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
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
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
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
perpetuall line of their Bishops and the lawfull succession of Pastors receiued from the Church for the honor whereof we vse to call the English Caluinists by a milder terme not hereticks but schismaticks Behold he confesseth we haue the Catholick order a perpetuall line of Bishops a lawfull succession of Pastors that deriued from the Church But withal I would haue you to know that though we receiued it froÌ„ the Church of Rome yet with a double difference For first Crâ—nmer and the rest receiued their Orders from Popish Bishops in a Popish manner that is defiled with many Popish pollutions but when it pleased God to open their eyes they pared away the pollutions and retayning onely that which was good deliuered it vnto posteritie So we succeed you in your Orders not simply but so far as they are agreeable to the Scripture for the man of â—in did â—it in the Temple of God and Antichrist had vsurped the chaire of Christ so that now in the Church of Rome good things and bad things were mingled together therefore in that which you receiued from Christ wee willinglie succeed you in that which you haue from Antichrist we renounce and disclaime you Secondly Cranmer and the rest receiued from you a shell of succession without the kernell of Doctrine For though your Church did giue men power to preach the truth yet being bewitched with Antichrist in many things it did not reueale the truth but when God by the Scriptures reuealed it vnto them they both preached it themselues and commended it to posterity Neither was this to leape out of the Church but out of the corruptions in the Church euen as the wheate kernel when it is clensed leapeth not out of the barne but out of the chaffe Moreouer though our Doctrine may seeme to you extraordinarie because it differeth from the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome yet as our calling and function so our Doctrine is the same which the spirit of God hath deliuered in holy Scripture to be ordinary in the Church till the end of the world and therefore you haue no reason to require any Miracles at our hands PHIL. These points shal be further skanned I warrant you In the meane time As Tigellius in Horace had nothing certaine and setled in all the course of his life but was alwaies distracted into contrary affections In respect of his pace some times he ran most swiftly as though hee had fled from his enemie some times hee mooued so slowly as though hee had carried the sacrifices of Iuno In respect of his traine he had many times two hundred attending him againe sometimes he had onely two And in his speech now he imitated Kings and Tetrarches and spake nothing but all bigge words an other time hee would stoope to very meane matters So that nothing was more vnlike and vnequall in the course of life then this poore wretch was to himselfe euen so your Dâ—ctors some times they creepe vpon the ground by and by they catch at the clouds and starres Now they refuse all miracles and â—nock at such at require them on a suddaine they challenge to themselues all the miracles since the beginning of the world ORTHOD. And herein they doe nothing but what may stand with reason For if you speake of our doctrine we professe and are readie to prooue that wee teach the same doctrine for substance which Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles both taught and confirmed by Miracles And in this sence all the Miracles of Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles are ours because they are so many seales and confirmations of that Doctrine which we teach But if the question bee concerning our persons then wee confesse that wee can worke no miracles wee take no such matter vpon vs neither is it necessarie because both our calling and doctrine are Ordinary PHIL. I will proue that you haue no lawfull ordinarie calling in the Church of England And first you challenge to your selues no other ministers but either Bishops or Priests or Deacons for other inferiour orders you haue none But neither your Bishops nor your Priestes nor your Deacons haue any lawfull ordinary calling For first to the ordinarie calling of a Bishop ordination or consecration is requisite by precedent Bishops hauing episcopal power of order and iurisdiction but your Bishops are descended from such progenitours as had neither of these no Episcopall power of Order because either they had no consecration at all or at least such as is not able to abide the touchstone no Episcopall iurisdiction because they are neither elected nor confirmed by our holy Father the successour of Peter to whom onely Christ gaue the Keyes and in them the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power Therefore your Bishops are no Bishops and consequently all ordinations deriued from them are mere nullities SEcondly your ordination of Priestes is most intollerable for according to holy Church this sacred action consisteth of two parts answerable to the two principal functions of Priesthood the former is garnished with these seemely ceremonies First of all the Bishop with all the Priestes present layeth his hands vpon the head of the person to be ordained then he inuesteth him in a sacred stoale so fitted and fashioned that it maketh a Crosse vpon his brest after this he anointeth his hands with holy oile and lastly he deliuereth him the Chalice with wine and the Paten with the hoast saying Accipe potestatem offerre sacrificium Deo Missasque celebraretam pro viuis quam pro defunctis in nomine domini that is take thou power to offer sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses as well for the quicke as for the dead in the name of the Lord. This is the first part of the ordination which graceth him with the principall function of Priesthood whereby he is made interpres mediator dei hominum That is an Interpreter and mediator of God and man Yea higher then a King happier then an Angell creator of his Creator This is that which maketh the holy Priesthood to be honoured because no King nor Emperor no Angel nor Archangel is able to do as we doe that is with pronouncing of a few words to make the body of Christ flesh blood and bone as it was borne of the Virgin Mary Moreouer after Masse the Bishop imposeth hands saying Accipe spirituâ—â— sanctum quorum peccata remiseris remituntur cis quorum retinueris retenta sunt that is Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes thou forgiuest they are forgiuen them and whose thou retainest they are retained This is the second part wherein hee receiueth the second function of Priesthood that is the power of absolution Such are the rites of holy Church wherein you are notoriously defectiue To passe ouer with silence your contempt of the sacred ceremonies of Crossing and anointing which are but accidentall you want the very essentiall
labours to the grace of God which imposition of hands the ancient writers terme Ordination vsing the word largely and improperly But if we should imagine that he was properly ordained what can be collected thereupon PHIL. THat this should be a paterne to all posteritie as appeareth by the authorities before alleadged and consequently that a Bishop should not be ordained by fewer then three ORTHOD. There may be a faire patterne and yet posteritie may sometimes want meanes to imitate that patterne When the number may be had we greatly commend it when it cannot then both this and all other Ecclesiasticall Constitutions must yeeld to necessitie PHIL. The contrary is manifest by the words of Anâ—cletus A Petro Iacobo Iohanne Apostolis est ordinatus successoribus dantibus formam eorum vt non minus quam à tribus Episcopis reliquisque omnibus assensum praebentibus vllatenus ordinetur Episcopus Wherefore a Bishop must not be ordained Vllatenus by any meanes or in any respect by fewer then three and consequently not in case of necessitie Is not this to make the number of three a substantiall point of Episcopall Ordination ORTHOD. The same word in effect is vsed about the Consecration of an Archbishop Archiepiscopus ab omnibus suae Prouinciae Episcopis ordinetur hoc autem nullatenus liceat immutare That is Let an Archbishop be ordained of all the Bishops of his Prouince and let it by no meanes be lawfull to change this Where this word Nullatenus doeth not proue that the consent of all is substantiall as is confessed by Cardinall Turrecremata PHIL. You must marke what followeth Sin aliter praesumptum fuerit viribus carere non dubium est quia irrita erit secus acta ordinatio i. If the action shal be otherwise done through presumption there is no doubt but it wanteth validitie because the Ordination otherwise performed shal be voyd ORTHOD. It shal be void but how Quoad officij executionem saith the Glosse i. According to the execution of the Office Whereupon Hugo saith Episcopus tamen erit licet ab omnibus non consecretur sed repelletur ab Officio Episcopali nisi dispensetur cum illo i. Yet he shal be a Bishop although he be not Consecrated of all but he shal be repelled for his presumption from the Episcopal Office vnlesse he be dispensed withall Wherefore in the iudgment of Hugo the Ordination is not void in respect of the power but the Church may make it void in respect of the execution and yet vpon his repentance he may be admitted to the execution not by a new ordination but by dispensation which proueth that the transgression was not substantial but accidental PHIL. Damasus saith It is apparant to all men that they are no Bishops which are ordained of fewer then three because it is forbidden by the holy Fathers that they which are ordained of one or two Bishops should not so much as be named Bishops If they haue not the name how shall they haue the office Wherefore whatsoeuer they shall doe amongst Bishops Necesse est vt irritum fiat i. It must needes bee voide Quia quod non habent dare non possunt i. because they cannot giue that which they haue not ORTHO Your owne Cardinall shall answere you Wheresoeuer saith hee it can bee found that an ordination is voide and of no validitie because it is performed by fewer then by three it is to be vnderstood Non quantum ad veritatem Sacramenti sed quantum ad executionem officij i. Not in respect of the trueth of the Sacrament but in respect of the execution of the office And truely there is no reason that he should inioy an honorable office in the Church which presumptuously breaketh the Lawes of the Church Therefore the Church may iustly repell them from execution but cannot take away their power which they haue in themselues and haue power to imprint in others Yet while they haue it without the Churches approbation they cannot giue it with the Churches approbation and while they stand in opposition the Church esteemeth the orders they giue as no orders yet are they true orders in the nature of the thing but the Church restraineth the execution of them as though they were none for order and discipline sake Yet as you heard before euen in case of presumption the Church may dispense vpon due consideration and consequently receiue into her bosome such as were ordained in Schisme and let them inioy both their orders and honours But when the defect springeth neither from schisme nor heresie from presumption nor singularitie but onely from vrgent necessitie there being no voluntary violation necessitie it selfe is a sufficient dispensation And this must be the meaning of Damasus or else â—f you vrge from his words an absolute nullity you wil make him condradict both the positions and practise of your owne Church as hereafter shal be declared CHAP. V. Wherein their Argument drawne from the Councels is propounded vrged and answered PHIL. THE contrary may be proued by the Councels and I hope as in all other Controuersies betweene vs and you so in this you shall be presently confounded by them I will beginne with that first famous generall Councell of Nice ORTHO Indeed a vaine Iesuite cryeth Concilia generalia mea sunt primum vltimum media that is All generall Councells are mine the first the last and the middle For tryall whereof let vs take a little viewe of this Nicen Councell wherein you so glory and first concerning that very Canon which you produce against vs as though we did transgresse it we may iustly say that the Church of England hath as well obserued it as euer did any Church vpon the face of the earth But the Church of Rome doth indeed transgresse it In which sometimes one Bishop alone doth consecrate a Bishop two Abbots supplying the place of the other two Bishops as Bellarmine confesseth Secondly according to the Nicen Canons the power to confirme Bishops belongeth to the Metropolitan of the prouince without whose approbation whosoeuer is ordeined a Bishop the Nicen Fathers account for no Bishop but the Church of Rome alloweth him whom the Pope alloweth though he be not allowed by his Metropolitan and disalloweth him whom the Pope disalloweth though he be lawfully allowed by his Metropolitan Thirdly the Nicen Canons forbidde that any Bishop should absolue them which are excommunicate by another Bishop But the Pope will open and shut bind and loose at his pleasure Fourthly the Nicen Canons appoint that old customes should bee kept and namely that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue the preheminence in Egypt Lybya and Pentapolis because such also is the custome of the Bishop of Rome and likewise that in Antioch and other Prouinces the Churches should inioy their dignities and prerogatiues Which words in all reason import that euery Metropolitan should haue preheminence
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
both the outward court by excommunications absolutions dispensations calling generall councels c. and the court of conscience by forgiuing and retaining sinnes In a word in these keyes all Ecclesiasticall power was comprehended and giuen vnto Peter ORTHOD. The keyes were giuen to the rest of the Apostles as well as to Peter for the occasion of these words was a question of Christ proposed to al his Apostles whom say you that I am this question was answered by Peter Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Wherupon Saint Austin obserueth that Peter alone made answer for all the Apostles and his obseruation is according to the Scriptures which testifie that Peter before this time had answered in the name of them all VVe beleeue and know that thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Now as Peter answered one for all so Christ said to Peter and in him to them all I will giue you the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen Thus the Fathers in terpret the place Austin Peter receiued the keyes together with them al Ierome they did all receiue the keyes Origen Christs promise of building his Church of giuing the keyes of binding and loosing made as to Peter only was common to all Hilarie They obtained the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Ambrose VVhat is said to Peter is said to the Apostles This consent of Fathers should ouer ballance your opinion by the Councell of Trent And here I might iustly returne Campians flourish vpon you Patres admiseris captus es excluseris nullus es If you admit the Fathers you are catched If you exclude them you are no body Indeed my Masters you make the world beleeue that you will be iudged by the Fathers but when it comes to the tryall you commonly forsake them the Fathers must be pretended for a fashion but the holy Father of Rome is the very needle and compasse whereby you saile PHIL. WE confesse that all receiued the keyes but Christ gaue them to Peter immediatly to the rest by Peter so all power both of order and iurisdiction proceedeth from Peter ORTHO Let Bellarmine himselfe iudge the cause betweene vs who proueth by foure arguments That the Apostles receiued their iurisdiction immediately from Christ. First by these words of Christ himselfe As my Father sent me so send I you which exposition he strengtheneth by the authorities of Chrysostom Theophylact Cyrill and Cyprian by the euidence whereof he affirmeth that the same thing was giuen to the Apostles by these words I send you which was promised to Peter by these words I will giue thee the keyes and afterward deliuered by these words Feed my sheepe and addeth Constat autem per illa tibi dabo claues per illud pasce oues intelligi iurisdictionē plenissimā etiam exteriorē i It is cleare that by these words I will giue thee the keyes and by this saying feede my sheep there is vnderstood a most full iurisdiction euen in the outward Court Secondly hee proueth it because Mathias was neither elected by the Apostles nor receiued any authority by them but beeing elected by God was presently accounted amongst the Apostles And verilie saith hee if all the Apostles had their iurisdiction from Peter that should haue beene manifested most of all in Matthias Thirdly he proueth it by Saint Paul who professeth that he had his iurisdiction from Christ and thence confirmeth his Apostleship for he saith Paul an Apostle not of men or by man but by Iesus Christ And that he might declare that he receiued no authoritie from Peter or any other Apostle he saith VVhen it pleased God which had separated me from my mothers womb called me by his grace to reueale his sonne in mee that I should preach him among the Gentiles immediatly I cōmunicated not with flesh and bloud Neither came I againe to Ierusalem to thē which were Apostles before mee but I went into Arabia and turned againe into Damascus Then after three yeeres I came againe to Ierusalem to visite Peter And againe To mee those that seemed to bee something conferred nothing Fourthly because the Apostles were made onely by Christ and yet had Iurisdiction as appeareth First by Paul excommunicating the Corinthian Secondly by the same Paul making Ecclesiasticall lawes Thirdly because the Apostolick dignitie is the highest dignitie in the Church Wherefore it is euident that the rest of the Apostles receiued not their Iurisdiction from Peter but from Christ. PHIL. CHrist promised the keyes to Peter onely therefore in this respect he must haue a preheminence aboue the rest ORTH. Whatsoeuer Christ promised that hee performed but he performed not the keyes to Peter with any preheminence aboue his fellows but alike to all therefore hee did not promise them to Peter by way of preheminence but to him with the rest PHIL. Did he not say I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose c. So they were promised to Peter in the singular number ORTHO Though these wordes bee of the singular number yet they were not spoken to Peter as he was Peter or a singular person but to Peter representing the person of the Church as the Fathers say according to the Scripture For when he said I will giue thee the keyes he added immediately by way of explication and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon earth it shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon earth it shall bee loosed in heauen Vpon which wordes Bellarmine saith thus The plaine sence of these wordes I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose is this that first there is promised an authoritie or a power signified by the keyes and then the actions or office is explained by these wordes to bind and to loose So that to loose and to open to shut and to bind is altogether the same But the Lord expressed the actions of the keyes by loosing and binding not by shutting and opening that we might vnderstand that all these speeches are metaphoricall and that heauen is then opened vnto men when they are loosed from their sinnes which hindered their entrance into heauen But the power of binding and loosing was giuen to all the Apostles by Christ in these wordes whatsoeuer you shall bind on earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heauen PHIL. Cardinall Caietan thinketh that to open and to shut is of a larger extent then to bind and to loose ORTHOD. Bellarmine thinketh this more subtill then sound because there are no keyes in the Church sauing onely of Order and Iurisdiction both which are signified by the actions of binding and loosing as Caietan confesseth and Bellarmine proued before both by Fathers and Scripture PHIL. The power of binding and loosing is
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
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
hitherto God be thanked he hath missed the Chesnut PHIL. NOw I plainely perceiue That you are deepely ingaged in the schisme and heresie of England O England England thou wast sometimes a most famous and flourishing Church thy faith and Religion shining like a Diamond of true lustre thy zeale and deuotion burning like the flaming fire the sparkling Starres in the firmament were not so glorious but now alas since Caluinisme came in thou hast lost thy lustre thy glory is eclipsed there remaineth no sparkle of thy ancient loue no faith no Religion no Church ORTHOD. You tread in the steps of your foâ—efathers and helpe to fill vp the measure of their iniquitie For it hath bene alwayes their custome to lay odious imputations vpon our Religion that by this stratageme they might win Proselytes vnto their owne Rich. Bristow affirmed that our Religion is proued by experience to be indeed no Religion Cardinall Allen speaking of our Sacraments Seruice and Sermons calleth them things which assuredly procure damnation William Reinolds hath blazed to the world that our Religion is worse then the Turkish The bookes of Sanders and Parsons haue bene as full of slanders as a serpent is of poison To passe ouer Harding Stapleton and others the latter brood is as venemous as the former One example for all may be that lewd Libeller which exclaimeth That the Protestants haue no faith no hope no charitie no repentance no Iustification no Church no Altar no sacrifice no Priest no Religion no Christ. What shall we say to these intemperate spirits If they speake of malice then I say with Michael the Archangel The Lord rebuke them but if they speake of ignorance as I hope they do then I say with the holy Martyr S. Stephen Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Or with our blessed Sauiour Father forgiue them they wote not what they do For that faith and Religion which is agreeable to the Scripture is true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke But the faith and Religion publickly professed at this day in England is in euery Article and branch thereof agreeable to the Scripture therefore it is in euery Article and branch thereof true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke Moreouer where the Gospel is truely preached and the holy Sacraments rightly administred there is a true Christian visible Church but both these dueties are religiously performed in England what reason haue you then to say that we haue no Church PHIL. BEcause you haue no Ministerie for there cannot be a Church without Pastors and bishops as S. Cyprian teacheth who defineth the Church to be a people vnited to a Bishop And S Hierome when he saith That it is no Church which hath not Priests This doeth appeare euidently by S. Paul who declareth that Christ gaue Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints the worke of the Ministerie and the edification of the body of Christ vntill we meet all in the vnitie of faith into a perfect man and the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ. In which place as our learned Cardinall hath obserued the Apostle teacheth That there shall be Pastours in the Church till the day of Iudgement for then we shall meet the Lord in the vnitie of faith Behold saith father Hessius till the number of the Elect bee accomplished in the end of the world the Church shall alwayes haue Pastors and teachers Neither doeth Luther deny this but rather put it among the Notes of the Church And Caluin affirmeth That the Church can neuer want Pastors and teachers From this plaine approued principle thus I dispute Where there is no true Ministerie there is no true Church but among the Protestants in England there is no true Ministerie therefore among them there is no true Church CHAP. II. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministerie is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops the second of Presbyters The third of Deacons ORTHODOX WHat mislike you in our Ministerie PHIL. Not one thing or two but the whole frame of it absolutely and altogether for to deale plainly your Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay men Neither is this my priuate opinion but the generall iudgement of our learned diuines which affirme the same As for example Ri. Bristow Consider what Church that is whose Ministers are but very Lay men vnsent vncalled vnconsecrated and therefore executing their pretended Office without benefit or spirituall comfort of any man yea to the certaine and great damnation of themselues and others vnfit and vnworthy by this onely that they bee called to that fond function of any seruice in the Church of God holding therefore amongst vs when they repent and come againe no other place but the place of Lay-men in no case admitted no nor looking to minister in any Office vnlesse they take our Orders which before they had not M Harding In this your new Church Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons or any inferior Order you haue none D. Sanders The new Clergie in England is composed partly of our Apostataes partly of meerely Lay-men M. Houlet That either all or the most part of the Ministers of England be meerely Lay men and no Priests and consequently haue no authoritie in these things it is euident Cardinall Allen with our learned diuines at Rhemes All your new Euangelists which haue intruded themselues into Church and Pulpit be euery one from the highest to the lowest false prophets running and vsurping being neuer lawfully called D. Stapleton They being sent of no man nor hauing Ordination haue inuaded the Ecclesiastical Chaires D. Kellison Forasmuch as the inferior Ministers are made by those Bishops and are children of those fathers they also are no true Priests hauing neither Order nor Iurisdiction William Reinolds There is no feeder of sheepe or oxen in all Turkie which doeth not vndertake the gouernment of his flocke or droue vpon better reason and greater right order and authoritie then these your magnificent Apostles and Euangelists can shew for this their Propheticall and Apostolicall and most diuine and most high Office of gouerning soules reforming Churches teaching heauenly Trueth and declaring the minde and will of God to men And finally the Catholicke Priests in their supplication to King Iames Neither is any of your Protestant Ministers comming to our Catholicke fraternity reputed other then meerely Lay-men without Orders Thus you see how we all agree in this point Neither is this the opinion of vs English Exiles onely but other Catholicke doctors are of the same minde The Hereticks of our age saith Bellarmine haue neither Ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and Office of a Bishop more
Bishops but they are found in the Church of Rome and not in the Church of England PHIL. YOur Bishops are no Bishops because they are not ordained according to the Canons ORT. The ancient Canons are more reuerently regarded in the Church of England then in the Church of Rome For how well you haue obserued them in former ages let your owne Baronius testifie How foule saith hee was then the face of the holy Romane Church when most potent and withall most filthie harlots did beare all the sway at Rome at whose lust Sees were changed Bishops appointed and which is horrible to be heard and not to bee vttered whose louers the false Popes were thrust into the seate of Peter which were not to bee written in the Catalogue of the Romane Bishops but onely for the noting of the times for who may say they were lawfull Popes which were thus without right thrust in by such strumpets No where wee finde any mention of Clergie choosing or giuing consent afterward All Canons were put to silence the pontificall decrees were choked ancient traditions proscribed and the old customes sacredrite and former vse in choosing the high Bishop vtterly extinguished And for later times your owne learned friends also complaine as followeth Budeus The holie Canons and rules of Church discipline made in better times to guide the life of Clergie men are now become leaden rules such as Aristotle saith the rules of Lesbyan buildings were For as leaden and soft rules doe not direct the building with an equall tenour but are bowed to the building at the lust of the builders so are the Popes Canons made flexible as leade and waxe that now this great while the Decrees of our ancestours and the Popes Canons serue not to guide mens manners but that I may so say to make a banke and get mony Franciscus de Victoria Doct of the chaire at Salmantica in Spaine Wee see dailie so large or rather so dissolute dispensations proceede from the Court of Rome that the world cannot indure them Neither is it onely to the offence of the little ones but of the great ones also No man seeketh a dispensation but hee obtaineth it Yea at Rome there are which giue attendance to see if any bee willing to craue dispensation of all things established by law all that craue it haue it If you Philodox would see the particulars reade but Claudius Espencaeus a diuine of Paris vpon the Epistle to Titus and vnlesse your fore-head bee as hard as brasse it will make you blush I will conclude this point with the saying of Ruardus Tapperus Chancelour of Louaine In the Court of Rome all things are set at sale with dispensations contayning many things wherewith Christ himselfe is not able to dispence Behold this is your keeping of Canons in the Church of Rome But because you accuse the Church of England for breaking the Canons in making of Bishops I answere first that the consecration of our Bishops is most canonicall Secondly that if wee failed in this or that Canon yet euery transgression of an Ecclesiasticall Canon doth not make a nullitie in a consecration As for example It was prouided by the great Councell of Sardica that none should bee made Bishop vnlesse hee had passed the inferiour orders and staied a long time in them Notwithstanding Nectarius was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople being not only a lay-man but as yet vnbaptized and was presently made Bishop in the second generall Councell held at Constantinople Likewise Saint Ambrose Tarasius Nicephorus Eusebius of Caesarea Thalasius yea and some Popes also as for example Petrus Moronaeus were of lay men aduanced to the Episcopall office yet I know you dare not pronounce a nullitie in their Consecration Wherfore seeing it is a plaine case that euery breach of a Canon doth not annihilate a consecration you must tell vs what Canon you meane and wherein we breake it PHIL. I meane that Canon which requireth that a Bishop should bee consecrated by three Bishops which Canon the Councel of Trent calleth an Apostolicke tradition ORTHO HEre arise two questions the former whether three Bishops be required of necessitie to an Episcopall consecration the later whether the Bishops of England be consecrated by three Now that the state of the former may be the clearer giue me leaue to aske you a few things And first what say you to Amphilochius who was created Bishop not by men but by Angels vnlesse Nicephorus delude vs with fables PHIL. It seemeth to bee no fable but a true Story For Amphilochius was allowed for a lawfull Bishop but this was done as Cardinall Bellarmine saith by diuine dispensation extraordinary ORTH. What say you then to the blessed Apostles were they Bishops or no And if Bishops whether in that they were Apostles or by distinct consecration and if by distinct consecration by whom were they consecrated PHIL. Cardinall Turrecremata teacheth that Chirst himselfe made Peter a Bishoppe immediatelie and Peter ordained the rest first Iohn next Iames then others And Cardinall Bellarmine maketh it the two and twentith prerogatiue of Peter Quòd solus Petrus a Christo ordinatus Episcopus fuerit caeteri autem a Petro Episcopalem consecrationem acceperint i. That onely Peter was ordained Bishop by Christ and the rest receiued their Episcopall consecration from Peter ORTHOD. These conceites and fancies when they shal be weighed in the ballance wil be found too light In the meane time what say you to the consecration of Iohn and Iames were they sound and Canonical PHIL. They were sound no doubt but why should you aske if they were canonicall seeing the Canon was not then made You must vnderstand that there is one consideration to bee had of the Church when it is in the cradle and another when it is growne to ripe and florishing yeeres In the infancie of the Church when Christ ascending into glorie had consecrated Peter and made him the spring and fountaine of all Episcopall Order it was necessarie that the first should bee consecrated by Peter alone the next by two at the most and these consecrations were sound and sufficient but when Iames the brother of our Lord was ordained Bishoppe of Ierusalem by Peter Iohn and the other Iames they gaue a Forme or Patterne to their successours as Anacletus declareth that a Bishop should by no meanes bee consecrated by fewer then by three all the rest giuing their consent ORTHO Suppose a Church should suffer such desolation which the Lord forbid that a Canonicall number of Catholicke Bishops were not to be found what should then be done in this case of necessitie PHIL. Wee may learne that partly of the Councell of Sardica which permitteth a supply from the next prouince partly of Pope Gregory the seuenth who when the Churches of Africke were brought to so lowe an ebbe that they had
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
Aristobulus S. Peters scholler doe testifie in like maner the foresaid authours Mirmianus Dorotheus Baronius out of the Greeke Martyrologe that he was sent by S. Peter into Britaine and there made a Bishoppe ORTHO What you or your fellowes say is not greatly materiall but how falsely you report of Dorotheus may appeare by these his words Aristobulus euen he which is mentioned by the Apostle to the Romanes was made Bishop of Britaine this is all which he saith if he say so much for there are diuers readings But howsoeuer there is not one word of S. Peter yet Parsons brings him to auouch that Aristobulus was sent by S. Peter And whereas Parsons calleth him S. Peters scholler he is not so described by Dorotheus but rather as S. Pauls Therfore if he were Bishop of Britaine it is farre more likely that he was sent by S. Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles then by S. Peter Let vs now proceed to Ioseph of Arimathea PHIL. OF Ioseph of Arimathea his comming into France and his sending thence into Great Britaine either by S. Philip as some say who preached then in Gaule or as others hold by S. Peter himselfe as he passed that way to and from Britaine and how he obtained a place to exercise an Eremiticall life for him and his ten companions in the Iland called Aâ—allonia where Glanstenbury after was builded albeit I find no very certaine or ancient writer to affirme it yet because our latter Historiographers for two hundred yeeres past or more doe hold it to haue come downe by tradition and namely Iohannes Capgrauius a learned man of the order of S. Dominicke and others after him I doe not meane to dispute the matter here but rather to admire and praise the heauenly prouidence of God c. ORTHOD. The words of Iohn Capgraue are thus Ioseph cum silio c. i. Ioseph with his sonne Ioseph and other ten companions traâ—eiling through Britaine vnder the raigne of King Aruiragus preached the faith of Christ boldly in the yeere of our Lords incarnation 63. And againe They came into France to Philip the Apostle and of him were sent into Britaine And againe The King granted vnto them a certaine Iland inuironed with woods bushes and fennes called of the inhabitants Jnis Ditrin i. the Iland of glasse Which relation seemeth very probable There is extant an Epistle if it be not counterfeit alledged by Lelandus and other Antiquaries and ascribed to S. Patrick wherein it is thus written Ostenderunt mihi c. i. The brethren which I found at Glastenbury shewed vnto me the writings of Fugatius and Damianus in which it was contained That 12. disciples of Philip and Iacob had built the old Church and that three Pagan Kings gaue to the said 12 so many possessions of lands King Henry the second in the Charter of Glastenbury affirmeth That the Church thereof was founded by the Disciples of our Lord. William of Malmesbury in his booke of Glastenbury Abbey saith That the olde Church was built by Ioseph Yea The ancient Monuments of the said Abbey doe testifie the same And also that Ioseph was sent thither by S. Philip out of France This is that Ioseph which made Sepulchre in his Garden That in the middest of his pleasures he might thinke of mortalitie He buried the blessed body of Christ and afterward became a Preacher of the Resurrection In Glastenbury he powred out his precious Ointment and all Britaine was filled with the sweetnesse of the odour Now whether he were the first Preacher in Britaine I cannot define but if hee were then the first Conuerter came from Arimathea and not from Rome being sent by S. Philip and not by S. Peter PHIL. That the Gospel came first to Glastenbury from Rome may thus be proued King Inas aboue 900. yeeres past when he layd the foundation of Glastenbury Abbey in memory of S. Ioseph and his fellowes that had liued a solitary life there caused these Verses to be written in the Church Anglia plaude lubens mittittibi Roma salutem Fulgor Apostolicus Glasconiam irradiat Be glad England for that Rome sendeth health to thee and Apostolicall brightnesse doeth lighten Glastenburie Which could not well be spoken if the comming of these Saints and first inhabiters there had not had some relation to Rome and to the Apostles that sent them ORTHOD. If Inas layed the foundation of Glastenbury Abbey in memorie of S. Ioseph who liued there then we haue a noble Monument of Iosephs being in England But that euer he was at Rome or sent hither by any Bishop of Rome is more then we can find or you can proue William of Malmesbury declareth That when the ancient Church built by Ioseph was vtterly decayed there was another built by Deui Bishop of S. Dauids Which also in time growing ruinous was repaired by 12. men comming out of the North but K. Inas pulled it downe and reared a stately one to Christ Peter and Paul In this certaine Verses are written The first 12. whereof are a continuall commendation of Peter and Paul by way of comparison then follow those two which you haue cited in which he willeth England to reioyce And why because Rome sendeth her health But how the next verse declareth Because the Apostolicke brightnesse doeth lighten Glastenbury Where if the Poet speake of the brightnes of doctrine as you seeme to take it then it is not necessary to referre it to the first inhabitants it may haue relation to the doctrine not long before preached by Austin For I know you will call his doctrine Apostolicke Yet it seemeth that the Poet meaneth not the brightnesse of doctrine but of patronage and protection imagining according to the corrupt opinion of those times that the Saints by whose names the Churches were called were Patrons and Protectors of the said Churches For in the words following Peter and Paul are called two Bulwarks and towers of faith And K. Inas who dedicated the Church vnto them is said to haue giuen these Bulwarks as euerlasting gifts to his people By which what can be meant but that those Apostles were now by his Dedication become their Bulwarks and towers of protection So the Apostolicke brightnesse that is their glorious Patronage and protection is said to shine most radiantly ouer Glastenbury And health is said to be sent from Rome because they ascribe their safety to those Apostles which were the founders of the Church of Rome which doeth in no case argue that Christianitie was first brought hither from Rome NOw what will you say if the Britaine 's were Christians before the Romanes For who was the first founder of the Church of Rome you proclaime euery where that S. Peter But when came S. Peter thither Baronius saith in the yeere 44 being the second of the Emperour Claudius Now let vs consider when our Iland first receiued the sweete influence of the
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
Catholicke and the followers hereticall We acquit the Masters and condemne the Schollers they are heires of heauen which haue written those bookes the defendours whereof are troden downe to the pit of hell But now the Church hath long agoe with one voice condemned this Heresie When Praetextatus and Felicianus hauing baptised sundry in schisme returned to vnitie the Church did not rebaptise them whom they had baptised but kept them in that baptisme which they had in Schisme For according to Saint Austin some doe minister baptismum legitimum and that legitimè some neither legitimè nor yet legitimum some legitimum but not legitimè Such as performe it in the true element and forme of wordes being themselues in the bosome and vnitie of the Church doe minister both legitimum and legitimè such as faile in the institution and are themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe neither minister legitimè nor yet legitimum such as doe obserue the substance of institution being themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe minister legitimum but not legitimè And those which receiue it from them haue a lawfull baptisme but not lawfully For it is one thing to haue a lawfull thing vnlawfully and another thing not to haue it at all The Sacraments of the Church may be found without the Church as the riuers of Paradise are found without Paradise Heretickes and Schismatickes may haue rem columbae though they themselues be extra columbam PHIL. The trueth of this Doctrine is so plaine that no common Catholick is ignorant of it ORTH. Then to proceede what if the Priest wee speake of were interdicted suspended excommunicated degraded PHIL. Yet if hee obserue in all points of substance the institution of Christ it is effectuall and neuer to bee repeated This is vndoubtedly the iudgement of our Church And therefore in Queene Maries time though the land had beene interdicted and vnder the Popes curse for Schisme and Heresie by the space of twentie yeeres wee did not rebaptise them who were then baptised but haue kept them with vs in their former baptisme ORTH. COncerning baptisme we agree Now to come to the eucharist shall the vngodly life or wicked opinion of the Minister make his ministration of it vneffectuall to the people of God PHIL. In no case so he obserue the ordinance of Christ. ORTHOD. You answere rightly For the sonnes of Eli were wicked men and procured Gods heauie wrath against themselues yet there is no doubt but the God of all Grace did accept of those Sacrifices which his faithfull children with an honest heart presented according to the Law of the Lord to be offered euen by their hands so long as they inioyed the Office of Priesthood Our Sauiour in the Gospel reproued the Scribes and Pharisees for their false and superstitious doctrine which was so commonly receiued and so anciently continued that there can be no question but many of the Priests were infected with it Yet Christ commanded the Leper to shew himselfe to the Priest Yea he himselfe frequented the Feasts wherein Sacrifices were offered by those Priests But to goe forward Can the Eucharist be ministred by a Priest whom the Pope hath excommunicated and degraded PHIL. Though all Priests haue the power of Order vnder the Pope yet for as much as they haue it not immediatly from the Pope but from God therefore the Pope cannot so take it away but that if they will they may vse it For a Priest though the Pope should ExcoÌ„municate suspend interdict degrade him yet if he will himselfe he shall truely Consecrate For euery Priest hath an indeleble Character which is a certaine spirituall and supernaturall power imprinted in the soule of man in Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders whereby the Baptized Confirmed and Ordered are inabled to giue or receiue the Offices of certaine Sacraments The Character of Confirmation being not greatly to our present purpose may bee passed ouer The Character of Baptisme is a passiue power whereby the Baptized is made â—it to receiue other Sacraments whereof without Baptisme he were vncapable The Character of Order is an actiue power to minister the Sacraments vnto other Now in holy Orders it must be obserued That the Priestly Character doeth differ from the Episcopall For the Episcopall is either an other or the same extended so that it conteineth the Priestly and somewhat else A Priest in respect of his Priestly Character is first of all the publicke and ordinary Minister of Baptisme For a Lay-man may not Baptise publickely but onely priuately Neither priuately in the presence of the Priest or Deacon but onely in their absence Neither alwayes in their absence but onely in case of necessitie for then a Lay-man be he Iew or infidel may Baptize so hee intend to doe that which the Catholicke Church doeth in that kinde of Administration A Deacon may Baptise not onely priuately but publickely so it be at the appointment of the Bishop or Priest But a Priest may suo iure Baptize ex Officio euen in the presence of a Bishop as is declared by Pius Quintus and the Councell of Trent who qualifie the contrary opinion and reduce it to a tollerable sence Secondly a Priest by vertue of his Priestly Character may consecrate the Hoaste which no Lay-man King nor Emperour no Angel nor Archangel can performe because they want this Character Indeed a Deacon may helpe to minister the Eucharist but he cannot Consecrate no not by dispensation If he should take it vpon him he should effect nothing But euery Priest receiueth in his Ordination a Character not from man but from the Eternall God which in respect of the Eucharist is absolute perfect and independent Wheresoeuer it is there God is present ex pacto and coÌ„curreth to the producing of supernaturall effects which he doeth not where this Character is wanting Now the holy Councels of Florence and Trent do teach vs That this Character is indeleble death onely if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting ORTHOD. If by indeleble Character bee meant onely a gracious gift neuer to be reirerated then we may safely confesse that in Baptisme and holy Orders there is imprinted an indeleble Character For a man rightly Baptized becomming a Turke or a Iew and afterward returning to the faith and Church of Christ is in no case to be rebaptized the vertue of his former Baptisme is not spunged out but still remaineth auaileable Likewise when a Priest lawfully ordained becoming a schismaticke or hereticke is iustly censured for his crimes and afterward is reclaimed if the Church shall need his labours and hold it conuenient that he execute the Ministeriall function hee may in no case be reordained but may performe it by vertue of his Orders formerly receiued Hitherto of a Priest NOw to transferre our speech to a Bishop Shall his iniquitie hinder him from giuing Orders PHIL. No verily for there is the
same reason of this and the former ORTHOD. There is so For as Christ is the chiefe Baptizer so hee is the chiefe Ordainer It is hee that giueth d Pastours and teachers vnto the Church therefore the personall iniquitie of the seruant cannot disanull the gracious gift of the master For who conferred Priesthood among the Iewes After the consecration of Aaron and his sonnes which was performed by the hands of Moses and was extraordinary there is no doubt but the honour of it belonged ordinarily to the high Priest But did not Aaron make a golden calfe Did not Eli see his sonnes runne into a slander and stayed them not Yet so long as they liued they did execute the Pontificall office neither were their Ordinations called in question no not the Ordinations of Annas and Caiaphas But is there the same reason here also of Hereticks and schismatiks PHIL. Card. Bell saith Quis ignorat Catholicorum Baptizatos ab Haereticis verè esse Baptizatos similiter Ordinatos verè esse Ordinatos quādo Ordinator Haereticus verè Episcopus fuerat adhuc erat saltem quantum ad Characterem i. Which of the Catholicks is ignorant that the Baptized of Hereticks are truely Baptized and those that are likewise Ordained of Hereticks are truely Ordained when the Hereticall Ordainer had bene truly a Bishop and was still at least in respect of the Character ORTHOD. S. Basill affirmeth That of all the Arch heretickes of the whole world whereof many were then very famous none euer durst reordaine the Ordained except one Eustathius Ancyrogalata whose wicked crime the Councel of Gangren declareth In the 2. Councel at Nice the Monks said According to sixe holy and generall Councels we receiue those that returne from Heresie vnlesse there be some intolerable cause Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said And all we also being instructed of our holy fathers doe so define And againe Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said What say you of Anatolius was not he President of the fourth Synode yet he was Created of that wicked Dioscorus Therefore let vs also receiue the Ordained of Hereticks as Anatolius was receiued And againe Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said Truely very many which were Presidents in the sixt Synod were created of Sergius Pyrrhus Paul and Peter teachers of the Heresie of the Monothelites Yea these likewise diuided the Constantinopolitan Sees among the Clergie From Peter their last teacher vnto the sixth Synode there came betweene no fewer then fifteene yeeres in which space were Thomas Iohn and Constantine ordained of heretikes who notwithstanding were not for this cause reiected The heresie lasted about fiftie yeeres yet the fathers in the sixth Synod condemned onely the forenamed foure whereby it is euident that heresie in their iudgement doth not take away the power of giuing orders which you confesse and must needes because one of your owne Popes was ordained by heretikes if Felix the second were a Pope PHIL. In the time of Gregory the thirteenth the Roman Martyrologe was set out at Rome where there was a great controuersie among learned men concerning Felix whether his name were to bee spunged out and Baronius with many other were of that opinion but it fell out as it were by a diuine miracle the very day before Saint Felix his day that some digging for treasure found a chest wherein was this inscription The body of Felix Pope and Martyre which condemned Constantius so Baronius yeelded to Felix as it were pleading his owne cause especially seeing Pope Gregory himselfe was of that iudgement Therefore we confesse that Felix was a lawfull Pope although his entrance is much to be misliked For according to the common sentence of the Fathers hee was intruded by the Arians and ordained of them therefore at the first while Liberius suffered persecution for the Catholicke Faith hee was a Schismaticall Anti-pope but as Binius saith from such time as hee aduanced the banner of faith by excommunicating Constantius Vrsacius Valens and other Arians and Liberius for his manifest Communion with Hereticks was plainely accounted banished from the Communion of Catholikes omnium Catholicorum iudicio quanquam antea schismaticus fuisset legitimus Ecclesiae Catholicae Pontifex haebericaepit that is Although before he had beene a schismatick yet then he began to bee accounted the lawfull Bishop of the Catholick Church by the iudgement of all Catholickes ORTHOD. Then you confesse that Felix which was ordained of Arians was notwithstanding a lawfull Bishop yea and a lawfull Pope by the iudgement of all Catholicks for if you should say otherwise what would become of those fiue Deacons 21. Priests 19. Bishops which hee ordained If heretikes haue no power to ordaine then Felix was no Bishop and consequently according to your owne positions al ordinations deriued from him were mere nullities PHIL. You heard before out of the councels of Florence and Trent that the Character is indeleble whereupon it followeth that neither schisme nor heresie nor any censure of the Church can take it away wherefore seeing the Episcopall character whether it be a diuerse from the Presbyterall or the same more extended is an absolute perfect and independent power of conferring the Sacraments of Confirmation and Order therefore a Bishop may not onely without any further dispensation confirme and order but hee cannot bee hindered by any superiour power but that hee may trulie confer these Sacraments if it please himselfe as our learned Cardinall affirmeth which is also the common opinion of the schoolemen Heretiks saith Dominicus a Soto whosoeuer they be euen such as are cut off although they were not formerly promoted lawfully by the Church but by heretikes doe verily conferre the Sacrament of order although they bee forbidden by the Church and therefore while they doe conferre it they sinne mortally Gabriel Biel although a Bishop being an heretike and Apostata degraded cut off or publikely excommunicated bee depriued of all iurisdiction by the law it selfe neither can he absolue any man from his sinnes yet hee may actually ordaine any man capable of the order being willing yea though he be not subiect to his iurisdiction notwithstanding that the Church doth iustly prohibit him And Capreolus Bishops although they bee heretikes schismatickes and degraded may confer orders This is agreeable to the Decree of Pope Anastasius concerning those whom Acasius ordained after his condemnation to wit That no harme at al should befal them By al this it appeareth that the orders thus ministred are effectuall ORTHO But doth not degradation depriue a man of the degree PHIL. Non est dubitandum saith Petrus a Soto per haeresim vel excommunicationem siue etiam degradationem non amittipotestatem quae sacramento collata est siue characterem vt dicunt baptismi confirmationis ordinis quanquam vsus illius amittatur that is It is not to bee doubted that the power
iust experience it prooueth otherwise As for the Popes if you meane the ancient Bishops of Rome wee regard them with reuerence and if their true writings were extant wee would willingly embrace them but as for your late Popes wee litle respect them Moreouer if your Bishops had for them the former definitions of Fathers and Councels they might more easily haue conuinced their aduersaries in disputation this should haue beene a spurre vnto them and not a bridle PHIL. As it was not fit to call the former definitions in question againe so much lesse was it fit that those things which ought to haue beene discussed in the Vniuersities by certaine order before the learned and iudicious should bee handled before the people which was vnskilfull and desirous of noueltie which vseth to define euery thing rather by outcryes then by arguments ORTHOD. As though this disputation had beene intended before the rude and barbarous multitude and not rather before the most honourable graue wise and iudicious in the whole Kingdome The trueth is that the Bishops doubted the cause they feared that they were not able to defend it by the Scriptures PHIL. They saide that against the contentious and such as would not rest in the iudgement of the Church little good could bee done by disputation And verily no maruell if they were loth to haue triall by disputation when the Iudge was Nicholas Bacon a layman an Hereticke altogether ignorant of Diuinitie the most reuerend Archbishop of Yorke assisting for fashion sake onely The day came which was the third of April there was infinite concourse vnequall lawes of disputation were prescribed of the Heretickes onely nothing was done with order and reason the time slipped away with declamations on both sides the prophane iudge moderateth all things as it pleaseth him all comes to nothing and so the Heretickes proceede in their madnesse ORTH. These are figures of rehetoricke wherewith you vse to embellish your speeches as it were with precious stones Whosoeuer will hold with the Pope is presently with you a good Catholicke and a very learned man but let him bee neuer so wise learned and iudicious if hee loue God his Prince and countrey better then the Pope hee shall bee reproached with ignorance and heresie as appeareth in that honourable personage Sir Nicholas Bacon Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England a man famous for wisdome pietie and the zeale of Gods glory But why doe you blemish him because hee had the fauour of a gracious Prince you might haue learned of Salomon Hee that loueth purenesse of heart for the grace of his lippes the King shall bee his friend can you blame him for that hee was designed by his Soueraigne to bee a moderatour at the disputation you should rather haue considered the Queenes great mildenesse and gracious proceeding in that shee vouchsafed to ioyne with him an assistant as Sanders confesseth one of your owne Religion a man of eminent note in Church and common wealth who stoode not for a cipher or for fashion sake but was armed with authoritie and had power to prouide that the Papistes should haue full libertie to speake their mindes before that great and honourable assembly How was it possible that the businesse should bee contriued with greater equalitie and indifferencie PHIL. Should a lay man iudge of Bishops and profound Diuines ORTH. Did not Basil Bishop of Ancyra and other Bishops dispute with Photinus before certaine noble men which the Emperour had appointed to bee Iudges did not Saint Austine dispute with the Donatists Marcellinus the tribune being Iudge did hee not dispute with Pascentius the Arrian Laurentius a secular man being Iudge And if it please you to looke into the volumes of Councels you shall finde that in the fourth generall Councell being the first at Chalcedon noble men of the Laity were appointed Iudges whose names are set downe in the beginning of the first action The like is to bee found in the sixt generall Councell being the third at Constantinople And in the third generall Councell being the first at Ephesus Theodosius and Valentintan appointed Candidianus an Earle to bee the Iudge PHIL. These were Iudges after a sort But how that may appeare by the wordes of the Emperour concerning Candidianus Ad Sacram vestram Synodum abire iussimus sed ea lege conditione vt cum quaestionibus controuersijs quae circafidei dogmata incidunt nihil quicquam commune habeat i. wee haue commanded him to goe vnto your sacred Synode but vpon this condition that hee haue nothing at all to doe with questions and controuersies of faith ORTHOD. Very true But first to remoue all such persons as might be troublesome to the sacred Synode Secondly not to suffer those which were of the Synode to depart before the consultation were ended Thirdly not to let them dispute any by-matters before the principall were fully discussed and concluded Fourthly to prouide that the disputation might be peaceable without tumult Fiftly to see that euery man might haue libertie without offence to propose what he thought good and to confute the contrary In like manner Sir Nicholas Bacon was appointed to these and the like offices and not to decide or determine any controuersie of faith PHIL. Hee was a capitall enemie of the Catholickes ORTHOD. All that was done or said at those meetings is extant to bee seene whereby it may appeare that all his proceedings about that businesse were most milde moderate honourable and Christian though the Bishops did shew themselues very obstinate PHIL. The Protestants would haue had them to dispute vpon such Articles proposed for questions as seemed to haue a greater shewe of proofe in the Scriptures for the Heretickes as of the Communion vnder both kindes of publique prayers to bee had in the vulgar tongue and such like ORTHOD. In the publique reformation of a Church the first thing to be considered is the due ordering of diuine seruice and Sacraments therefore the questions were chosen with singular discretion one concerning the prayers whether they should bee in the vulgar tongue another concerning the Lords Supper whether it should bee ministred in both kindes In both which points you had done great iniurie to the people of God But you say that the Protestants made choise of such questions as seemed to haue a greater shew of proofe in the Scripture and haue we thinke you but a seeming shew of proofe no sound substantial proofe indeed If the Bishops had bin of this opinion it should rather haue incouraged them to the incounter then haue caused them to flie the field Is the holy Scripture for vs in these questions onely if the disputation had beene about the worshipping of images inuocations of Saints iustification by faith and such like could not wee haue produced as pregnant proofes out of the Scriptures for these as for the former but now one may
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
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
the action of Baptizing still remaineth water in substance so the Bread and Wine still retaine their former substance euen after the blessing For Christ did breake the Bread after he had blessed it yet still it was Bread as the Apostle witnesseth saying the Bread that we breake Yea the Communicants doe eate it after it is broken and still it is Bread euen in the mouthes of the Communicants For S. Paul saith Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this Bread Neither is it called Bread because it was bread but because it is Bread not in name onely but in nature and properties For after Consecration it nourisheth the body as before it is subiect to fall vpon the ground to bee eaten of Mice to bee deuoured of Beastes to bee burned in the fire to bee turned to ashes and to suffer putrifaction which cannot be affirmed of the body of Christ because that holy one shall not see corruption so the wine after Consecration doth not onely nourish and comfort the heart but if the Priest drinke too much of it it will intoxicate his braine yea and if it bee kept too long it will bee turned to vinegar and putrifie All which things doe argue that the elements doe still retaine the true nature and substance of Bread and Wine and are not changed into the body and blood of Christ in corporall manner by vertue of the blessing But that wee may vnderstand this the better I pray you tell me what is meant by the blessing PHIL. THe blessing is the same with Consecration and was performed in these wordes this is my Body ORTHOD. The Scripture expounds blessing by thankesgiuing For Saint Matthew Saint Luke and Saint Paul say that when Christ had giuen thankes hee brake the bread Saint Marke saith that when he had blessed hee brake it So Matthew Marke Luke and Paul say that when Christ had giuen thankes he gaue the Cuppe and mention not the blessing of it Yet Saint Paul elsewhere calleth it the Cuppe of blessing Likewise whereas Saint Luke saith that Christ tooke the fiue loaues and the two fishes and looked vp to heauen and blessed them Saint Iohn saith that Iesus tooke the bread and gaue thankes whereby it is euident that the holy Ghost vseth the word blessing and thankesgiuing indifferently But withall we must obserue that vnder the word thankesgiuing is comprehended prayer As when the Apostle teacheth vs to receiue the creature with thankesgiuing he renders this reason because it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer Where it is plaine that thankesgiuing in the former place comprehendeth prayer and the word Prayer vsed in the latter place comprehendeth thankesgiuing as though the Apostle should haue said we on our part must receiue the creature with prayer and thankesgiuing because it is sanctified as on Gods part by his word and ordinance so on our part by prayer and thankesgiuing Secondly we must obserue that the creature may be sanctified to a double vse That is either corporall or spirituall and to both by prayer and thankesgiuing Thirdly that the sanctifying of a creature is in the Scripture called blessing as when it is said the Lord blessed the seuenth day and sanctified it Now our Lord Iesus intending to institute a Sacrament tooke the bread and gaue thankes not only for the bread but especially for the redemption of the Church and praied that these elements of Bread and Wine might be euerlastingly sanctified to Sacramentall vse thus the Bread and Wine were blessed And whereas you with Bellarmine and others say that this blessing was performed by these wordes this is my Body it cannot bee For the blessing was finished before those words were vttered Saint Marke saith that when he had blessed the Bread hee brake it by which it is euident that the blessing was accomplished before the bread was broken it is manifest that he brake it before he gaue it therefore the blessing was finished before the Bread was giuen But he gaue it saying take eate this is my body therefore the blessing was finished before he said this is my body Now how is it possible that he should blesse by those wordes seeing the blessing was fully ended before those words were begunne Wherefore Cardinall Caietan doth rightly call it benedictionem laudis non Consecrationis i. the blessing of praise and not of Consecration But if we should imagine that he blessed by saying this is my body would not this imagination inuert the order of the actions of Christ PHIL. THere are many Hysterologies in holy Scripture and therefore no maruell if there be one here Now the words and actions of Christ reduced to their naturall Methode are thus to be ordered Hee tooke the Bread and when he had blessed saying this is my body hee brake it and gaue it saying take and eate ORTHOD. Aquinas sayth that these wordes were vttered non consequenter sed concomitanter meaning that he blessed by these wordes this is my body yet so that the wordes were in pronouncing all the while that he brake and gaue the Bread But this vanisheth of it selfe because as hath beene proued out of the text the blessing was finished before the wordes were begunne Cardinall Bessarion ordereth them thus hee tooke the bread and when he had blessed saying take eate this is my body he brake it and gaue it But this may also be confuted by the same reason and moreouer it containeth an absurditie for so he should bid them take it before hee gaue it And thirdly if hee blessed saying take eate this is my body then take and eate are wordes of blessing as well as this is my body Now you with Durantus order them thus he tooke the bread and when he had blessed saying this is my body he brake it and gaue it and saide take and eate but this is also confuted by the same argument drawne from the blessing Secondly the word saying which is but once in the Text by ordering them thus is vsed twice Thirdly the words Take eate which Christ vsed first are put last Fourthly whereas Christ spake all in one continuall sentence the sentence is dismembred and torne into two These inconueniences your owne Doctors Sotus and Caietanus did see and auoid For as your learned Archbishop affirmeth in his Epistle to Pope Sixtus Quintus Hi tenent eundem fuisse ordinem rerum narrationis Euangelicae That is They hold that the actions of Christ were done in the same order wherein they are reported by the Euangelists But let vs feigne that the words and actions are to be ordered as you would haue them yet notwithstanding by the word hoc must needs be meant the Bread for if he tooke the bread and blessed it saying Thus is my body what can be meant by the Pronoune thus but onely this bread PHIL. THe Pronoune this cannot
it bringeth vnto thē a singular comfort if they be past sence yet if God shal restore them whē they heare what was done it will reioyce them and if they doe not recouer yet it shall bring this benefit to all that shall heare it that Gods messenger vpon due examination hath pronounced that they dyed in faith and repentance PHIL. If absolution be only declaratory then this declaration is either absolute or conditionall If it be absolute then it is either rash or superfluous For if the Priest know not whether the party hath faith and repentance and yet pronounce absolutely that his sinnes are forgiuen then hee cannot bee excused from rashnesse and if hee know it in some sort yet because the party knoweth it better then hee his declaration shall be superfluous And if the declaration be onely conditionall then it cannot comfort the conscience and consequently it is to no end and therefore both rash and superfluous ORTHOD. The declaration is conditionall For though vpon due and speciall consideration wee may say priuately and particularly to this or that man i pronounce that thy sinnes are forgiuen thee yet this is alwayes to be vnderstood with a secret condition and the condition is this If thou beleeue and repent Neither may wee pronounce it otherwise then vpon a charitable perswasion proceeding vpon probable grounds that this condition is fulfilled PHIL. But how can it comfort the conscience seeing the condition is vncertaine ORTHOD. It is certaine to the conscience of the party himselfe PHIL. What need is there then of the Ministers absolution ORTHOD. Yes for the party knowing in his owne soule that he made a sincere confession is comforted by the messenger of the Lord of Hostes declaring ex officio the sweet promises of the Gospel according to Christs appointment PHIL. If it be onely declaratory then it may be performed by a Lay-man by a woman a childe an infidel yea by the diuell himselfe yea by a Parret if he be taught to speake as well as by a Priest ORTHOD. Who taught this Parret thus to speake let wise men iudge But to the point A man may be said to pronounce and declare remission of sinnes two wayes First by a narratiue and historicall rehearsall out of the generall duetie of charitie and so may euery Christian. Secondly by a Ministeriall power giuen by a speciall commission from God adorned and established with a speciall promise and so may euery lawfull Minister The commission is giuen vs in our Ordination Whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen The promise was made in these words Behold I am with you vntill the end of the world Both are expressed in these words of Iob If there be an Angel with him that is with the man whose soule draweth neere vnto the graue or an interpreter one of a thousand to declare vnto man his righteousnes then will hee haue mercy vpon him and will say deliuer him that he goe not downe into the pit for I haue receiued a reconciliation Here are two persons to be considered First a man lying at the point of death distressed and groning vnder the burthen of his sinnes Secondly the man of God appointed to comfort those that mourne in Sion The latter is described foure wayes by his Titles Office Commission and Gods promise vnto him His Titles are an Angel or interpreter his Office to declare vnto man his righteousnes that is the righteousnes of Iesus Christ imputed to all beleeuers according to the couenant of grace his Commission Deliuer him that he goe not downe into the pit The promise Then will God haue mercie vpon him and say I haue receiued a reconciliation Such Titles such Office by such speciall Commission and promise are not giuen to any Lay man in the Booke of God Wherefore though they are bound by their generall calling to edifie and comfort one another yet this belongeth to the Minister in a speciall maner Neither is there any doubt but God will giue a speciall blessing to his owne Ordinance Thus haue we examined all Bellarmines arguments and find them to be nothing els but smoke He hath sowne the winde and reaped the whirlewinde Hitherto of Absolution as it belongeth to the Minister Now the parts of penance which you require in the penitent as Contrition Confession and Satisfaction may bee passed ouer because wee speake of the Priest and not of the penitent Yet giue me leaue to tell you that Auricular confession as it is vsed in the Church of Rome is a pollicie to diue into the secrets of men not so much to apply salues vnto their sores or to yeeld true comfort to the wounded conscience as to worke for your owne aduantage and to turne all things to your owne pleasure and profit If you say that this may be the fault of some particular men and not of the Church yet to vrge it as you doe as a thing necessary to saluation by Law diuine is the fault of your Church Surely this doctrine was not knowne to S. Austine when he said Quid mihi cum hominibus vt audiant confessiones meas quasi ipsi sanaturi sint omnes languores meos i. What haue I to doe with men that they should heare my Confessions as though they should heale all my diseases Nor to Chrysostome who saith Art thou ashamed to confesse thy sinnes rehearse them dayly in thy prayers for I doe not say that thou shouldest disclose them to thy fellow seruant who may mocke thee but to God who healeth them And as for your Popish Satisfaction it is a most blasphemous derogation from the all sufficient Satisfaction of our Sauiour Iesus Christ. For you doe not meane thereby a satisfaction to the party offended nor Canonicall satisfaction to the Congregation for the taking away of publique scandall both which we willingly embrace but you teach that after the Priest hath forgiuen the penitent his sinnes there still remaineth the very same punishment which the sinner should haue suffered in hell fire excepting onely eternitie for which you enioyne him to make satisfaction to God by workes of Popish penance Moreouer you teach workes of supererogation and that many holy men haue suffered more for God and righteousnes sake then the guilt of their temporall punishments to which they were subiect by reason of their sinnes required and that this superfluitie remaineth as a treasure in the Church to be dispensed by the Prelates in their indulgences especially by the Pope in the yeere of Iubile which shamelesse practise what is it else but a deuise to get money Thus you haue turned repentance into a Sacrament of penance and penance into Mines of siluer and gold Hitherto of our Presbyters Now let vs come to the Deacons CHAP. XI Of the third controuersie concerning Deacons PHIL. THere are no Deacons in the Church of England and therefore you cannot be lawfull Presbyters ORTHOD. Bellarmine confesseth that the