what Law the order of Ecclesiastical Constitution is bounden and let them not think those words of the Apostle to be his but rather the words of Christ himself Opinor requiri Consecrationem quandam hoc est impositionem manuum Orationem jejunium c. tamen nusquam hoc munere fungi posse nisi ubi Magistratus invitet jubeat aut permittat By Scripture there is no Consecration of Bishops and Priests required but only the appointing to the Office of a Priest cum Impositione manuum Consecration of Bishops and Priests I read not in the New Testament but Ordinatio per manuum Impositionem cum Oratione is read there as in the places above and the only appointment as I think is not sufficient Praeter vocationem ceu designationem externam quae vel a Principe fit vel a populo per electionem suffragia requiritur Ordinatio alia per manuum impositionem idque per Verbum Dei Besides the appointing to the Office it appeareth that in the Primitive Church the Apostles used certain Consecration of the Ministers of the Church by imposition of Hands and Prayer Acts 6. and with Fasting Acts 14 c. The Office of Priesthood is too dangerous to set upon when one is but appointed only Therefore for the confirmation of their Faith who take in hand such charge and for the obtaining of farther Grace requisite in the same Consecration was ordained by the Holy Ghost and hath been always used from the beginning Deputation to the Office is not sufficient to make a Priest or a Bishop as appeareth by David and Solomon who deputed the 24 above-mentioned to their Offices yet they made none of them Priests nor any other The appointing to the Office per manuum Impositionem is in Scripture and the Consecration of them hath of long time continued in the Church There is a certain kind of Consecration required which is imposition of the Bishops hands with Prayer and the appointing only is not sufficient To the twelfth I suppose that there is a Consecration required as by Imposition of Hands for so we be taught by the ensample of the Apostles In the New Testament is required to the making of a Bishop Impositio manuum cum Oratione which I take for Consecration and Appointment unto the Office is not sufficient for King David 1 Chron. 24. did appoint 24 to be Bishops who after were consecrated so that both the Appointment and the Consecration be requisite Respondent Eboracens Londinens Carliolens Leighton Tresham Robertâ—onus Edgeworth Curren Dayns Oglethorp Consecrationem esse requisitam Redmanus ait eam receptam esse ab Apostolis atque a Spiritu Sancto institutam ad conferendam gratiam Dayus Roffens Symmons aiunt Sacerdotium conferri per manuum impositionem idque ê Scripturis Consecrationem vero diu receptam in Ecclesia Coxus Institutionem cum manuum impositione sufficere neque per Scripturam requiri Consecrationem Robertsonus addit supra alios nusquam hoc munere fungi posse quempiam nisi ubi Magistratus invitet jubeat aut permittat In the twelfth Question where it is asked Whether in the New Testament be required any Consecration of a Bishop or only appointing to the Office be sufficient The Bishop of St. Davids saith That only the appointing Dr. Cox That only appointing cum manuum Impositione is sufficient without Consecration The Bishops of York London Duresme Carlisle Drs. Day Curren Leighton Tresham Edgworth Oglethorp say That Consecration is requisite Dr. Redmayn saith That Consecration hath been received from the Apostles time and institute of the Holy Ghost to confer Grace My Lord of Rochester Dr. Day and Symmons say That Priesthood is given per manuum impositionem and that by Scripture and that Consecration hath of long time been received in the Church 13. Question Whether if it fortuned a Christian Prince Learned to conquer certain Dominions of Infidels having none but temporal learned Men with him if it be defended by God's Law that he and they should Preach and Teach the Word of God there or no And also make and constitute Priests or no Answers IT is not against God's Law but contrary they ought indeed so to do and there be Histories that witnesseth that some Christian Princes and other Laymen unconsecrate have done the same To the thirteenth To the first part of this Question touching Teaching and Preaching the Word of God in case of such need we think that Laymen not ordered not only may but must preach Christ and his Faith to Infidels as they shall see opportunity to do the same and must endeavour themselves to win the Miscreants to the Kingdom of God if that they can for as the Wise Man saith God hath given charge to every Man of his Neighbour and the Scripture of God chargeth every Man to do all the good that he can to all Men And surely this is the highest Alms to draw Men from the Devil the Usurper and bring them to God the very Owner Wherefore in this case every Man and Woman may be an Evangelist and of this also we have example But touching the second part for case of Necessity As we neither find Scripture nor Example that will bear that any Man being himself no Priest may make that is to say may give the Order of Priesthood to another and authority therewith to minister in the said Order and to use such Powers and Offices as appertaineth to Priesthood grounded in the Gospel So we find in such case of need what hath been done in one of the ancient Writers altho this authority to ordain after form afore-mentioned be not to Laymen expresly prohibited in Scripture yet such a prohibition is implied in that there is no such authority given to them either in Scripture or otherways for so much as no Man may use this or any other authority which cometh from the Holy Ghost unless he hath either Commission grounded in Scripture or else Authority by Tradition and ancient use of Christ's Church universally received over all To the thirteenth and fourteenth following I think that necessity herein might either be a sufficient Rule and Warrant to determine and order such Cases considering that tempore necessitatis mulier baptizat laicus idem facit audit confessionem or else that God would inspire in the Princes heart to provide the best and most handsome Remedy therein And hard were it peradventure to find such great necessity but either in the train of the said Prince or in the Regions adjoining thereunto there might be had some Priests for the said purposes or finally That the Prince himself godlily inspired in that behalf might for so good purposes and intents set forth the Act indeed referring yet this thing to the better judgment of others To the thirteenth and fourteenth following I never read these cases neither in Scripture nor in
them a few Bishops in the Northern and Western Parts When afterwards the Patriarch of Constantinople was declared by the Emperor Mauritius The Vniversal Bishop Gregory the great did exclaim against the Ambition of that Title as being equal to the Pride of Lucifer and declared that he who assumed it was the Forerunner of Antichrist saying that none of his Predecessors had ever claimed such a Power And this was the more observable since the English were Converted by those whom he sent over so that this was the Doctrine of that See when this Church received the Faith from it But it did not continue long within those limits for Boniface the Third assumed that Title upon the Grant of Phâ—â—as And as that Boniface got the Spiritual Sword put in his hand so the Eighth of that name pretended also to the Temporal Sword but they owe these Powers to the Industry of those Popes and not to any Donation of Christs The Popes when they are Consecrated promise to obey the Canons of the Eight first General Councils which if they observe they will receive no Appeals nor pretend to any higher Jurisdiction than these give to them and the other Patriarchs equally As for the Decrees of Latter Councils they are of less Authority For those Councils consisted of Monks and Friers in great part whose exemptions obtained from Rome obliged them to support the Authority of that Court and those who sate in them knew little of the Scriptures Fathers or the Tradition of the Church being only conversant in the Disputes and Learning of the Schools And for the Florentine Council the Eastern Churches who sent the Greek Bishops that sate there never received their Determination neither then nor at any time since Many places were also brought out of the Fathers to show that they did not look on the Bishops of Rome as superior to other Bishops and that they understood not those places of Scripture which were afterwards brought for the Popes Supremacy in that sense so that if Tradition be the best Expounder of Scripture those latter glosses must give place to the more ancient But that passage of St. Ierome in which he equals the Bishops of Eugubium and Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome was much made use of since he was a Presbyter of Rome and so likely to understand the Dignity of his own Church best There were many things brought from the Contests that other Sees had with Rome to show that all the Priviledges of that and other Sees were only founded on the practice and Canons of the Church but not upon any Divine Warrant Constantinople pretended to equal priviledges Ravenna Milan and Aquileia pretended to a Patriarchal Dignity and Exemption Some Arch-Bishops of Canterbury contended that Popes could do nothing against the Laws of the Church so Laurence and Dunstan Robert Grostest Bishop of Lincoln asserted the same and many Popes confessed it And to this day no Constitution of the Popes is binding in any Church except it be received by it and in the daily practice of the Canon Law the customs of Churches are pleaded against Papal Constitutions which shows their Authority cannot be from God otherwise all must submit to their Laws And from the latter Contests up and down Europe about giving Investitures receiving Appeals admitting of Legates and Papal Constitutions it was apparent that the Papal Authority was a Tyranny which had been managed by cruel and fraudulent Arts but was never otherwise received in the Church than as a Conquest to which they were constrained to yield And this was more fully made out in England from what passed in William the Conqueror and Henry the 2d's time and by the Statutes of Provisors in many Kings Reigns which were still renewed till within an hundred years of the present time Upon these grounds they Concluded that the Popes Power in England had no Foundation neither in the Law of God nor in the Laws of the Church or of the Land As for the Kings Power over Spiritual persons and in Spiritual causes they proved it from the Scriptures In the old Testament they found the Kings of Israel intermedled in all matters Ecclesiastical Samuel though he had been Judge yet acknowledged Sauls Authority So also did Abimelech the High-Priest and appeared before him when cited to answer upon an Accusation And Samuel 1 Sam. 15.18 sayes he was made the head of all the Tribes Aaron in that was an Example to all the following High-Priests who submitted to Moses David made many Laws about sacred things such as the Order of the Courses of the Priests and their Worship and when he was dying he declared to Solomon how far his Authority extended He told him 1 Chron. 28.21 That the Courses of the Priests and all the people were to be wholly at his commandment pursuant to which Solomon 2 Chron. 8.14 15. did appoint them their charges in the service of God and both the Priests and Levites departed not from his commandment in any matter and though he had turned out Abiathar from the High-Priesthood yet they made no opposition Iehosophat Hezekiah and Iosias made likewise Laws about Eccledsiastical Matters In the New Testament Christ himself was obedient he payed Taxes he declared that he pretended to no earthly Kingdom he charged the people to render to Caesar the things that were Caesars and his Disciples not to affect temporal dominion as the Lords of the Nations did And though the Magistrates were then Heathens yet the Apostles wrote to the Churches to obey Magistrates to submit to them to pay Taxes they call the King Supream and say he is Gods Minister to encourage them that do well and to punish the evil doors which is said of all persons without exception and every Soul is charged to be subject to the Higher Power Many passages were cited out of the Writings of the Fathers to show that they thought Church-men were included in these places as well as other persons so that the Tradition of the Church was for the Kings Supremacy and by one place of Scripture the King is called Supream by another he is called Head and by a third every Soul must be subject to him which laid together make up this conclusion That the King is the Supream Head over all persons In the primitive Church the Bishops in their Councils made rules for ordering their Dioceses which they only called Canons or Rules nor had they any compulsive Authority but what was derived from the Civil Sanctions After the Emperors were Christians they made many Laws about sacred things as may be seen in the Codes and when Iustinian digested the Roman Law he added many Novel Constitutions about Ecclesiastical persons and causes The Emperors called general Councils presided in them and confirmed them And many Letters were cited of Popes to Emperors to call Councils and of the Councils to them to Confirm their Decrees The Election of the Popes themselves was
after them And so the Apostles ordained Matthias to be one of their number St. Paul made and ordained Timothy and Titus with others likewise Of the Sacrament of Extream Vnction we have manifestly in the Gospel of Mark and Epistle of St. Iames. Materia Sacramentorum est Verbum Elementum virtus quam Deus per illa digne sumentibus conferat gratiam juxta suam promissionem nimirum quod sint Sacra Signacula non tantum signantia sed etiam significantia Unde opinor constare hanc Sacramentorum vim esse in Sacris Literis I find in Scripture of such things as we use to call Sacraments First Of Baptism manifestly Of Eucharistia manifestly Of Pennance manifestly Of Matrimony manifestly Of Ordering per manus Impositionem Orationem manifestly It is also manifest that the Apostles laid their hands upon them that were Christened Of the Vnction of the Sick with Prayer manifestly Albeit the seven Sacraments be not found in Scripture expressed by name yet the thing it self that is the Matter Nature Effect and Vertue of them is found there Of Baptism in divers places of the most Holy Communion of Matrimony of Absolution of Bishops Priests and Deacons how they were ordained per manuum Impositionem cum Oratione Of laying the Apostles hands on them that were Christened which is a part of Confirmation of Unction of them that were sick with Prayer joined withal Natura vis effectus ac uniuscujusque Sacramenti proprietas seorsim in Scriptura reperitur ut veteres eam interpretati sunt As it appeareth in the Articles which be drawn of the said seven Sacraments In Scripture we find of the Form of the Sacraments as the words Sacramental and the Matter as the Element Oil Chrism and the Patient receiving the Sacrament and of Grace and encrease of Vertue given by them as the Effects The things are contained in Scripture as Baptism Confirmation Eucharistia Poenitentia Extrema Vnctio Ordo altho they have not there this name Sacramentum as Matrimony hath and every one of them hath his Matter Nature Effect and Vertue I think the Thing the Matter the Nature the Effect and Vertue of them all be in the Scripture and all there institute by God's Authority for I think that no one Man neither the whole Church hath power to Institute a Sacrament but that such Institution pertaineth only to God To the seventh I say That we may evidently find in Scripture the substance of every one of the seven Sacraments the Nature Effect and Vertue of the same as of Baptism Confirmation Pennance Matrimony and so forth of the rest Of the Matter Nature Vertue and Effect of such as we call Sacraments Scripture maketh mention Of Baptism manifestly of the most Holy Communion manifestly of Absolution manifestly of Matrimony manifestly of Bishops Priests and Deacons Scripture speaketh manifestly for they were ordered per Impositiones manuum Presbyterii cum Oratione jejunio Conveniunt praeter Menevens naturam septem Sacramentorum nobis tradi in Scripturis Eboracens effectus singulorum enumerat item Carliolens Londinens non Respondet Quaestioni Treshamus ait ideo ê Scripturis tradi nobis Sacramenta quoniam tota Ecclesia non habet Authoritatem Instituendi Sacramenta In the seventh they do agree saving this That the Bishop of St. David says That the Nature Effect and Vertue of these seven Sacraments only Baptism the Sacrament of the Altar Matrimony Pennance are contained in the Scripture The other say That the Nature and the Vertue of all the seven be contained in the Scripture 8. Question Whether Confirmation cum Crismate of them that be Baptized be found in Scripture Answers OF Confirmation with Chrism without which it is counted no Sacrament there is no mention in the Scripture To the eighth We find Confirmation cum Impositione manuum in Scripture as before cum Chrismate we find not in the Scripture but yet we find Chrismation with Oil used even from the time of the Apostles and so taken as a Tradition Apostolick To the eighth I find in Scripture in many places de Impositione manuum which I think considering the usage commonly and so long withal used to be Confirmation and that with Chrism to supply the visible appearance of the Holy Ghost which Holy Ghost was so visibly seen in the Primitive Church nevertheless for the perfect declaration of the verity hereof I refer it to the judgment of Men of higher knowledg in this Faculty Altho Confirmation be found in the Scripture by Example as I said before yet there is nothing written de Chrismate The Imposition of Hands the Holy Doctors take for the same which we call Confirmation done upon them which were christened before whereof is written in the Acts. And as for Chrisma it should seem by Cyprian both as touching the confection and usage thereof that it hath a great ground to be derived out of Scripture tho it be not manifestly therein spoken of Res Effectus Confirmationis continentur in Scriptura nempe Impositio manuum per Apostolos Baptizatis per quam dabatur Spiritus Sanctus De Chrismate nihil illic legimus quia per id tempus Spiritus Sanctus signo visibili descenderit in Baptizatos Quod ubi fieri desierit Ecclesia Chrismate signi externi loco uti coepit I find not in Scripture that the Apostles laying their hands upon them that were baptized did anoint them Chrismate Confirmation cum Chrismate I read not in Scripture but Impositionem manuum super Baptizatos I find there is which ancient Authors call Confirmation and Inunction with Chrisma hath been used from the Primitive Church De Impositione manuum cum Oratione expressa mentio est in Scripturis quae nunc usitato nomine a Doctoribus dicitur Confirmatio Sacrum Chrisma traditio est Apostolica ut ex veteribus liquet The Question is not simple but as if it were asked Whether Eucharistia in infermentato be in the Scripture or baptismus cum sale Imposition of the Apostles hands in which was conferred the Holy Ghost for Confirmation of them who were baptized is found in Scripture Chrisma is a Tradition deduced from the Apostles as may be gathered by Scripture and by the Old Authors and the Mystery thereof is not to be despised This Sacrament is one unitate integritatis as some others be Therefore it hath two parts of which one that is Impositio manuum is taken Heb. 6. Act. 8. The other part that is Chrisme is taken of the Tradition of the Fathers and so used from the Primitive Church vid. Cyp. Epist. lib. 1. Ep. 12. Confirmation is found in Scripture and Confirmation cum Chrismate is gathered from the old Authors I say Confirmation is found in Scripture but this additament cum Chrismate is not of the Scripture yet is
And the corruptions of their Worship and Doctrine were such that a very small proportion of common sense with but an overly looking on the New Testament discovered them Nor had they any other varnish to colour them by but the Authority and Traditions of the Church But when some studious men began to read the Ancient Fathers and Councils though there was then a great mixture of Sophisticated stuff that went under the Ancient names and was joyned to their true works which Criticks have since discovered to be spurious they found a vast difference between the first Five Ages of the Christian Church in which Piety and Learning prevailed and the last Ten Ages in which Ignorance had buried all their former Learning only a little misguided Devotion was retained for Six of these Ages and in the last Four the restless Ambition and Usurpation of the Popes was supported by the seeming holiness of the begging Friers and the false Counterfeits of Learning which were among the Canonists School-men and Casuists So that it was incredible to see how men notwithstanding all the opposition the Princes every-where made to the progress of these reputed new Opinions and the great advantages by which the Church of Rome both held and drew many into their Interests were generally inclined to these Doctrines Those of the Clergy who at first Preached them were of the begging Orders of Friers who having fewer engagements on them from their Interests were freer to discover and follow the truth And the austere Discipline they had been trained under did prepare them to encounter those difficulties that lay in their way And the Laity that had long lookt on their Pastors with an evil eye did receive these Opinions very easily which did both discover the Impostures with which the world had been abused and shewed a plain and simple way to the Kingdom of Heaven by putting the Scriptures into their hands and such other Instructions about Religion as were sincere and genuine The Clergy who at first despised these new Preachers were at length much Allarmed when they saw all people running after them and râ—ceiving their Doctrines As these things did spread much in Germany Switzerland and the Netherlands so their Books came over into England where there was much matter already prepared to be wrought on not only by the prejudices they had conceived against the corrupt Clergy but by the Opinions of the Lollards which had been now in England since the days of Wickliff for about 150 years Between which Opinions and the Doctrines of the Reformers there was great Affinity and therefore to give the better vent to the Books that came out of Germany many of them were translated into the English-Tongue and were very much read and applauded This quickned the proceedings against the Lollards and the enquiry became so severe that great numbers were brought into the Toils of the Bishops and their Commissaries If a man had spoken but a light word against any of the Constitutions of the Church he was seized on by the Bishop's Officers and if any taught their Children the Lord's Prayer the Ten Commandments and the Apostle's Creed in the Vulgar Tongue that was crime enough to bring them to the Stake As it did Six men and a woman at Coventry in the Passion-week 1519. being the 4 th of April Longland Bishop of Lincoln was very cruel to all that were suspected of Heresie in his Diocess several of them abjured and some were Burnt But all that did not produce what they designed by it The Clergy did not correct their own faults and their cruelty was looked on as an evidence of Guilt and of a weak Cause so that the method they took wrought only on peoples fears and made them more cautious and reserved but did not at all remove the Cause nor work either on their reasons or affections Upon all this the King to get himself a name and to have a lasting Interest with the Clergy thought it not enough to assist them with his Authority but would needs turn their Champion and write against Luther in defence of the Seven Sacraments This Book was magnified by the Clergy as the most Learned Work that ever the Sun saw and he was compared to King Solomon and to all the Christian Emperours that had ever been And it was the chief subject of flattery for many years besides the glorious Title of Defender of the Faith which the Pope bestowed on him for it And it must be acknowledged that considering the Age and that it was the Work of a King it did deserve some Commendation But Luther was not at all daunted at it but rather valued himself upon it that so great a King had entred the lists with him and answered his Book And he replied not without a large mixture of Acrimony for which he was generally blamed as forgetting that great respect that is due to the Persons of Soveraign Princes But all would not do These Opinions still gained more footing and William Tindal made a Translation of the New Testament in English to which he added some short Glosses This was printed in Antwerp and sent over into England in the year 1526. Against which there was a Prohibition published by every Bishop in his Diocess Bearing that some of Luthers followers had erroneously Translated the New Testament and had corrupted the Word of God both by a false Translation and by Heretical Glosses Therefore they required all Incumbents to charge all within their Parishes that had any of these to bring them in to the Vicar-General within 30 days after that premonition under the pains of Excommunication and incurring the suspition of Heresie There were also many other Books Prohibited at that time most of them written by Tindal And Sir Thomas More who was a man celebrated for Vertue and Learning undertook the answering of some of those but before he went about it he would needs have the Bishops Licence for keeping and reading them He wrote according to the way of the Age with much bitterness and though he had been no Friend to the Monks and a great declaimer against the Ignorance of the Clergy and had been ill used by the Cardinal yet he was one of the bitterest Enemies of the new Preachers not without great cruelty when he came into Power though he was otherwise a very good-natured man So violently did the Roman Clergy hurry all their Friends into those excesses of Fire and Sword When the Party became so considerable that it was known there were Societies of them not only in London but in both the Universities then the Cardinal was constrained to act His contempt of the Clergy was looked on as that which gave encouragement to the Hereticks When reports were brought to Court of a company that were in Cambridge Bilney Latimer and others that read and propagated Luther's Book and Opinions some Bishops moved in the year 1523. that there might be a Visitation appointed
the whole Matter that I hope the Reader will not be ill pleased to have a short abstract of them laid before him An Abstract of those things which were written for the Divorce The Law of Marriage was originally given by God to Adam in the state of Innocence with this Declaration that man and wife were one Flesh but being afterwards corrupted by the Incestuous commixtures of those which were of Kin in the nearest degrees the Primitive Law was again revived by Moses And he gives many Rules and Prohibitions about the Degrees of Kinred and Affinity which are not to be looked on as new Laws and judiciary Precepts but as a Restoring of the Law of Nature originally given by God but then much corrupted For as the Preface which is so oft repeated before these Laws I am the Lord insinuates that they were conform to the Divine Nature so the consequences of them show they were Moral and Natural For the Breaches of them are called Wickedness and Abomination and are said to defile the Land and the Violation of them is charged on the Canaanites by which the Land was polluted and for which it did vomit out the Inhabitants From whence it must be concluded that these were not positive Precepts which did only bind the Iews but were parts of the Law of Mankind and Nature otherwise those Nations could contract no Guilt by their Violating them Among the forbidden Degrees one is Thou shalt not discover the Nakedness of thy Brothers wife it is thy Brothers Nakedness And it is again repeated If a man shall take his Brothers wife it is an unclean thing he hath uncovered his Brothers Nakedness they shall be childless These are clear and express Laws of God which therefore must needs oblige all persons of what rank soever without exception In the New Testament St. Iohn Baptist said to Herod It is not Lawful for thee to take thy Brothers wife which shows that these Laws of Moses were still obligatory St. Paul also in his epistle to the Corinthians condemns the Incestuous person for having his Fathers wife which is one of the Degrees forbidden by the Law of Moses and calls it a Fornication not so much as named among the Gentiles From whence it is inferred that these forbidden degrees are excluded by the Law of Nature since the Gentiles did not admit them St. Paul also calling it by the common name of Fornication within which according to that place all undue Commixtures of men and women are included Therefore those places in the New Testament that condemn Fornication do also condemn Marriages in forbidden degrees our Saviour did also assert the foundation of affinity by saying that man and wife are one Flesh. But in all Controverted things the sense of the Scriptures must be taken from the Tradition of the Church which no good Catholick can deny and that is to be found in the Decrees of Popes and Councils and in the writings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church against which if any argue from their private understanding of the Scriptures it is the way of Heresie and savours of Lutheranism The first of the Fathers who had occasion to write of this Matter was Tertullian who lived within an Age after the Apostles He in express words says that the Law of not Marrying the Brothers wife did still oblige Christians The first Pope whose decision was sought in this Matter was Gregory the Great to whom Austin the Apostle of England wrote for his resolution of some things in which he desired direction and one of these is Whether a man may Marry his Brothers wife who in the Language of that time was called his Kinswoman The Pope answered Negatively and proved it by the Law of Moses and therefore Defined that if any of the English Nation who had Marryed within that degree were converted to the Faith he must be admonished to abstain from his wife and to look on such a Marriage as a most grievous Sin From which it appears that that good Pope did judge it a thing which by no means could be dispenced with otherwise he had not pressed it so much under such Circumstances since in the first Conversion of a Nation to the Christian Faith the Insisting too much upon it might have kept back many from receiving the Christian Religion who were otherwise well inclined to it Calixtus Zacarias and Innocent the Third have plainly asserted the obligation of these Precepts in the Law of Moses the last particularly who treats about it with great vehemency So that the Apostolick See has already judged the Matter Several Provincial Councils have also declared the obligation of the Precepts about the degrees of Marriage in Leviticus by the Council at Neocesarea If a woman had been Marryed to two Brothers she was to be cast out of the Communion of the Church till her death and thâ— man that Marryed his Brothers wife was to be Anathematized which was also Confirmed in a Council held by Pope Gregory the Second Iâ— the Council of Agde where the Degrees that make a Marriage incestuous are reckoned this of Marrying the Brothers wife is one of them and there it was Decreed that all Marriages within these Degrees were Null and the Parties so Contracting were to be cast out of the Communion of the Church and put among the Catechumens till they separated themselves from one another And in the Second Council of Toledo the Authority of the Mosaical Prohibitions about the Degrees of Marriage is acknowledged It was one of Wickcliffs errors that the Prohibition of Marriage within such degrees was without any foundation in the Law of God for which and other points he was condemned first in a Convocation at London then at Oxford and last of all at the general Council of Constance these Condemnations were confirmed So formally had the Church in many Provincial Councils and in one that was General decided this matter Next to these the Opinions of the Fathers were to be considered In the Greek Church Origen first had occasion to Treat about it writing on Leviticus and Chrysostome after him but most fully St. Basil the Great who do expressly assert the obligations of these Precepts The last particularly refuting at great length the Opinion of some who thought the Marrying two Sisters was not unlawful laies it down as a Foundation That the Laws in Leviticus about Marriage were still in force Hesychius also writing upon Leviticus proves that these Prohibitions were universally obligatory because both the Egyptians and Cananites are taxed for Marrying within these Degrees From whence he inferrs they are of Moral and Eternal obligation From the Greek they went to the Latine Fathers and alledged as was already observed that Tertullian held the same Opinion and with him agreed the three great Doctors of the Latin Church Ambrose Ierom and
places cited from the New Testament As for that of Herod both Iosephus and Eusebius witness that his Brother Philip was alive when he took his wife and so his sin was Adultery and not Incest We must also think that the Incestous Person in Corinth took his Fathers Wife when he was yet living otherwise if he had been dead St. Paul could not say it was a Fornication not named among the Gentiles for we not only find both among the Persians and other Nations the Marriage of Step-Mothers allowed but even among the Iews Adonijah desired Abisha in Marriage who had been his Fathers Concubine From all which they concluded that the Laws about the Degrees of Marriage were only Judiciary Precepts and so there was no other obligation on Christians to obey them than what flowed from the Laws of the Church with which the Pope might dispense They also said that the Law in Leviticus of not taking the Brothers wife must be understood of not taking her while he was alive for after he was dead by another Law a man might marry his Brothers wife They also pleaded that the Popes Power of Dispensing did reach further than the Laws of the Church even to the Law of God for he daily Dispensed with the Breaking of Oaths and Vows though that was expresly contrary to the Second Commandment and though the Fifth Command Thou shalt do no Murther be against Killing yet the Pope Dispensed with the putting Thieves to death and in some cases where the reason of the Commandment does not at all times hold he is the only judge according to Summa Angelica They Concluded the Popes Power of Dispensing was as necessary as his Power of Expounding the Scriptures and since there was a Question made concerning the obligation of these Levitical Prohibitions whether they were Moral and did oblige Christians or not the Pope must be the only Judge There were also some late Presidents found one of P. Martin who in the case of a mans having Marryed his own Sister who had lived long with her upon a Consultation with Divines and Lawyers Confirmed it to prevent the Scandal which the dissolving of it would have given Upon which St. Antonin of Florence says that since the thing was dispensed with it was to be refered to the judgment of God and not to be condemned The Pope had granted this Dispensation upon a very weighty Consideration to keep peace between two great Crowns it had now stood above Twenty years it would therefore raise an high scandal to bring it under debate besides that it would do much hurt and bring the Titles to most Crowns into Controversie But they Concluded that whatever Informalities or Nullities were pretended to be in the Bulls or Breves the Pope was the only competent judge of it and that it was too high a presumption for inferior Prelates to take upon them to examine or discuss it But to these Arguments it was Answered by the writers for the Kings cause that it was strange to see men who pretended to be such Enemies to all Heretical Novelties yet be guilty of that which Catholick Doctors hold to be the foundation of all Heresie which was the setting up of private senses of Scripture and Reasonings from them against the Doctrine and Tradition of the Church It was fully made out that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church did universally agree in this that the Levitical Prohibitions of the Degrees of Marriage are Moral and do oblige all Christians Against this Authority Cajetan was the first that presumed to write opposing his private conceits to the Tradition of the Church which is the same thing for which Luther and his followers are so severely Condemned May it not then be justly said of such men that they plead much for Tradition when it makes for them but reject it when it is against them Therefore all these exceptions are overthrown with this one Maxime of Catholick Doctrine That they are Novelties against the constant Tradition of the Christian Church in all Ages But if the force of them be also examined they will be found as weak as they are New That before the Law these degrees were not observed proves only that they are not evidently contrary to the Common sense of all men But as there are some Moral Precepts which have that natural evidence in them that all men must discern it so there are others that are drawn from publick inconvenience and dishonesty which are also parts of the Law of nature These Prohibitions are not of the first but of the second sort since the Immorality of them appears in this that the Familiarities and freedoms among near Relations are such that if an horror were not struck in men at conjunctures in these degrees Families would be much defiled This is the Foundation of the Prohibitions of Marriages in these degrees Therefore it is not strange if men did not apprehend it before God made a Law concerning it Therefore all examples before the Law show only the thing is not so evident as to be easily collected by the light of Nature And for the story of Iudah and Tamar there is so much wickedness in all the parts of it that it will be very hard to make a President out of any part of it As for the Provision about Marrying the Brothers wiâ—e that only proves the ground of the Law is not of its own Nature Immutable but may be Dispensed with by God in some cases And all these Moral Laws that are founded on publick conveniency and honesty are Dispensable by God in some cases but because Moses did it by Divine Revelation it does not follow that the Pope can do it by his Ordinary Authority For that about Herod it is not clear from Iosephus that Philip was alive when Herod Marryed his Wife For all that Iosephus says is that she separated from her Husband when he was yet alive and divorced her self from him But he does not say that he lived still after she Marryed his Brother And by the Law of Divorce Marriage was at an end and broken by it as much as if the Party had been dead So that in that case she might have Marryed any other Therefore Herods sin in taking her was from the Relation of having been his Brothers Wife And for the Incestuous person in Corinth it is as certain that though some few Instances of a King of Syria and some others may be brought of Sons Marrying their Step-Mothers yet these things were generally ill looked on even where they were practised by some Princes who made their Pleasure their Law Nor could the Laws of Leviticus be understood of not Marrying the Brothers wife when he was alive for it was not Lawful to take any mans Wife from him living Therefore that cannot be the meaning And all those Prohibitions of Marriage in other degrees excluding those Marriages simply whether during the life or after the death of
jests about Confession praying to Saints Holy Water and the other Ceremonies of the Church were complained of And the last Articles contained sharp reflexions on some of the Bishops as if they had been wanting in their Duty to suppress such things This was clearly levelled at Cranmer Latimer and Shaxton who were noted as the great Promoters of these opinions The first did it prudently and solidly The second zealously and simply And the third with much indiscreet pride and vanity But now that the Queen was gone who had either raised or supported them their Enemies hoped to have advantages against them and to lay the growth of these opinions to their charge But this whole Project failed and Cranmer had as much of the Kings favour as ever for in stead of that which they had projected Cromwell by the Kings order coming to the Convocation Declared to them that it was the Kings pleasure that the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church should be Reformed by the Rules of Scripture and that nothing was to be maintained which did not rest on that Authority for it was absurd since that was acknowledged to contain the Laws of Religion that recourse should rather be had to Glosses or the Decrees of Popes than to these There was at that time one Alexander Alesse a Scotch-man much esteemed for his Learning and Piety whom Cranmer entertained at Lambeth Him Cromwell brought with him to the Convocation and desired him to deliver his opinion about the Sacraments He enlarged himself much to Convince them that only Baptism and the Lords Supper were Instituted by Christ. Stokesley Bishop of London answered him in a long Discourse in which he shewed he was better acquainted with the Learning of the Schools and the Canon-Law than with the Gospel He was Seconded by the Arch-Bishop of York and others of that Party But Cranmer in a long and learned Speech shewed how useless these niceties of the Schools were and of how little Authority they ought to be and discoursed largely of the Authority of the Scriptures of the use of the Sacraments of the uncertainty of Tradition and of the Corruption which the Monks and Friars had brought into the Christian Doctrine He was vigorously seconded by the Bishop of Hereford who told them the world would be no longer deceived with such Sophisticated stuff as the Clergy had formerly vented The Laity were now in all Nations studying the Scriptures and that not only in the vulgar Translations but in the original Tongues and therefore it was a vain imagination to think they would be any longer governed by those arts which in the former Ages of Ignorance had been so effectual Not many days after this there were several Articles brought in to the upper House of Convocation devised by the King himself about which there were great debates among them The two Arch-Bishops heading two Parties Cranmer was for a Reformation and with him joyned Thomas Goodrich Bishop of Ely Shaxton of Sarum Latimer of Worcester Fox of Hereford Hilsey of Rochester and Barlow of St. Davids But Lee Arch-Bishop of York was a known favourer of the Popes Interests which as it first appeared in his scrupling so much with the whole Convocation of York the acknowledging the King to be Supreme Head of the Church of England so he had since discovered it on all occasions in which he durst do it without the fear of losing the Kings favour So he and Stokesley Bishop of London Tonstâ—ll of Duresm Gardiner of Winchester Longland of Lincoln Sherburn of Chichester Nix of Norwich and Kite of Carlisle had been still against all changes But the King discovered that those did in their hearts love the Papal Authority though Gardiner dissembled it most artificially Sherburn Bishop of Chichester upon what inducement I cannot understand resigned his Bishoprick which was given to Richard Sampson Dean of the Chappel a Pension of 400 l. being reserved to Sherburn for his Life which was confirmed by an Act of this Parliament Nix of Norwich had also offended the King signally by some correspondence with Rome and was kept long in the Marshalsea and was convicted and found in a Premunire The King considering his great Age had upon his humble submission discharged him out of Prison and pardon'd him But he died the former year though Fuller in his slight way makes him fit in this Convocation For by the 17th Act of the last Parliament it appears that the Bishoprick of Norwich being vacant the King had recommended William Abbot of St. Bennets to it but took into his own hands all the Lands and Manours of the Bishoprick and gave the Bishop several of the Priories in Norfolk in exchange which was confirmed in Parliament I shall next give a short abstract of the Articles about Religion which were after much consultation and long debating agreed to First All Bishops and Preachers must instruct the people to believe the whole Bible and the three Creeds that made by the Apostles the Nicene and the Athanasian and interpret all things according to them and in the very same words and condemn all Heresies contrary to them particularly those condemned by the first four general Councils Secondly Of Baptism the people must be instructed That it is a Sacrament instituted by Christ for the Remission of sins without which none could attain Everlasting Life And that not only those of full Age but Infants may and must be Baptized for the pardon of Original sin and obtaining the gift of the Holy Ghost by which they became the Sons of God That none Baptized ought to be Baptized again That the opinions of the Anabaptists and Pelagians were detestable Heresies And that those of ripe Age who desired Baptism must with it joyn Repentance and Contrition for their sins with a firm Belief of the Articles of the Faith Thirdly Concerning Penance they were to instruct the people that it was instituted by Christ and was absolutely necessary to Salvation That it consisted of Contrition Confession and Amendment of Life with exterior works of Charity which were the worthy Fruits of Pennance For Contrition it was an inward shame and sorrow for sin because it is an offence of God which provokes his displeasure To this must be joyned a Faith of the mercy and goodness of God whereby the penitent must hope that God will forgive him and repute him justified and of the number of his Elect Children not for the worthiness of any merit or work done by him but for the only Merits of the Blood and Passion of our Saviour Jesus Christ. That this Faith is got and confirmed by the Applicatition of the Promises of the Gospel and the use of the Sacraments And for that end Confession to a Priest is necessary if it may be had whose Absolution was instituted by Christ to apply the promises of Gods Grace to the penitent Therefore the people were to be taught That the Absolution is spoken by an Authority
trusted to outward Ceremonies and their Curates for their own gain encouraged them in it It was observed that the opinion of Clergy-mens being exempted from the secular Judge was ill grounded that Bishops did ordain without due care and Tryal that the Dignified Clergy misapplyed their Revenues did not follow their first Institution and did not reside upon their Benefices And in fine he moves that the four Sacraments which had been left undetermined by the former Articles might be examined the outward signs and actions the promises made upon them and the efficacy that was in them being well considered The second Paper consists of two Resolutions made concerning Confirmation by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Stokesley Bishop of London by which I perceive the way of examining matters by giving out of questions to Bishops and Divines was sooner practised then when I first took notice of it page 286. there are several other Papers concerning Confirmation but these are only Subscribed and the rest do generally follow these two Prelates who were then the heads of two different parties The Arch-Bishop went on this ground that all things were to be tryed by the Scripture but Stokesley and almost the whole Clergy were for receiving the Tradition of the Church as not much inferiour to the Scriptures which he asserts in his Subscription The third Paper was offered to the King by Cranmer to perswade him to proceed to a further Reformation that things might be long and well considered before they were determined that nothing might be declared a part of Gods faith without good proofs from Scripture the departing from which rule had been the occasion of all the Errors that had been in the Church that now men would not be led as they had been but would examine matters that many things were now acknowledged to be truths such as the unlawfulness of the Popes Usurped Power for which many had formerly suffered death Whereupon he desires that some points might be Examined by Scrinture as whether there is a Purgatory whether departed Souls ought to be Invocated whether Tradition ought to be believed whether there be any satisfaction besides the satisfaction of Christ whether free will may dispose it self to grace and whether Images ought to be kissed or used to any other end but as representations of a piece of History In all these he desired the King would suspend his Judgment and in particular that he would not determine against the Lawfulness of the Marriage of the Clergy but would for some time silence both parties He also proposed that this point might by order from the King be examined in the Universities before indifferent Judges that all the Arguments against it might be given to the Defenders twelve days before the publick disputation and he offered that if those who should defend the Lawfulness of Priests Marriage were in the Opinion of indifferent Judges overcome they should willingly suffer death for it but if otherwise all they desired was that in that point the King might leave them in the liberty to which the Word of God left them Ad Page 249. line 18. I have seen a much fuller paper concerning Orders and Ecclesiastical functions which the Reader will find in the Collection signed by Cromwell the two Arch-Bishops and eleven Bishops and twenty Divines and Canonists Declaring that the Power of the Keys and other Church-functions is formally distinct from the Power of the Sword That this Power is not absolute but to be limited by the Rules that are in the Scripture and is ordained only for the edification and good of the Church that this Power ought to be still preserved since it was given by Christ as the mean of reconciling sinners to God Orders were also declared a Sacrament since they consisted of an outward action instituted by Christ and an inward grace conferred with them But that all Inferiour Orders Ianitors Lectors c. were brought into the Church to beautifie and adorn it and were taken from the Temple of the Iews And that in the New Testament there is no mention made but of Deacons or Ministers and Priests or Bishops nor is there belonging to Orders any other Ceremony mentioned in the Scripture but Prayer and Imposition of hands This was signed either in the year 1537 or 1538 since it is Subscribed both by Iohn Hilsey Bishop of Rochester and Edward Fox Bishop of Hereford for the one was consecrated in 1537 and the other dyed in May 1538. On this Paper I will add two remarks the one is that after this I do never find the Inferiour Degrees under a Deacon mentioned in this Church so it seems at this time they were laid aside They were first set up in the Church about the end of the second or the beginning of the third Century in the middle of which we find both Cornelius Bishop of Rome and St. Cyprian mentioning them as Orders that were then established and it seems they were designed as previous steps to the Sacred functions that none might be Ordained to these but such as had been long before separated from a secular state of Life and had given good proofs of themselves in these lower degrees But it turned in the Church of Rome to be only a matter of form and many took the first Tonsure that they might be exempted from the Secular Power and be qualified for Commendams and some other Worldly advantages to which these lower Orders were sufficient by those Rules which the Canonists had brought in Another thing is that both in this Writing and in the Necessary Erudition of a Christian man Bishops and Priests are spoken of as one and the same Office In the Antient Church they knew none of those Subtilties which were found out in the latter Ages It was then thought enough that a Bishop was to be dedicated to his function by a new Imposition of hands and that several Offices could not be performed without Bishops such as Ordination Confirmation c. but they did not refine in these matters so much as to enquire whether Bishops and Priests differed in Order and Office or only in degree But after the Schoolmen fell to examine matters of Divinity with Logical and Unintelligible niceties and the Canonists began to Comment upon the rules of the Ancient Church they studied to make Bishops and Priests seem very near one another so that the difference was but small They did it with different designs The Schoolmen having set up the grand Mystery of Transubstantiation were to exalt the Priestly Office as much as was possible for the turning the Host into God was so great an action that they reckoned there could be no Office higher than that which qualified a man to so mighty a Performance therefore as they changed the form of Ordination from what it was Anciently believed to consist in to a delivering of the Sacred Vessels and held that a Priest had his Orders by that rite and not by
The Laws made in England against Hereticks p. 25. Vnder Richard the 2d ibid. Vnder Henry the 4th ibid. And Henry the 5th p. 26 Heresie declared by the Kings Iudges p. 27 Warhams proceeding against Hereticks ib. The Bishop of London's proceedings against them p. 29 The Progress of Luthers Doctrine p. 30 His Books were Translated into English p. 31 The King wrote against him ibid. He replyed ibid. Endeavours to suppress the New Testament p. 32 Sir Thomas More writes against Luther ibid. Bilney and others proceeded against for Heresie ibid. BOOK II. Of the Process of Divorce between King Henry and Queen Katherine and of what passed from the 19th to the 25th year of his Reign in which he was declared Supream Head of the Church of England THe beginning of the Sute of Divorce p. 34 Prince Arthur Marryed the Infanta ibid. And died soon after p. 35 A Marriage proposed between Henry and her ibid. It is allowed by the Pope ibid. Henry Protested against it p. 36 His Father disswaded it ibid. Being come to the Crown he Marries her ibid. Shâ— bore some Children but only the Lady Mary lived ibid. Several Matches proposed for her p. 37 The Kings Marriage is questioned by Forreigners ibid. Anno 1527. He himself has Scruples concerning it ib. The Grounds of these p. 38 All his Bishops except Fisher condemn it ibid. The reasons of State against it p. 39. Wolsey goes into France ibid. The Kings fears and hopes ibid. Arguments against the Bull p. 40 Calumnies cast on Anne Boleyn p. 41 They are false and ill-contrived p. 42 Her Birth and Education p. 43 She was contrâ—cted to the Lord Piercy p. 44 The Divorce moved for at Rome ibid. The first Dispatch concerning it ibid. Anno 1528. The Pope granted it p. 47 And gave a Bull of dispensation p. 48 The Popes craft and policy ibid. A subtile method proposed by the Pope p. 49 Staphileus sent from England p. 50 The Cardinals Letters to the Pope p. 57 A fuller Bull is desired by the King ibid. Gardiner and Fox are sent to Rome p. 52 The Bull desired by them ibid. Wolsey's earnestness to procure it p. 53 Campegio declared Legate p. 54 He delaies his Iourney ibid. The Pope grants the Decretal Bull p. 55 Two Letters from Anne Boleyn to Wolsey ibid. Wolsey desires the Bull may be seen by some of the Kings Council p. 56 The Emperor opposes the Kings business p. 57 A Breve is found in Spain ibid. It was thought to be forged ibid. Campegio comes to England p. 58 And lets the King see the Bull ibid. But refuses to shew it to others ibid. Wolsey moves the Pope that some might see it ibid. But in vain p. 59 Campana is sent by the Pope to Engl. p. 60 The King offers the Pope a Guard ibid. The Pope inclines to the Emperor ibid. Threatnings used to him p. 61 Anno 1529. HE repents the sending over a Bull ibid. But feeds the King with Promises p. 62 The Popes sickness p. 63 Wolsey aspires to the Papacy Ibid. Instructions for promoting him p. 64 New motions for the Divorce p. 65 The Pope Relapses dangerously ibid. A new Dispatch to Rome p. 66 Wolseys Bulls for the Bishoprick of Winton p. 67 The Emperor Protests against the Legates ib. Yet the Pope promises not to recal it ibid. The Legates write to the Pope p. 68 Campegio led an ill life p. 69 The Emperor moves for an Avocation ibid. The Popes Dissimulation p. 70 Great contests about the Avocation ibid. The Legates begin the Process p. 72 A severe charge against the Queen ibid. The King and Queen appear in Court ibid. The Queens speech p. 73. The King declares his scruples ibid. The Queen Appeals to the Pope p. 74 Articles framed and witnesses examined ib. An Avocation prest at Rome ibid. The Pope joyns with the Emperor p. 75 Yet is in great perplexities ibid. The Avocation is granted p. 76 The Proceedings of the Legates ibid. Campegio adjourns the Court p. 77 Which gave great offence ibid. Wolseys danger ibid. Anne Boleyn returns to Court p. 78 Cranmers Opinion about the Divorce p. 79 Approved by the King p. 80 Cardinal Wolsey's fall ibid. The meanness of his temper p. 81 He is Attached of Treason ibid. He dies his Character p. 82. A Parliament called ibid. Complaints against the Clergy p. 83 The Kings debts are discharged ibid. The Pope and the Emperor unite p. 84 The Womens peace ibid. Anno 1530. The Emperor is Crowned at Bononia ib. The Vniversities consulted in the Kings sute of Divorce p. 85 The answers from Oxford and Cambridge p. 86. D. Crook Imployed in Venice p. 87 Many in Italy wrote for the Divorce p. 88 It was opposed by the Pope and the Emperor p. 89 No Money given by the Kings Agents ibid. Great Rewards given by the Emperor p. 90 It is determined for the King at Bononia Padua Ferrara and Orleance p. 91 At Paris Bourges and Tholose p. 92 The Opinions of some Reformers ibid. And of the Lutherans p. 94 The King will not appear at Rome ibid. Cranmer offers to defend the Divorce p. 95 The Clergy Nobility and Gentry write to the Pope for the Divorce ibid. The Popes answer to them p. 96 A Proclamation against Bulls ibid. Books written for the Divorce p. 97 Reasons out of the Old and New Testament ibid. The Authorities of Popes and Councils p. 98 And the Greek and Latine Fathers p. 99 And Canonists p. 100 Marriage is Compleat by Consent ibid. Violent Presumptions of the Consummation of the former Marriage ibid. The Popes Dispensation of no force p. 101. Bishops are not to obey his Decrees p. 102 The Authority of Tradition ibid. The Reasons against the Divorce p. 103 Answers made to these p. 104 The Queen is intractable p. 105 Anno 1531. A Session of Parliament ibid. The Clergy found in a Premunire p. 106 The Prerogatives of the Kings of England in Ecclesiastical affairs ibid. The Encroachments of Popes ibid. Statutes made against them p. 107 The Popes endeavoured to have those repealed p. 109 But with no effect p. 111 The Clergy excused themselves p. 112 Yet they submit and acknowledg the King Supream Head of the Church ibid. The King Pardons them p. 113 And with some difficulty the Laity ibid. One Attainted for Poysoning ibid. The King leaves the Queen p. 114 A disorder among the Clergy ibid. The Pope turns to the French p. 115 And offers his Niece to the Duke of Orleance ibid. The Turk invades the Empire p. 116 Anno 1532. THe Parliament complains of the Spiritual Courts ibid. They reject a Bill concerning Wards p. 117 An Act against Annates ibid. The Pope writes to the King p. 118 The Kings answer ibid. Sir Edward Car sent to Rome p. 119 His Negotiation there p. 120 He corrupts the Cardinal of Ravenna ibid. The Process against the King at Rome p. 121 A Bull for new Bishopricks ibid. The Pope desires
it a very ancient Tradition as appeareth by Cyp. de Vnct. Chrism To the eighth Question I say That Confirmation of them that be baptized is found in Scripture but cum Chrismate it is not found in Scripture but it was used cum Chrismate in the Church soon after the Apostles time as it may evidently appear by the cited Authors The laying of the Bishops hands upon them that be christened which is a part of Confirmation is plainly in Scripture and the Unction with Chrisme which is another part hath been observed from the Primitive Church and is called of St. Austin Sacramentum Chrismatis Unction of the Sick with Oil and the Prayer is grounded expresly in Scripture Conveniunt omnes Confirmationem cum Chrismate non haberi in Scripturis Eboracens Tresham Coren Day Oglethorpe Edgworth Leighton Symmons Redman Robinsonus Confirmationem in Scripturis esse contendunt caeterum Chrisma esse traditionem Apostolicam addit Robertsonus ubi fieri desierat miraculum Consecrandi Spiritus Sancti Ecclesia Chrismate signi externi loco uti coepit Convenit illi Londinens Carliolens putat usum Chrismatis ex Scripturis peti posse Putant omnes tum in hoc Articulo tum superiori Impositionem manuum esse Confirmationem In the eighth they do agree all except it be the Bishop of Carlile That Confirmatio cum Chrismate is not found in Scripture but only Confirmatio cum manuum Impositione And that also my Lord of St. Davids denieth to be in Scripture as we call it a Sacrament My Lord of Carlâ—le saith That Chrisma as touching the confection and usage thereof hath a ground to be derived out of Scripture The other say That it is but a Tradition 3. Question Whether the Apostles lacking a higher Power as in not having a Christian Kâ—ng among them made Bishops by that necessity or by Authority given by God Answers ALL Christian Princes have committed unto them immediately of God the whole Cure of all their Subjects as well concerning the Administration of God's Word for the Cure of Souls as concerning the ministration of things Political and Civil Governance And in both these Ministrations they must have sundry Ministers under them to supply that which is appointed to their several Offices The Civil Ministers under the King's Majesty in this Realm of England be those whom it shall please his Highness for the time to put in Authority under him As for Example The Lord Chancellor Lord Treasurer Lord Great Master Lord Privy Seal Lord Admiral Majors Sheriffs c. The Ministers of God's Word under his Majesty be the Bishops Parsons Vicars and such other Priests as be appointed by his Highness to that Ministration As for Example The Bishop of Canterbury the Bishop of Duresme the Bishop of Winchester the Parson of Winwick c. All the said Officers and Ministers as well of that sort as the other be appointed assigned and elected and in every place by the Laws and Orders of Kings and Princes In the admission of many of these Officers be divers comely Ceremonies and Solemnities used which be not of necessity but only for a good order and seemly fashion for if such Offices and Ministrations were committed without such solemnity they were nevertheless truly committed And there is no more Promise of God that Grace is given in the committing of the Ecclesiastical Office than it is in the committing of the Civil Office In the Apostles time when there was no Christian Princes by whose Authority Ministers of God's Word might be appointed nor Sins by the Sword corrected there was no Remedy then for the correction of Vice or appointing of Ministers but only the consent of Christian Multitude among themselves by an uniform consent to follow the advice and perswasion of such Persons whom God had most endued with the Spirit of Counsel and Wisdom And at that time forasmuch as the Christian People had no Sword nor Governour amongst them they were constrained of necessity to take such Curats and Priests as either they knew themselves to be meet thereunto or else as were commended unto them by others that were so replete with the Spirit of God with such knowledg in the profession of Christ such Wisdom such Conversation and Counsel that they ought even of very Conscience to give credit unto them and to accept such as by them were presented and so sometimes the Apostles and others unto whom God had given abundantly his Spirit sâ—nt or appointed Ministers of God's Word sometimes the People did choose such as they thought meet thereunto and when any were appointed or sent by the Apostles or others the People of their own voluntary Will with thanks did accept them nor for the Supremity Empire or Dominion that the Apostles had over them to command as their Princes and Masters but as good People ready to obey the advice of good Counsellors and to accept any thing that was necessary for their edification and benefit To the ninth We find in Scripture that the Apostles used the Power to make Bishops Priests and Deacons which Power may be grounded upon these words Sicut misit me vivens Pater sic ego mitto vos c. And we verily think that they durst not have used so high Power unless they had had Authority from Christ but that their Power to ordain Bishops Priests or Deacons by Imposition of Hands requireth any other Authority than Authority of God we neither read in Scripture nor out of Scripture To the ninth I think the Apostles made Bishops by the Law of God because Acts 22. it is said In quo vos Spiritus Sanctus posuit Nevertheless I think if Christian Princes had been then they should have named by Right and appointed the said Bishops to their Rooms and Places I think that the Apostles made Bishops by Authority given them from God That Christ made his Apostles Priests and Bishops and that he gave them Power to make others like it seemeth to be the very trade of Scripture Opinor Apostolos Authoritate Divina creasse Episcopos Presbyteros ubi Publicus Magistratus permittit Altho the Apostles had no authority to force any Man to be Priest yet they moved by the Holy Ghost had authority of God to exhort and induce Men to set forth God's Honour and so to make them Priests The Apostles made that is to say ordained Bishops by authority given them by God Ioh. 20. Sicut misit me vivens Pater ita ego mitto vos Item Ioan. ult Act. 20. and 1 Tim. 4. Paulus ordinavit Timotheum Titum praescribit quales illi debeant ordinare 1 Tim. 1. Tit. 1. Apostoli autoritate mandato Dei ordinabant ac instituebant Episcopos petita ac obtenta prius facultate a Principe ac Magistratu ut opinor qui tum praeerat Christ gave his Apostles authority to make other Bishops and
the Doctors and therefore I cannot answer unto them by Learning but think this to be a good Answer for all such Questions viz. Necessitas non habet Legem It is to be thought that Christ may call as it pleaseth him inwardly outwardly or by both together So that if no Priest might be had it cannot be thought but that a Christian Prince with others learned inwardly moved and called might most charitably and godlily prosecute that same their Calling in the most acceptable Work which is to bring People from the Devil to God from Infidelity to true Faith by whatsoever means God shall inspire In hoc casu existimarem accersendos verbi Sacramentorum Ministros si qui forent vicini quin si nulli invenirentur Principem illum Christianum haberemus pro Apostolo tanquam missum a Deo licet externo Sacramento non esset commendatus quum Deus Sacramentis suis non sit alligatus To the thirteenth and fourteenth following It is not against God's Law that the Prince and his learned temporal Men may Preach and Teach and in these cases of extream Necessity make and institute Ministers In this case as I think the Prince and other temporal learned Men with him may by God's Law Teach and Preach the Word of God and Baptize and also the same Necessity standing elect and appoint Men to those Offices In summa necessitate Baptizare praedicare possunt debent haec etenim duo necessaria sunt media ad salutem at ordinare ut conjectura ducor non debent sed aliunde Sacrificos accersire quos si habere nequeant Deus ipse cujus negotium agitur vel oraculo admonebit quid faciendum erit vel necessitas ipsa quae sibiipsi est Lex modum Ordinandi suggeret ac suppeditabit I think they might in such case of Necessity for in this case the Laymen made the whole Church there and the authority of preaching and ministring the Sacraments is given immediately to the Church and the Church may appoint Ministers as is thought convenient There be two Stories good to be considered for this Question which be written in the 10 th Book of the History Ecclesiastick the one of Frumentius who preached in India and was after made Priest and Bishop by Athanasius And the other Story is of the King of the Iberians of whom Rufâ—ine the writer of the Story saith thus Et nondum initiatus Sacris fit suae gentis Apostolus Yet nevertheless it is written there That an Ambassad was sent to Constantine the Emperor that he would send them Priests for the further establishment of the Faith there The Prince and his temporal learned Men might and ought in that necessity to instruct the People in the Faith of Christ and to baptize them ut idem rex sit suae gentis Apostolus and these be sufficient for the Salvation of his Subjects But as concerning other Sacraments he ought to abide and look for a special Commission from Almighty God as Moses had or else to send unto other Regions where Priests or Bishops may be had and else not to meddle Examples in Eccles. Hist. lib. 10. cap. 1. de Frumentio cap. 2. de Ancilla captiva quae convertit gentem Hiberorum cujus captivae monitis ad Imperatorem Constantinum totius gentis legatio mittitur res gesta exponitur Sacerdotes mittere exorantur qui coeptum erga se Dei munus implerent c. I think that in such a necessity a learned Christian Prince and also temporal Men learned be bound to preach and minister either Sacraments so that the same Ministers be orderly assigned by the High Power and the Congregation I say to the first part That such a King and his temporal learned Men not only might but were also bound to preach God's Word in this case And as to the second part I say That if there could no Bishop be had to Institute the Prince might in that of necessity do it To the thirteenth I suppose the Affirmative thereof to be true Quamvis potestas clavium residet praecipue in Ecclesia In such a case I do believe that God would illuminate the Prince so that either he himself should be made a Bishop by internal working of God as Paul was or some of his Subjects or else God would send him Bishops from other parts And as for preaching of the Word of God the Prince might do it himself and other of his learned Subjects altho they were no Priests In prima parte Quaestionis Conveniunt omnes etiam laicos tali rerum statu non solum posse sed debere docere Menevens Thirlebeus Leightonus Coxus Symmons Tresham Redmanus Robertsonus etiam potestatem Ministrandi Sacramenta Ordinandi Ministros concedunt illis Eboracens hanc prorsus potestatem denegat Coren credit Principem Divinitus illuminandum consecrandum fore in Episcopum interne aut aliquem ex suis Pauli exemplo Simile habet Herefordensis Carliolensis Dayus nihil respondet de Ordinandis Presbyteris in hac necessitate In the thirteenth Concerning the first part Whether Laymen may Preach and Teach God's Word They do all agree in such a case That not only they may but they ought to teach But in the second part touching the Constituting of Priests of Laymen my Lord of York and Doctor Edgworth doth not agree with the other they say That Laymen in no wise can make Priests or have such Authority The Bishops of Duresme St. Davids Westminster Drs. Tresham Cox Leighton Crayford Symmons Redmayn Robertson say That Laymen in such case have authority to minister the Sacraments and to make Priests My Lords of London Carlisle and Hereford and Dr. Coren think That God in such a case would give the Prince authority call him inwardly and illuminate him or some of his as he did St. Paul 14. Question Whether it be forefended by God's Law that if it so fortune that all the Bishops and Priests of a Region were dead and that the Word of God should remain there unpreached and the Sacrament of Baptism and others unministred that the King of that Region should make Bishops and Priests to supply the same or no Answers IT is not forbidden by God's Law To the fourteenth In this case as we have said in the next Article afore Teaching of the Word of God may be used by any that can and would use it to the Glory of God and in this case also the Sacrament of Baptism may be ministred by those that be no Priests which things altho we have not of Scripture yet the universal Tradition and practice of the Church doth teach us And peradventure contract of Matrimony might also be made the Solemnization thereof being only ordained by Law positive and not by any ground either of Scripture or of Tradition altho for very urgent causes the said Solemnization is
18. v. 16. Lev. 20.21 And in the New Mat. 14.4 1 Cor. 5. â— Lib. 4 to cont Marcionâ—â— The Authorities of Popes a ad omnes Galâ—iâ—e Episcopos b 30. Quaest. 3. cap. Pitanâ—m c De Pres. cap. cum in juventutem and Counciâ—s Can. 2. Chap. 5. 〈◊〉 61. Chap. 5. a And the Greek In 20. Levit. b Homil. 71. on 22. Mat. c Epist. ad Diodor. On Levit. 18. and 20. And the Latine Fathers a Lib. 8. Ep. 66. b Cont. Hâ—â—vidium c Cont. Faâ—st chap. 8 9 10. Quaest. 64. in Lev. Ad Bonifac Lib. 3. chap. 4. Lib. 15. de Civ Dâ—i chap. 16. And of the Modern Writers In Epist. ad Pium Fratâ—em e On 18. Lev. g Epist. ad Arch. Rotomag Epis. Sag. f Lib. 2. de Sacram. p. 2. chap. 5. Art 2. h Epist. 240. The Schoolmen 2 dâ— 2 dae Quaest. 154. art 9. In Tertiam Quaest. 54. art 3. In 4tam. dist 40. Q. 3. and 4. And Canonists Marriage compleated by Consent Violent presumptions of the Consummation of Prince Artâ—â—r's Marriage The Popes Dispensation of no force In Quodiâ— Lib. 4. Art 13. in 4 tam dist 15. Q. 3. art 2. Sâ—p Cap. Conjunctioniâ— 35. Q. 2. 3. Sup. Cap. Literas de Rest. Spons Cap. ad Audien Spousal Several Bishops refuse to submit to the Popes Decrees The Authority of Tradition The Arguments for the Marriage 1529. The Anwers made to h ese 1531. The Queen still intractable Hall A Session of Parliament Morâ— Convocation The whole Clergy sued in a Premâ—nire The Prerogative of the Kings of England in Ecclesiastical affairs The Encroachment of the Papacy Mat. Paris The Laws made against them 25 Edw. 1st repeated in the Stat. of Provisors 25. Edw. 3d. 25. Edward 3d. Statute of Provisors 27. Edward 3d. cap. 1st 38. Edward 3d. cap. 1st 3. Richard 2d cap. 3d. 12 Richard 2d cap. 15. 16. Richard 2d cap. 5. 2. Hen. 4. cap. 4. 6. Henry 4. cap. 1st 7. Hen. 4. cap. 6.8 17. Hen. 4. cap. 8. 4. Hen. 5. cap. 4. Ex MSS. D Petyt 1530. Reg. Chicâ—el Fol. 39. Collect. Numb 37. 1531. And to the King and Parliament Collect. Numb 38. Collect. Numb 39. But to no purpose Collect. Numb 40. The Clergy excuse themselves Yet they Compound And acknowledge the King Supreme Head of the Church of England Lord Heâ—bert Antiquit. Britanniae in vita Warham Printed in the Cabala The Commons desire to be included in the King's Pardon Hall Which thâ— King afterwards grants One Attainâ—â—ed for Poisoning 22. Hen. 8 Act. 16. Lord Herbert The King leaves the Queen A disorder among the Clergy of London about the Subsidy Hall The Pope falls off to the French Faction A Match projected between the Pope's Neece and the Duke of Orleance The Emperor is engaged in a War with â—he Turk 1532. The Parliament complains of the Ecclesiastical Courts Hall But reject a Bill about Wards The Commons Petition that they may be Dissolved 1532. The King's Answer An Act against Annates Collect. Numb 41. Parl. Rolls The Pope writes to the King about the Queens Appeal L. Herbert Collect. Numb 42. A Dispatch of the King to the Pope Sir Edward Karne sent to Rome His Negotiation there taken from the Original Letters Cott. lib. Viteli B. 13. The Cardinal of Ravenna corrupted by Bribes Collect. Numb 43. Collect. Numb 44. Collect. Numb 45. A Bull for erecting new Bishopricks The Pope desires the King would submit to him Collect. Numb 46. A Session of Parl. One moves for bringing the Queen to Court At which the King is offended A Subsidy is voted The King remits the Oaths which the Clergy swore to be considered by the Commons Their Oath to the Pope Their Oath to the King More laid down his Office An Enterveiw with the French King Eliot sent to Rome with Instructions Cott. Lib. Vil. B. 13. The King Married Anne Boâ—eyn Nov. 14. Cowper Holinsâ—ies and Sanders An enterview between Pope and Emperor Some overtures about the Divorce Lord Herbert 1533. A Session of Parliament An Act against Appeals to Rome 24. Hen. 8. Act 22. 1533. Warhams Death Aug. 23. The King resolves to promote Cranmer Fox Cranmers Bulls from Rome His Protestation about his Oath to the Pope Antiq. Brit. iâ— vita Cranmâ—â— 1532. New Endeavours to make the Queen submit But in vain 1533. Cranmer proceeds to a Sentence of Divorce taken from the Originals Cott. lib. Otho C. 1â— Collect. Numb 47. The Censures past at that time Cott. lib. Otho C. 10. The Pope unites himself to the French King And condemns the Kings proceedings in England Queen Elizabeth Born Sâ—p 7. An Interview between the Pope and Frâ—nch King at Marsâ—illâ—s The Pope promises to give Sentence for the King of England's Divorce Fidel. serv. Infidâ— subdit Responsio Bzovius The French King prevails with the King of England to submit to the Pope Which was well received at Rome Hist. Council of Trent by Padre Paule But the Imperialists opposed it 1531. And with great preparation procure a sentence against the King The King resolves to abolish the Popes Power in England Which had been much disputed there 1532. â—elerine Inglese Hall The Arguments upon which it was rejected 1533. 1534. The Arguments for the Kings Supremacy From the old Testament 1533. And the New And the Practises of the primitive Church And from Reason And from the Laws of England 1534. The Qualification of that Supremacy Necessary Erudition upon the Sacrament of Orders The necessity of extirpating the Popes Power Pains taken to satisfie Fisher about it The Origiâ—nal is in the Cott. lib. 〈◊〉 C. 10. Journal Procer The Act for taking away the Popes Power It is the Act 21 in the Statute Book 27 in the Record and 8 in the Journal The judgments past on that Act. Act about the Succession to the Crown 22 in the Statute Books 34 in the Reâ—ord 26 in the Journal The Oath about the Succesâ—ion Journal Procer Act about punishing Hereticks 14 in the Stâ—tute Book 33 in the Record 31 in the Journal The submission made by the Clergy to the King 19 in the Statute Book 25 in the Record Journal Procâ—r 〈…〉 26 in the Record Collect. â—umb 48. The Act about the Maid of Kâ—nt and her Complices 12 in Statute Book 31 in the Record 7 in the Journâ—â— See his Works paâ— 1435. The 〈…〉 of the 〈◊〉 Sâ—ow Stow. The Nuns speech at her death Hall Stow Fisher gently dealt with But is obstinate and intractable Collect. Numb 49. Cott. Lib. Cleopatâ—e E. 4. The Oath for the Succession generally sworn Orig. Cott. Lib. Otho C. â—â— Collect. Numb 50. Rot. Claus. Those last clausâ—◠〈◊〉 not in the other Writing More and Fisher refuse the Oath See his works p. 1428. Weavers Monuments page 504 and 506. And are proceeded against Another Session of Parliament The Kings Supremacy declared The Oath about the Succession conâ—iâ—med The first Fruits of Benefices given to the King Sundry
to be observed when it may be observed but that the Princes may not Make that is may not Order Priests nor Bishops not before Ordered to minister the other Sacraments the ministry whereof in Scripture is committed only to the Apostles and from them derived to their Successors even from the Primitive Church hitherto and by none other used we have answered in the thirteenth Article Vt supra Quaest. 13. Vt supra Quaest. 13. Not only it is given of God to Supream Governours Kings and Princes immediate under them to see cause and compel all their Subjects Bishops Priests with all others to do truly and uprightly their bounden Duties to God and to them each one according to his Calling but also if it were so that any-where such lacked to do and fulfil that God would have done right-well they might by the inward moving and calling of God supply the same Huic Quaestioni idem Respondendum quod priori arbitror Vt supra Quaest. 13. To this case as to the first I answer That if there could no Bishops be had to order new Priests there by the Princes assignation and appointment then the Prince himself might ordain and constitute with the consent of the Congregation both Priests and Ministers to Preach and Baptize and to do other Functions in the Church Si ab aliis Regionibus Sacerdotes haberi non poterint opinor ipsum Principem deputare posse etiam Laicos ad hoc Sacrum Officium sed omnia prius tentanda essent ut supra To this I think may be answered as to the last Question before howbeit the surest way I think were to send for somâ— Ministers of the Church dwelling in the next Regions if they might be conveniently had Likewise as to the next Question afore If the King be also a Bishop as it is possible he may appoint Bishops and Priests to minister to his People but hitherto I have not read that ever any Christian King made Bishop or Priest I make the same answer as to the 13th Question is made To the fourteenth I suppose the Affirmative to be true in case that there can no Bishops nor Priests be had forth of other Countries conveniently In this case I make answer as before That God will never suffer his Servants to lack that thing that is necessary for there should either from other parts Priests and Bishops be called thither or else God would call inwardly some of them that be in that Region to be Bishops and Priests Fatentur ut prius omnes Laicos posse Docere Eboracens Symmons Oglethorp negant posse Ordinare Presbyteros tamen concedit Eboracens baptizare contrahere Matrimonia Edgworth tantum baptizare posse nam sufficere dicit ad salutem Alii omnes eandem potestatem concedunt quam prius Roffens non aliud respondet his duabus Quaestionibus quam quod necessitas non habeat Legem In the fourteenth they agree for the most part as they did before That Lay-men in this case may teach and minister the Sacraments My Lord of York Dr. Symmons and Oglethorp say They can make no Priests altho Symmons said they might minister all Sacraments in the Question before Yet my Lord of York and Edgworth do grant That they may Christen The Bishops of London Rochester and Dr. Crayford say That in such a case Necessitas non habet Legem 15. Question Whether a Man be bound by Authority of this Scripture Quorum Remiseritis and such-like to confess his secret deadly sins to a Priest if he may have him or no Answers A Man is not bound by the authority of this Scripture Quorum Râ—miseritis and such-like to confess his secret deadly Sins to a Priest although he may have him To the fifteenth This Scripture is indifferent to secret and open Sins nor the authority given in the same is appointed or limited either to the one or to the other but is given commonly to both And therefore seeing that the Sinner is in no other place of Scripture discharged of the confession of his secret Sins we think that this place chargeth him to confess the secret Sins as well as the open To the fifteenth I think that as the Sinner is bound by this authority to confess his open sins so also is he bound to confess his secret sins because the special end is to wit Absolutionem a peccato cujus fecit se servum is all one in both cases And that all sins as touching God are open and in no wise secret or hid I think that confession of secret deadly sins is necessary for to attain absolution of them but whether every Man that hath secretly committed deadly sin is bound by these words to ask Absolution of the Priest therefore it is an hard Question and of much controversy amongst learned Men and I am not able to define betwixt them but I think it is the surest way to say that a Man is bound to Confess c. I think that by the mind of most ancient Authors and most holy Expositors this Text Quorum Remiseritis peccata c. with other-like serveth well to this intent That Christian Folk should confess thâ—â— secret deadly sins to a Priest there to be assoiled without which mean there can be none other like Assurance Opinor obligare modo aliter conscientiae illius satisfieri nequeat I cannot find that a Man is bound by Scripture to confess his secret deadly sins to a Priest unless he be so troubled in his Conscience that he cannot be quieted without godly Instruction The Matter being in controversy among learned Men and very doubtful yet I think rather the truth is That by authority of this Scripture Quorum Remiseritis c. and such-like a Man is bound to confess his secret deadly sins which grieve his Conscience to a Priest if he may conveniently have him Forasmuch as it is an ordinary way ordained by Christ in the Gospel by Absolution to remit sins which Absolution I never read to be given sine Confessione praeviâ Confitenda sunt opinor etiam peccata abdita ac secreta propter Absolutionem ac conscientiae tranquillitatem praecipue pro vitanda desperatione ad quam plerumque adiguntur multi in extremis dum sibi ipsis de remissione peccatorum nimium blandiuntur nullius dum sani sunt censuram subeuntes nisi propriam I think that altho in these words Confession of privy Sins is not expresly commanded yet it is insinuated and shewed in these words as a necessary Medicine or Remedy which all Men that fall into deadly sin ought for the quieting of their Consciences seek if they may conveniently have such a Priest as is meet to hear their Confession Where there be two ways to obtain remission of Sin and to recover Grace a Man is bound by