Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	day_n	parliament_n	session_n	3,425	5	10.6408	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A08327	The guide of faith, or, A third part of the antidote against the pestiferous writings of all English sectaries and in particuler, agaynst D. Bilson, D. Fulke, D. Reynoldes, D. Whitaker, D. Field, D. Sparkes, D. White, and M. Mason, the chiefe vpholders, some of Protestancy, and some of Puritanisme : wherein the truth, and perpetuall visible succession of the Catholique Roman Church, is cleerly demonstrated / by S.N. ...	S. N. (Sylvester Norris), 1572-1630.	1621 (1621)	STC 18659; ESTC S1596	198,144	242

such as Bonner was discharged and neuer called more in question about that matter But it was presently after ordeyned in Parlament That all actes heretofore made or 8. Eliz. 1. 39. Eliz. 8. done by any person about the consecration confirmation or inuesting of any person elected to the dignity of an Archbishop or Bishop by vertue of the Queenes letters patents or commission since the beginning of her raigne shal be adiudged good 18. Which lawes had beene superfluous and not beseeming the dignity of that place if the sayd Bishops had been sufficiently made before especially seeing it is prouided in the same parlament that all tenders of the sayd 8. Eliz. c. 1. circa finē ●ath made by any Archbishop or Bishop aforesayd or before the last day of this present Session to be made c. all refusalls of the same oath so tendred or before the last day of this present Session to be tendred by any Archbishop or Bishop c. shal be voyde and of no effect or validity in the law What better proofes What more forcible arguments to conuince the nullity of their Bishops former ordination then these Acts of Parlament these decisions of the Iudges That acquittance of Bishop Bonner This disanuiling of the oath tendred and refusall Abridgement of Diars reports 7. Eliz. 23. 4. thereof vntill that present Session in which their Bishops were adiudged authorized and enacted to be lawfull Otherwise it had belonged to that high Court to haue defended and maynteyned their Bishops precedent inauguration their tendring of the oath according to Sand de schis Angli pa. 166 D. Harding in his cōfut of the Apol. par 2. cap. ● the Statute of the first of Queene Elizabeth condemned others refusall contrary thereunto 19. Further if Protestant superintendents had that vndoubted ordination which Mayster Mason fancieth why did their Ministers after Queene Elizabeth had vniustly deposed her lawfull Pastours seeke to Antony Kitchen Bishop of Landasse to be consecrated by him who by reason of his pretended blindnes auoyded the taske Why did they repayre to the Irish Bishop in the Tower Fulk in his answ to a counter Cashol p. 50. VVhitak contr 1. q. 5. cap. 6. Sutcliffe answere to exceptions pag. 87. Sparke in his answere to M. Iohn d' Albinsc 1. p 20 23. 24. 26. who likewise refused to lay hands vpon them and therfore were constreyned to ordeyne one another at the Nagge 's head in Cheapeside in such ridiculous manner as they are now ashamed of it Or if they had receaued their consecration from our Catholik Bishops what iniury doth Doctour Fulke both to his owne Prelats ours in saying vnto vs You are much deceaued if you think we esteeme your offices of Bishops Priestes and Deacons any better then laymen and you presume too much to thinke that we receaue your ordering to be lawfull What wronge doth Doctour Whitaker to himselfe and his collegues when he affirmeth our Catholique Bishops not to be lawfull Bishops eyther by diuine ecclesiasticall or Ciuill law And Sutcliffe in like manner The Romish Church is not the true Church hauing no Bishops nor Priestes at all but only in name what disgrace did Doctour Sparke cast on the glory of their Clergy when writing agaynst vs he presumeth to auow that our Bishops and Priestes haue no ordinary calling but wholy vnlawfull That infinite haue had their cōsecrations and orders from such as were no true Popes or Bishops during the tyme of the Papall schismes and thereupon inferreth how can we count those right Bishops and Priestes 〈◊〉 were made by such as had no right to make any or how shall we 〈◊〉 them from such as fetch their pedigree from right Popes This 〈◊〉 will trouble the whole Church of Rome to cracke 20. But now M. Sparke not the Church of Rome alone but your reformed Church of England is put to the trouble of cracking that nut Now you your selfe must cracke it or els you are a wolfe an intruder who commeth to kill and destroy the sheepe of Christ For as Socrates in the like case pithyly reasoned By the Nicen Fathers Socrates in hist Eccl. l. c. 32. all later Bishops are ordeyned if they had not the holy Ghost who might descend by ordination into euery one neyther haue these receaued the function of Priesthood For how could they receaue it when it 〈…〉 giuen by them who had it not So I dispute with Mayster Mason if our Bishops and Priestes had no ordinary calling no right to ordeyne any Yf they were wholy vnlawfull and meere laymen as his fellowes weene what calling haue their superintendents What ordination What spirituall iurisdiction deriued from such as had no authority to ordeyne them Doctour Whitaker therefore VVhitak contr 2. q. 5. c. 6. folio 35● more ancient and neerer the beginning of Protestant profession then Maister Mason flatly denyeth the ordination or calling of their Mynistery to proceed from the Catholique Clergy which went before them saying Our Bishops and ministers although they be not ordeyned by Papistical Nostri Episcopi ministri si non sunt a Papisticis Episcopis ordinati tamen rite legitime ordinātur Ibidem folio 357. Ibidē folio 36. Bishops yet they are orderly and lawfully ordeyned A little before Truly amongst them Catholiques only they are lawfull Pastours who are called and created according to their order But we say their Ministery was corrupted and therefore that we ought not to be made and created Bishops by them Immediatly after being vrged with a Canon of the first Nicen Councell That a Bishop ought to be created by two or three Bishops he answereth That law was enacted by the Bishops and it was pious if it may be commodiously done and if there be godly Bishops from whome ordination may be had otherwise not which constitution in the flourishing Church may be reteyned not in the lapsed Agayne Touching ordination by three Bishops that constitution is to be obserued as longe as thinges remayne whole and entire and as longe as the Bishops were good otherwise not 21. Besides Yf he Bellarmine graunt our vocation saith Whitaker to be lawfull which neuer any Catholique did Ibid. f. 361. for ordination we 〈◊〉 contend because they that haue authority to cal haue authority also to ordeyne of lawfull ordination cannot be ●●tayned c. But touching the Bishops of those tymes they neuer could be drawn Ad Episcopos veròillorum ●emporū quod attinet illinū quam induci potuerunt vt quemquā ordinarēt nisi qui illis per ōniafaueret to ordeyne any vnlesse it were such a one as in all thinges fauoured thē For this cause he flieth at the end to an extraordinary successiō agaynst the common fashion and vulgarly receaued custome c. This quoth he our Church had because the ordinary succession was corrupt Where I pray Mayster Mason where lay your Registers hid when this glorious light of your

most falsly in the Fathers of the Primitiue Church Since Luther we will not deny but some Lutheran sect hath been alwayes visible Where then is the latency Where the inuisibility To which you fledd before found such reliefe as you had a Lord your Herauld to blazon it abroad with prayse notwithstanding this second euasion was thus very pithily refelled by the forenamed dispute THE CATHOLIKE No knowne and apparent Heretikes can constitute the Church of Christ But all these your Martyrs and Confessours which Fox nameth were knowne and apparent Heretikes Therefore they could not constitute the Church of Christ such a● you suppose your Protestant Church to be THE PVRITAN I deny the Minor they were not knowne heretikes THE CATHOLIKE I proue the Minor Fox nameth the VValdenses Albigenses Lollardes VVicklifists such others But all these were knowne and apparent Heretikes Therefore all those whome Fox nameth are knowne and apparent Heretikes THE PVRITAN I deny the Minor The VValdenses Albigenses c. were true and faithfull Catholiques THE CATHOLIKE The VValdenses and Albigenses c. held many articles of Faith which you condemne as heresyes and many other damnable doctrines against both you and vs which both our Churches iustly burne with the note of heresy as all Historiographers testisy who liued about the same time and relate their particuler errours Therefore the VValdenses Albigenses c. were knowne and apparent Heretikes THE PVRITAN Peruse the Acts and Monuments of M. Fox and you shall see our holy Martyrs euidently freed from these slaunders of Papists THE CATHOLIKE If Fox therefore either sayth nothing in way of purgation or produceth not witnesses worthy of credit for that which he doth say it is manifestly proued you had no Church for those 900. yeares THE LORD DE LA WARE Let vs therefore see Foxes Chronicle The Conclusion of the Conference 6. Foxes Chronicle of Actes and Monuments being brought after much tossing and turning could be found not any one Authour of credit but Foxes bare denial to disproue all those writers who registred in expresse termes the infamous heresies of those forenamed sectaryes Yet least Foxes assertion take place with some partiall companion before so many faythfull witness●● no way interessed in our quarell I shall bring in heereafter the verdict of Protestants themselues who attach the Albigenses VValdenses VVicklifistes c. of the same heresyes of which our Catholikes endite them 7. In the meane while consider I pray what cause the Barō had to vaunt of his souldiers triumph who in both these encounters ranne out of the field so shamefully ouerthrowne as many who were present can witnes and pitty withall the beggery of Protestants who are faigne to gather the miserable ragges either of some inuisible spirits or open Heretikes to patch vp the coate of their mishapen Church CHAP. IIII. In which it is argued that the true visible and apparently knowne Church can neuer faile WHEN I note the admirable consent and perfect harmony which the Prophets and Apostles the old and new law vniformely make in establishing the perpetuall neuer ceasing raigne of Christs visible Church I cānot but wonder at the former blasphemous speaches of these many other not wholy vnlearned Protestants For in the old Testament it is called an euerlasting kingdome A kingdome that shall not be dissipated f●● euer Daniel 7. Dan. 2. Luc. 1. Micheas 4. In the new of his kingdome there is no end In the old Our Lord shall raigne ouer them in the Mountaine of Sion from hence forth now and for euer where he speaketh of the visible mountaine of the Church because to it he sayth all people shall flocke In the new he shall raigne in the house of Iacob Luc. 1. for euer In the old the Prophet testifyeth God founded his Citty for euer Vpon which place S. Augustin writeth Perchance Psal 47. the Citty which replenished the world shal be ouer throwne God forbid he founded it for euer In the new Vpon this rocke will I build my Church the gates of hell shal not preuaile against it Where the pronowne demonstratiue Matt. 16. v. 18. this and the gates of hell striuing and not preuayling against the Church argue a sensible foundation and visible Church S. Chrysostome comparing this promise Chrys in hom quod Christus fit Deus of Christ made to Peter for the continuall building and perseuerance of his Church with that prophesy of his touching the destruction of the Iewes temple there shall not be left a stone vpon a stone after a long and eloquent discourse he hath these wordes Doest tho● see how whatsoeuer he hath built no man shall destroy and whatsoeuer he hath destroyed no man shall build He builded the Church and no man shall be able to destroy it He destroyed the temple and no man is able to build it and that in so long a tyme for they haue endeanoured both to destroy that and could not and they haue attempted to build vp this neither could they a●chieue it In the old I will make a league of peace to them an euerlasting couenant shall be to them Ezech. 37. v. 26. and I will found them and will multiply them and will giue my sanctification in the middest of them for euer And to signify that he meaneth a visible couenant establishment or multiplication Ibid. v. 28. it followeth and Gentills shall know that I am the Lord the sanctifyer of Israel In the new Behould I am with you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world with you preaching Matt. 28. v. vltim christening and ministring Sacraments therfore the Church shall neuer cease exercising these visible acts vntill the end of the world Yet because some sectaryes restraine that passage to the Apostles hearken what S. Aug. in psal 47. Augustine writeth directly against them Neither did he say this to the Apostles only who were not to perseuere to the c●●um●ation of the world but to them he spake and vs he signified Because as he auoucheth in another place To all Christians these wordes appertayned who were to come and continue to the end August serm 45. de verbis ●emini of the world They appertaine as he affirmeth to al because by the teachers and baptizers all the shepheards by the instructed and baptized all the people or sheep of the fold are denoted who could not be taught instructed nor baptized if they were not visibly knowne one to the other 2. Finally in the old testament I haue sworne to Dauid Psal 88. v. 4. Matt. 13. v. 30. his seed shall remaine for euer In the new testament The good seed sowed in the field is sayd to grow vntill the haruest But by whome is it sowed how doth it increase By visible pastours preachers of the word amongst whom Amongst the faithfull how long Vntill the haruest vntill the consumation of the world Where In the Field of our Lord. And

Christ who was to come in flesh Thou art a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech Of Saint Ambrose Christ is declared to offer in vs whose speach sanctifyeth the sacrifice which is offered Of Epiphanius The Priesthood of Melchisedech now florisheth in the Church Theophilact Christ is called a Priest for euer because there is dayly offered there is perpetually offered an oblation by the mynisters of God hauing Christ our Lord both the Priest and sacrifyce Of Saint Leo Eucherius Primasius and the rest whose testimonyes togeather with the Priestly function of Melchisedech which they mayntayne M. Fulke and his felow-protestants vtterly contemne Insomuch as Fulke sayeth this bringing forth of bread and wine was no part of Melchisedeches Priesthood therfore those Fathers were deceaued that iudged that act to pertayne to his Priesthood Marke the arrogancy of this yesterday-vpstart in censuring the Fathers for allowing a Priesthood which he with his adherentes flatly detest Well then seing they renounce both these orders I know not in what ranke to place them vnlesse it Tully in Philip. be in the order of Asinius the voluntary Senatour as Tully iesteth at him himselfe being made by himselfe Or of the order of Don-Quixote knighted in an Inne by the good fellow his host For so they are eyther voluntary Priestes arrogating that dignity without commission or created at the Nags-head in Cheape by them that had as much authority to make them as the Inkeeper to dub a knight Or at the most they can be no other then Parlamentall Priests ordayned by the new deuised forme of that temporall Court authorized by the letters patents first of a Child then of a woman which although it may giue more shew and countenance to the vsurpation of their titles yet it giueth no more right then the former to the dignity of their functions 13. Moreouer no secular Princes or temporall Magistrates No secularprinces haue power to cōferre ecclesiastical orders haue authority to confer Ecclesiasticall orders But the order of Mynistery which our ghospellers challenge was both in Kinge Edward and Queene Elizabeths dayes wholy deuised and primarily conferred by the is secular and temporall authority It was therefore no true Episcopall Priestly or Ecclesiasticall order The Maior or first Proposition is apparant in nature For no man can imparte vnto others that which he hath not himselfe Secular persons neyther a part nor assembled togeather in publike Parlament haue any ecclesiasticall order or iurisdiction much lesse can they communicat it vnto others Then Ciuill Magistrates haue only Ciuill power in Ciuill affayres ordeyned to Ciuill and naturall endes The Episcopall or Priestly order is a spirituall dignity touching spirituall functions directed to a spirituall and supernaturall end which can no more be deriued from a Ciuill Magistrate then white from blacke day from night The Minor or second Proposition I proue by the Parlament lawes other testimonyes vnanswerable In the first of King Edward a Statute was made That Archbishops Bishops should not send out their sommons citations other processes in their own names but in the name and stile of the Kinge Seeing as the law it selfe speaketh that all authority of iurisdiction spirituall Edward 1. chap. 2. and temporall is deriued and deducted from the Kinges Maiesty as supreme head of these Churches and Realmes of England and Ireland and so iustly acknowledged by the Clergy of the sayd Realmes Then you heard before how by the Kinges letters Patentes Archbishoprickes and Bishopprickes were conferred And Fox testifyeth that King Henry 8. imparted to the Fox in his Monu pag 522. 1. Eliz. 1. c. 1. Lord Cromwell the exercise of his supreme spirituall regimēt making him in the Church of England vicegerent for concerning all his iurisdiction ecclesiasticall In the first likewise of Queen● Elizabeths raygne a Statute was enacted whereby all spirituall or ecclesiasticall power or authority is vnited and annexed to the Imperiall crowne of her Realme c. all sorrayne vsurped power iurisdiction preheminence cleerly extinguished c. and by solemne oath renounced forsaken in so much as Doctour Whitgift placed in the Queene the fulnes of VVhitg tract 8. c. 3. d. 33. all ecclesiasticall gouernement from whome all ecclesiasticall power and authority is deriued to Bishops and mynisters she hauing in her as he writeth the supreme gouernment in al causes ouer all persons as she doth exercise the one apportayning to matters Ciuile and temporall by the Lord Chauncelour So doth she the other concerning the Church religion by the Archbishops 14. As this power was straunge and neuer heard of before in any Christian heathen or Turkish commonwealth So the maner of consecrating the mynisters of those dayes was new and before vnasuall For another Act was made in the third of King Edwards raign 3. Edward c. 12. fol. 15. wherein it is sayd Be it therefore enacted by the Kinges Highnes with the assent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and the Com●ons of this present Parlament assembled and by the authority of the same That such forme and manner of making and consecrating of Archbishops Bishops Priests Deacons and other Mynisters of the Church as by sixe Prelats and sixe other men of this Realme learned in Gods law by the Kinges Maiesty to be appointed and assigned or by the most number of them shal be deuised for that purpose and set forth vnder the great seale of England before the first day of Aprill next comming shall by vertue of this present Act be lawfully exercised and vsed and none other any Statute law or vsage to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding Further when this new deuised forme of consecrating Bishops Priests c. bred many doubtes of the inualidity of their consecration and ordering Queene Elizabeth in publique Parlament decreed that all persons that haue been or shal be made ordered or consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priestes after the forme and order prescribed by Kinge Edward in the same forme and order be in very deed 8. Elizab. 1. and also by authority hereof declared and enacted to be and shal be Archbishops Bishops Priests c. and rightly made ordered and consecrated Any Statute law canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding 15. What meaneth this Statute Were your Bishops lawfully ordeyned and consecrated before Why then are they not only declared as M. Mason would excuse the manner of speach but enacted to be and shal be Archbishops c In vayne was this Act if they needed it not and Mason lib. 3. c. 4. p. 122. if they needed it it auayled them nothing as I haue already proued Or to speake more clearely Eyther the Lordes of the Parlament with their Queene had authority to install their Bishops in Episcopall dignity and make their inauguration lawfull in case it had beene inualid or they had no power to doe it Which of these M. Mason will you graunt For

one you must needes Had they authority Then no other ordination at that time to the validity of their orders was essentially required in their opinions but the royall assent of the Queene approbation of her Nobility Had they no authority or power to do it It was an vniust act thē of vsurpation in that honourable assembly a great want of Wisdome to make a law not appertayning to their office and nothing Mason pa. 132. 8. Eliz. c. 1. profitable to their cause 16. The like absurdityes ensew of the dispensation her Maiesty vsed to make good the consecrations of D. Paprker and other intruders ordeyned in the second or third of her raigne For if their consecrations were sound as Mayster Mason obiecteth to himselfe why did the Queene in her letters patentes directed for the consecrating of them vse diuers generall wordes and sentences whereby she dispensed with all causes or doubtes of any imperfection or disability that could or might be obiected in any wise agaynst the same as may appeare by ●● Act of Parlament referring vs to the sayd letters Patents remayning vpon record Whereupon I conclude that seeing no man can dispense in the disabilityes of holy orders but such as haue authority to giue and conferre them eyther M. Maiesty who graciously dispensed to vse Mayster Masons wordes with Mason l. ● c. 5. p. 132. all causes or doubtes in their orders was the chiefe collatour and giuer of them or she iniuriously challenged to her selfe that which no law neyther of God nor man could possibly affoard her All the dawbinges which M. Mason applyeth to couer these faultes are pithily and iudiciously cast of by Mayster D. Champney For wheras he one while sayth that the Queene dispensed with the trespasses Doctour Champney in his answ to Mayster Mason c. 13. agaynst her owne lawes It is answered that there were no lawes of hers transgressed in consecrating of any before that tyme she hauing repealed in her first Parlament the lawes of Queene Mary which disanulled that new inauguration deuised by the twelue deputed by King Edward and hauing enacted no new lawes her selfe any way violable in that kinde before she practised that supreme power of her spirituall soueraygnty in graunting dispensations which was about the second yeare of her raygne Then when Mason dallyeth that she dispensed not in essentiall pointes of ordination but only in accidentall Mason l. 3. c. 5. p. 133. 8. Eliz. c. ● not in substance but in circumstance the wordes of the Queenes letters patents giue testimony agaynst him that she dispensed with all causes or doubtes of any imperfection or disability that can or may be obiected in any wise agaynst the same Now the doubtes were not about any accidentall ceremony or other not essentiall circumstance but as appeareth No man cā dispēse in the disabilityes of holy orders but he that hath power to cōferre thē by the Statute made in the Eight of Queene Elizabeth and by other most learned lawyers of the Realme as I shall declare by by they were about the very substance it selfe of their ordination whether they were true Bishops or no Likewise it belongeth only to them to dispense euen in accidental disabilities of holy orders to whome it belongeth to conferre the orders Therfore if Queene Elizabeth had power in M. Masons iudgemēt to doe the one she had authority to confer the other and that collation thogh voyde in it selfe was iudged sufficient amongst the Protestants Besides whereas M. Mason sayth That the wisdome of their Church discreetly and religiously pared away all superfluous and superstitions ceremonyes in ordination Mason l. 2. c. 11. p. ●4 What ceremony vnbeseeming What circumstance vnfitting remayned amongst them which needed dispēsation Especially seeing as M. Doctour Champney wel vrgeth agaynst him It is not to be thought that the Queene would dispense with those which the wisdome of their Church retayneth as good lawfull 17. In fine the ordination ministred in Queene Elizabeths raygne was no other then such as was deuised in the dayes of Kinge Edward ratifyed and confirmed by her But that inauguration was no validity as 8. Eliz. 1. appeareth by an Article of Queene Maryes made by the consent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and thus Fox in his Acts and Monum p. 1295. related by Mayster Fox 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 deed the Bishop c. The same Fox reporteth that Doctour Brook Bishop of Glocester proceeding to the degradation of Ridley consecrated Bishop after that new forme yet made Priest after the ancient tolde him That they were to degrade him only Fox pag. 1604. of Priesthood for they did not take him to be a Bishop Agaynst which Ridley neuer excepted Howbeit Cranmer being truly consecrated was degraded as Archbishop Then the opinion of the Iudges and censure of the common law disallowed that new ordination In the great Abridgement of the common law it is sayd Que Euesques c. That the Bishops in King Edward the sixt dayes were not consecrated Brookes Nouell cases placito 463. fol. 101. printed 1604. and therefore were not Bishops For which cause a lease for yeares made by them and confirmed by the Deane and Chapter shall not binde the Successour for such were not Bishops Contrarywise of a Bishop depriued which was Bishop in fact at the tyme of the letting confirmation made by the Deane and Chapter These were the Iudges words which are yet further strengthned by the case of Bishop Bonner who was certified into the Kings Bench by Doctour Horne supposed Bishop of Winchester for refusing the new oath appointed to ecclesiasticall persons by the statute of the first of Queene Elizabeth 1. Elizab. c. 1. vnto him offered in Southwarke in the Bishops howse there and his addition was Legum doctor in sacris or diuibus constitutus non clericus nec Episcopus And therefore the certificate was challenged sed non alocatur Also the sayd certificate was challenged for that the oath was sayd to be tendred vnto him by Robert Horne Bishop of Winchester who was no Bishop And Bonner was endited vpon this certificate in the County of Midlesex according to the Statute he pleaded thereunto not guilty And it was holden that the triall should not be made by a iury of Midlesex but by a Iurry of Surry and the venew of Southwarke c. It was also much debated amongst 6. 7 Eliz. Diar folio 234. al the Iustices in the Lord Catlins chamber if Bonner might giue in euidence vpon this issue not guilty that the said Bishop of VVinchester non fuit Episcopus tēpore oblationu Sacramenti and resolued by all that the verity and matter being so indeed he should be well receaued vpon this issue and that the Iury should trye it The triall was