Christ himselfe For the Bishop imposeth hands saying whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen and whose sinnes you retaine they are retained c. ORTHOD. The very same words are vsed in the Church of England as may appeare by the booke The Bishop with the Priests present shall lay there hands seuerally vpon the head of euery one that receiueth Orders The receiuers humbly kneeling vpon their knees and the Bishop saying Receiue the holy ghost whose sinnes thou dost forgiue they are forgiuen and whose sinnes thou dost retaine they are retained and therefore if the power of absolution bee giuen by these words then it is giuen and receiued in the Church of England PHIL. Not so for though you haue the words yet you haue not the true sence of the words and therefore neither doe your Bishops giue it nor you receiue it ORTHOD. Then let vs without all partiallity examine the true sence meaning of them For as much therefore as our Sauiour did represent a reall donation both by breathing and saying receiue without all controuersie somewhat was really giuen actually received but what was that vndoubtedly the holy Ghost for he said receiue the holy Ghost But what is meant by the holy Ghost It cannot be denied that they receiued the presence of the spirit for their direction support and assistance and the Lord hath promised the same spirit to all faithfull ministers when he said Behold I am with you that is with you and your successors vntill the end of the world To this purpose it is well spoken of Leo Qui mihioneris est author ipse fiet administrationis adiutor that is He that is author of my burthen will be the helper in my administration and againe Dabit virtutem qui contulit dignitatem i. Hee that gaue me the dignity will giue me strength to performe it But seeing it is euident that in the booke of God the holy Ghost doth many times signifie the gifts of the holy Ghost to point out the fountaine and welspring of those heauenly graces the interpretation of Saint Ierome may seeme most consonant to reason who by the holy Ghost vnderstandeth in this place a grace of the holy Ghost in these words acceperunt spiritus sancti gratiam that is they receiued a grace of the holy Ghost It remaineth therefore that we consider what grace that was It was not the grace of adoption or regeneration because they had receiued that already as appeared by the fruits thereof We beleeue know that thou art the Christ the son of the liuing God nor the grace of miracles because they receiued not that till afterward Behold I wil send the promise of my Father vpon you but tarry in the city of Ierusalem vntil you be induced with power from aboue which promise was fulfilled in the fiery tongues it seemeth therefore to be some ordinary grace which should continue with them their successors in the Church for euer as is confessed on both sides what can this be but that which Christ himself doth mētion in the words following as it were of set purpose to take away al ambiguous construction whose sins you remit they are remitted c. And this is expressed likewise by S. Ierome who calleth it gratiam qua peccata remitterent i. a grace whereby they might forgiue sins This is also the iudgement of S. Chrysostome saying a man should not erre if hee should say that they then receiued a certaine power and spirituall grace not that they should raise againe the dead or worke miracles but that they might forgiue sinnes To these we may ioyne Saint Ambrose who saith Hee that hath receiued the holy Ghost hath receiued power both to loose sinne and to bind it and a little after Munus spiritus sancti est officium Sacerdotis that is the guift of the holy Ghost is the Priests office Wherefore by holy Ghost is meant a ghostly ministeriall grace or power to forgiue sinnes PHIL. Thus far we agree as may appeare by our learned writers Cardinal Bellarmine Palacius and others but all the question is in what manner the Minister forgiueth sinnes ORTHOD. Saint Paul saith All things are of God which hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe by Iesus Christ and hath giuen vnto vs the Ministery of reconciliation For God was in Christ and reconciled the world vnto himselfe not imputing their sinnes vnto them and hath committed vnto vs the word of reconciliation Whereby it appeareth that God reconcileth the world properlie by not imputing their sinnes the Apostles and other Ministers of the Gospell ministerially as Embassadours of Christ to whom is committed the word and ministery of reconciliation For what other thing is our forgiuenesse of sinnes then a reconciling of men to God but we reconcile men to God by preaching and declaring the word of the Gospell therefore by preaching and declaring the word of the Gospell we forgiue sinnes PHIL. There is
bibl â— l 6. 〈◊〉 71. Petrus * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. s. q. 8 9. 〈◊〉 1. arg â—coti d Alex. de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 part 4. q. 21. mâ—â—b â— â— 339 e 〈…〉 â— disp 16. â— 2. a Bonâ—â—â— de vita B. Franc. 5. b Bell. de paeâ—it l. 3 c. 12. idem auctor c Fetus in Mat. c. 9. Editio Mogunt 1559. 6. a Bell. de paenit l. 3. c. 2. b Ibid. primum igitur * Mat. 16. 19. c Esai 59. 2. d Amb. de spiâ— sanct l. 3. c. 19. a Luke 24. 32. b Bell. quo supra c Bell. Ibidem d Fab. Incarâ— serut sacerdot pag. 76. e 1. Tim. 4. 16. f Ezech. 18. 27. g Bell. de paenit lib. 3. c. 2. h Ibidem a Ibidem b Greg. Hom. 26. in Euang. c Ibidem d Leuit. 14. 11. e Bell ibidem Quaâ—tâ— f Ibidem Quinto a Esay 44. 22. b Bellarm. Ibide◠〈◊〉 6 c Act 10. 4. d Bell. Ibidem pergit e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ibidem pergit Pater b Ibidem pergit Chrys. c Ibidem Addit vâ—timâ— a Bel. â—bid Sed aâ—â—liamus b Naz. In oraâ—â—â—â— ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 percâ—lsâ—s 7 c Bel. Ibidem Sanct Ambr. d Ambr. l. 1. 〈◊〉 pen. cap. 2. 8 e Ambr. â— 7. f Cyp. 〈◊〉 52. g Baron anno 254. n. 107. a Bel. ibid. S. Hieron b Ep. ad Heliodorum 9 c August de Câ—uit Dei lib. 20. c. 9. d Bel abidem S. Innoâ—ent e Innoc. 1 â—n Epist. 1. ad Decentium c. 7. 10 f Bel. ibid. S. Gregory g Hom. 26. in Euangelia 11 a Bellarâ—inus Ibâ—dem Sepâ—iâ—o 12. b August Ep. 180. ad Hoâ—raâ—um * Ioh. 3. 15. c Bell. de sacr bapt cap. 6. At sint d Eze. 18. a Amb. in oratione de obitâ— Valentiniani b Aug. l. 4. de Bap. c. 22. c Bern. Epistola 77. d Cap. Apostolicam de presb non Bapt. e Sessione 6. c. 4. f Lorin Ies. Comm. in act 2. g Aug. Quest. super Leu. l. 3. que 84. h Bell. ibidem Deinde i Aug. l. 1. de adulter Coniug â—â—lt k Leo in Epistola ad Theoderum l Can. 76. m Can. 12. n Ex bell ibidem Yertio a Bellar. ibid. Quarto b Iob 33. 23. a Conc. Trid. sess 4. Can. 7. b Confess lib. 10. c. 3. c Chrysost. in Psalm 50. Hom. 2. d Poena illa quae luenda restat post culpae remissionem est illa ipsa poena sensus quam in gâ—henna pati debuisset peccator remota solum aetern tate Bell de poenit l. 4. c. 1. Quod si e Bellar. de indulg l. 1. c. 2. propos 4. f Bellar. de sacram Ord. c. 5. Presbyteratus non includit essentialiter Diaconatum g Constitutions and Canons Ecclâ—s Anno 1603. Canon 32. a The forme of making Bishops c. in the preface b In the ordering of Deacons c Ex Bell. de cleric c 13. a Exempla habemus in Anglia quam pluriâ—â— vt Parkeri Grindalli Sandesij Horni aliorum qui secundum Catholicum riâ—um olim Presbyteri ordinati essent Brist Antih motiu â— 2. pag. 266. b Vrged by Brist Mot. 21. and by Christ. a sacro Boâ—co de inuest Christi Eccles. â— â— a 13. Elis. â— 12. b Artic. 31. 2. c Greg. princ Anâ— f. 66. B. d Artic. Smalcald part 3. Artic. 10. a Epist. 37 3. b Ibidem 3 c Pontif. in ord ad reconciâ—iand Apost Schis vel Haereticum p. 649. a Actâ— anâ— Monumenâ—â— vol. 2. p. 1295. b Bell. de Sacram ord l. 1. c. 9. ad tertiam respondeo a Can. 19. b Aug. de Baptismo Contra Dâ—natistas l. 4. cap. 15. c Ephes. 4. 11. 12. d See Bishop Iewel def par 2. c. 7. diâ— 1. e In 4. sent sâ—e Tortura Torti p. 62. 2. Sam. 23. 12. a A Preface to a Booke called A discussion numb 135. b Christ. a Sacrabosco de inuest Christi Eccles. c. 3. He should say c. 4 a Sir Thomas Moore b Sacroâ—â—â—â— quo supra cap. 4. c 〈◊〉 â— Reply pag. 31. * See aboue pag. 93. d See pag. 134. e See pag. 135. a Acts 20. 28 * See p. 137. b Math. 5. 16. c Pag. 134. d Esay 57. 4. e Eccles. 7. 8. f Psal. 1. 1. g Pro. 12. 22.
immodestly then euer did any other heretickes And other reuerend diuines vse almost the same words Gregory de Valentia saith Certainely it is apparent that in the Catholicke Romane Church there are lawfull Ecclesiasticall Ministers as being rightly ordained of true Bishops but in the Synagogues of Sectaries it is euident that there are not lawfull Ministers for they are not ordained of lawfull Bishops and therefore it is manifest that they haue no Church seeing that a Church cannot want lawfull Ministers Likewise father Turrian saith That the Donatists and Luciferians had after a sort some fashion of a Church because they had Bishops though schismaticall and other Ministers whom Bishops ordained But the Protestants haue no forme or fashion of a Church at all because they haue no Ministers at all of the Church or word but meere Lay men Mattheus Lanoius hath proued that onely the Romane Church hath lawfull vocation And D. Tyreus hath written of the false calling of the new Ministers but these are sufficient And that this is the iudgement of holy Church may appeare by the practise for as you haue heard out of Rich. Bristow Your Ministers returning to vs are not admitted to minister vnlesse they take our Orders which sheweth that in the iudgement of the Church they are not lawfull Ministers but meerely Lay-men ORTHOD. Our Ministerie is agreeable to the blessed booke of God and therefore holy and I doubt not but when the chiefe Shepheard shall appeare those that haue instructed many vnto righteousnesse shall shine as the starres for euer and euer But how proue you that our Ministers are no lawfull Ministers PHIL. CAn there be a lawfull Minister without a lawfull calling ORTHOD. It is impossible For no man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but hee that is called of God as was Aaron It is written of Iohn the Baptist There was a man sent from God The Apostles did not preach before they had this warrant Behold I send you And S. Paul saith How can they preach except they be sent And the Lord in the Prophet Ieremie reproueth such as ranne before they were sent Therefore though a man were wiser then Solomon and Daniel he must expect till the Lord send him he that teacheth without a calling how can he hope that Christ will be with him This is an order saith Beza appointed in the Church by the Sonne of God and obserued inuiolably by all true Prophets and Apostles That no man may teach in the Church vnlesse he be called PHIL. If there cannot be a lawfull Minister without a lawfull calling then I must demaund how the Ministers of England can iustifie their calling Might not a man say to euery one of you as Harding said to Iewell How say you sir you beare your selfe as though you were Bishop of Salisburie but how can you proue your vocation by what authoritie vsurpe you the Administration of Doctrine and Sacraments what can you alledge for the right and proofe of your Ministerie who hath called you who hath laied hands on you by what example hath he done it how and by whom are you consecrated who hath sent you who hath committed vnto you the Office you take vpon you be you a Priest or be you not if you be not how dare you vsurpe the name and Office of a Bishop if you be tell vs who gaue you Orders ORTHOD. You please your selues and beat the aire with a sound of idle and emptiâ— words but leaue your vaine flourishes and let vs heare what you can say against our calling PHIL. Then I demand whether you haue an inward or an outward calling ORTHOD. We haue both PHIL. An outward calling must either bee immediatly by the voyce of Christ as was the calling of the Apostles or mediatly by the Church ORTHOD. We are called of God by the Church For it is he which giueth Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints PHIL. All that are called of God by the Church deriue their authoritie by lawfull succession from Christ and his Apostles If you doe so then let it appeare shew vs your discent let vs see your pedegree If you cannot then what are you whence come you If you tell vs that God hath raised you in extraordinary maner you must pardon vs if we be slow in beleeuing such things there are many deceiuers gone out into the world and Sathan can transforme himselfe into an Angel of light In a word euery lawful calling is either ordinary or extraordinary if yours be ordinary let vs see your authoritie if extraordinary let vs see your miracles If one take vpon him extraordinary authoritie as an Ambassadour from a King he must produce his commission vnder the Kings seale If you will challenge the like from God then we require a miracle that is the Seale of the King of heauen But to vse the words of Doct. Stapleton In the hatching of the Protestants brood no ordinary vocation nor sending extraordinary appeareth so the ground and foundation being nought all which they haue builded vpon it falleth downe ORTHOD. The Ministers of England receiue imposition of hands in lawfull maner from lawfull Bishops indued with lawfull authoritie and therefore their calling is Ordinary PHIL. Your Bishops themselues whence haue they this authoritie ORTHOD. They receiued it from God by the hands of such Bishops as went before them PHIL. But your first reformers whence do they deriue their succession ORTHOD. Archbishop Cranmer and other heroicall spirits whom the Lord vsed as his instruments to reforme Religion in England had the very selfe-same Ordination and succession whereof you so glory and therefore if these argue that your calling is Ordinary you must confesse that theirs likewise was Ordinarie PHIL. We must not onely examine Cranmer and such others consecrated in King Henries time but them also which were in King Edwards and in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths as Parker Grindall Sands Horne and the like which were Priests after the Romane rite but leaped out of the Church before they were Bishops ORTHOD. As the first Bishops consecrated in King Edwards time deriued their Spirituall power by succession from those that were in King Henries so the first that were aduanced vnder the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth receiued theirs from such as were formerly created partly in K. Henries dayes partly in King Edwards And the Bishops at this day vnder our gracious soueraigne King IAMES haue the like succession from their predecessours as may be iustified by Records in particular and is confessed in generall by â—udsemius who came into England in the yeere of our Lord 1608. to obserue the state of our Church and the Orders of our Vniuersities Concerning the state saith he of the Caluinian sect in England it so standeth that it may either indure long or be changed suddenly and in a trâ—ce in regard of the Catholicke order there in a
Bishops but they are found in the Church of Rome and not in the Church of England PHIL. YOur Bishops are no Bishops because they are not ordained according to the Canons ORT. The ancient Canons are more reuerently regarded in the Church of England then in the Church of Rome For how well you haue obserued them in former ages let your owne Baronius testifie How foule saith hee was then the face of the holy Romane Church when most potent and withall most filthie harlots did beare all the sway at Rome at whose lust Sees were changed Bishops appointed and which is horrible to be heard and not to bee vttered whose louers the false Popes were thrust into the seate of Peter which were not to bee written in the Catalogue of the Romane Bishops but onely for the noting of the times for who may say they were lawfull Popes which were thus without right thrust in by such strumpets No where wee finde any mention of Clergie choosing or giuing consent afterward All Canons were put to silence the pontificall decrees were choked ancient traditions proscribed and the old customes sacredrite and former vse in choosing the high Bishop vtterly extinguished And for later times your owne learned friends also complaine as followeth Budeus The holie Canons and rules of Church discipline made in better times to guide the life of Clergie men are now become leaden rules such as Aristotle saith the rules of Lesbyan buildings were For as leaden and soft rules doe not direct the building with an equall tenour but are bowed to the building at the lust of the builders so are the Popes Canons made flexible as leade and waxe that now this great while the Decrees of our ancestours and the Popes Canons serue not to guide mens manners but that I may so say to make a banke and get mony Franciscus de Victoria Doct of the chaire at Salmantica in Spaine Wee see dailie so large or rather so dissolute dispensations proceede from the Court of Rome that the world cannot indure them Neither is it onely to the offence of the little ones but of the great ones also No man seeketh a dispensation but hee obtaineth it Yea at Rome there are which giue attendance to see if any bee willing to craue dispensation of all things established by law all that craue it haue it If you Philodox would see the particulars reade but Claudius Espencaeus a diuine of Paris vpon the Epistle to Titus and vnlesse your fore-head bee as hard as brasse it will make you blush I will conclude this point with the saying of Ruardus Tapperus Chancelour of Louaine In the Court of Rome all things are set at sale with dispensations contayning many things wherewith Christ himselfe is not able to dispence Behold this is your keeping of Canons in the Church of Rome But because you accuse the Church of England for breaking the Canons in making of Bishops I answere first that the consecration of our Bishops is most canonicall Secondly that if wee failed in this or that Canon yet euery transgression of an Ecclesiasticall Canon doth not make a nullitie in a consecration As for example It was prouided by the great Councell of Sardica that none should bee made Bishop vnlesse hee had passed the inferiour orders and staied a long time in them Notwithstanding Nectarius was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople being not only a lay-man but as yet vnbaptized and was presently made Bishop in the second generall Councell held at Constantinople Likewise Saint Ambrose Tarasius Nicephorus Eusebius of Caesarea Thalasius yea and some Popes also as for example Petrus Moronaeus were of lay men aduanced to the Episcopall office yet I know you dare not pronounce a nullitie in their Consecration Wherfore seeing it is a plaine case that euery breach of a Canon doth not annihilate a consecration you must tell vs what Canon you meane and wherein we breake it PHIL. I meane that Canon which requireth that a Bishop should bee consecrated by three Bishops which Canon the Councel of Trent calleth an Apostolicke tradition ORTHO HEre arise two questions the former whether three Bishops be required of necessitie to an Episcopall consecration the later whether the Bishops of England be consecrated by three Now that the state of the former may be the clearer giue me leaue to aske you a few things And first what say you to Amphilochius who was created Bishop not by men but by Angels vnlesse Nicephorus delude vs with fables PHIL. It seemeth to bee no fable but a true Story For Amphilochius was allowed for a lawfull Bishop but this was done as Cardinall Bellarmine saith by diuine dispensation extraordinary ORTH. What say you then to the blessed Apostles were they Bishops or no And if Bishops whether in that they were Apostles or by distinct consecration and if by distinct consecration by whom were they consecrated PHIL. Cardinall Turrecremata teacheth that Chirst himselfe made Peter a Bishoppe immediatelie and Peter ordained the rest first Iohn next Iames then others And Cardinall Bellarmine maketh it the two and twentith prerogatiue of Peter Quòd solus Petrus a Christo ordinatus Episcopus fuerit caeteri autem a Petro Episcopalem consecrationem acceperint i. That onely Peter was ordained Bishop by Christ and the rest receiued their Episcopall consecration from Peter ORTHOD. These conceites and fancies when they shal be weighed in the ballance wil be found too light In the meane time what say you to the consecration of Iohn and Iames were they sound and Canonical PHIL. They were sound no doubt but why should you aske if they were canonicall seeing the Canon was not then made You must vnderstand that there is one consideration to bee had of the Church when it is in the cradle and another when it is growne to ripe and florishing yeeres In the infancie of the Church when Christ ascending into glorie had consecrated Peter and made him the spring and fountaine of all Episcopall Order it was necessarie that the first should bee consecrated by Peter alone the next by two at the most and these consecrations were sound and sufficient but when Iames the brother of our Lord was ordained Bishoppe of Ierusalem by Peter Iohn and the other Iames they gaue a Forme or Patterne to their successours as Anacletus declareth that a Bishop should by no meanes bee consecrated by fewer then by three all the rest giuing their consent ORTHO Suppose a Church should suffer such desolation which the Lord forbid that a Canonicall number of Catholicke Bishops were not to be found what should then be done in this case of necessitie PHIL. Wee may learne that partly of the Councell of Sardica which permitteth a supply from the next prouince partly of Pope Gregory the seuenth who when the Churches of Africke were brought to so lowe an ebbe that they had
onely two Bishops would not suffer those two to consecrate a third but willed them to proceede to an election and send the party elected to Rome to be consecrated by three ORTHO The presence of three when they may conueniently be had we greatly commend yet not as a commandement of God but as a constitution of the Church to be imbraced of congruity and not of necessitie PHIL. YEs of necessity and that both necessitate precepti by the necessity of a command which we are bound to obey because as Anicetus saith instituente domino sieri iubetur it is commanded to be done the Lord so appointing and also necessitate medij as a necessary meanes necessary I say not only ad bene esse to the well performance of the consecration but also ad esse to the very being of it so that without it there is a nullity For first of all this is the generall iugdement of the Iurists as appeareth by those words of Cardinall Turrecremata Iuristae quasi omnes sunt huius opinionis quod requiratur ternarius numerus Episcoporum ita vt si quis a paucioribus consecretur dicatur nihil agi that is almost all the Iurists are of this opinion that the number of three Bishops is so required that if one be consecrated by fewer it may be said that nothing is done Which iudgement of the Iurists preuaileth with most eminent Canonists as appeareth by the words following in the Cardinall Vnde Hugo Archidiaconus dicunt vt Papa solus cum vno Episcopo non posset consecrare hac forma durante that is whereupon Hugo and the Archdeacon say that the Pope alone with one Bishop cannot consecrate so long as this forme endureth The words of the Archdeacon are these est ergo de forma substantia sacramenti quod ibi sint tres Episcopi si ordinetur a minus non est Episcopus quia deest substantia siue forma quâ— exigitur in collatione illius ordinis that is therefore it is of the forme and substance of the Sacrament that there be three Bishops and if one be ordained of lesse he is no Bishop because the substance or forme required in the Collation of that Order is wanting Moreouer whereas in the second Counsell at Arles it is saide that a Metropolitan should not presume to ordaine a Bishop without three of his prouinciall Bishops which the Canon Law aleadgeth three or two that is three with the Metropolitan or two besides him the glosse vpon the word three saith thus quod dicit tribus est de substantia consecrationis alias non esset consecratê° â—iessent pauciores that is Whereas the Councell saith three it is of the substance of the consecration otherwise he should not be consecrated if there were fewer ORTHO IS this the Iudgement of your Iesuites PHIL. Father Turrian speaking of the Metropolitan and two Bishops assistant saith Hi sunt tres prorsus necessarij these are three altogether necessary and elsewhere he produceth this saying of Damasus Quod Episcopi non sint qui minus quam a tribus ordinati sunt Episcopis omnibus patet quoniam prohibitum est a sanctis patribus vt qui ab vno vela duobus ordinati sunt Episcopis neque nominentur Episcopi si nomen non habent qualiter officium habebunt that is it is manifest to all men that they are no Bishops which are ordeined of lesse then three Bishops Because the holy Fathers forbid that such as are ordained of one or two Bishops should not so much as be called Bishops if they haue not the name how should they haue the office and he inferreth this conclusion in the words of Damasus Quare quicquid inter Episcopos aut de rebus solummodo adeos pertinentibus egerint necesse est vt irritum fiat quia quod non habent dare non possunt that is Wherefore whatsoeuer they shall doe among Bishops or concerning things belonging onely to Bishops it must needs be void because they cannot giue that to another which they haue not themselues Whereupon he accounteth your Bishops no Bishops your Ministers no Ministers your ordinations no ordinations Nec enim schismaticae ordinationes sunt sed nullae penitus ac potius meré laicae For the ordinations of the Protestants are not Schismaticall ordinations but no ordinations at all and mere laick ORTHO What saith Bellarmine to this matter for he was the noble and renowned Iesuite though now he hath changed his habit for a red hat PHIL. He saith Nostri temporis haeretici neutrum habent id est nec ordinationem nec successionem propterea longé inuerecundiús quam vlli vnquam haeretici sibi nomen munus Episcopi vsurpant i. the Heretickes of our time haue neither that is neither ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and office of a Bishop farre more immodestly then euer did any other Heretickes the ground of which assertion as may appeare both by the antecedents and consequents is because they are not consecrated by three ORTHO Doth hee not allow a consecration by fewer in case of necessitie PHIL. It cannot be doubted saith he but ordinarily three Bishops are required to the ordination of a new Bishop vnlesse peraduenture by dispensation with one Bishop ordaining there be present two mitred Abbots which may supply the place of Bishops as it vseth sometimes to be done ob Episcoporum raritatem for the scarcitie of Bishops Hetherto Bellarmine to which Binius addeth aliamue iustam causam or for any other iust cause ORTHO By whose dispensation must this be PHIL Binius saith per summi Pontificis dispensationem by the Popes dispensation ORTHO If there bee neither three nor two nor any Abbots assisting nor yet the Popes dispensation what is then the iudgement of Bellarmine PHIL. You shal heare himselfe speake from which an insoluble argument is taken in this manner A Church cannot be without Bishops as we haue declared among the Lutherans there are no Bishops for they haue no ordination nor succession from the Apostles therefore among them there is no Church And verely that neither Luther who was accounted Bishop of Wittenberge nor Zuinglius who was reputed Bishop of Tigur nor Oecolampadius who in the very Epitaph vpon his graue is called the first Bishop of Basill nor Caluin who was called the first Bishop of Geneua nor any other of them were ordeined of three Bishops nor of one by dispensation with the assistance of Abbots is a thing notoriously knowen neither do they deny it Therefore these are no Bishops at least in the iudgement of the Fathers of the Nicen and Carthaginian Councell yea in the iudgement of the Apostles themselues who haue decreed that a Bishop ought to be ordained by three Bishops Thus Bellarmine is clearely of opinion that a Bishop must either be ordained of three or haue assistance
of Abbots with a dispensation or else he is no Bishop and this argument he calleth insoluble ORTHO HOw this doth crosse and condradict it selfe in due place shall appeare in the meane time I would willingly know what is the receiued opinion of your Seminaries There is a certaine manuscript booke called Controuersiae huius temporis in Epitomen reductae made by Parsons the Iesuite out of the Dictates of Bellarmine and Maldonate and appointed to be written out by euery Student in your Colledge I pray you what saith that booke to this point PHIL. It agreeth with the former the words are these Primus Canon Apostolorum hoc idem declarat scilicet Episcopum non posse ordinari nisi a tribus Episcopis hinc sequitur ineuitabiliter Haereticos non habere vllos pastores seu Episcopos cum primi illorum Episcopi Caluinus Lutherus Zuinglius nunquam fuerunt ordinati ab alijs Episcopis That is The first Canon of the Apostles declareth this same thing to wit that a Bishop cannot be ordeined but of three Bishops hence it followeth vnauoydably that the Hereticks haue not any pastours or Bishops seeing that their first Bishops Caluin Luther Zuinglius had neuer beene ordained of other Bishops ORTHO HItherto we haue seene how you hold the state of the first question but doe your Iesuites and Seminaries vrge this against the Church of England PHIL. Yes for it is a maine point ORTHO Then your maine point is a vaine point but let vs heare them PHIL. Bellarmine speaking of the marriage of English Bishops saith Nullam excusationem habent nisi forte velint liberè confiteri quod verissimum est se veros Episcopos non esse neque aliquid de Episcopatu habere nisi quae sibi iniuste vsurpant nomen opes That is They haue no excuse vnlesse peraduenture they will freely confesse which is most true that they are no true Bishops neither haue any thing of the Episcopall function but what they vniustly vsurpe vnto themselues to wit the name and the riches If nothing else then not the Character not the Iurisdiction not the Order not the Office they haue nothing nothing at all except the name and the riches ORTHOD. The riches alas Is it not strange that a Cardinall swimming in streames of gold to the chinne should enuy the riches of the Bishops of England But be they rich or poore surely if the Pope might haue had his will before this time he would haue made them poore ynough In the daies of King Henry the eight when a view was taken it appeared that he had receiued out of England onely for Inuestitures of Bishops 4000. pounds by the yeere one yeere with another and that for 40. yeeres together But how dare Bellarmine thus accuse our Bishops as though they had nothing belonging to the Episcopall function What no learning none at all It is not long agoe since he put off his Cardinals robes disguising himselfe vnder the ill fauoured habit and vizard of Tortus when one of our Bishops whether learned or no let the world iudge did so vnmaske and display him that all Popish hearts haue cause to bleed to see the weakenesse of their chiefe Champion so plainely discouered And as our Bishops haue learning so let the Cardinall know that they are famous and eminent Preachers very labourious in the Vineyard of Christ and in this respect farre vnlike to his brethren the Cardinals For Iulius the second said that he could not with a good conscience make Frier Giles a Cardinall because then he should leaue his preaching and afterward Leo the tenth made him a Cardinall that he might hold his peace For commonly in the Church of Rome the great Bishops preach seldome the Cardinals seldomer and the Popes neuer But what is the ground of his accusation PHIL. Because they are not Canonically ordeined The same point is likewise vrged against them by Doctor Stapleton Whether went they into France Spaine or Germanie seeing that at home there was no number of such as might and would serue their turne No no as their Religion is contrary their ende is diuers their beginning hath bene vtterly different from the true Christian faith planted among vs so are their proceedings different and repugnant they haue not come in by the doore they haue stolne in like theeues without all Spirituall authoritie or gouernement This difference betweene the Protestants and our true Bishops the first Apostles importeth so much that it may not lightly be passed ouer for their authoritie being proued nought all their doings can be no better I say therefore by the verdict of holy Scripture and practise of the Primitiue Church these men are no Bishops Your pretended Bishops haue no such Ordination no such laying on of the hands of Bishops no authoritie to ordaine Priests and Ministers and therefore neither are you true Ministers neither they any Bishops at all ORTHOD. What reason haue you to say that our Bishops are not consecrated by three the Canon hath alwaies bene obserued in our Church neither can all the Papists in the world giue any one instance to the contrary since the time of Reformation PHIL. Doct. Sanders declareth That there was a time when you had neither three nor two Bishops and yet at the same time your new Superintendents inuaded the Ecclesiasticall Chaires and were glad to seeke their Confirmation from the Prince and Parliament after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration And therefore all the water in the Thames cannot cleare the Clergie of England from being vsurpers ORTHOD. But if this be false then all the water in the Tybur though it were turned into Holy-water cannot purge the Papists from being slanderers And how false it is shall hereafter be declared out of authenticall Records by which it shall appeare That the Queenes Letters patents of Commission concerning the Confirmation and Consecration of the very first Bishop made in her time were directed to 7. Bishops and also that the Consecration was accomplished by 4 Bishops whose names and titles shall be specified In the meane time this onely I say In lying and slandering many Papists haue had an admirable dexteritie but Sanders surmounted them all For as his booke of Schisme is truely called by a learned Bishop Sterquilinium mendactorum A dunghill of lies so it might be iustly termed Sterquilinium calumniarum A very dunghill of slanders Insomuch that for his noble facultie that way he deserueth no more to be called M. Doct. Sanders but M. Doct. Slanders PHIL. It is no slander but a trueth which shal be auouched to your faces for I wil proue al that I haue said in order My masters marke what I say If you can iustifie your Calling we will all come to your Church and be of your Religion ORTHOD. Remember your promise and proceed with your Argument PHIL. I will proceed and
the English there are none both which branches hee presupposeth as granted the French but when doeth any of them come ouer into England as though hee should say their comming is vncertaine so he concludeth that Austin must make Bishops alone without other Bishops Now from Austin we will proceede to his successours PHIL. They may all be presumed to bee Canonicall ORTH. Yet they came from such as were not canonicall Now from the Saxons wee will proceede to the Normans And here what say you to Lanfranck whom William the Conqueror made Archbishop in stead of Stigandus PHIL. There is no reason to doubt of him or any other till wee come to Cranmer CHAP. VI. Of the Consecration of the most Reuerend Father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie ORTH. THen it remaineth that we consider the Consecration of that most reuerend Father and blessed Martyr Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury concerning whom I expect your iudgement PHIL. My iudgement is that he was a principall cause of all those lamentable alterations which happened in the daies of king Henry the eight and Edward the sixt ORTH. Doe you call them lamentable therein you resemble Enuy in the Poet which lamented because she saw nothing worthy of lamentation For those alterations which ye call lamentable were a gracious beginning of a thousand blessings both to the Church and Common wealth of England But speake directly to the point in question whether Cranmer were a Canonicall Bishoppe Why doe you not answere You are like to one which holdeth a Wolfe by the eares who neither knoweth how to hold him nor how to let him goe faine would you infringe the Consecration of Cranmer but alasâ—e you cannot PHIL. Father Becan directing his speach to the Bishops of England saith thus Legitimè consecrati non estis a quo enim an à rege at is consecrandi potestatem non habet An ab Episcopo Cantuariensi vel aliquo simile ne id quidem Nam Thomas Cranmerus qui sub Henrico 8. Cantuariensem Episcopatum obtinuit non fuit consecratus ab vllo Episcopo sed a solo rege intrusus designatus igitur quotquot ab eo postea consecrati sunt non legitimè sed eâ— presumptione consecrati sunt 1. You are not lawfully consecrated for by whom were you whether by the King but he hath not power to consecrate Or by the Bishop of Canterbury or some like Neither that truly For Thomas Cranmer who vnder K. Henry the 8. obtained the Bishopricke of Canterburie was not consecrated by any Bishop but intruded and designed by the King alone therefore as many as were afterward consecrated by him were not consecrated lawfully but by presumption ORTH. Or rather Becan playeth the part of a presumptuous Iesuite against the Lords annointed in saying that King Henry intruded Cranmer as also in glauncing at his most famous and religious successours as though they themselues had consecrated Bishops For what needed he to moue any such question if it were not to raise a mist and cast a cunning surmise to induce men to thinke that it was so But indeede it was not so for our soueraignes in the aduancing of Bishops do nothing but that which they may lawfully by their Princely right agreeable to the patterne of most religious Kings and Emperours and iustifiable both by the lawes of God and the land as in due place shall appeare And as hee wrongeth the Prince so doth hee traduce Archbishop Cranmer as though he were consecrated either by the King or by none at all and consequently the whole Clergie of England at this day deriuing their consecration from that renowned Martyr But if this accusation were true doe you not marke how it would make a cracke in your golden chaine of succession wherein you so reioyce and glory For if Cranmer were no Bishop then some approoued in Queene Maries time would prooue no Bishops as for example Anthony Kitchen Bishop of Landaff and Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Ely both which deriued their Consecration from Cranmer as may be iustified by records the latter whereof was highly commended by the Pope and made one of his Commissioners in the time of Queene Marie and imploied in the proceedings against that most Reuerend Archbishop If this cannot content the Iesuite I will referre him to Parsons his fellow Iesuite a man who neither loued Archbishop Cranmer nor any other of our Religion and yet clearely confesseth that he was a true Bishop BVt what mislike you in Cranmer was hee not in the order of Priesthood let the Pope be Iudge who in his Bull to Cranmer calleth him Magistrum in Theologia in Presbyteratus ordine constitutum i. Master or Doctor in Diuinitie setled in the order of Priesthood Or was he made Archbishop without the Popes authoritie The Pope himselfe affirmeth the contrary both to the King in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus Henrico Anglorum Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis c. De fratrum eorundem consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus ipsumque illi Ecclesiae Cantuariensi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus c. Bonon 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. Pontif. nostri 10. ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the glorious King of the English We haue made Prouision by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of our said brethren of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury and we haue set him ouer the said Church of Canterbury to be their Archbishop And to Cranmer himselfe in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus dilecto filio Thomae electo Cantuariensi Praefatae Ecclesiae Cantuariensi de eorundem fratrum consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus teque illi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus pastorem curam administrationem ipsius Ecclesiae tibi in spiritualibus temporalibus plenariè committendo ¶ Bon. Anno 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. That is Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We haue prouided by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of the same brethren for the foresaid Church of Canterbury and haue set thee ouer it to be their Archbishop and pastour and fully committing vnto thee the charge and administration of the same Church in things spirituall and temporall Or did the Pope and his Cardinals accept the person of Cranmer vndeseruedly Let your holy Father speake for himselfe ¶ Clemens Episcopus Hâ—n Angl. Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis nobis fratribus nostris ob suorum exigentiam meritorum acceptâ— c. That is ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the most glorious King of England We haue made prouision of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury accepted of vs and our brethren according as his deserts required OR was he Consecrated without the Popes licence Behold the Bull for his Consecration ¶ Clemens Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cant. Tibi vt a quocunque
malueris Catholico Antistite gratiam Communionem Apostolicae sedis habente accitis in hoc sibi assistentibus duobus vel tribus Episcopis similem gratiam Communionem habentibus munus Consecrationis recipere valeas c. Concedimus facultatem Dat. Bonon 1532. Pontificatus nostri decimo That is ¶ Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We grant licence to thee that thou mayest receiue the gift of Consecration of whatsoeuer Catholick Prelat thou wilt so he enioy the fauour and Communion of the Apostolicke See two or three Bishops enioying the like fauour and communion being sent for and assisting him in this businesse Or was he entangled with any Ecclesiasticall censures which might peraduenture be imagined to hinder his Consecration That is more then we find or if he were behold his absolution ¶ Clem. dil fil Thom. Cran. Archidiac de Tanuton in Ecclesia Wellensi Magistro in Theol. salutem Te a quibusuis excommunicationis suspensionis interdicti alijsque Ecclesiasticis sententijs censuris poenis a iure vel ab homine quauis occasione vel causa latis si quibus quomodolibet innodatus existis c. tenore praesentium absoluimus c. Dat Bonon 1532. 9. Mart. That is ¶ Clement to our welbeloued sonne Thomas Cranmer Archdeacon of Tanuton in the Church of Wells Master or Doctor in Diuinity Salutation We absolue thee by the Tenor of these presents from whatsoeuer sentences of excommunication suspension and interdiction and other Ecclesiasticall sentences censures and punishments inflected by the Law or by man vpon any occasion or cause if by any meanes thou be intangled with any Or was he not Consecrate by so many and such Bishops as the Popes Bull prescribed The time place and persons are extant in Record against which you can take no exception The briefe extract whereof I will communicate vnto you for your better satisfaction Tho. Cran. consecrated 30. of March 1533. 24. H. 8. by Iohn Lincolne Iohn Exon. Henry Assaph OR was it not performed with wonted Ceremonies according to the vsuall forme of your Church But those continued all the dayes of K. Henry the 8. euen when the Pope was banished as Sanders confesseth ¶ Sand. de schis p. 297. Ceremoniam autem solennem vnctionem more Ecclesiastico adhuc in consecratione illa Episcopali adhibere voluit That is It was the will and pleasure of King Henry the eight That the Ceremony and solemne vnction should be vsed after the maner of the Church in that Episcopall consecration Or did he want the Pall which if we may beleeue you containeth the name of an Archbishop with the fulnesse of Bcclesiasticall power But this was sent him from your holy father ¶ Clem. Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cantuar. Pallium ipsum de corpore beati Petri sumptum per venerabiles fratres nostros Archiep. Ebor. Episcop Londin Tibi assignandum per praefatum nuntium tuum duximus destinandum vt ijdem Archiepiscopus Episcopus vel eorum alter illud tibi postquam munus consecrationis acceperis assignent c. Dat. Bonon 1532. 5. Non. Mart. That is We thought good that it should be appointed by your foresaid messenger That the Pall it selfe taken from the body of blessed Peter should be assigned vnto you by your venerable brethren the Archbishop of Yorke and the Bishop of London that the said Archbishop and Bishop or either of them may assigne it vnto you after you haue receiued the gift of Consecration PHIL. I deny not that Cranmer was truely ordained because Catholicke Bishops consecrated him and so I confesse that hee liued and died a true Bishop but peraduenture he was neuer any lawfull Archbishop of Canterburie ORTHOD. Why so hee was Canonically chosen by the Church of Canterburie with the consent of the King and the Popes approbation appearing both by his Bulls and the Pall which hee sent him hee was Canonically consecrated by his Comprouincials with the Popes consent who stiled him Thomam Cranmerum olim Archiepiscopum Cantuariensem i. Thomas Cranmer sometimes Archbishop of Canterburie both in his Bull of Commission to the Bishops of London and Ely authorising them to proceed against him And likewise in his Bull of prouision for Cardinall Poole Neither did he onely giue him the title of an Archbishop but he tooke order also for his Degradation which was openly performed by the Commissioners Concerning which it is famously knowen That whereas they did onely Vnpriest Ridley Hooper and Farrer as taking them for no Bishops they did Vnbishop Cranmer taking from him both his Episcopall and Archiepiscopall robes In the doing whereof Cranmer said vnto them Which of you hath a Pall to take away my Pall To whom they answered That they did it by the Popes Commission Wherefore you must of force confesse without all peraduenture That he was not onely Bishop but also truely Archbishop of Canterburie PHIL. Let all this be granted yet I must needs adde that his proceedings were Schismaticall and opened a way for the great Schisme of Henry the eight CHAP. VII Of the abolishing of Papall Iurisdictions by King Henry the eight which the Papists iniuriously brand with imputation of Schisme ORTH. FOrasmuch as it is the custome of Papists to brand the raigne of King Henry the eight with the odious name of Schisme let me a little dispell those clouds and mists wherewith they darken the glorie of that Heroicall Prince When the time was come that it pleased the Almightie to deliuer England from the vsurped authoritie of the Bishop of Rome the beginning of it did grow from a detestable dispensation For whereas Prince Arthur elder sonne to Henry the 7. had married the Lady Katherine daughter to Ferdinando King of Spaine it pleased God that the said Prince Arthur shortly after deceased without issue so his yonger brother Henry Duke of Yorke was proclaimed Prince of Wales Now Ferdinando King of Spaine being disappointed of his former hope and still desirous to make his daughter Queene of England after long suite with great cost and charges in the life time and with the consent of Henry the 7. obtained a dispensation that she being wiâ—e to the one brother might lawfully be married to the other This matter was referred first to Pope Alexander the sixt then to Pius the third both which died before it could be accomplished After them succeeded Iulius the second the noble warriour who brake through al difficulties couragiously granted the dispensation contrary to the opinion of all the Cardinals of Rome being Diuines By vertue whereof Prince Henry being yet of tender yeeres was contracted to his brothers wife While the marriage was expected it pleased God that in Spaine Elizabeth mother to the Lady Katherine and in England Henry the seuenth departed this life so the kingdome descended to Henry the eight who was
him by not doing that which hee commaundeth and by hindring him from executing his will yet it is not lawfull to iudge him or punish him or depose him which belongeth to none but the superiour ORTHOD. And you must consider that it is one thing to punish by vertue of Iurisdiction ouer a partie and another thing to hinder the iniuries which the partie endeauoreth actuallie to inferre as the Venetian Doctours haue prooued out of Caietan Turrecremata and Bellarmine Now King Henry did challenge no iurisdiction but ouer his owne subiects and within his owne dominions yet it was fit that in his owne necessary defence hee should remoue papall iniuries by prouiding as it became a vertuous Prince for the quiet of his owne conscience and the good of his subiects Which blessings could neuer haue beene procured if the Pope had still enioyed his vsurped authority in England PHIL. You shall not perswade mee but that King Henry was guiltie both of Schisme and heresie Onuphrius saith that Paul the third did thinke him vnworthie to bee accounted in the number of Christians ob inauditum heresis crimen that is For such a crime of heresie as had not beene heard of ORTHOD. What meant the Pope thinke you when hee condemned him for heresie Sigonius recordeth that in a Councell at Mentz in the presence of the Emperor there was a disputation Vtrum Henricus Regio titulo a Gregorio spoliari potuisset that is VVhether Henry the Emperour might bee depriued of the title of a King by Pope Gregorie Wherein most of the Bishops assented to Geberardus defending the Popes authority So it came to passe that Vecilo Archbishop of Mentz beeing of the contrarie opinion was branded for heresie in an other councell wherein Otho Bishop of Ostia the Popes Legat was present And the same Sigonius saith that the Emperour Henry the fourth renouncing his Fathers heresie did imbrace the obedience of the Pope Not to performe obedience to the Pope was his Fathers heresie but his sonne was a gracious Catholicke for shewing obedience to the Pope though therein hee were an vngracious sonne against his owne father PHIL. Onuphrius saith That king Henry the eight followed Noua nefaria Lutheri dogmata the new and wicked opinions of Luther Bellarmine saith that in England in the reigne of Henry and afterwards in the reigne of Edward the whole kingdome did after a sort slide backe from the faith ORTHOD. That which you call Heresie and Apostacy is true religion and that which you honour with the name of true religion is full of Heresie and idolatry Many papall abuses were discouered in the daies of King Henry moe in the daies of King Edward so the Gospell was like to the light which shineth more and more to the perfect day the brightnesse whereof abolished both the Pope the Popish religion Afterward when Queene Mary had restored both the Lord stirred vp the spirit of Queene Elizabeth who with an inuincible courage reformed religion And that which shee happily begunne our gracious Soueraigne King Iames hath happily continued Neither can any man accuse them of Schisme vnlesse they will accuse the holy Apostle Saint Paul who When certaine were hardened and disobeyed speaking euill of the way of God before the multitude hee departed from them and separated the Disciples As the Apostle practised this in his owne person so hee gaue the like commaundement to others If any man teach otherwise and consenteth not to the wholesome words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to godlinesse c. From such separate thy selfe And the Lord crieth by his Prophet Goe not vp to Bethauen This Bethauen was Bethel but her idolatry made her Bethauen therefore goe not vp to Bethauen If Rome which was sometimes Bethel the house of God become Bethauen the house of vanitie then thou must not goe vp to Bethauen Goe out of Babylon my people goe out of Babylon if Rome which was some times a pure virgine become the whore of Babylon then go out of Babylon my people least you be partakers of her plagues Wherefore al Christian Kingdomes were bound to separate themselues from the erronious and idolatrous Church of Rome PHIL. Thus you say But I rather account of the iudgement of the Church of Rome which noteth both them and you for schismatickes and heretickes CHAP. IX Whether Schisme and Heresie annihilate a Consecration ORTHO WHether we or you be guiltie of those crimes God the righteous iudge will one day reueale In the meane time let vs admit though for al your brags you are neuer able to proue it that Cranmer vpon his reuolte from the Pope did presently become a schismatick and an hereticke Yet tell mee in good sooth Philodox doeth a Bishop falling into schisme and heresie cease to be a Bishop doth hee loose his power of giuing orders PHIL. It is a disputable point and I can tell you that great Clerkes seeme to bee of that opinion Pope Innocent saith that those which are Baptized of heretickes are receiued with their Baptisme but the ordained of heretickes are not receiued with their order And againe the ordained of Heretickes haue their head wounded And againe it is affirmed that hee which hath lost the honour cannot giue the honour and that hee which receiued receiued nothing because there was nothing in the giuer which hee could receiue Which he sealeth vp with this conclusion Aquiescimus verum est We yeeld and it is true Pope Iohn the twelfth caused those which were ordained of Leo 8. a schismaticall Pope to say Pater meus nihil habuit sibi nihil mihi dedit that is my father had nothing to himselfe and nothing he gaue to me Pope Nicolas the first saith No reason doth teach how Gregory who was Canonically and Synodically deposed and excommunicated can promote or blesse any man therefore Photius receiued nothing of Gregory but that which he had but he had nothing he therefore gaue nothing He which stoppeth his ears from hearing the law his prayer shal be abhominable if abhominable then not to be heard if not to be heard then vneffectuall if vneffectuall then verily it bringeth nothing to Photius Wherefore though Cranmer had a lawfull consecration yet it seemeth when hee fell into schisme and heresie hee lost his order and power of ordination Therefore the Bishops in King Edwards time consecrated by Cranmer receiued nothing because Cranmer had nothing to giue And the Bishops in Queene Elizabeths time consecrated by those whom Cranmer did consecrate receiued nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue And those which now succeede them receiued nothing because their predecessours had nothing to giue ORTHO Take heed Philodox least while you goe about to put out our eyes you put out your owne For if your allegations be sound what shall become of Bonner Bishop of London what shall become of
Nicolas Heath whom Queene Mary made Archbishop of Yorke and after the death of Gardiner Lord Chancelour of England what shall become of Thurlby whom Queene Mary translated from Norwich to Ely For all these were consecrated at such time when in your iudgement both the consecrators and consecrated were stained with schisme and heresie Did all these receiue nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue If they were no Bishops then what becomes of the Bishops in Queene Maries raigne whom these did consecrate if they all receiued nothing then you must confesse that the Priestes whom they ordained were no Priestes If they were no Priests then though they vsed the words of Consecration they could not Consecrate the hoast If this be true then al that worshipped the hoast which they did Consecrate were idolatours PHIL. Edmond Bonner and the rest of our Bishops and Priests were Reuerend and Canonicall whatsoeuer you esteeme of them ORTH. Can there be a Bishop without effectuall Consecration PHIL. It is impossible ORTHO And other Consecration they had none but that which wee haue mentioned for I hope they were not reordained in Queene Maries time PHIL. Reordained I doe not thinke so for as rebaptizations so reordinations were forbidden in the Councell of Capua And Gregory saith as he which is once baptized ought not to be baptized againe so hee which is once consecrated ought not to be Consecrated againe in the same order Therfore vndoubtedly they were not reordained but Cardinall Poole the Popes legate absolued them from Schisme and heresie so they were confirmed for lawful Bishops ORTHOD. You hold that it is impossible to be a Bishop without effectuall Consecration Therefore seeing they had no other Consecration but that mentioned and yet were Bishops it followeth that their Consecration was effectuall wherefore you are forced to confesse that if a schismatical and hereticall Bishop giue orders the orders are effectuall But least this conclusion should seeme to flowe rather from the affection you beare to your owne Bishops then from any force of reason especially your own allegations standing still to the contrary let vs reuiew the whole matter and proceed by degrees ballancing euery thing with aduice and iudgement And answere I pray you not out of priuate humour and passion but from the publicke and most authenticall recordes of your Church ANd first if a wicked priest as for example a drunkard fornicator or blasphemer baptize a childe I demaund whether the baptisme bee good or no PHIL. If it be performed in the true element of water with Euangelicall words that is In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost according to our Sauiour Christs holy institution it is sound and sufficient and neuer to be iterated as our learned Popes Councels and Fathers alleadged by Cardinall Bellarmine doe testifie For the wickednesse of the Minister cannot pollute the puritie of the mysteries of God they are auaileable to his children though they be ministred by a Iudas For it is well said of our learned Cardinall that he which hath not forgiuenesse of sinnes formally may haue it Ministerially as he that hath not in his purse one halfepeny of his owne may notwithstanding cary many crownes to another from his lord and master ORTHO Very true for that which S. Paul saith of preaching may bee extended to other Ministeriall duties If I doe it willingly I haue a reward but if I doe it against my will notwithstanding the dispensation is committed vnto me As though he should say If I do it willingly that is cheerfully for conscience sake seeking onely the glory of God and the saluation of his people then there is a reward laid vp for me But if I shall performe it vnwillingly that is for feare couetousnesse vaine glory or any other carnall respect though to my selfe it be not profitable because I loose my reward yet it may be auailable to others because the dispensation is committed vnto me The foulnesse of an vnsanctified hand cannot staine the beautie of these glorious mysteries For as Gregory Nazianzen saith A seale of Iron may imprint the Princes image as well as a signet of gold And we know by experience that a garden may as well be watered with an earthen as with a siluer pipe But what if the Priest we speak of be a schismaticke and an hereticke PHIL. Though he be yet if hee baptize according to the institution of Christ the baptisme is effectuall and neuer to be repeated ORTHOD. You say well for in such a case though it be ministred by Hereticks and schismaticks yet it is not the baptisme of heretickes and schismatickes but of Iesus Christ. For it is he that baptiseth and neither is he that planteth any thing nor hee that watereth bâ—â— God which giueth the increase To which purpose it is excellently said of Ausâ—â—n To the baptisme which is Consecrated with Euangelicall words pertaineth not the errour of any man either of the giuer or of the receiuer whether he thinke otherwise then the heauenly doctrine teacheth of the Father or of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost Indeed it was decreed in the great counsell of Nice that the Pauliâ—nistae comming to the Catholicke Church should be rebaptized where by rebaptizing they meane the repeating of that action which was erroniously supposed to be true baptisme but in trueth was not because it wanted the true essentiall forme of words which the Councell iudged necessary to be supplied Therefore there is no repugnancie betweene them and the Affrican Councel which decreed vnder Pope Stephen that the Nouatians returning to the Catholicke Church should not be rebaptized because their former baptisme though giuen by heretickes was according to the true forme of the Church and therefore sufficient It is true that Agrippinus Bishop of Carthage defended rebaptization and he was the first of all mortall men which defended it wherein he was followed by Saint Cyprian and the Bishops of Africke but then they had not seene the point defined by any generall Councels and though they held an errour yet they did not iudge them heretickes which held the contrary neither did they rebaptize those whom the Catholickes had baptized nor make any rent in the Church but kept the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace yea Saint Austin saith some report that Cyprian recalled this errour S. Hierom affirmeth that the Bishops of Africk did the like moued by the authority of Stephen Bishop of Rome But after them came the Donatists stiffely maintaining and increasing this errour euen when the Church had determined the contrary and therefore were iustly iudged hereticks Yea they took vpoÌ„ them to rebaptize such as were baptised in the Catholicke Church which was a diabolicall presumption For which causes Vincentius Lyrinensis saith Of one and the same opinion wee iudge which may seeme strange the authors
Catholicke and the followers hereticall We acquit the Masters and condemne the Schollers they are heires of heauen which haue written those bookes the defendours whereof are troden downe to the pit of hell But now the Church hath long agoe with one voice condemned this Heresie When Praetextatus and Felicianus hauing baptised sundry in schisme returned to vnitie the Church did not rebaptise them whom they had baptised but kept them in that baptisme which they had in Schisme For according to Saint Austin some doe minister baptismum legitimum and that legitimè some neither legitimè nor yet legitimum some legitimum but not legitimè Such as performe it in the true element and forme of wordes being themselues in the bosome and vnitie of the Church doe minister both legitimum and legitimè such as faile in the institution and are themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe neither minister legitimè nor yet legitimum such as doe obserue the substance of institution being themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe minister legitimum but not legitimè And those which receiue it from them haue a lawfull baptisme but not lawfully For it is one thing to haue a lawfull thing vnlawfully and another thing not to haue it at all The Sacraments of the Church may be found without the Church as the riuers of Paradise are found without Paradise Heretickes and Schismatickes may haue rem columbae though they themselues be extra columbam PHIL. The trueth of this Doctrine is so plaine that no common Catholick is ignorant of it ORTH. Then to proceede what if the Priest wee speake of were interdicted suspended excommunicated degraded PHIL. Yet if hee obserue in all points of substance the institution of Christ it is effectuall and neuer to bee repeated This is vndoubtedly the iudgement of our Church And therefore in Queene Maries time though the land had beene interdicted and vnder the Popes curse for Schisme and Heresie by the space of twentie yeeres wee did not rebaptise them who were then baptised but haue kept them with vs in their former baptisme ORTH. COncerning baptisme we agree Now to come to the eucharist shall the vngodly life or wicked opinion of the Minister make his ministration of it vneffectuall to the people of God PHIL. In no case so he obserue the ordinance of Christ. ORTHOD. You answere rightly For the sonnes of Eli were wicked men and procured Gods heauie wrath against themselues yet there is no doubt but the God of all Grace did accept of those Sacrifices which his faithfull children with an honest heart presented according to the Law of the Lord to be offered euen by their hands so long as they inioyed the Office of Priesthood Our Sauiour in the Gospel reproued the Scribes and Pharisees for their false and superstitious doctrine which was so commonly receiued and so anciently continued that there can be no question but many of the Priests were infected with it Yet Christ commanded the Leper to shew himselfe to the Priest Yea he himselfe frequented the Feasts wherein Sacrifices were offered by those Priests But to goe forward Can the Eucharist be ministred by a Priest whom the Pope hath excommunicated and degraded PHIL. Though all Priests haue the power of Order vnder the Pope yet for as much as they haue it not immediatly from the Pope but from God therefore the Pope cannot so take it away but that if they will they may vse it For a Priest though the Pope should ExcoÌ„municate suspend interdict degrade him yet if he will himselfe he shall truely Consecrate For euery Priest hath an indeleble Character which is a certaine spirituall and supernaturall power imprinted in the soule of man in Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders whereby the Baptized Confirmed and Ordered are inabled to giue or receiue the Offices of certaine Sacraments The Character of Confirmation being not greatly to our present purpose may bee passed ouer The Character of Baptisme is a passiue power whereby the Baptized is made â—it to receiue other Sacraments whereof without Baptisme he were vncapable The Character of Order is an actiue power to minister the Sacraments vnto other Now in holy Orders it must be obserued That the Priestly Character doeth differ from the Episcopall For the Episcopall is either an other or the same extended so that it conteineth the Priestly and somewhat else A Priest in respect of his Priestly Character is first of all the publicke and ordinary Minister of Baptisme For a Lay-man may not Baptise publickely but onely priuately Neither priuately in the presence of the Priest or Deacon but onely in their absence Neither alwayes in their absence but onely in case of necessitie for then a Lay-man be he Iew or infidel may Baptize so hee intend to doe that which the Catholicke Church doeth in that kinde of Administration A Deacon may Baptise not onely priuately but publickely so it be at the appointment of the Bishop or Priest But a Priest may suo iure Baptize ex Officio euen in the presence of a Bishop as is declared by Pius Quintus and the Councell of Trent who qualifie the contrary opinion and reduce it to a tollerable sence Secondly a Priest by vertue of his Priestly Character may consecrate the Hoaste which no Lay-man King nor Emperour no Angel nor Archangel can performe because they want this Character Indeed a Deacon may helpe to minister the Eucharist but he cannot Consecrate no not by dispensation If he should take it vpon him he should effect nothing But euery Priest receiueth in his Ordination a Character not from man but from the Eternall God which in respect of the Eucharist is absolute perfect and independent Wheresoeuer it is there God is present ex pacto and coÌ„curreth to the producing of supernaturall effects which he doeth not where this Character is wanting Now the holy Councels of Florence and Trent do teach vs That this Character is indeleble death onely if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting ORTHOD. If by indeleble Character bee meant onely a gracious gift neuer to be reirerated then we may safely confesse that in Baptisme and holy Orders there is imprinted an indeleble Character For a man rightly Baptized becomming a Turke or a Iew and afterward returning to the faith and Church of Christ is in no case to be rebaptized the vertue of his former Baptisme is not spunged out but still remaineth auaileable Likewise when a Priest lawfully ordained becoming a schismaticke or hereticke is iustly censured for his crimes and afterward is reclaimed if the Church shall need his labours and hold it conuenient that he execute the Ministeriall function hee may in no case be reordained but may performe it by vertue of his Orders formerly receiued Hitherto of a Priest NOw to transferre our speech to a Bishop Shall his iniquitie hinder him from giuing Orders PHIL. No verily for there is the
exceedingly addicted to Baronius yet in this point hee forsakes him and maketh no mention of Conciliati PHIL. You must not thinke that they were consecrated againe but receiued the mysterie of blessing after the manner of their ancestours which the Authour named the Sacrament of blessing ORTHOD. By Sacrament of blessing is meant the Sacrament of order For the Bishop which pronounceth the wordes whereby the mysticall blessing or the spirituall power is giuen is saide in the fourth Councell of Carthage to powre out the blessing PHIL. But the meaneth onely those solemnities which were accustomed to be vsed in the reconciliation of a Schismaticke or Hereticke ORTH. So saith Baronius but I will proue the contrary For as you heard before it was decreed that all which Constantine did in Ecclesiasticall Sacraments and diuine worship should be reiterated excepting onely Baptisme and confirmation but what thinke you did not Pope Stephen and the Romaine Councell account holy orders an Ecclesiasticall Sacrament PHIL. Yes vndoubtedly ORTH. Then vndoubtedly they decreede that the holy orders should be reiterated which were giuen by Constantine And therfore if they were onely reconciled and not reordained then Pope Stephen did contrary to his own decree which is most absurde Wherefore it is a cleare case that Pope Stephen the fourth vsed reordination PHIL. If he did so then he was blame worthy For though Constantine were a Schismaticall Antipope though of a lay man hee was suddenly made Bishop and hudled vp his orders in all hast contrary to the Canons yet wee cannot deny but he receiued those orders and had power in respect of his Episcopall Character to deliuer them vnto others And seeing his Character was indeleble as wee haue proued therefore though he had not onely beene a Schismaticke but also an Hereticke excommunicated and degraded yet he could not haue lost his power of giuen orders ORTHOD. If you continue constant in this opinion then you must at your leasure bethinke yourselfe how it may be reconciled with your former allegations out of Pope Innocent Pope Iohn and Pope Nicolas in the meane time it is sufficient for vs to take that you grant PHIL. I tolde you it was a disputable point and seemed almost insoluble to Peter Lombard Yet now at last by much disputing the trueth is found out learned men are agreed vpon it and vnlesse I be deceiued the holy doctrine of the indeleble character deliuered in the Councels of Florence and Trent was the very needle to direct their course CHAP. X. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Henry the eighth after the abolishing of the Popes Iurisdiction ORTH. THen at last to gather into briefe heads that which hath beene discoursed at large you graunt that Archbishop Cranmer was a Canonicall Bishop PHIL. I grant it for the reasons before alleadged ORTHO And you make no doubt of any of the Bishops of England before Cranmer PHIL. None at all as you heard before ORTHOD. And you say that euery Canonicall Bishop hath an Episcopall Character PHIL. We say so ORTHOD. And that this Character is so indeleble that no schisme no sinne no heresie no censures of the Church no excommunication suspension interdiction degradation nothing nothing at all sauing onely death if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting PHIL. All this was proued out of the most famous Councels of Florence and Trent ORTH. And that euery Bishop by vertue of his Episcopall Character hath power to giue holy orders yea euen the order of a Bishop PHIL. Very true so he be assisted by a sufficient number of Bishops and impose hands vpon a capable person according to the forme of the Church ORTHOD. THen to proceed to the rest of the Bishops consecrated in King Henries daies in the time of the pretended schisme were not they capable of the Episcopall function PHIL. Though King Henry abolished the authoritie of the Pope yet the sacrifice of the Masse continued till the end of his reigne So we make no doubt but the Priesthood then in vse was a sacrificing Priesthood complete in all points and consequently capable of the Episcopal Character notwithstanding the crime of schisme and heresie ORTHOD. Then George Browne Archbishop of Dublin Edmond Bonner whom king Henry preferred to Hereford and thence to London Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Westminster and such like were all capable of the Episcopall office PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTH. If these and such other as returned to the Pope in the dayes of Queene Mary why not William Barlow Rowland Lee Thomas Goodrich Iohn Hodgeskins For in King Henries dayes they were all alike all Masse Priestes and yet all opposite to the Popes Supremacy PHIL. There is one reason of all ORTHOD. If the Consecrated were capable what say you to the Consecrators were not they sufficient If they were not then what will become of Heath Bonner and Thurlby PHIL. They were sufficient ORTHOD. But were the Consecrations performed by a sufficient number of assistants PHIL. Yes verely ORTHOD. Then it seemeth that King Henry did not disanull the Canons of the Church which required that a Bishop should be Consecrated by three PHIL. No truely but rather established them by act of Parliament as Doctor Sanders acknowledgeth speaking of Henry the eight Cum ab Ecclesia sede Apostclica regnum suum diuisisset decreuit ne quisquam electus in Episcopum bullas pontificias vel mandatum Apoâ—â—olicum de consecratione requireret sed regium tantum diploma vt adferret secundum quod a tribus Episcopis cum consensu Metropolitae ordinatus iubebatur lege conâ—itâ—orum facta ad imitationem antiquorum Canonum esse verus Episcopus nec alto modo ordinatum pro Episcopo agnosci oportere That is Henry the eighth when he had diuided his kingdome from the Church and see Apostolicke decreed that no man elected Bishop should require the Popes Buls or mandate Apostolicke concerning his Consecration but that he should bring onely the kings letters patents according to which being ordained of three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane he was enacted to be a true Bishop by the law of Parliament made to the imitation of the ancient Canons and that no man otherwise Consecrated should be acknowledged for a Bishop ORTHOD Then it seemeth that all the Bishops in King Henries time were Consecrated by three PHIL. How could it be otherwise you haue heard out of Doctor Sanders that the Canons required three the act of Parliament required three and it appeareth by the act itselfe that if any Archbishop or Bishops did not within twentie dayes next after that the kings letters patents came to their hands Consecrate the person presented with all due circumstance they incurred the penaltie of a premunire therefore we may presume that the practise of those dayes was continually by three ORTHOD. SVrely it was then practised from time to time as may appeare by recorde whereof I will giue
a taste beginning from Cranmer Anno 1533. Thom. Cran. Cons. Arch. of Cant. 30. Mart. by Iohn Lincoln Iohn Exon. Henry Assaph Anno 1534. Rowland Lee Cons. B. of Lichfield 19. April by Thom Cant. Iohn Lincolne Christ. Sidon Anno 1535. George Browne Cons. Arch. Dublin 19. Mart. by Thom. Cant. Iohn Roff. Nich Sarum Anno 1536. Rob. Warton cons. B. of Assaph 20. Iul. by Tho. Cant. Ioh. Bangor Will. Norwic. An. 1537. Rob. Holgate cons. B. of Landaff 25. Mart. by Ioh. Roffen Nich. Sarum Ioh. Bangor An. 1537. Henr. Holbeck cons. B. of Bristow 24. Mart. by Iohn Roff. Hug. Wigorn. Rob. Assaph An. 1538. Will. Finch cons. Suf. of Taunton 7. April by Iohn Roff. Robert Assaph Will. Colchest An. 1540. Tho. Thurlby cons. B. of Westm. 9. Decemb. by Edm. Lond. Nich. Roff. Ioh. Bedf. An. 1541. Ioh. Wakeman cons. B. of Gloucest 25. Sept. by Thom. Cant. Edm. Land Tho. Westmonast An. 1541. Arth. Buckley cons. B. of Bangor 19. Febr. by Ioh. Sarum Will. Meneuensis Ioh. Glocest. An. 1542. Paul Bush cons. B. of Bristow 25. Iun. by Nich. Roff. Thom. Westmon Ioh. Bedf. An. 1545. Ant. Kitchin cons. B. of Lan. 3. Mat. 37. H. 8. by Thom. Westm. Thom. Sidon Suffrag Salop. NOw from the Consecrators let vs proceed to the forme of Consecration and consider whether the ancient Canons which you approue and vrge were altered in King Henrtes time PHIL. It doth not appeare by the Statute that there was any alteration For it was enacted that the Consecration should be solemnized with all due circumstance And moreouer that the Consecrators should giue to the Consecrated all Benedictions Ceremonies and things requisite for the same And surely if there had bene any alteration in things essentiall Doct. Sanders speaking purposely of this very point would not haue concealed it But he saith plainely It was his will speaking of King H. 8 that the Ceremonie and solemne Vnction should as yet be vsed in Episcopall Consecration after the maner of the Church And againe more plainely Primo loco sancierunt vt cum Episcopi ac Presbyteri Anglicani ritu ferè Catholico excepta R. Pontificis obedientia quam omnes obnegabant ad illud vsque tempus ordinati fuissent in posterum alia omnino forma ab ipsis praescripta Ordinationes fierent authoritate à puero Rege adid accepta That is First they decreed speaking of K. Edwards time That whereas the Bishops and Priests of England had bene ordained euen vnto that time almost after the Catholicke rite excepting the obedience of the Bishop of Rome which they all dented hereafter Ordinations should be made altogether after an other forme by them prescribed by authoritie which they receiued to that purpose from the King being a childe But the Statute of Q. Mary putteth all out of doubt Enacting That all such diuine Seruice and Administration of Sacraments as were most commonly vsed in this Realme of England in the last yeere of King Henry the 8. should be vsed and frequented through the whole Realme of England and all other the Queenes dominions and no other in any other maner forme or degree Now the makers of this Statute were perswaded that holy Order was a Sacrament therefore holy Orders were ministred in Q. Maries time as they were in the last yeere of K. Henry But all good Catholicks will confesse that in Q. Maries time the true essentiall forme of Consecration was obserued Therefore I graunt that it was also vsed all the time of King Henry ORTHOD. If the persons were capable and consecrated by a sufficient number of Canonical consecrators according to the forme of your Church then you must needs iudge their Consecration effectuall and them Canonicall Bishops PHIL. Our Church in Q Maries time did so iudge of them for most of her old Bishops were made in Schismate Henriciano Yet they were allowed and the new euen Cardinall Poole among the rest did all deriue their Consecration from the old yet were they all approued by our holy Father the Bishop of Rome and by name B. Bonner and B. Thurlby to whom he giueth honorable testimony in his Commission for the proceeding against Cranmer ORTHOD. Then if we can deriue our Bishops from any three in King Henries reigne before the banishing of the Pope or after you must acknowledge them to be Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth so ORTHOD. Or else Bonner and his coequals must lie in the dust and all the Bishops made in Q. Maries time must eternally be cancelled out of the Catalogue of Bishops Hitherto of K. Henries time Proceed we now to the Bishops in K. Edwards dayes and consider whether those were Gold or lead CHAP. XI Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Edward the sixt PHIL. THe Bishops in King Edwards time we take for no Bishops ORTHOD. No But you must there is no remedie And for the more perspicuitie let vs distinguish them into certaine ranckes The first of such as were made both Priests and Bishops in K. Henries time and were continued in King Edwards The second of such as were Priests in K. Henries time and made Bishops in K. Edwards To these you may adde a third of such if any such you find as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of K. Edward The first you haue confessed already to be Canonicall therefore let vs come to the second in which are those blessed Saints and glorious Martyrs Ridley Hooper and Ferrar concerning whom first I demaund whether they were in the order of Priesthood or no PHIL. Yes father Parsons graunteth it saying Ridley studied at Cambridge and there was made Priest trauailed ouer the sea to Paris and returning againe became King Henties Chaplaine Likewise Iohn Hooper as may be seene by Fox his relation of him was a Priest in Oxford in the daies of King Henry the eight So Robert Ferrar Priest and Chaplaine to Cranmer in King Henries time Thus I confesse that they were Priests but I deny that they were Bishops for father Parsons speaking of the â—oxian Calendar and Saints of the month of Februarie in which number were Hooper and Ferrar saith Among Foxe his Saints there is neither eremâ—â—icall nor monasâ—icall life noâ— solitude either from the worlde or women nor any one so much as pretending the title of vâ—rginitie in any seâ—e nor any true Bishoppe indeed if their ordination bee examined For beside Cranmer other Bishops or Clergie men were there none of all the packe that was burned ORTHOD. What say you then to father â—atimer who was ordained in the same manner in all respects as Bonner was Though hee had now relinguished his Bishopricke yet still according to your owne principles hee was a true Bishoppe 〈◊〉 respect of the Episcopall character But to prosecute the present point what mislike you in Ridley Hooper and Ferrar you haue already confessed that they were
which hath not the right order of Priesthood but the Priesthood conferred in King Edwards time was no Priesthood because they wanted the authority to offer the blessed sacrifice of the Masse therefore those Priests were not capable of the Episcopall order ORTHO I answere first that seeing that King Edward rained but sixe yeeres and fiue moneths it is likely that most of them which were aduanced in his time to bee Bishops were before his time in the order of Priesthood Secondly if any be produced which were not yet it shal be iustified God willing when we come to the point that the order of Priesthood conferred in the dayes of King Edward Queene Elizabeth and King Iames is the true ministery of the Gospel and that your sacrificing Priesthood is sacrilegious and abominable In the meane time you must giue vs leaue to holde that the ministery of the Church of England is holy in the sight of God and iustifiable in the sight of man CHAP. XII Of the Bishops Consecrated in the dayes of Queene Marie THe lineall descent hath led vs to the Bishops in Queen Maries time concerning which shal I craue your iudgement PHIL. You know it already they were all Canonical ORTHOD. For the more distinct proceeding let vs diuide them into two ranckes the old Bishops and the new the old I cal such as being cōsecrated before her time were continued in her time the new which were Consecrated in her time PHIL. All which were allowed for Bishops in Queene Maries time whether old or new were Canonicall ORTHO The old Bishops were all made in the dayes of K. Henry the eighth and almost all in those very times which you brand with imputation of schisme and heresie when none could bee Consecrated vnlesse hee did sweare to the king against the Pope Wherefore seeing you iudged both Consecrators and Consecrated schismaticall and hereticall and yet esteeme them Canonicall your obiections of schisme and heresie must eternally bee silenced in the question of Canonicall Bishops For if these crimes can frustrate a Consecration then their Consecration was frustrate and they were no Bishops or if they were Bishops and Canonicall then all the Bishops in King Henries time were likewise Canonicall Moreouer some of them whom you so commend were Bishops in King Edwards time as for example Thomas Thurlby whom King Henrie promoted to be Bishop of Westminster was aduanced by King Edward to the Bishopricke of Norwich and afterward preferred by Queene Mary to the Bishopricke of Ely and moreouer to be one of her priuie Councell Yea some of them had the place of a Bishop in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth Namely Anthony Kitchin who in King Henries time was made Bishop of Landaff kept his dignities and place in the dayes of K. Edward continued the same all the reigne of Queene Mary and so till the day of his death which was in the fift yeere of Queene Elizabeth Wherefore in iustifying the old Bishops you iustifie al generally which were Consecrated in King Henries daies and some which continued in King Edwards and Queene Elizabeths But now from the old let vs come to the new PHIL. QVeene Mary aduanced Holiman bishop of Bristow Coates bishop of Chester Watson bishop of Lincolne Morris bishop of Rochester Morgan bishop of S. Dauis Brooke bishop of Glocester Glin bishop of Bangor Christophorson bishop of Chichester Dauid Poole bishop of Peterborow Cardinall Poole bishop of Canterbury and others ORTHOD. And these reuerend Prelats Bush bishop of Bristow Tailor bishop of Lincolne Scory bishop of Chichester Barlow bishop of Bathe and Wells Couerdale bishop of Exeter and Harly bishop of Hereford with sundry others were at that time forced to leaue their bishopricks For what cause partly for not yeelding to the Pope and Popish Religion partly because they were married which Greg. Martin calleth a polluting of holy Orders though S. Paul saith it is honourable among all men and the bed vndefiled But let vs see the Consecration of your new bishops PHIL. I will begin with that renowned Prelate Cardinall Poole whose Consecration followeth Anno 1555. Reginald Poole cons. Archb. Cant. 22. Mart. by Nichol Arch. Ebor. Thom. Eltens Edmund Lond. Rich. Wigorn. Ioh. Lincoln Mauric Roff. Thom. Asaph Anno 1557. Thom Watson Dauid Pole Cons. B. 15. Aug. by Nich. Ebor. Thom. Eli. Wil. Bangor Anno 1557. Ioh. Christophorson cons. B. 21. No. by Edmund Lond. Tho. Elien Mauric Roff. ORTHOD. All these deriue their Consecration from bishops which were made in the time of the pretended Schisme and some of them from Cranmer himselfe therefore you must either acknowledge all them and namely Cranmer for Canonicall or neither Cardinall Poole nor any of the rest made in Queene Maries time can be Canonicall THE THIRD BOOKE OF THE BISHOPS CONSEcrated in the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth and of our gracious Soueraigne King IAMES CHAP. I. Of the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some Antecedents and Consequents of their Depositions PHIL. THe reuolution of times hath brought vs to the raigne of Queene Elizabeth euen to that blacke and dolefull day wherein all the Bishops of England all I say one onely excepted were deposed from their degrees and dignities For a great penaltie was inflicted vpon such as should after the Feast of S. Iohn Baptis◠1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesiasticall Office whatsoeuer after the old rite or administer any Sacrament after the Romane maner to wit That hee which offended against that Law for the first time should pay 200 Nobles or be in bonds sixe Moneths for the second 400. Nobles or a yeere in bonds for the third he should be in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods By which meanes it came to passe That at the day prescribed the holy and diuine Offices ceased to be performed publikely through the whole Kingdome And because the Bishops would not consent to those impieties nor affirme vpon their Oathes that they beleeued in their consciences That the Queene onely was the Supreame gouernesse of the Church of England vnder Christ they were all saue one shortly after deposed from their Degree and dignitte and committed to certaine prisons and custodies whereupon they are all at this day dead with the long tediousnesse of their miseries The names of which most glorious Confessours I will set downe that the thing may be had in euerlasting remembrance First of all Nicholas Archbishop of Yorke and a little before that time Lord Chancellour of England then Edmund Bonner Bishop of London and Tunstall of Durham Iohn of Winton Thomas of Lincolne Thurlby of Ely Turberuill of Exeter Borne of Bath Pole of Peterborow Baine of Lichfield Cuthbert of Chester Oglethorp of Carlile and Thomas Goldwell of S. Asaph c. ORTH. Here are two things to be discussed The deposing of the old Bishops and aduancing of the new Concerning the first
Binius out of Baronius Thus much for the prophane title As for the thing it selfe The Scripture witnesseth that Salomon was King ouer all Israel if ouer all Israel then ouer the tribe of Leui and consequently euen ouer Abiathar the high Priest if he be their king why are not they his subiects If they be his subiects and he their Soueraigne how can they bee exempted from his Iurisdiction A point so cleare that sundry of your learned writers haue confessed it IOhannes Parisiensis saith that in the old Testament the Priests which annointed kings without all doubt were subiect vnto kings Your owne Iesuite Salmeron affirmeth that potestas spiritualis legis naturae vel Moisisminor erat Regia potestate in veteri testamento ideo etiam summi Sacerdotes regibus subdebantur that is the spirituall power of the Law of nature and of the law of Moses was lesser then the princely power in the old Testament therefore euen the high Priests were subiect vnto kings Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith Non mirum esset si in veteri Testamento summa potestas fuisset temporalis that is It were no maruell if in the olde Testament the chiefe power were the temporall Dominicus a Soto in veteri Testamento dubio procul Sacerdotes a principibus secularibus iudicati that is In the olde Testament without doubt the Priests were iudged by the secular princes Fryer Paule This doctrine that Ecclesiasticall persons vnlesse they be free by priuiledge and fauour should be subiect to secular Magistrates is demonstrated and confirmed by examples of the old Testament whereby it appeareth that all the kings did command iudge and punish Priests and that this was done not onely of bad kings or indifferent but of the most holy and religious Dauid Salomon Ezechias and Iosias Carerius in veteri Testamento Rex super Sacerdotes potestatem habebat eosque pro crimine occidere multo magis officijs dignitatibus spiritualibus eos priuare poterat that is In the old Testament the king had power ouer the Priests and might for their offences kill them much more depriue them of their offices and spirituall dignities Hitherto Carerius out of Tostatus PHIL. IF the kings of Israel had such authoritie doth it follow that Christian Princes must haue the like ORTHOD. What else You must consider that the new Testament doth yeeld vs no examples of Christian kings therefore when the question is concerning the power of kings in the Church of God wee must goe to the fountaine that is the old Testament where there was both a Church and kings in the Church religiously performing the office of kings and what Princely authoritie they exercised for which they are approoued by the spirit of God the same without all question belongeth in like maner to Christian Princes therefore what authoritie Salomon had ouer Abiathar the same haue Christian Princes by the law of God ouer their owne Clergie CHAP. III. Of the Oath of the Princes Supremacy for denying whereof the old Bishops were depriued PHIL. IS not the deposing of a Bishop a spirituall censure how then can it be performed by the secular powers ORTH. The secular powers doe noâ— depose a Bishop by degradation nor by vtterly debarring him from his Episcopall function but onely by excluding him from the exercise of Episcopallactes vpon their subiects and within their dominions And this godly Princes haue performed from time to time in the best and primatiue ages against the Arrians Nestotians and other heretickes as might be declared by many examples PHIL. Shall a Prince take that from them which he cannot giue them ORTH. Hee cannot giue them an intrinsecall power to minister the word and Sacraments which proceedeth from the key of order but he may giue them an extrinsecall power that is a libertie to execute their function within his dominions This he may doe by vertue of the scepter which God hath giuen him though he meddle not with the keyes which God hath giuen to the Church and as he may giue this libertie so he may take it away vpon iust cause as Salomon did when he deposed Abiathar PHIL. If we should admit that Queene Elizabeth had so much authority as king Salomon yet this would not iustifie her proceedings For it belongeth not to Parliaments or secular Princes to make lawes concerning the depositions of Bishops or to inflict any such punishments ORTHOD. Did not the Emperour Martian make a law that such Bishops as went about to infringe any of those things which were enacted by that holy and generall Councell of Chalcedon should be deposed Did not Iustinian make a constitution that if any Patriarch Metropolitane Bishop or Clerke should violate his decrees made for the preseruation of holy order and estate he should be excluded from the Priestly function Did not Theodosius the yonger likewise make a law that the Nestorian Bishops should be expelled and deposed PHIL. The lawes of these Emperours concerning the deposing of Bishops were not put in execution by laymen as Queene Elizabeths were but by Bishops ORTH. Gratian the Emperour made a lawe against the Arrians commanding them like wilde beastes to be driuen from the Churches and the places to be restored to good pastours the execution whereof he committed to Saporas the most famous captaine of that time If this were allowable in the Emperour Gratian then much more in Queene Elizabeth for he did it when there was plentie of good Bishops within his owne dominon Queene Elizabeth did it onely in case of necessitie Neither did she send a captaine to driue them away by violence as Gratian did but appointed honourable commissioners to tender the oath vnto them vpon the obstinate refusall whereof their places were voyd by vertue of the Statute PHIL. GRatian had for him the determination of Synods which had already coÌ„demned the Arrians therefore in this case it was lawfull for him both to make a Law and to commit the execution of it to Lay-men ORTHOD. So had Q. Elizabeth For a Synod of Bishops professing your owne Religion among whom was Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester gaue to K. Henry the title of Supreame head of the Church of England as may appeare by the Acts of the Synod it selfe About two yeeres after the same was renewed in another Synod and about two yeeres after that the two Vniuersities deliuered their iudgement That the Pope had no more to doe in England by the Law of God then any other Bishop The determination of Cambridge is already extant in print The like of Oxeford remaineth in Record wherein after long deliberation and much disputation with all diligence Zeale and conscience they make this profession Tandem in hanc sententiam vnanimiter omnes conuenimus ac concordâ—s fuimus viz. Romanum Episcopum maiorem aliquam iurisdictionem non habere sibi à Dâ—o collatam in sacra Scriptura in
hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
25. Ianu. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Ioh. Roff. Anno 1596. Thomas Bilson Cons. 13. Ianu. by Ioh. Archb Cant. Rich. Lond. Will. Wint. Rich. Bangor ¶ Ely THe Bishops of Ely in the Queenes time Richard Coxe and Martine Heaton the Consecration of Bishop Coxe was handled before the other followeth Anno 1599. Martin Heaton Cons. 3. Febr. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich Lond. Will. Cou. and Lichf Anton. Cicest ¶ Salisbury THe Bishops of Salisbury were Iohn Iewel Edmund Gueast Iohn Peirs Iohn Goldwell and Henry Cotton Anno 1559. Iohn Iewel Cons. 21. Ianu. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Edmund London Rich. Ely Ioh. Bedford Anno 1559. Edmund Gueast Cons. 24. Mart. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Nich. Lincolne Ioh. Sarum Anno 1576. Iohn Peirs Cons. 15. April by Edm. Archb. Cant. Edw. London Rob. Winton Anno 1591. Iohn Coldwell Cons. 26. Decem. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Ioh. London Tho. Wint. Rich. Bristoll Ioh. Oxon. Anno 1598. Henry Cotton Cons. 12. Nouem by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich. London William Couent Ant. Cicest ¶ Norwich THe Bishops of Norwich were Thomas Parkhurst Edmund Freake Edmund Scambler William Redman and Iohn Iegon Of these Edmund Scamblers Consecration hath already beene declared the rest follow Anno 1560. Thomas Parkhurst Cons. 1. Sep. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Gilbert Bath and Wells William Exon. Anno 1571. Edmund Freake Cons. 9. Mart. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Robert Wint. Edm. Sarum Anno 1594. William Redman Cons. 12. Ianu. by Iohn Archb. Cant. Rich. London Iohn Roff. William Lincoln Anno 1602. Iohn Iegon Cons. 20. Febru by Iohn Archb. Cant. Rich. London Iohn Roff. Ant. Cicest ¶ Rochester THe Bishops of Rochester were Edmund Gueast Edm. Freake Iohn Pierce and Iohn Yong whereof the three first haue bene already handled the fourth followeth Anno 1577. Iohn Yong Cons. 16. Mart. by Edm. Archb. Cant. Iohn Lond. Ioh. Sarum CHAP. VII Of the Bishops in the Prouince of Canterburie consecrated since our gracious Soueraigne King Iames did come to the Crowne with a little touch concerning the Prouince of Yorke ANd that you may know that the same order in Consecration of Bishops is still retained vnder the raigne of our gracious Soueraigne King Iames behold these that follow Anno 1603. Ioh. Bridges Cons. B. of Oxon. 12. Febr. by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Tob. Durham Ioh. Roff. Anthon. Cicest Anno 1604. Rich. Parry Cons. B. of Asaph 30. Dec. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Tob. Durham Mart. Eltens Anno 1604. Tho. Rauis Cons. B. of Glouc. 17. Mart. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Tob. Durham Anth. Cicest Anno 1605. Will. Barlow Cons. B. of Roch. 30. Iun. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Rich. London Anth. Cicest Thom. Glouc. Anno 1605. Lanc. Andrewes Cons. B. of Cic. 3. Nou. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Rich. Lond. Ioh. Norwich Thom. Glouc. Will. Roff. Anno 1607. Henr. Parry Cons. B. of Glouc. 12. Iul. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Thom. Lond. Will. Roff. Lancel Cicest An. 1608. Ia. Mountagu coÌ„s B. of Ba. Wels. 17. Ap. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Thom. Lond. Henr. Sarum Will. Roff. Lanc. Cicest Henr. Glouc. Anno 1608. Rich. Neile Cons. B. of Roch. 9. Octob. by Rich. Arch. Cant. Thom. Lond. Lanc. Cicest Ia. Bath Wells An. 1609. Geor. Abbot Con. B. of Cou. Lich. 3. Dec. by Rich. Archb. Cant. Lanc. Ely Rich. Roff. Samuel Harsnet Cons. B. of Cicest the same day by the same persons Anno 1611. Giles Thomson Cons. B. of Glou. 9. Iul. by Georg. Archb. Cant. Ioh. Oxon. Lanc. Eli. Ia. Bath Wells Rich. Cou. Lichf Iohn Buckridge Cons. B. of Roch. the same day by the same persons Anno 1611. Ioh. King Cons. B. of Lond. 8. Septemb. by Georg. Archb. Cant. Rich. Cou. Lichf Giles Glouc. Ioh. Roff. Anno 1612. Miles Smith Cons. B. of Glou. 20. Sept. by Georg. Cant. Ioh. Lond. Rich. Cou. Lich. Ioh. Roff. The like hath bene continually obserued in the Prouince of Yorke for a taste whereof I will giue you two examples The former in the Queenes time the later in the raigne of our gracious Soueraigne Anno 1598. Hen. Robinson Cons. B. of Carl. 23. Iul. by Rich. Lond. Ioh. Roff. Anth. Cic. Anno 1606. Will. Iames Cons. B. of Durham 6. Sept. by Tob. Ebor. Rich. Lond. Will. Roff. Lanc. Cic. THis which you haue seene may seeme sufficient Yet because I desire to giue ample contentment I haâ—â—â—et downâ— the successiue Ordination and Golden chaine of the most reuerend Father George now L. Archbishop of Canterbury the ioy of the Clergie and Gods great blessing vpoÌ„ this Church ascending lincke by lincke vnto the Bishops in the time of King Henry the 8. which our aduersaries acknowledge to be Canonicall Whereunto that all the Clergie of England may know in particular how to proue their succession I intend when God shall grant me opportunitie to view the Records of the other Prouince to annex the like Episcopal line of the other most reuerend Metropolitane Tobie L. Archbishop of Yorke CHAP. VIII The Episcopall line and succession of the most Reuerend Father in God George now Lord Archb. of Canterbury particularlie declaring how he is Canonically descended from such Bishops as were Consecrated in the daies of King Henry the eight which our Aduersaries acknowledge to bee Canonicall He was Consecrated 3. December 1609. By 1. R. Bancroft Cons. 8. May 1597 by Lancel Eli. Whose Consecrations were before described and may bee deduced in the like manner Richard Rosf Whose Consecrations were before described and may bee deduced in the like manner 2. Ioh. Whitg Cons. 21. Apr. 1577. by Iohn Young See the next page Anthony Rud. See the next page Richard Vaughan See the next page Anthony Watson See the next page 3. Ed. Grindal Cons. 21. Dec. 1559. by 4 Mat. Parker Cons. 17. Dec. 1559 by Wil. Barlow in the time of Henry 8. Ioh. Hodgskins in the time of Henry 8. 5 Miles Couerdale Cons. 30. Aug. 1551. by Thomas Cranmer in the time of Henry 8. Iohn Hodgâ—kins in the time of Henry 8. 7 Nicholas Ridley Cons. 5. Sep. 1547. by Henry Lincolne in the time of Hen. 8. Iohn Bedford in the time of Hen. 8. Thomas Sidon in the time of Hen. 8. 6 Ioh Scory Cons. with Miles Couerdale vide 5. 8 Ioh. Hurly Cons. 26. May 1553. by Thomas Cranmer Christ. Sidon 9 Iohn Taylour Cons. 26. Iuly 1552. by Thomas Cranmer Iohn Scory vide 6. Nich. Ridley vide 7. William Barlow in the time of Henry the 8. Iohn Bedford in the time of Henry the 8. 10. Ioh. Elmer Cons. 24. Mar. 1577 by Edmund Grindall â—ide 3. 11 Edw. Sands Consecrated with Edmund Grindall vide 3. 12 Iohn Piers Cons. 15. Apr. 1576. by Robert Horne vide 13. 19 Ri. Câ—râ—else cons. 21. May 1570. by Mathew Parker vide 4. Robert Horne vide 13 20 Edm. Guest cons. 24. Mar. 1559 by Mathew Parker vide 4 Nicholas BullinghaÌ„ vid. 17 Iohn Iewell
videtur c. It seemeth we may say seeing an Abbot gouerneth his Monastery by ordinary Iurisdiction and an Abbatesse is equall vnto him in freedome of administration that she hath ordinarie Iurisdiction as well as the Abbot Yea the same Stephen striueth to attibute vnto her the power of excommunication which is more then the Church of England ascribeth to Princes For it attributeth vnto them onelie that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwayes to godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed vnto their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuil sword the stubborne euill doers When the B hath vsed his spirituall censures he can proceed no further but as Iosias compelled all that were found in Israel to serue the Lord So may euery Prince by his royall authority compell all his subiects to do their duty and those which refuse to be reformed by the Church he may restraine with the ciuil sword inflicting tēporal punishments as the qualitity of the offence requireth When Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed in the Councell of Antioch he did notwithstanding hold his Church and chaire by violence whereupon the Councell knowing that of themselues they could proceed no further were forced to seeke the aide of Aurelian the Emperour by whose commandement he was expelled PHIL. IF the Iurisdiction of the Prince and the Prelate be so different how then is the Prelates deriued from the Prince ORTHOD. Heere wee must consider the matters handled in the consistories of Bishops and the manner The matters originally and naturally belonging to those Courts are onely such as are originally and naturally Ecclesiasticall the manner to ratifie their iudgements is not properly vnder any corporall mulct but onely by spirituall censures as suspension excommunication and such like In both which respects the Iurisdiction of Bishops hath beene much inlarged by the fauour and indulgence of Christian Princes Concerning the matter Constantine the Great gaue libertie to Clerkes to decline the iudgement of ciuill Iudges and to bee iudged by their owne Bishops By occasion whereof many Ciuill Causes were brought to the cognisance of Ecclesiasticall Courts Hee made also a law to ratifie those iudgements As though they had beene pronounced by the Emperour himselfe Now all the Iurisdiction which Bishops haue in Ciuill Causes is meerely from the Prince Concerning the manner it seemeth sometimes expedient to annex coactiue power to the Episcopall office both for the honour of Prelacie and also to make their spirituall censures the more regarded which also without controuersie must bee acknowledged to proceede from the Prince For as the Lord hath compacted the light into the body of the Sunne that thence it might be communicated to Moone and Starres So hee hath put all ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction into the person of the Prince from whom as from a glorious Sunne or fountaine all other inferiour lampes doe borrow their light But if wee speake of that Episcopall Iurisdiction which both in respect of matter and manner is meerely spirituall the immediate fountaine of it is God himselfe as our most learned and religious King with his royall Penne hath thus witnessed to the world That Bishops ought to bee in the Church I euer maintained it as an Apostolicke institution and so the ordinance of God contrary to the Puritanes and likewise to Bellarmine who denyeth that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction immediately from God If his Maiesties iudgement bee contrary to Bellarmines who holdeth the negatiue then his Princely wisedome embraceth the affirmatiue to wit that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction meerely spirituall immediately from God Notwithstanding for so much as they exercise the same in a Christian Common wealth at the holy direction and command and vnder the gracious protection of a religious King within the kings dominions vpon the Kings subiects according to the Canons and statutes established by the Kings authoritie wee may iustly call those Courts the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts and the Archbishops and Bishops the kings Ecclesiasticall iudges Wherefore though this spirituall power in regard of it selfe be immediately from God yet in these respects it may rightly be said to be deriued from the king So it is a Christo tanquam ab authore conferente a Rege tanquam a iubente dirigente promouente protegente PHIL. If your Bishops haue their spirituall Iurisdiction immediately from God when doe they receiue it ORTHO When they are made Bishops that is in their Consecration For the partie to be Consecrated is presented to the Archbishop in these words Most reuerend Father in God wee present vnto you this godly and well learned man to be Consecrated Bishop Where the word Bishop is taken in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sense for a Timothy or a Titus an Angel or gouernour of the Church And the Archbishop with other Bishops present imposeth hands saying f Take the holy Ghost that is such ghostly and spirituall power as is requisite to aduance a Presbyter to the office of a Bishop so here is giuen him whatsoeuer belongeth to the Episcopall office as the prayers going before the pronouncing of these words and following after doe declare wherein humble petition is made for Gods blessing and grace that hee may dulie execute the office of a Bishoppe faithfullie serue therein and minister Episcopall discipline PHIL. If it be giuen in Episcopall Consecration how then is it giuen immediatly from God ORTHOD. I will answere you if you will answere me a few questions And first I demaund whence is the power of Order PHIL. It is immediatly from God because it requireth a Character and grace which onely God can effect For though it be said to be giuen with Imposition of hands yet the meaning is not that either the Imposer or the Imposition of hands doeth giue it but God himselfe while hands are Imposed To which purpose it is excellently said of S. Ambrose O brother who giueth the Episcopall grace God or man Thou answerest without doubt God but yet God giueth it by man Man imposeth hands God giueth the grace The Priest imposeth an humble hand and God blesseth with a mightie hand ORTHOD. And whence commeth the grace of Baptisme PHIL. This also without question is immediatly from God ORTHOD. And whence commeth faith in the hearing of the Gospel PHIL. It is likewise immediatly from God ORTHOD. And doeth not God in all these vse the ministerie of man PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTHOD. Then you see a thing may be giuen immediatly from God though in giuing it he vse the meanes and ministery of man for in such like speeches the word Immediatly is not so taken as excluding meanes but as distinguishing the action of God from the meanes When the children of Israel were stung of the fierie serpents God in healing them vsed the
at Rome that the Romane Bishop might absolutely succeed him ORT. This is your owne coniecture and not Law diuine PHIL. Pope Marcellus saith that Peter came to Rome iubente Domino the Lord so commaunding ORTH. This is your owne tradition and not Law diuine And as your succession so your monarchicall iurisdiction cannot be proued to be by Law diuine This was well knowne to the Fathers of the first generall councell who confined the Bishop of Rome as well as the Bishop of Alexandria ascribing his patriarchical power vnto custome not to Law diuine This was likewise knowne to the Fathers of the second and fourth generall councels who ascribe the preheminence of the Bishop of Rome to the honour of the Imperiall City for so the Fathers of the fourth councell interpret the second and affirme it themselues Antiquae Romae throno quòd vrbs illa imperaret iure patres priuilegia tribuere eadem consideratione moti 150. Dei amantissimi Episcopi sanctissimo nouae Romae throno aequalia priuilegia tribuêre rectè iudicantes vrbem quae imperio senatu honorata sit aequalibus cum antiquissima regina Roma priuilegijs fruatur etiam in Rebus Ecclesiasticis non secus ac illam extolli ac magnifieri secundam post illam existentem The Fathers did rightly giue priuiledges to the throne of old Rome because the City then raigned and the 150. Bishops most earnest louers of God assembled in the second generall councell which was the first at Constantinople mouedâ—y the same consideration gaue equall priuileges to the most holy throne of new Rome rightly iudging that the City which was honoured both by the Empire and the Senate and enioyeth equall priuileges with Rome the most ancient Queene of Cities should bee extolled and magnified euen in things Ecclesiasticall no otherwise then Rome being the second in order after it Thus they hold the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome to bee not Monarchicall because they giue equall priuileges to Constantinople but Patriarchicall which they referre not to the Institution of Christ nor to Peters fact nor to the succession in Peters chaire but to the honour of the Imperiall City in that it was Imperiall therefore as Binius confesseth they hold it to be by Law humane and not diuine PHIL. Baronius Bellarmine and Binius doe tell you that this Canon was not confirmed by Pope Leo. ORTHO Eusebius Bishop of Doryleum did testifie the contrarie openly in the councell in these words Sponte subscripsi quoniam hanc regulam sanctissimo Papae in vrbe Româ relegi praesentibus clericis Constantinopolitanis eamque suscepit i. I haue subscribed willingly because I read ouer euen this Canon to the most holy Pope in the City of Rome in the presence of the Clerkes of Constantinople and hee embraced it But let vs imagine that hee did not embrace it yet I referre this point to any indifferent iudge whether wee should rather beleeue sixe hundred Bishops and vpward speaking vprightly what they thinke and grounding their iudgement vpon the decrees of former generall councels then one man with a few flattering fauorites speaking partially in his owne cause PHIL. This Canon was not made by the councel but Anatolius with the Easterne Bishops made it secretly and by stealth after the Iudges and the Popes Legate were gone out of the Councell ORTHOD. The Church of Constantinople beeing desirous to propose this matter Entreated the Popes Legats to communicate with them in the handling of it who refused because the Pope had giuen charge to the contrary then they made relation of it to the Iudges who commaunded the holy councell then present to looke into it which they did accordingly therefore though it pleased the Iudges to depart yet the councell proceeded by authority from the Iudges And the Popes Legats might haue staied if it had pleased themselues Moreouer The Decrees were read at the next meeting openly in the councell before the iudges who ratified them by their sentence and all the councell cried and redoubled againe and againe that the sentence was iust PHIL. The Popes Legats interposed a contradiction affirming that the Apostolike See ought not to be debased ORTHOD. The Iudges notwithstanding would not relent but concluded the whole businesse thus Tota Synodus approbauit i. The whole Synod hath approuedit wherefore it was the iudgement of the whole Synod that the Popes iurisdiction is not by Law diuine CHAP. IIII. Of the Election of Bishops in the primitiue Church before there were any Christian Princes PHIL. IF wee consider the practise of the Christian world in primitiue antiquitie which was nearest to the fountaine and knew best the meaning of Law Diuine wee shall finde that they were either elected or at least confirmed by the Pope or by authoritie from the Pope either expresly or by his permission or conniuencie and so receiued their iurisdiction ORTHOD. To examine these points in order let vs begin with the election of Ministers concerning which we find three varieties in the new Testament The first by lots the second by voyces the third by the spirit of prophesie Matthias was chosen by lots the Deacons by voyces Timothy and others by the spirit of prophesie For as Chrysostome saith In those dayes the pastours were made by prophesie what is by prophecie by the holy Ghost as Saul was shewed by prophecie when hee lay hid among the stuffe as the holy Ghost said separate vnto me Paul and Barnabas so was Timothie chosen Theodoret thou hast not thy calling from men but thou receiuedst that order by diuine reuelation Oecumenius by reuelation of the spirit Timothy was chosen of Paul to bee a Disciple and ordained a Bishop This kind of election seemeth to bee vsuall in the Apostles times and to haue continued so long as the gift of prophecie and discerning of spirits remained Now of these three the first and third were by God himselfe the second by all the faithfull This is all wee finde in Scripture yet here is no precept but onely example Wherefore it seemeth that the Lord hath left this point as a thing indifferent to bee ordered by the discretion of the Church so all things be done honestly and in order From the Scripture if wee come to the ages following they referred it to the Clergie and people PHIL. To the Clergy I grant by the conniuencie of the Pope but in the Councell of Laodicea elections of B. are forbidden to be made by the people ORTH. The Councell in that place nameth Priestes not Bishops and if vnder the name of Priestes you comprehend Bishops yet you must consider that it being onely prouinciall could not impose lawes to the whole Christian world That Bishops were chosen by popular elections after this Councell may appeare by the great Nicen Councell assembled as Baronius thinketh six yeeres after the Councell of
shortly intituled the errours of Baronius wherein are set downe in particular twentie errours which he committed in denying the story of Pope Iohn the twelft and I haue heard of some others which haue taken great paines to the like purpose God blesse their labours that they may dispell those foggie mists of falsifications that the truth may shine as the Sunne in his strength Hitherto of Anastasius and yet for your fuller satisfaction I will referre you to 2. more the one is Walthram who wrote before Sigebert the other Eutropius Longobardus who was 200. yeeres before them both as of late hath beene declared by a learned Bishop Now let the world iudge who it is which vseth lying feigning and imposture whether Sigebert or Bellarmine Binius and Baronius PHIL. BAronius is amongst the historians as the Moone amongst the Starres and I doubt not but whatsoeuer he saith hee buildeth vpon a sure foundation which is euident in this point of Pope Adrian because Eginhardus who went not from the side of Charles and wrote his life most exactly maketh no mention of it neither doe the French Annals ORTHOD. Their silence doth not preiudice the relation of others for in a matter of story the affirmation of one is to be preferred before the silence of many Neither are the French stories silent in it as may appeare by Frosard who collecting the actions of Charles out of the ancient French writers hath the same storie PHIL. How can it bee that Adrian gaue any such priuiledge to Charles the Emperour seeing Charles was not Emperour in the dayes of Adrian for Adrian died Anno 795. and Charles was not Emperour till the yeere 800. ORTHOD. The title of Emperour and solemnitie of imperiall coronation was not added till the time of Pope Leo yet hee conquered Italy in the yeere 774. which was 21. yeeres before the death of Adrian Wherefore seeing the Romanes did then acknowledge him for their Prince why should they not attribute that authoritie to him in elections which belonged to their Prince PHIL. Where was this grant made vnto him ORTHOD. At Rome in the Lateran PHIL. It is impossible for he was but foure times at Rome and it could not be at any of those times ORTH. How oft he was at Rome before or after skilleth not this is sufficient for our purpose that he went from the seige of Papia to keepe his Easter at Rome with Pope Adrian which done he went backe to the seige where Desiderius King of the Lombards yeelded himselfe vnto him so returning to Rome he appointed the Synode wherein if you will not beleeue Sigebert you may beleeue Gratian set cut by Pope Gregory or Theodoricus de Niem PHIL. If he did come from Papia to Rome yet he did not there hold a Councell For whence should hee so sodenly haue so many Bishops and Abbots ORTHOD. Anastasius saith that Charles went from thence to Rome Abstollens secum diuersos Episcopos Abbates carying with him diuers Bishops and Abbots which may argue that he intended a Councell and made preparation for it And here I maruell why the Clerkes of the Roman spunge which raced out the graunt of Adrian to Charles did leaue this of the Bishops and Abbots vnspunged for why should he carry with him those Bishops and Abbots but to holde a Councell Thus thâ—se good fellowes haue conueyed the grant out of Anastasius they haue stollen away the fairest Swanne that did swim in the streame but they haue let fall some of the feathers by which it appeareth that there was the Swanne PHIL. To what end should Charles call a Councell in Italy ORTHOD. Theodoricke de Niem saith This Synode was celebrated by 153. Bishops and Abbots by all the regions and orders of the citie and by the whole Clergie of the Church of Rome Exquirentibus vsus leges mores eiusdem Ecclesiae imperij i. searching out the customes lawes and manners of the same Church and Empire Why I pray you should Charles so employ them but only that the priuiledges of the Empire might be confirmed vnto him PHIL. What were these priuiledges ORTHOD. The Romanes had receiued great kindnesse not onely from Charles but also from his father and grandfather For first of all when the Lombards besieged the citie of Rome his grandfather Charles Martell was the meanes of raising the siege Afterward when the Lombards hauing wonne Rauenna did seeke to haue Rome also and the Romane Dukedome his father Pipin recouering Rauenna did bestow it with the territories thereof vpon Saint Peter and his successours which Charles after his conquest of Italy did establish and amplifie He neuer entred the citie with violence but expelled those which offered them violence He neuer aduanced his banner against them but when they were vexed by the Lombards and not being able to defend themselues implored his ayde he droue the Lombards out of Italy and protected them Finally he neuer was an enemie to Rome but alwayes a friend for which great benefits the Romanes to shew themselues thankeful did yeeld vnto him Princely prerogatiues both in Church and Common wealth Concerning the Common wealth Pope Adrian as the mouth of the whole Synod Citizens and Nobles assembled Patriciatus dignitatem et consesserat i. did grant vnto him the honour to be the Father of the Common wealth that is the Prince Patron and Protectour of the Romanes Concerning the Church Pope Adrian with the whole Synod tradiderunt Carolo ius potestatem eligendi Pontificem ordinandi sedem Apostolicam 1. deliuered vnto him he right and power of electing the Pope and of disposing the See Apostolicke I passe ouer the other part of the decree concerning Inuestitures of other Bishops because as yet we speake onely of the Bishops of Rome PHIL. If the Pope deliuered this power as you say or granted it as some say or gaue it as Sigebert saith to Charles then it followeth that he had it not of his owne right but only by the gift and grant of the Pope ORTHOD. The power of electing the Pope may be ascribed vnto Charles in a double sence either that he might doe it with the Clergie and people or without theÌ„ if in the first sense then the meaning of the Canon is not to debarre the Clergie and people from elections but to decree that though they may lawfully make an election yet their election is not sufficient and auailable vnlesse the Emperour doe perfect and accomplish it with his royall assent If this be the meaning then whatsoeuer is heere deliuered to Charles was before his time anciently acknowledged to belong to the Emperours as I haue alreadie declared And yet for your further satisfaction you may see in the Canon law that though the Emperor Constantinus Pogonatus by his Diualis or sacred Epistle released to Pope Agatho the some of money which the Bishops of Rome euer since the
you compasse sea and land to make one proselite and when hee is become one you make him two fould more the childe of Hell then yee your selues are But when he is reconciled what is then to be done PHIL. Though now hee bee a Catholicke when the Diuell is coniured out of him yet before he can be Priest hee must be cast wholy in a newe mould For as I told you we account your Ministers but meerly lay men without orders ORTHOD. The more to blame you and therein you degenerate from your forefathers as may appeare by the articles sent by Queene Mary to Bishop Bonner one whereof was this Item touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to any orders after the new sort and fashion of orders considering they were not ordered in very deede the bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiency and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to minister Heere you see that they did not ordaine them a new but onely supply that which they thought to be wanting and therefore they misliked not our orders in whole but in part PHIL. Yes they wholly misliked them as you may see by the words considering they were not ordered in very deed If they were not ordered in very deed then howsoeuer they pretended orders yet they had no orders at all but were meerely lay men and so are you For that which they call the new sort and fashion of orders was according to the booke established by King Edward which is vsed in England to this very day ORTHO Doth not a Bishop ordaine when he imposeth handes and saith Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes you forgiue c. PHIL. I answere that Priests are ordained when it is said vnto them take thou power to offer sacrifice but they are also ordained afterward when it is said vnto them Receiue the holy Ghost For by the former wordes they are ordained to the function of sacrificing by the latter to the function of absoluing by both ioyntly to the full and perfect order of Priesthood ORTHOD. But these words Receiue the holy Ghost were vsed in king Edwards time and are to this day in the Church of England in making of Ministers And therefore those that are promoted to orders after the new sort and fashion as you call it are ordered in very deed neither did the Penners of the article meane otherwise PHIL. Are not their words plaine that they were not ordered in very deed ORTHOD. They meant that they were not ordered fully and perfectly therfore aduised the Bishops to supply that which wanted Which they could not say with reason if they had thought them to be meerely lay men therefore they iudged them to bee Priests in part and yet part of the office to bee wanting which needed supply That which they had was the power receiued by these wordes Receiue the holy Ghost That which they supposed to be wanting was the power of sacrificing Therefore their meaning was not to reiterate that which they had but to supply that which was wanting in their cōceit euen as we on the contrary side cause such as come from Popery to vs to renounce the power of sacrificing which we hold sacrilegious but doe not reiterate those Euangelicall words wherin we agree And this you must needes grant vnlesse you will allow of reordination PHIL. Reordination God forbid No sir we will neuer allow of that For order imprinteth a Character and therefore can neuer be reiterated ORTHOD. But you granted before that a Priest is ordained when the Bishop saith vnto him Receiue the holy Ghost And therefore if the power of remitting sinnes giuen in these words were reiterated either in Queene Maries time or among you at this day in ordaining your proselytes then you cannot possibly defend your Church from Reordination If you abhorre Re-ordination then you must confesse that when any Minister reuolteth from vs to you yet in making him Priest you must not repeat those words Receiue the holy Ghost which proueth inuincibly that vnlesse you will be contrary vnto your selues you cannot esteeme vs to bee meerely lay men Or if you will needs aduance your owne orders and make a nullitie in ours and order our fugitiue Ministers accordingly then you must runne there is no remedy vpon the rocke of Reordination by repeating the words wherein we agree PHIL. Though we agree in the wordes yet we differ in the sense ORTHOD. That is no barre to Reordination for if a child bee Baptised in the true forme of words an Heretick shall Baptise the same child in the same wordes though in another sense yet all good Christians will iudge it to be Rebaptisation and there is the same reason of Reordination Therefore thus I reason When you Metamorphise an English Minister into a Popish Priest either you repeat the words Receiue the holy Ghost or you doe not if you doe repeat them then I haue made it manifest that you vse Reordination If you doe not then you iustifie not onely our practise but also our orders For you hold these words necessary in ordination to the conferring of one of the principall functions of Priesthood and therfore in not repeating them you acknowledge that they had receiued that function before in the Church of England consequently that the ministers of England are not lay men So your owne practise doth either condemne your selues or iustifie vs but our practise condemneth altogether the first part of your Priesthood that is your carnall sacrificing as simply abhominable and the latter part so farre as it is polluted with your popish constructions PHIL. If the first part of our Priesthood bee simply abhominable and the latter as it is vsed by vs bee polluted then Cranmer Ridley Parker Grindall and the rest of your Coronels had no other Priesthood but that which was partly abhominable and partly polluted ORTHO When God opened their eyes they did vtterly renounce your carnall sacrificing as derogating from the all-sufficient sacrifice of Iesus Christ the other part that is the power of forgiuing sinnes which they receiued corruptly in the Church of Rome they practised purely in the Church of England renouncing the Pope and all Popish pollutions PHIL. But when the question is concerning the validity of orders wee must not so much respect the practise as the power receiued in ordination how Cranmer Parker and such like receiued both parts of their Priesthood in the Church of Rome And as the Church gaue them so they receiued them in that very sense which the Church of Rome holdeth at this day Wherefore seeing you condemned both parts as we vse them for nettles I cannot but maruell how you can be Roses ORTHOD. Let me aske you a question If one Baptize a Conuert in the Element of water according to the true forme of the Church yet so that both the Baptizer and the baptized haue
some pernicious errour as for example If they deny the Godhead of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost shall this hinder the validitie of the Baptisme PHIL. No for you must consider that there is a visible Priest and an inuisible It is required to the substance of Baptisme that the visible Priest apply water to the baptized In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost If he faile in any of these points the Baptisme is frustrate And therefore it was decreed in the great Councell of Nice that the Paulianists should be rebaptized where they take the word rebaptised improperly meaning that the former was not performed in the true wordes and therefore was in deed no Baptisme But if it were duely performed in water with such words as Christ hath appointed their priuate opinions and misconstruction cannot hinder the validitie of the Baptisme Satis ostendimus saith S. Austin ad Baptismum qui verbis Euangelicis consecratur non pertinere cuiusquam vel dantis vel accipientis errorem siue de Patre siue de Filio siue de Spiritu sancto aliter sentiat quam coelesiis doctrina insinuat i. We haue sufficiently declared that to the Baptisme which is consecrated with Euangelicall words pertaineth not the errour of any man either of the giuer or of the receiuer whether he thinke otherwise then the heauenly doctrine teacheth of the Father or of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost For whosoeuer be the Minister Christ the inuisible Priest is the principall Baptizer and therefore if the right Element and forme of words be vsed we regard not the erronious sense of the seruant but the true sense of the Lord and Master ORTHOD. So I say to you there is a visible Bishop and an inuisible if the visible shall impose hands vpon a capable person vsing those Euangelicall words which Christ hath sanctified his owne priuate opinions cannot hinder the validitie of the Ordination for so that right and sufficient words be vsed we will not respect the erronious construction of the seruant but the true sense and meaning of the Lord and Master Therefore though Cranmer and Parker were ordained in the rite of the Church of Rome though both the ordainers gaue the power and the ordained receiued it in the erronious sense of the Church of Rome yet neither the error of the ordainers nor of the ordained pertaineth to the Ordination As Christ is the chiefe Baptizer so he is the chiefe Ordainer for hee giueth Pastours and teachers for the consummation of the Saints Wherefore when God vouchsafed to take away the scales of ignorance from the eyes of his blessed instruments which he vsed in the reformation of Religion it was their duetie not to follow the erronious sense of the visible Bishop but the true meaning of the inuisible Bishop who was the authour of these holy and admirable words Receiue the holy Ghost c. In which words of Christ that was accomplished which was promised by the keyes which keyes the Fathers call the knowledge of the Scripture the interpretation of the Law the word of God And Pope Adrian the key of ministery so whosoeuer is ordained by these words receiueth the keyes and may open the kingdome of heauen by the Word and Sacraments Wherfore seeing these words were retained in the Ordination of Priests euen in the darkenesse of Poperie it followeth that the Church of Rome had power by these words rightly vnderstood according to the Scripture to minister the word and Sacraments But that which in it selfe was lawfull to them was made vnlawfull by adding the abhomination of sacrifising and by wresting the words of Christ to their Popish shrift Thus though the Church of Rome gaue her Priests authority to preach the truth yet she did not reueale the truth vnto them but plunged them in ignorance and errors Therefore whereas those words of Christ in themselues a Rose by corruption of time were ouergrowne with nettles those heroicall spirits which reformed religion did weede away the Romane nettles and so there remained onely the sweet Rose of Iesus Christ. Thus it came to passe that that which was practised in the Church of Rome vnlawfully as beeing polluted with wicked humane inuentions was by the goodnesse of God purged and restored to the orient colour and natiue purity To conclude in the primitiue Church the ministeriall power was receiued purely and deliuered purely In the beginning of Popery it was receiued purely and deliuered corruptly During the sway of Popery it was receiued corruptly and deliuered corruptly In the beginning of the reformation it was receiued corruptly and deliuered purely Now in the sun shine of the Gospell it is receiued purely and deliuered purely Thus it appeareth that although we receiued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull which was to be declared Now the Lord of his mercy so blesse his owne ordinance that we may vse this holy function to his glory and the winning of many thousand soules Amen LAVS DEO ¶ AN APPENDIX WHen this worke had almost passed the Presse there came to my hands certaine scandalous Bookes made by our Popish aduersaries reproching the Consecrations of some Bishops of blessed memory Who in their life time powred out such precious ointment as still filleth the Church with the sweetnes of the odour Among which Iewels Bishop Iewell is first produced who like another Shammah stood in the middest of the field and defended it and slew the Philistims so the Lord gaue great victory In regard wherof they being filled with malice and enuie and not beeing able with dint of Argument to encounter him and the rest of his fellow Souldiers those worthies of Dauid which fought the Lords battels haue sought by all meanes to disgrace their Calling disgorging their poison against them without any respect of conscience or truth in these opprobrious and scurrilous words Of M. Iewels being Bishop we haue not so much certaintie yea we haue no certaintie at all For who I pray you made him who gaue him his Iurisdiction who imposed hands vpon him what Orders had they what Bishops were they 136. True it is that both he Sands Scory Horne Grindall and others if I mistake not their names in the beginning of the Reigne of Queene Elizabeth met at the Horse-head in Cheape side a fit signe for such a Sacrament and being disappointed of the Catholicke Bishop of Landaffe who should there haue bene to Consecrate them they vsed the like art that the Lollards once did in another matter who being desirous to eate flesh on Good-Friday and yet fearing the penalties of the Lawes in such cases appointed tooke a Pigge and diuâ—ng him vnder the water said Downe Pigge and vp Pike And then after constantly auouched that they had eaten no flesh but fish So I say these graue Prelates assembled as afore said seeing the Bishop whom they expected
came not to consecrate them they dealt with Scory of Hereford to doe it who when they were all on their knees caused him who kneeled downe Iohn Iewell to rise vp Bishop of Salisburie And him that was Robert Horne before to rise vp Bishop of Winchester and so foorth with all the rest Which Horse-head Ordering was after confirmed Synodically by Parliament wherein they were acknowledged for true Bishops And it was further Enacted That none should make any doubt or call in question that Ordination 137. This was the first ordering of Master Iewell and the rest as I haue beene informed by one that heard it from Master Neale reader of the Hebrew Lecture in Oxford who was there present and an eye witnesse of what was done and past c. Now the place of Sacrobosco which he câ—teth in the Margent is this Principio regni Elizabeth aecreandi erant Episcopi sectarij Candidatâ— conuenerunt Londini in quodam Hospitio plateae Anglicè dictae heapside ad insigne capitis Manni vna ordines collaturus Lâ—ndauensis Episcopus homo senex simplex quod vt intellexit Bonâ—rus tunc decanus EpiscoporuÌ„ in Anglia misit è turri Londinensi vbi religionis causa detinebatur capellanum suum qui Landauensi proposita excommunicationis paena prohiberet nouos candidatos ordinare ea autem denuntiatione territus Landauensis pâ—dâ—m retulit multiplicique tergiuersatione vsus sacrilâ—gam vitauit ordinationem Hîc furere Candidati Landauensem contemnere noua quaerere consilia quid plura Scoreus Monachus post Herefordensis Pseudo-Episcopus caeteris excaeteris quidam Scoreo manus imponunt fiuntque sine Patre Filij Pater a Filijs procreatur res saeculis omnibus inaudita Quod D. Thomas Neale Hebraicus Oxoniae lector qui interfuit antiquis confessoribus illi mihi narrarunt fidem astruit quod in comitijs postea sancitum fuit vt pro legitimis Episcopis haberentur Parlamentarij isti These imputations I found first in generall cunningly cast forth by Kellison who said He heard credibly reported that some of our new superintendents were made Bishops at the Nagges-head in Cheape Whereupon because I would deale candidè with my aduersary and propose his obiection with most probability I brought it against the first Bishop consecrated in the Queenes time that is Archbishop Parker and cleered him from this reproach For can any man of reason imagine that they would goe to consecrate one another in a Tauâ—rne and so incurre the danger of the Law after that they had according to their hearts desire an Archbishop of their owne religion quietly possessed of his Church and Chaire But now the Authour of the Preface affirmeth in particular that Iewell Sands Horne and Grindal were there then and in that maner Consecrated by Scory and Scory by some of them saith Sacroboscus To answere briefly for the glasse is almost runne First it is a sillie surmise that Bishop Scory should be Consecrated by them seeing he was Consecrated by Archbishop Cranmer and other Bishops in the time of King Edward Secondly those reuerend Prelates Grindall and Sands were both Consecrated vpon one day by Matthew Archbishop of Canterbury assisted by three other Bishops as you haue heard out of the Records To which I adde moreouer vpon a reuiew of the same Records that the place of their Consecration was the Chappell at Lambehith the time the Sabboth day in the forenoone after Morning prayer the maner with imposition of hands and such forme of words and Praiers as are vsed in the Church For the better performance whereof there was a Sermon Preached by Master Alexander No well then the Archbishops Chaplaine vpon this Text Take heed vnto your selues and to all the flocke whereof the holy Ghost hath made you ouerseers And a Communion reuerently ministred by the Archbishop Thirdly Bishop Iewell was Consecrated the 21. of Ianuary following by Matthew Archbishop of Canterbury Edmund London Richard Ely and Iohn Bedford in the foresaid Chappel at Lambehith vpon the Sabboth in the forenoone with Common praiers Communion and a Sermon preached by Master Andrew Peirson the Archbishops Chaplaine vpon this Text Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorifie your Father which is in Heauen Lastly Bishop Horne was Consecrated the yeere following by Mathew Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Bishop of Saint Dauids Edmund Bishop of London and Thomas Bishop of Couâ—ntry and Lichfield as was before related The place of his Consecration was likewise the Chappell at Lambehith the time the Sabbath day in the fore-noone and the maner in all respects as the former Thus all things were most orderly and reuerently performed Now let the world iudge what is to bee thought of these men which dare so confidently blaze such vntruthes and are not ashamed to produce an eye witnesse for that which was neuer seene by the eye of man As for their downe Pigge and vp Pike and such other of the same stampe I may say with the Prophet On whomhaue you iested vpon whom haue you gaped and thrust out the tongue And I aduise you to remember the saying of Salomon As the noise or crackling of the thornes vnder the pot so is the laughter of a foole As also that of Dauid Blessed is the man that hath not sit in the seat of the scornefull I will conclude this point with this saying of Salomon The lying lips are an abomination to the Lord but they that deale truely are his delight ¶ A note of the Editions of some Bookes cited by page ACTES and Monu Lond. 1610. Antiquit. Britt Hannou 1605. Antisand Cantabr 1593. Anglicar rerum Scriptor Francof 1601. Bellarm. apol resp Colon. 1610. Binius Colon. 1606. Brist Motiu Antih Atrebat 1608. Eliens Episc. Resp. adapol Bell. Lond. 1610. Georg. Princ. Anhalt Wittenb 1570. Hollinsh Lond. 1587. Ioh. de Turrecrem in Gâ—at decr Venet. 1578. Kellison Replie 1608. Lelandus Lond. 1545. Matth. Paris Tigur 1589. Nauar. Manualâ— Mogunt 1603. Pars. 3. Conuers 1603. Pollinus Romae 1594. Pontificale Romae 1595. Sand. de Schism Ingolst 1587. Tortura Torti Lond. 1609. Turr. de Eccles. Colon. 1674. Vargas de Episc. Iurisd Romae 1563. Walfingham Francof 1603. GEntle Readers the most materiall mistakings which I haue obserued are these some wherof notwithstanding are amended in most Copies for other which escaped me I craue your courteous pardons Hanc veniam petimúsque damúsque vicissim ERRATA Page 57. line 12. Northumb. Read Part of Northumb. Pag. 119. line 2. Marco Read Mario Ibid. line 5. Marke Read Marius Ibid. line 10. from the law Read in the Law Pag. 126. line 33. stattorum Read statutorum Pag. 135. line 36. Anno 1677. Read Anno 1577. Pag. 178. line 1. Clement 5. Read Clement 2. P. 213. l. 23 ni the Eucharistim properly Read in the Eucharist improperly Pag. 238. line 40. subance Read substance In the Margent
already performed by Imperiall authoritie Thus you see the practise of the Emperours in the Church of Constantinople no man contradicting them and the very last of these examples was aboue 300. yeeres before the grant of Adrian yea aboue 100. yeeres before Vigilius Now from the Imperiall Cities let vs come to the kingdome of Spaine CHAP. X. Of the Election of the Bishops of Spaine IN the 16. Councell at Tolledo it was concluded That if a Bishop did not set his helping hand to the extirpation of Idolatrie he should be deposed Alio ibidem Principali Electione constituto Another being appointed there by the Princes Election This Councell was holden in the yeere 693. fourescore yeeres before Inuestitures were granted to the Emperour Charles by Pope Adrian And before that it was decreed in the 12. Councel of Tolledo as followeth It hath pleased all the Bishops of Spaine and Galicia That sauing the priuiledge of euery Prouince it shall hencefoorth be lawfull for the Bishops of Tolledo to set vp such Prelates in the Sees of their predecessours and to choose such successours for Bishops departed as the Princely power shall Elect and finde worthy by the iudgement of the foresaid Bishops of Tolledo This Councell was holden in the yeere 681. almost an 100. yeeres before Pope Adrian And yet the Kings of Spaine had authoritie to Elect before this Councel which may appeare by these wordes of Baronius Wee must not be ignorant of this point that the Kings of the Gothes in Spaine did challenge to themselues the nomination of such Bishops as were to bee made which nomination of them made by the King was referred to a Councell that they might iudge of the qualitie of the person whether he were worthy of a Bishoprick These things are euident by the Monuments of ancient writers Now because much time passed before they could be dispatched by reason whereof the Sees were long vacant therefore the Councell made the decree Thus it is euident that the authoritie of the Councell was translated to the Archbishop but the Kings authoritie was the same as before and had so bene from the time of the Gothes PHIL. Indeed in the time of the Gothes it was in the Kings and so hath continued in the Kings of Spaine to this present age by the indulgence of the Popes ORTHOD. The ancient Kings of the Gothes were Arrians and enemies to Christ did they elect Bishops by indulgence of Popes PHIL. They did it by tyrannie will you take a paterne from Arrians and Tyrants ORTHOD. The Arrians of Spaine were conuerted in the yeere 589. and professed the faith in the third Councell of Toledo Yet the Orthodox Kings continued their authoritie in Elections Shall we say that they tooke a patterne from Tyrants and Arrians Neither did the Arrian Kings offend in that they elected Bishops but in that they elected Arrian Bishops Neither is an Orthodox Prince bound to relinquish his owne right because it hath bene abused by hereticall Princes For the right of Princes is most ancient deriued neither from Pope nor Arrian but from the patterne of Salomon who chose Sadok high Priest aboue 1000 yeeres before either Arrian or Papist was borne Hitherto of Spaine CHAP. XI Of the Election of the Bishops of France IN France the Kings had the choise of Bishops almost 300. yeeres before the Empire came to their hands For their first Christian King Clodoueus conuerted in the yeere 499 elected Dinifius Bishop of Turone After him succeeded Childibertus who made his brethren Clodomer Theodorick and Clotharius partakers of his Kingdome all which vsed the same authority for by the commandement of Clodomer Omasius was made Bishop of Turone after Dinifius by the commandement of Theodorick Quintianus was made Bishop of Aruerne by the commandement of Clotharius Cato was appointed to be Bishop of Turone which when he refused and afterward would haue had it the King repelled him After the death of Clotharius raigned his sonne Cheribert who made Pascentius Bishop of Poictiers But why should I reckon vp any moe There is a world of examples recorded by Gregorius Turonensis collected from him by one of our learned Bishops all which were aboue a thousand yeeres agoe Afterward when the French Kings became Roman Emperours Pope Adrian decreed and defined that they should haue not only Inuestitures but also the disposing of the Roman See as hath beene declared And although Lodowick the sonne of Charles bee said to haue renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet as the Court of Paris affirmeth He alwaies retained Inuestitures Neither had the Kings of France of ancient time authority in Bishopricks onely but in benefices also Si ad priscorum institutorum normam saith Duarenus omnia exigere velimus nullum est in Gallia beneficium nullum Ecclesiae ministerium quod absque regis consensu cuiquam deferri possit if wee will examine all things according to the rule of ancient constitutions there is in France no benefice no ministry of any Church which can bee conferred vpon any man without the consent of the King Notwithstanding it came to passe in processe of time that the Pope by his prouisions reseruations and expectatiue graces made lamentable desolation in the Church of God for redresse whereof when the councell of Basill had published most worthy decrees Pope Eugenius went about to disanull them VVherefore Charles the 7. king of France at the supplication of the councell and by the aduice of his owne Bishops assembled in Synod vndertooke to protect them to which purpose hee set out that noble constitution called the pragmaticall sanction which was receiued with such an applause of all good men that the like was neuer heard of in the kingdome of France This pragmatical sanction was fitly called by a great learned man the Palladium of France for as the image of Pallas was said to fall downe from heauen among the Troianes so this sanction seemed to be sent from heauen by diuine prouidence among the Frenchmen And as Apollo did prophesie that the remouing of the Palladium would be the destruction of Troy so wise men presaged that the taking away of this Sanction would portend great calamity to the Church of France Yet for al this the Popes would neuer be quiet till they had if not wholly vanquished yet wonderfully weakened it especially Pius the 2. who was one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil but now beeing Pope hee is become another man neither wanted there some which to please the Pope opposed themselues against it whose subtilties and Sophismes are answered by that famous Canonist Archbishop Panormitan who was himselfe also one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil. Yea the court of Paris offered a booke to Lodowick the eleuenth wherein they declared how by the abrogation of the Sanction foure mischiefs would follow the first A confusion of the
whole Ecclesiasticall order the 2. a desolation of their country the 3. the impouerishing of the kingdome by wasting their treasure the 4. the ruine and subuersion of Churches The consideration of which things so preuailed with the King that Pope Pius was disapointed of his purpose PHIL. That which Pius could not performe in the daies of Lewis videlicet that the pragmaticall Sanction should be taken cleane away was afterward effected by Leo the 10. in the reigne of King Francis the first therefore in the councell of Lateran the pragmaticall Sanction was abrogated by a publique Decree ORTH. King Francis to vse the words of Duarenus made choice rather to serue the stage and the time with his owne profit as hee himselfe confesseth and remit somewhat of the publique right then to striue so oft with the Popes about this Helena especially seeing he perceiued that some danger from them did hang ouer his head Yet for al this the Sanction cannot be said to bee cleane taken away For the vniuersity of Paris did interpose an appeale to the next general councell which appeale stood with iustice equity for 3. reasons first because the fact of the king was not voluntary but by compulsion Secondly because the Parisians whom it must concerned were neither called nor heard Thirdly because there is no reason that the councell of Lateran and constitution of Leo should derogate from the authority of the councel of Basil. And if we should suppose that it did not onelie derogate from it but also abrogate it yet the verie constitution of Pope Leo yeeldeth to the King the power of nomination in these wordes VVhen a Cathedrall or Metropoliticall Church is vacant let not the Bishoppe bee chosen by the Colledge of Canons but let the King within sixe monethes offer and nominate a graue and fit man to the Pope Thus it is euident that the French Kings retained their right and authoritie in making of Bishoppes euer since their first embracing of the Christian faith And had they this by the indulgence of the Pope Let the Councell of Basill be witnesse let Charles the seuenth bee witnesse let the Court of Paris bee witnesse yea let King Francis himselfe who confessed that when hee went against the sanction hee remitted of the publique right be witnesse And thus much for France CHAP. XII Of the Election of the Bishops of England PHILOD COncerning England King Henry the first did pretend to challenge Inuestitures as vsed by his father and brother before him whereof yet notwithstanding wee finde no expresse proofe or example in any of our histories that they vsed them much lesse that they were lawfully granted vnto them ORTHOD. I will prooue both that they vsed them and that they vsed them lawfully That his brother William Rufus vsed them may appeare by William of Malmesbury who declareth that the King being sicke made mention of the Archbishopricke of Canterbury which was then voide and willed the Bishops to consider of it who answered that whom the King should thinke worthy they all would accept willingly Itaille cubito se attollens hunc ait sanctum virum Anselmum eligo ingenti subsecuto fragore fauentium so he raising himselfe vp vpon his elbowe saide I elect this holy man Anselmus whereupon followed a great applause Now that Bishoprickes in those dayes were giuen by deliuering of a ring and a staffe may appeare by Rafe Bishop of the South Saxons who being threatened by the same King baculum protendit annulum exuit vt si vellet acciperet held out his Crosier put off his ring that the King might take them if hee would intending thereby to resigne his Bishoprick That William the Conquerour vsed the like authoritie is also manifest by the same authour saying Nondum ille efflauerat cum a Gulielmo Rege Lanfrancus Cadomensis Abbas ad Archiepiscopatum electus est Stigandus had not yet breathed out his Ghost when Lanfranck Abbot of Saint Steuens in Cane was elected by King William the Conquerour to the Archbishoprick The like may be shewed before the Conquest where by the way let me tell you that wee stand not so much vpon the ring and the staffe as vpon the thing it selfe that is the Princes power and authoritie for which I will produce some examples as it were a few clusters of a great vintage beginning with Edward the Confessour of whom Malmsbury faith Rex Robertum quem ex Monacho Gemiticensi Londoniae fecerat Episcopum Archiepiscopum creauit the King Edward the Confessour created Robert Archbishop whom before of a Monke he had made Bishop of London And before that King Alfred made Asserio Bishop of Shierburne and Denewulfus Bishop of Winchester and more then two hundred yeeres before that Edelwalke King of the South Saxons promoted Wilfrid to an Episcopall See Thus it is euident that as in other Kingdomes so in England Inuestitures were anciently practised by Princes Wherefore King Henrie the first might haue challenged them not onely as vsed by his father and brother but also as the ancient custome of the Kingdome in the time of the Saxons Wherein onely this was the difference that in ancient time Princes vsed them without contradiction but now the Popes perceiuing that if Princes should haue the bestowing of them after the olde custome it would abate that power to which they themselues aspired beganne to spurne excommunicating both the giuers and takers This was done in the fifth and seuenth Romane Councels vnder Gregory the seuenth but Pope Vrban went further decreeing that not onely the giuers and takers but also all such as consecrated any man so promoted should bee excommunicate At this Councell Anselmus was present by whose aduise and perswasion the decree was made Whereupon when after the death of William Rufus King Henry the first not knowing of this decree much lesse imagining that it was concluded by the meanes of Anselmus had called him home hee well rewarded the kindnesse of so gracious a Prince for first hee would not bee induced to doe his homage to his Lord and Soueraigne was not this a good subiect did hee not well deserue to be canonized for a Saint then he refused to consecrate those whom the King did inuest to Bishoprickes by a staffe and a ring so the King commanded Gerard Archbishop of Yorke to performe that office as Malmsbury Matthew Paris and Roger Houeden doe testifie PHIL. But what followeth in the same authours William Gifford Elect of Winchester refused to receiue Consecration from him and was therefore by the king banished the land Rinelmus Elect of Hereford resigned his Bishopricke into the kings hands being troubled in conscience because hee receiued inuestiture from a lay Prince by occasion of which broiles the rest to whom the king had giuen inuestitures remained vnconsecrated ORTHOD. Whose fault was that not the kings who required no more then was confirmed