Gospel And here for our direction we will follow the conduct of a starre I meane of Gildas who for antiquitie is the most ancient Historian of our Nation For his wisdome was surnamed Sapiens and for his deuotion and eloquence may well be termed The zealous and Golden mouthed Gildas This Gildas declareth how these frozen Ilands farre remote from the visible Sunne receiued the glittering beames of Christ Iesus the inuisible Sunne in the time of Tiberius Caesar. Which point is the more remarkable because he professeth in the same place That hee pronounceth it vpon sure grounds and certaine knowledge Now Tiberius died in the yeere of Christ 39. according to Baronius Whereupon it followeth That Britaine receiued the Gospel fiue yeeres at least before either Paul or Peter came to Rome By which it is manifest that the first conuerters of our Nation did not come from Rome PHIL. If they did not come from Rome yet preached they the Romane faith of which S. Paul had written to the Romanes themselues before the going of S. Ioseph into Britaine Fides vestra annuntiatur in vniuerso mundo i Your faith is preached and diuulged throughout the whole world Signifying that the Christian faith planted in Rome by S. Peter was deriued already for a platforme into all other parts of the world round about ORTHOD. Whosoeuer they were or whence soeuer blessed be the Name of God who vouchsafed euen in the morning of the Gospel gratiously to remember vs and to display vnto vs the riches of his mercie in Christ Iesus Now whereas you say they preached the Romane faith Bee it so The Romane yet not yours but the very same which is professed this day in the Church of England Let the present doctrine of Rome bee made conformable to that which Saint Paul deliuered to the Romanes and wee will embrace with you the Roman faith Hitherto of the first conuersion Now let vs come to the second CHAP. III. Of the second Conuersion as some call it or rather of a new supply of Preachers and a further propagation of the Gospell in the time of King Lucius and Pope Eleutherius PHIL. NOw do follow two other more famous and publike conuersions of the said Island vnder two renowned Popes of Rome and by their speciall industry which are acknowledged and registred by the whole Christian world and do so much presse the spleene and moue the gall of our Rome-biters as they leaue no corner of their wits vnsisted to discredit or reiect the same The former of them was vnder Pope Eleutherius and King Lucius ORTHO This is not to be called a conuersion of the Island but rather a new supply of Preachers and further propagation of the Gospell For Iohn Capgraue who is commended by Parsons for a learned man relateth that Eluanus who was brought vp at Glastenbury had dispersed through the wide fields of Britaine those first seeds of the Gospell sowen by Ioseph It is also recorded in your Martyrologe which vsed to bee read in your Churches that Lucius neuer carried himselfe as an enemy to Christian religion but shewed himselfe fauourable in respect of their miracles and integrity of life and that he had imbraced the Christian religion sooner if hee had not seene Christians reproched by the Pagans as infamous persons and despitefully handled by the Romans that were in authority But afterward vnderstanding by the Emperours Ambassadours that some Senatours were become Christians and amongst other Pertinax and Trebellius yea and that Marcus Aurelius the Emperour hauing gotten a victory by the praiers of the Christians had vsed them kindly hee sent an Ambassage to Eleutherius Bishop of Rome by Eluanus and Meduinus Brittans intreating Eleutherius by them that hee would open a passage by himselfe and his Ministers for the fostering and cherishing of Christian religion in Brittaine Iohn Capgraue reporteth that Eleutherius made Eluanus Bishop of Brittaine and Meduinus a Doctour to preach the faith of Christ through the whole Island Which sheweth that when they were sent Ambassadours to Eleutherius they were no nouices but profound Diuines and practised teachers in the schoole of Christ as they are tearmed by one of your owne Historians Thus it appeareth that there were learned Preachers who had sowen the seed of the Gospell through the whole Island and Christians famous for miracles euen at the time of Eleutherius his sending PHIL. PEraduenture some priuate Christians but neither the King nor any induced by the Kings authority For it is manifest by Saint Bede that the King wrote to Eleutherius desiring that by his commandement he might bee made a Christian whereby it is plaine that as yet hee was not made a Christian. ORTH. In that he wrote this Epistle to this purpose you may see the motion proceeded from his owne brest and not from Eleutherius he was already made a Christian by the baptisme of the spirit and therefore was desirous to be made a Christian by the baptisme of water Hee had already entred himselfe into the schoole of Christ and sought meanes that his whole kingdome might follow after Which argueth that his soule was sanctified and seasoned with grace Serenauerant enim eius mentem sanctorum miracula the miracles of the Saints had cleared his minde PHIL. VVHat moued the King to send to Rome when there were Bishops in France and other places nearer then Rome ORTHO First the Church of Rome beeing in the Imperiall City planted by two so great Apostles Peter and Paul and flourishing with store of excellent men was most famous and likely to furnish them Secondly the Romans before this time had spred their golden Eagle ouer a great part of the Island The Emperor Hadrian as Aelius Spartianus reporteth had made a wall fourescore miles long Antoninus Pius as Iulius Capitolinus declareth had made another to diuide the Romans from the Brittans and all that liued within this wall were tributary to the Romans of which number King Lucius is said to bee whose father was brought vp at Rome intertained friendship with the Romans and pâ—ide them tribute In which respects as also for the great intercourse betweene Rome and Brittaine King Lucius had oportunitie to send and might conceiue great hope to preuaile Thirdly it is not vnlâ—â—elie that the Ambassadours which informed him how some of the Senators were become Christians might bee themselues Christians and perswaders of him both to become a Christian and to send to Rome for Preachers PHIL. You haue omitted the principall reason for seeing there was not at that time any face or fashion of a Church in Brittaine to whom should hee seeke for planting of religion and erecting of Bishoprickes but onelie to the Bishop of Rome the fountaine and fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall authoritie A particular Bishop hath iurisdiction onelie ouer his owne Dâ—oces an Arch-bishop onelie ouer his owne Prouince a Patriarch is likewise
election according to the ancient manner and the laudable custome of the foresaid Church aunciently vsed and inuiolably obserued After which election orderly performed and signified according to the law it pleased her highnesse to send her letters pattents of Commission for his confirmation and consecration to seuen Bishops six whereof were lately returned from exile whose names with so much of the commission as concerneth this present purpose I will here set downe for your better satisfaction Elizabeth Dei gratia c. Reuerendis in Christo patribus Anth. Landauensi Will. Barlow quondam Bath Episcopo nunc Cicestrensi electo Ioh. Scory quondam Cicestrensi Episcopo nunc Herefordensi electo Miloni Couerdale quondam Exoniensi Episcopo Ioh. Suffraganeo Bedford Ioh. Suffraganeo Theâ—ford Ioh. Bale Ossorensi Episcopo Quatenus vos aut ad minus 4. vestrum eundem Math. Parkerum in Archiepiscopum pastorem Ecclesiae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cantuar praedictae sicut praefertur electum electionemque praedictam confirmare eundem Magistrum Math. Parker in Arch Pastorem Ecclesiae praedictae consecrare caeteraque omnia singula peragere quae vestro in hac parte incumbunt pastorali efficio iuxta formam statutorum in ca parte editorum prouisorum velitis cum effectu c. Daâ— 6 Decem. Anno 2. Elizab that is That you or at the least foure of you would effectually confirme the said Matth Parker elected to bee Archbishop and Pastour of the Cathedrall and Metropoliticall Church of Christ at Canterbury aforesaid as is before mentioned and that you would effectually confirme the saide election and consecrate the saide Matthew Parker Archbishop and Pastour of the said Church and performe all and euery thing which belongs to your Pastorall office in this respect according to the forme of the statutes set out and prouided in this behalfe Behold how both the commission and statute concurre with the Canons PHIL. BVt was the consecration accordingly performed ORTH. You neede not doubt of it For first the Bishops to whom the letters patents were directed had reason to set their handes cheerefully to so good a worke so much tending to the aduancing of the true Religion which they all imbraced and for which all of them except one had beene in exile Secondly how durst they doe otherwise seeing it was enacted by a statute made in the 25. yeare of King Henry 8. and still in force that if any Archbishop or Bishop within the Kings dominions after any such election nomination or presentation signified vnto them by the Kings letters patents should refuse and not confirme inuest and consecrate with all due circumstance within twentie dayes after that the Kings letters patents of such signification or presentation should come to their hands then hee or they so offending should runne in the dangers paines and penalties of the statute of prouision and premunire made in the twentie fiue yeare of the raigne of king Edward the third and in the sixteenth of king Richard the second PHIL. This is some probabilitie but yet for all this seeing maister D. Sanders saith that you had neither three nor two Bishops and maister D. Kellison saith you could finde none I will not beleeue the contrary vnlesse you produce the consecration it selfe ORTHOD. Then to take away all scruple I will faithfully deliuer vnto you out of Authenticall records both the day when he was consecrated and the persons by whom Anno 1559. Matt. Park Cant. Cons. 17. Decem. by William Barlow Iohn Scorie Miles Couerdale Iohn Hodgeskins PHIL. IF all this were granted yet it were nothing vnlesse you could iustifie the consecration of his consecratours therefore you must tell me when they were made Bishops ORTHOD. Two of them in the raigne of king Henry 8. and two in the dayes of king Edward the sixt In the raigne of K. Henry B. Barlow and the Suffragan of Bedford Bishop Barlow was a man of singular note who to vse the wordes of Bale ab erudito ingenio famam accepit that is hee had great fame and renowne for a learned wit In regard whereof he was aduanced to be Prior of Bisham and from thence elected to the Bishoprick of Saint Asaph which election was confirmed 23. Febr 1535. and soone after it pleased the King to preferre him to the Bishopricke of Saint Dauids where hee continued all the dayes of King Henry duely discharging all things belonging to the order of a Bishop euen Episcopall consecration as I haue already declared out of authenticall records He was also translated by King Edward to the Bishoprick of Bath and Wels and by Queene Elizabeth promoted to Chichester And as he was generally acknowledged and obeyed as a Bishop in his owne nation so Bucanan relating how King Henry sent him Embassadour into Scotland doth giue him his iust Episcopall title Now you told vs before out of Sanders that in King Henries time none might bee acknowledged for a Bishop vnlesse hee were consecrated by three with the consent of the Metropolitane Wherefore seeing Barlow was so famously and notoriously acknowledged not onely in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth and King Edward but also in the dayes of King Henry it is a cleare case that hee was so consecrated The same is to be said of the Suffragan of Bedford PHIL. What tell you mee of Suffraganes you know how Damasus speaketh against those titulary Bishops called Chorepiscopi ORTHOD. There are two sorts of Chorepiscopi the first had no Episcopall Consecration who are reproued and that iustly for they were onely Priests and not Bishops and of these Damasus speaketh in the iudgement of Bellarmine The second had Episcopall Consecration and these though they had no citie nor diocesse of their owne but onely some countrey towne for their See yet in regard of their Consecration they were true Bishops as Bellarmine confesseth Respondeo Suffraganeos esse veros Episcopos quia ordinationem habent Iurisdictionem licet careant possessione propriae Ecclesia that is I answere that Suffraganes are true Bishops because they haue both ordination and Iurisdiction although they are not possessed of a Church of their owne And of this latter sort are the Suffraganes of England established by act of Parliament in these wordes Be it therefore enacted by authority of this present Parliament that the townes of Thetford Ipswich Colchester Douer Gilsord Southampton Taunton Shaftesbury Molton Marleborrow Bedford Leicester Glocester Shrewsbury Bristow Penreth Bridgwater Nottingham Grantham Hul Huntingdon Cambridge and the townes of Pereth and Barwicke S. Germans in Cornewall and the I le of Wight shall bee taken and accepted for Sees of Bishops Suffraganes to bee made in this Realme and in Wales And the Bishops of such Sees shall bee called Suffraganes of this Realme And for their consecration prouided alwayes that the Bishop that shall nominate the Suffragane to the kings highnesse or the
meanes of the brasen serpent yet the vertue of healing proceeded not from the brasen serpent but immediatly from himselfe For â—e that turned towards it was not healed by the thing that he saw but by thee O Sautour of all Euen so though God in giuing this Spirituall power vse the ministerie of man yet the power it selfe is immediatly from God For whereas S. Paul among the gifts of God to the Church nameth gouernments And S. Peter saith If any man minister let him doe it as of the abilitie which God ministreth Your Iesuit Salmeron though striuing to deriue it from the Pope as it is actuall yet considering it in it selfe being conuicted with the euidence of trueth saith thus Ministrationes quoque Domino ascribuntur sicut gubernationes à Paulo quia quicquid est supernaturale in ministerio gubernatione Deus per se fecit id autem ad quod creatura potest concurrere sinit eam agere etsi ipse praecipuè id operetur Gratia igitur gratis data administrandi gubernandi à Deo est immediatè i. Ministrations are ascribed to the Lord by S. Paul as also gouernments because whatsoeuer is supernaturall in ministerâ—â— and gouernment God hath wrought that by himselfe but he suffereth the creature to worke that vnto which it can concurre although himselfe in that bee the 〈…〉 pall agent Therefore the freely giuen grace of administring and gouerning is 〈…〉 tly from God And againe â— Si sâ—matur pro gratia gratis data gubernandi vel administrandi iurisdictionem vt sumunt Petrus Paulus procul dubio donumest quod ab homine procedere non potest i. If Iurisdiction or gouernment be taken for the freely giuen grace of gouerning or administring Iurisdiction as Peter and Paul take it without doubt it is a gift which cannot proceed from man Wherefore when S. Paul willeth Timothie To stirre vp the grace which is giuen him it is to be expounded not onely of the grace of Order but of all Episcopall grace And S. Ambrose when hee saith God giueth the grace doeth vndoubtedly meane all Episcopall grace For who can giue any grace to the Pastours of the Church but onely the God of all grace which giueth Pastours to the Church and appointeth them to be rulers ouer his family To Salmeron we may adde Henr. Gandauensis affirming that Bishops haue their power both of Order and Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ As also Gottifredus de Fontibus and Iohannes de Poliaco all alleadged by Salmeron Whose opinions he controuleth without reason seeing before in effect he affirmed the same I will conclude this point with the Vniuersitie of Paris which ratified this position with a Decree and caused one Iohannes Sarazim a Frier to recant the contrary PHIL. If Iurisdiction be giuen in Consecration then it should be equall in all Bishops ORTHOD. The power it selfe is equall in all though the determination of the power which is from the Church be vnequall When a Bishop is translated to another See hee doeth not lose his former habituall power no more then the Sunne doeth lose his light when hee passeth to the other Hemisphere When a Bishop of a smaller Circuit is aduanced to a greater he getteth not a greater power but a larger subiect whereupon he may exercise his power And when a Bishop is deposed hee is not absolutely depriued of his power but the matter is taken away vpon which his power should worke This is confessed by Vargas to be the opinion of Alphonsus and others If it happen that a Bishop for any crime bee depriued of his Bishopricke then he shall bee depriued of his subiects vpon whom hee ought to exercise his power of Iurisdiction but hee shall not be depriued of the power of Iurisdiction it selfe receiued in his Consecration CHAP. II. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all Spirituall Iurisdiction PHIL. THe giuing of Iurisdiction must onely proceed from him that is the fountaine of all Spirituall Iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane or Bishop vnder him that hath authoritie and commission from him For the Church of God is like vnto a Citie which hath one onely fountaine from whence there issue diuers great floods which are branched out againe into sundry goodly streames whence the water is conueyed by pipes and conduits to serue the whole Citie This fountaine is the Bishop of Rome the great floods are the Patriarches Archbishops and Metropolitanes the streames are the rest of the Bishops the pipes and conduits are all those which deriue their Iurisdiction from the Bishops Now the Church of England was sometimes flourishing like the Paradice of God but since it was cut off from the liuely spring alas for woe it is like to a barren and forsaken wildernesse ORTHOD. The Church of England God be thanked is in such a case that all her friends haue cause to reioyce and all her enemies to gnash their teeth And as for the fountaine you speake of it is not a well of liuing water made by the King of heauen but a puddle or pit of poyson digged by the Prince of darkenesse The Bishop of Rome wee graunt hath of ancient time beene reuerently regarded and had though not a generall iurisdiction yet a large extent yea hee had precedencie of dignity and place before all other Bishops but this was onely by law humane because he was the Bishop of the Imperiall Citie but now hee is like a furious floud which ouerfloweth the bankes he will be no more confined with bounds and limits hee chalengeth a generallity of iurisdiction ouer the Christian world and that by law diuine PHIL. I Will proue That he is the fountaine of al spirituall iurisdiction by law diuine for Saint Peter was so and the Pope succeeded him in this right ORTHOD. There is more required to inferre this conclusion then al the Seminaries Iesuites in the world are able to performe but first how proue you that Peter was inuested in this right by law diuine PHIL. The Scripture is full of testimonies declaring both his lawfull authority and his due execution thereof his authority might appeare by many arguments but I will make choice of two which proue the point in question most directly the promise of the keyes the coÌ„mission of feeding the sheep To begin with the first Christ said to Peter I wil giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen Christ gaue him not one keye only but 2. the key of knowledge the key of power by the key of knowledge he was able to open all Scriptures controuersies of religion The key of power is of order or of iurisdiction by the key of order he was able to ordaine Bishops and Pastours of the Church and againe to lock them out of the ministery by deposing degrading as occasion required by the key of iurisdiction hee might open and shut
of Abbots with a dispensation or else he is no Bishop and this argument he calleth insoluble ORTHO HOw this doth crosse and condradict it selfe in due place shall appeare in the meane time I would willingly know what is the receiued opinion of your Seminaries There is a certaine manuscript booke called Controuersiae huius temporis in Epitomen reductae made by Parsons the Iesuite out of the Dictates of Bellarmine and Maldonate and appointed to be written out by euery Student in your Colledge I pray you what saith that booke to this point PHIL. It agreeth with the former the words are these Primus Canon Apostolorum hoc idem declarat scilicet Episcopum non posse ordinari nisi a tribus Episcopis hinc sequitur ineuitabiliter Haereticos non habere vllos pastores seu Episcopos cum primi illorum Episcopi Caluinus Lutherus Zuinglius nunquam fuerunt ordinati ab alijs Episcopis That is The first Canon of the Apostles declareth this same thing to wit that a Bishop cannot be ordeined but of three Bishops hence it followeth vnauoydably that the Hereticks haue not any pastours or Bishops seeing that their first Bishops Caluin Luther Zuinglius had neuer beene ordained of other Bishops ORTHO HItherto we haue seene how you hold the state of the first question but doe your Iesuites and Seminaries vrge this against the Church of England PHIL. Yes for it is a maine point ORTHO Then your maine point is a vaine point but let vs heare them PHIL. Bellarmine speaking of the marriage of English Bishops saith Nullam excusationem habent nisi forte velint liberè confiteri quod verissimum est se veros Episcopos non esse neque aliquid de Episcopatu habere nisi quae sibi iniuste vsurpant nomen opes That is They haue no excuse vnlesse peraduenture they will freely confesse which is most true that they are no true Bishops neither haue any thing of the Episcopall function but what they vniustly vsurpe vnto themselues to wit the name and the riches If nothing else then not the Character not the Iurisdiction not the Order not the Office they haue nothing nothing at all except the name and the riches ORTHOD. The riches alas Is it not strange that a Cardinall swimming in streames of gold to the chinne should enuy the riches of the Bishops of England But be they rich or poore surely if the Pope might haue had his will before this time he would haue made them poore ynough In the daies of King Henry the eight when a view was taken it appeared that he had receiued out of England onely for Inuestitures of Bishops 4000. pounds by the yeere one yeere with another and that for 40. yeeres together But how dare Bellarmine thus accuse our Bishops as though they had nothing belonging to the Episcopall function What no learning none at all It is not long agoe since he put off his Cardinals robes disguising himselfe vnder the ill fauoured habit and vizard of Tortus when one of our Bishops whether learned or no let the world iudge did so vnmaske and display him that all Popish hearts haue cause to bleed to see the weakenesse of their chiefe Champion so plainely discouered And as our Bishops haue learning so let the Cardinall know that they are famous and eminent Preachers very labourious in the Vineyard of Christ and in this respect farre vnlike to his brethren the Cardinals For Iulius the second said that he could not with a good conscience make Frier Giles a Cardinall because then he should leaue his preaching and afterward Leo the tenth made him a Cardinall that he might hold his peace For commonly in the Church of Rome the great Bishops preach seldome the Cardinals seldomer and the Popes neuer But what is the ground of his accusation PHIL. Because they are not Canonically ordeined The same point is likewise vrged against them by Doctor Stapleton Whether went they into France Spaine or Germanie seeing that at home there was no number of such as might and would serue their turne No no as their Religion is contrary their ende is diuers their beginning hath bene vtterly different from the true Christian faith planted among vs so are their proceedings different and repugnant they haue not come in by the doore they haue stolne in like theeues without all Spirituall authoritie or gouernement This difference betweene the Protestants and our true Bishops the first Apostles importeth so much that it may not lightly be passed ouer for their authoritie being proued nought all their doings can be no better I say therefore by the verdict of holy Scripture and practise of the Primitiue Church these men are no Bishops Your pretended Bishops haue no such Ordination no such laying on of the hands of Bishops no authoritie to ordaine Priests and Ministers and therefore neither are you true Ministers neither they any Bishops at all ORTHOD. What reason haue you to say that our Bishops are not consecrated by three the Canon hath alwaies bene obserued in our Church neither can all the Papists in the world giue any one instance to the contrary since the time of Reformation PHIL. Doct. Sanders declareth That there was a time when you had neither three nor two Bishops and yet at the same time your new Superintendents inuaded the Ecclesiasticall Chaires and were glad to seeke their Confirmation from the Prince and Parliament after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration And therefore all the water in the Thames cannot cleare the Clergie of England from being vsurpers ORTHOD. But if this be false then all the water in the Tybur though it were turned into Holy-water cannot purge the Papists from being slanderers And how false it is shall hereafter be declared out of authenticall Records by which it shall appeare That the Queenes Letters patents of Commission concerning the Confirmation and Consecration of the very first Bishop made in her time were directed to 7. Bishops and also that the Consecration was accomplished by 4 Bishops whose names and titles shall be specified In the meane time this onely I say In lying and slandering many Papists haue had an admirable dexteritie but Sanders surmounted them all For as his booke of Schisme is truely called by a learned Bishop Sterquilinium mendactorum A dunghill of lies so it might be iustly termed Sterquilinium calumniarum A very dunghill of slanders Insomuch that for his noble facultie that way he deserueth no more to be called M. Doct. Sanders but M. Doct. Slanders PHIL. It is no slander but a trueth which shal be auouched to your faces for I wil proue al that I haue said in order My masters marke what I say If you can iustifie your Calling we will all come to your Church and be of your Religion ORTHOD. Remember your promise and proceed with your Argument PHIL. I will proceed and
within his own Prouince according to the custome of Rome which custome they commend and propose for a patterne But the Bishop of Rome careth neither for Canons nor Customes which make against him He is not content to bee Bishop in his owne Diocesse and Metropolitan ouer Bishops in his owne Prouince and Patriarch ouer his owne Metropolitans but he would stretch out the pawes of his Supremacie ouer the Christian world Fiftly the Nicen Canons would haue no Priest made without examination and such as are rashly ordained they doe not allow But the Bishop of Rome maketh boy Priests and boy Bishops and boy Cardinals Ferdinandus Medices a Florentine was made a Cardinall by Sixtus Quintus when he was not ful thirteene yeres old and Iohannes Medices which was afterwards Pope Leo the tenth was Cardinall before he was fourteene yeeres complet yet he was an Archbishop fiue yeeres before he was Cardinall And least you should imagine that this fauour was afforded only to Florentines Odettus Castilioneus was Cardinall at eleuen yeere old yet he was elected Bishop before he was Cardinall Alphonsus sonne to Immanuel King of Portugall was Cardinall at seuen yeeres old and yet he was Bishop before he was Cardinall These are the men whose office is to chuse the Pope to assist him with their Counsell and to sit with him as Iudges of the whole world And that which is more wonderfull if we may beleeue Glaber Rodulphus a Monke of your owne which liued at the same time Benedict the ninth was made Pope at twelue yeeres olde Was not this a fitte man to be Father of the Church Moderator of generall Councels Decider of all Controuersies Expounder of all Scriptures the onely Oracle vpon the face of the earth and Iudge Paramount of the Christian World Sixtly the Nicen Canons doe not suffer a Deacon so much as to sit amongst Priests but as the Priest was in place inferiour to the Bishop so the Deacon to the Priest Now though it were granted to be true which Bellarmine affirmeth that vnder Syluester there was seuen Cardinal Deacons in Rome yet the Nicen Councel maketh no exception at all of Cardinals But be he Cardinal or not Cardinall the Deacon is inferior to the Priest and the Priest to the Bishop but the Bishop of Rome hath aduanced his Cardinals euen such as are neither Bishops nor Priests First aboue Bishops then aboue Archbishops last of all aboue Patriarches Seuenthly the Nicen Canons forbid any Bishop to ordaine in his Church a Clerke belonging to another Bishop without the consent of the Bishop to whom he belongeth But the Bishop of Rome ordaineth whomsoeuer wheresoeuer whensoeuer not expecting the consent of any man Last of all the Nicen Canons forbid all Clerkes to follow filthy lucre Wherein how his holines excelleth is plainely platted out by Claudius Espencaeus a Diuine of your owne out of a shamelesse booke openly sold in Rome called the Taxe of the Chamber or Chauncery Apostolicke wherein a man may learne before hand at what price to be dispensed withall for any villany he shall commit be it adultery symony periurie incest or worse then incest Wherefore Philodox if paper could blush I am perswaded the leaues of that booke would be as red as scarlet So at Rome nothing is forbidden but to come without money if a man bring money it will procure a dispensation for any thing A wedge of gold findeth gâ—ace wheresoeuer it goeth and a Key of gold can open Saint Peters locke For all things are weighed at Rome in a ballance of golde as though pouerty were the onely irregularitie and no sinne in the world were greater then to want money so well doth the Church of Rome obserue the Nicen Canons But let vs heare the words of the Canon PHIL. A Bishop must be ordained if it be possible of all the Bishops in his prouince if this be hard to performe either by occasion of vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet surely three ought to bee congregated into one place so that they haue the consent of the absent solet theÌ„ make an ordination Likewise the fourth Councell of Carthage when a Bishop is ordained let two Bishops lay the Booke of the Gospels and hold it ouer his head and necke and one Bishop powring the blessing vpon him let all other Bishops that are present touch his head with their handes Likewise the second Councell of Arles Let no Bishop presume to ordaine a Bishop without permission of the Metropolitane nor any Bishop being a Metropolitance without three Bishops of the same Prouince so that others of the same Prouince be admonished by Epistles that they may signifie by their answere that they haue consented So the sixt Councell of Carthage A Bishop must be ordained of all the Bishops which are within the Prouince but if this bee hard either for vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet by all meanes three meeting together there may bee imposition of handes the absent Bishoppes consenting thereto by writing So the second Councell at Brachar It is meete that Bishops should bee appointed especially by the whole Councell but if this shal be hard in respect of necessitie or for the length of the iourney let three of them bee gathered together and let the subscriptions of all both present and absent bee taken and so afterward let the ordination be performed Thus you see the Councels and namely the Nicen requireth the presence of three For first it should bee performed by all the Bishops of the Prouince but if that cannot be by reason of vrgent necessitie yet surely three must bee congregated so they make it not a thing indifferent but a matter of necessitie and in any case require three ORTHOD. WHat if three present proceede to a consecration not expecting at all the consent of the absent PHIL. Their consent seemeth to bee onely of congruitie and not of necessitie ORTH. But the Nicen Canon not content with three present requireth also the consent of the absent in the same strictnesse of wordes Yet surely let three be congregated into one place so that they haue also the consent of the absent and so let them make an ordination Wherefore if you expound the one branch as a point of coÌ„gruâ—ty why do you vrge the other as of absolute necessitie Againe these Councels were holden Florente Ecclesia when the world was furnished with plentie of godly Bishops but you vrge them against a Church lately eclipsed and newly recouered from darkenesse the world round about being drowned in superstition and Idolatry These answeres might bee sufficient but for your better satisfaction let vs search the sence of your authorities by comparing them one with another The first was a Canon ascribed to the Apostles which being made when Bishops were scant requireth two or three The second drawne from the decrees of Popes supposed to
confined and circumscribed with in his boundes and limits But the authority of the Bishop of Rome is like vnto the Ocean inuironing the earth or to the highest heauens incompassing all therefore in such cases wee must haue recourse to the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. To whom had Frumentius recourse for the conuerting of India The Story whereof is this A Tyrian Philosopher arriuing in India was slaine by the Barbarians with all his company except two little children which were gone out of the shippe and were learning their lessons vnder a tree These children were brought vp by the King and aduanced by him one of them that is Adesius beeing made his Steward the other that is Frumentius his Secretary Afterward the King dying and leauing his sonne in his nonage the Queene intreated them both but especially Frumentius to assist her in the Gouernement of the kingdome While Frumentius was in this authority hee inquired among the Romane Merchants for Christians hee shewed them all fauour and countenance and admonished them to haue their assembles for praier and the seruice of God When the King came to age they deliuered him the kingdome and departed Adesius to Tyre Frumentius to Alexandria where hee went to Athanaesius and told him what was done intreating him to send some worthy Bishop to those multitudes of Christians and to those Churches which were built in that barbarous place Then Athanasius calling an assembly of Priests said Where shall we finde such a man in whom is the spirit of God to performe these things so hee made Frumentius Bp. sent him into India and the Lord blessed his labours signes and wonders were wrought by him and an infinite company of those barbarous people were conuetted to the faith This Story is recorded by Ruffinus who liued at the same time not out of the rumors of the people but by the relation of Adesius himselfe the companion of Frumentius who was afterward a Priest of Tyre And Socrates Theodoret and Sozomen doe all borrow the same from Ruffinus Thus Athanasius sent a Bishop to conuert India without consulting with the Bishop of Rome which verely he would haue done if hee had thought it necessary But the Pope then did challenge no such thing neither did that age ascribe it to him Wherefore the Kings sending to Eleutherius was not of necessity but because it stood most with his conueniencie PHIL. You are vnthankefull and vnwilling to acknowledge your obligation to Rome ORTHOD. We confesse a singular blessing from thence deriued vnto vs. For Eleâ—therâ—us sent Fugatius and Danatianus otherwise called Damianus by whom ioyning with Eluanus and Meduinus Christian Religion was aduanced Then King Lucius was baptised and many of his people Then the Druides were remoued and in their roomes christian Preachers placed Then the Temples which had beene founded to the honour of their many Gods were dedicated to the one and onely true God thus Idolatry was dispoiled of her pray and Dagon did fall downe before the Arke of Israel For the better vnderstanding whereof it must be obserued that the Romanes before this time had diuided Britaine into three Prouinces one of them was called Maxima Caesariensis the Metropolis wherof was Yorke Another Britannia prima the Metropolis wherof was London the third Britannia secunda the Metropolis wherof was Caerlegion Now in other cities they had their Flamines In these three noble Cities were the seates of the Arch flamines so there were 28. Flamines and three Archiflamines in stead of which so many Bishops Arch-bishops were appointed This is denied by Gultelmus Paruus but Lelandus confuteth him first by Asserius Meneuensis who was schoolemaster to King Alfred secondly by Geraldus in Dialogo Syluestri thirdly by Ptolomeus Lucensis who saith in the life of Eleutherius that the three Protoflamines of Britaine were conuerted into so many Archbishops Concerning their seates Lelandus addeth London of the Trinobantes and Yorke of the Brigantes did vndoubtedly shine with this dignitie therefore where is the third seate where but in Wales in which point though I hold my peace Trithemius is an euident witnesse Hitherto Lelandus Now although Britaine was after the Nicen Councell diuided into fiue Prouinces Valentia and Flauia Caesariensis being added to the former yet there were no new Archbishoprickes erected The reason whereof was because those two new Prouinces were taken out of the former and consequently could not haue Bishoprickes without the diminishing of the authoritie of the former in whose iurisdiction originally they were which was not sufferable because it was against the Canon of the Nicen Councell decreeing that in Antioch and in other Prouinces the dignities prerogatiues and authorities of Churches should be maintained PHIL. Were not all these Bishoprickes erected or at least confirmed by the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. When the King desired to receiue from him the Romane Lawes hee returned this answere That there were already in Britaine the olde and new Testament out of which by the Councell of his kingdome hee might take a Law to gouerne his people For he was the Vicar of Christ in his owne Kingdome And as hee did not interpose himselfe in matters temporall so neither doth it appeare that hee did in matters spirituall or ecclesiasticall Hee sent not one Preacher into Britaine before hee was entreated by the King Neither doe wee finde that hee assumed to himselfe any authoritie in erecting of Bishoprickes Neither did that age ascribe it vnto him as may appeare by the former example of Athanasius but it seemeth that the King being supreme Gouernour euen in religious causes within his owne Kingdome and assisted by learned Preachers established such gouernment and in such places as was most conuenient Yet make we no doubt but Eleutherius both gaue them instructions what hee thought fittest to be done if the Lord should blesse their labours and likewise approued it with ioy of heart when hee heard it was done not by vertue of any iurisdiction but out of a Christian deuotion Their diuersitie of ceremonies and their reiecting of Austin may induce vs to think that they had neuer beene vnder the Romane Patriarch And it is most likely that as the Churches of Cyprus had a gouernment within themselues exempt from the Iurisdiction of all others so the Churches of Britaine a little world without the world might bee gouerned by Primates of their owne and exempt from all forraine Iurisdiction PHIL. DId not the Bishop of Rome deliuer them from Arianisme and Pelagianisme ORTHO If it were so yet this would not argue any Papall Iurisdiction but onely Christian compassion But indeed it was not so We read in Bede that the land was infected with these heresies That Rome did recouer it we reade not He telleth how that at the request of the Britaines the French met in a Synod and sent Germanus and Lupus two reuerend Bishops by whose
Nicolas Heath whom Queene Mary made Archbishop of Yorke and after the death of Gardiner Lord Chancelour of England what shall become of Thurlby whom Queene Mary translated from Norwich to Ely For all these were consecrated at such time when in your iudgement both the consecrators and consecrated were stained with schisme and heresie Did all these receiue nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue If they were no Bishops then what becomes of the Bishops in Queene Maries raigne whom these did consecrate if they all receiued nothing then you must confesse that the Priestes whom they ordained were no Priestes If they were no Priests then though they vsed the words of Consecration they could not Consecrate the hoast If this be true then al that worshipped the hoast which they did Consecrate were idolatours PHIL. Edmond Bonner and the rest of our Bishops and Priests were Reuerend and Canonicall whatsoeuer you esteeme of them ORTH. Can there be a Bishop without effectuall Consecration PHIL. It is impossible ORTHO And other Consecration they had none but that which wee haue mentioned for I hope they were not reordained in Queene Maries time PHIL. Reordained I doe not thinke so for as rebaptizations so reordinations were forbidden in the Councell of Capua And Gregory saith as he which is once baptized ought not to be baptized againe so hee which is once consecrated ought not to be Consecrated againe in the same order Therfore vndoubtedly they were not reordained but Cardinall Poole the Popes legate absolued them from Schisme and heresie so they were confirmed for lawful Bishops ORTHOD. You hold that it is impossible to be a Bishop without effectuall Consecration Therefore seeing they had no other Consecration but that mentioned and yet were Bishops it followeth that their Consecration was effectuall wherefore you are forced to confesse that if a schismatical and hereticall Bishop giue orders the orders are effectuall But least this conclusion should seeme to flowe rather from the affection you beare to your owne Bishops then from any force of reason especially your own allegations standing still to the contrary let vs reuiew the whole matter and proceed by degrees ballancing euery thing with aduice and iudgement And answere I pray you not out of priuate humour and passion but from the publicke and most authenticall recordes of your Church ANd first if a wicked priest as for example a drunkard fornicator or blasphemer baptize a childe I demaund whether the baptisme bee good or no PHIL. If it be performed in the true element of water with Euangelicall words that is In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost according to our Sauiour Christs holy institution it is sound and sufficient and neuer to be iterated as our learned Popes Councels and Fathers alleadged by Cardinall Bellarmine doe testifie For the wickednesse of the Minister cannot pollute the puritie of the mysteries of God they are auaileable to his children though they be ministred by a Iudas For it is well said of our learned Cardinall that he which hath not forgiuenesse of sinnes formally may haue it Ministerially as he that hath not in his purse one halfepeny of his owne may notwithstanding cary many crownes to another from his lord and master ORTHO Very true for that which S. Paul saith of preaching may bee extended to other Ministeriall duties If I doe it willingly I haue a reward but if I doe it against my will notwithstanding the dispensation is committed vnto me As though he should say If I do it willingly that is cheerfully for conscience sake seeking onely the glory of God and the saluation of his people then there is a reward laid vp for me But if I shall performe it vnwillingly that is for feare couetousnesse vaine glory or any other carnall respect though to my selfe it be not profitable because I loose my reward yet it may be auailable to others because the dispensation is committed vnto me The foulnesse of an vnsanctified hand cannot staine the beautie of these glorious mysteries For as Gregory Nazianzen saith A seale of Iron may imprint the Princes image as well as a signet of gold And we know by experience that a garden may as well be watered with an earthen as with a siluer pipe But what if the Priest we speak of be a schismaticke and an hereticke PHIL. Though he be yet if hee baptize according to the institution of Christ the baptisme is effectuall and neuer to be repeated ORTHOD. You say well for in such a case though it be ministred by Hereticks and schismaticks yet it is not the baptisme of heretickes and schismatickes but of Iesus Christ. For it is he that baptiseth and neither is he that planteth any thing nor hee that watereth bâ—â— God which giueth the increase To which purpose it is excellently said of Ausâ—â—n To the baptisme which is Consecrated with Euangelicall words pertaineth not the errour of any man either of the giuer or of the receiuer whether he thinke otherwise then the heauenly doctrine teacheth of the Father or of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost Indeed it was decreed in the great counsell of Nice that the Pauliâ—nistae comming to the Catholicke Church should be rebaptized where by rebaptizing they meane the repeating of that action which was erroniously supposed to be true baptisme but in trueth was not because it wanted the true essentiall forme of words which the Councell iudged necessary to be supplied Therefore there is no repugnancie betweene them and the Affrican Councel which decreed vnder Pope Stephen that the Nouatians returning to the Catholicke Church should not be rebaptized because their former baptisme though giuen by heretickes was according to the true forme of the Church and therefore sufficient It is true that Agrippinus Bishop of Carthage defended rebaptization and he was the first of all mortall men which defended it wherein he was followed by Saint Cyprian and the Bishops of Africke but then they had not seene the point defined by any generall Councels and though they held an errour yet they did not iudge them heretickes which held the contrary neither did they rebaptize those whom the Catholickes had baptized nor make any rent in the Church but kept the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace yea Saint Austin saith some report that Cyprian recalled this errour S. Hierom affirmeth that the Bishops of Africk did the like moued by the authority of Stephen Bishop of Rome But after them came the Donatists stiffely maintaining and increasing this errour euen when the Church had determined the contrary and therefore were iustly iudged hereticks Yea they took vpoÌ„ them to rebaptize such as were baptised in the Catholicke Church which was a diabolicall presumption For which causes Vincentius Lyrinensis saith Of one and the same opinion wee iudge which may seeme strange the authors
exceedingly addicted to Baronius yet in this point hee forsakes him and maketh no mention of Conciliati PHIL. You must not thinke that they were consecrated againe but receiued the mysterie of blessing after the manner of their ancestours which the Authour named the Sacrament of blessing ORTHOD. By Sacrament of blessing is meant the Sacrament of order For the Bishop which pronounceth the wordes whereby the mysticall blessing or the spirituall power is giuen is saide in the fourth Councell of Carthage to powre out the blessing PHIL. But the meaneth onely those solemnities which were accustomed to be vsed in the reconciliation of a Schismaticke or Hereticke ORTH. So saith Baronius but I will proue the contrary For as you heard before it was decreed that all which Constantine did in Ecclesiasticall Sacraments and diuine worship should be reiterated excepting onely Baptisme and confirmation but what thinke you did not Pope Stephen and the Romaine Councell account holy orders an Ecclesiasticall Sacrament PHIL. Yes vndoubtedly ORTH. Then vndoubtedly they decreede that the holy orders should be reiterated which were giuen by Constantine And therfore if they were onely reconciled and not reordained then Pope Stephen did contrary to his own decree which is most absurde Wherefore it is a cleare case that Pope Stephen the fourth vsed reordination PHIL. If he did so then he was blame worthy For though Constantine were a Schismaticall Antipope though of a lay man hee was suddenly made Bishop and hudled vp his orders in all hast contrary to the Canons yet wee cannot deny but he receiued those orders and had power in respect of his Episcopall Character to deliuer them vnto others And seeing his Character was indeleble as wee haue proued therefore though he had not onely beene a Schismaticke but also an Hereticke excommunicated and degraded yet he could not haue lost his power of giuen orders ORTHOD. If you continue constant in this opinion then you must at your leasure bethinke yourselfe how it may be reconciled with your former allegations out of Pope Innocent Pope Iohn and Pope Nicolas in the meane time it is sufficient for vs to take that you grant PHIL. I tolde you it was a disputable point and seemed almost insoluble to Peter Lombard Yet now at last by much disputing the trueth is found out learned men are agreed vpon it and vnlesse I be deceiued the holy doctrine of the indeleble character deliuered in the Councels of Florence and Trent was the very needle to direct their course CHAP. X. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Henry the eighth after the abolishing of the Popes Iurisdiction ORTH. THen at last to gather into briefe heads that which hath beene discoursed at large you graunt that Archbishop Cranmer was a Canonicall Bishop PHIL. I grant it for the reasons before alleadged ORTHO And you make no doubt of any of the Bishops of England before Cranmer PHIL. None at all as you heard before ORTHOD. And you say that euery Canonicall Bishop hath an Episcopall Character PHIL. We say so ORTHOD. And that this Character is so indeleble that no schisme no sinne no heresie no censures of the Church no excommunication suspension interdiction degradation nothing nothing at all sauing onely death if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting PHIL. All this was proued out of the most famous Councels of Florence and Trent ORTH. And that euery Bishop by vertue of his Episcopall Character hath power to giue holy orders yea euen the order of a Bishop PHIL. Very true so he be assisted by a sufficient number of Bishops and impose hands vpon a capable person according to the forme of the Church ORTHOD. THen to proceed to the rest of the Bishops consecrated in King Henries daies in the time of the pretended schisme were not they capable of the Episcopall function PHIL. Though King Henry abolished the authoritie of the Pope yet the sacrifice of the Masse continued till the end of his reigne So we make no doubt but the Priesthood then in vse was a sacrificing Priesthood complete in all points and consequently capable of the Episcopal Character notwithstanding the crime of schisme and heresie ORTHOD. Then George Browne Archbishop of Dublin Edmond Bonner whom king Henry preferred to Hereford and thence to London Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Westminster and such like were all capable of the Episcopall office PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTH. If these and such other as returned to the Pope in the dayes of Queene Mary why not William Barlow Rowland Lee Thomas Goodrich Iohn Hodgeskins For in King Henries dayes they were all alike all Masse Priestes and yet all opposite to the Popes Supremacy PHIL. There is one reason of all ORTHOD. If the Consecrated were capable what say you to the Consecrators were not they sufficient If they were not then what will become of Heath Bonner and Thurlby PHIL. They were sufficient ORTHOD. But were the Consecrations performed by a sufficient number of assistants PHIL. Yes verely ORTHOD. Then it seemeth that King Henry did not disanull the Canons of the Church which required that a Bishop should be Consecrated by three PHIL. No truely but rather established them by act of Parliament as Doctor Sanders acknowledgeth speaking of Henry the eight Cum ab Ecclesia sede Apostclica regnum suum diuisisset decreuit ne quisquam electus in Episcopum bullas pontificias vel mandatum Apoâ—â—olicum de consecratione requireret sed regium tantum diploma vt adferret secundum quod a tribus Episcopis cum consensu Metropolitae ordinatus iubebatur lege conâ—itâ—orum facta ad imitationem antiquorum Canonum esse verus Episcopus nec alto modo ordinatum pro Episcopo agnosci oportere That is Henry the eighth when he had diuided his kingdome from the Church and see Apostolicke decreed that no man elected Bishop should require the Popes Buls or mandate Apostolicke concerning his Consecration but that he should bring onely the kings letters patents according to which being ordained of three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane he was enacted to be a true Bishop by the law of Parliament made to the imitation of the ancient Canons and that no man otherwise Consecrated should be acknowledged for a Bishop ORTHOD Then it seemeth that all the Bishops in King Henries time were Consecrated by three PHIL. How could it be otherwise you haue heard out of Doctor Sanders that the Canons required three the act of Parliament required three and it appeareth by the act itselfe that if any Archbishop or Bishops did not within twentie dayes next after that the kings letters patents came to their hands Consecrate the person presented with all due circumstance they incurred the penaltie of a premunire therefore we may presume that the practise of those dayes was continually by three ORTHOD. SVrely it was then practised from time to time as may appeare by recorde whereof I will giue
to himselfe out of all his people and he commanded them to be giuen for a gift vnto Aaron and his sonnes that is to the high Priest and his successours for it was his will that they whom hee himselfe had chosen to the ministerie of the Temple and holy things should bee subiect to the high Priest onely who represented the place of God on earth and by this he freed them from the iurisdiction of earthly Princes for Clergy men are the Ministers of God and offered to God by the whole people whereupon they are called Clerici as belonging to the inheritance of the Lord as Saint Hierom teacheth in his Epistle to Nepotianus Now surely secular Princes can haue no authoritie ouer those things which are offered and consecrated vnto God and made as it were proper vnto God himselfe which both the light of reason sheweth and God himselfe declareth not obscurely in holy Scripture when he saith in the last of Leuiticus Whatsoeuer shall be consecrated vnto the Lord it shall bee holy of holies vnto the Lord. ORTHOD. As houses and lands dedicated to God remained his proper and euerlasting possession so the tribe of Leui being once consecrated vnto God became for euer his peculiar inheritance But doth it therefore followe that they are all exempted from the iurisdiction of Princes the whole nation of the Iewes are called an holy nation and a kingdome of Priests all the males of Israel had the seale of the liuing God set vpon them in the Sacrament of circumcision yet not one of them were exempted from the power of their Prince It is true that by the lawe of God in matters concerning their office the Leuites were subordinate to the Priestes and the Priestes to the high Priest but both Priest high Priest were vnder the authoritie of the ciuill Magistrate Iehosaphat sent Priests Leuites to instruct the cities of Iudah and did he this without authoritie he sent Priestes and Leuites to be iudges and Delegates Amariah the high Priest to bee chiefe ouer them in the matters of the Lord did hee this also without authoritie when the house of God was defiled Hezechias called the Priestes and Leuites commanding them to sanctifie themselues and the house of the Lord and they did so according to the Kings commandement then hee commanded the Priestes the sonnes of Aaron to offer sacrifice vnto the Lord and they did so he appointed all the Leuites in the house of the Lord with Cymbals with Viols and with Harpes and the Leuites stood with the instruments of Dauid and the Priestes with Trumpets and Hezechias commaunded the Priestes to offer the burnt offering vpon the Altar and they did so then the King and the Princes commanded the Leuites to praise the Lord with the wordes of Dauid and Asaph the seer so they praised with ioy Then hee commanded the Priestes to offer the sacrifice of praise and they did so yea the King this holy King appointed the courses of the Priestes and Leuites by their turnes which things hee did well and vprightly before the Lord his God therefore wee must not thinke he passed the bounds of his authoritie If Priest or high Priest were exempted from the iurisdiction of Kings why did Iosias commande Helkiah the high Priest and the Priests of the second order to fetch out of the Temple all the instruments prepared for Baal for the groue and for all the hoast of heauen which hee burned without Hierusalem in the fieldes of Kedron and caused the dust of them to bee carried vnto Bethel If Priestes were exempted why did hee bring all the Priestes of the high places out of the cities of Iudah and all such of them as were Ieroboams Priests of which the man of Iudah prophecied hee sacrificed vpon the Altars the rest which were of the line of Aaron but yet had offered in the high places hee brought backe from Hierusalem though they were not suffered to sacrifice vnto the Lord but were thrust out of their Priesthood to the meanest offices amongst the Leuites Now from Kings let vs come to Nehemias the Viceroy who relating how Eliashib the high Priest had made a great chamber in the house of the Lord for Tobias the Ammonite addeth immediately But all this time was not I in Ierusalem signifying that if hee had beene there hee would not haue suffered such abomination And when hee came hee cast out the vessels of Tobias and commanded the Priestes to cleanse them and bring againe the vessels of the Lord. When one of the nephewes of the high Prieste had married the daughter of Sanballat Nehemias chased him away With what face now can you say that Princes in the olde Testament had no authoritie ouer the Priestes If Kings had no authoritie then they should not haue enioyned appointed commaunded and punished but onely haue aduised admonished and exhorted them If Priestes had any such priuiledge it is strange that in all the storie of the olde Testament wee finde not one Priest once pleading his priuiledge If they submitted themselues when their conscience tolde them that they had offended yet why did they not plead their immunitie when they were iniuriously handled Zacharias the Priest was slaine at the commandement of the King and yet neuer mentioned any priuiledge When Saul slew Abimelech and aboue eightie Priestes which wore a linnen Ephod Abimelech declared his innocency and acknowledged the Kings iurisdiction ouer him by calling the King his Lord and himselfe the Kings seruant but spoke not a word of any priuiledge Therefore all the world may see that there was no such matter these are but fictions of idle braines wherefore we may truly conclude that the tribe of Leui was not exempted from secular iurisdiction but the King might conuent command reprooue and punish them and yet not transgresse the law of God PHIL. Who dare affirme that a prophane person hath any authoritie or iurisdiction ouer those things which haue deserued to bee called holy of holies that is most holy ORTHOD. Who but a prophane Iesuite durst bee so bold as to call the light of Israel the annointed of the Lord the Minister of God a prophane person The ancient sages of the Christian world did vse to speake of Princes with all reuerence not onely of those which professed the true faith but of others also The third Romane councell vnder Symmacus calleth Theodoricus who was knowen to bee an Arrian a holy Prince whereupon Binius writeth thus An Arrian king is named most holy and most godly not according to his merites but according to custome like as Valerian and Gratian Ethnicke Emperours were called most holy by Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria as witnesseth Eusebius Which was done by the example of the Apostle Paul who called Felix being a wicked man but then in authoritie by the vsuall stile of most noble Hitherto
lesse then the keyes in the iudgement of the Schoolemen ORTHOD. You cry antiquitie antiquitie Fathers Fathers yet you forsake both antiquitie and Fathers and leane to the Schoolmen But what if the Schoolemen be against you Alexander of Hales saith that to bind and to loose is as much as to open and to shut Thomas maketh the power of binding and loosing the substance of the keyes And so doth Scotus But what if we should admit that the keyes contained more then the power of binding and loosing yet seeing this power includeth Iurisdiction as Bellarmine proueth by the Fathers and this was giuen by Christ to the rest of the Apostles therfore it followeth that they all had their Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ. A point so cleare that not onely Bellar. but Franciscus de victoria Alphonsus de castro and Cardinall Caietan as Bellarmine recordeth acknowledge the same beside many others PHIL. IF all this were granted yet Peter shall be the fountaine of Iurisdiction because the rest receiued it onely as delegates Hee as the ordinarie pastour of the Church from whom and his successours all posteritie must deriue it ORTHOD. You coine distinctions of your owne braine whereof you haue no warrant in the Scripture For whose delegates shall they bee Not S. Peters 1. because I haue prooued that they receiued not any Iurisdiction from him 2. If they were S. Peters delegates why did S. Paul alwayes call himselfe an Apostle of Iesus Christ and neuer the Legaâ—â— latere of S. Peter 3. If they were S. Peters Delegates then all their Iurisdiction died with him So belike S. Iohn who outliued S. Peter lost his iurisdiction and was glad to light his candle againe from Linus and after his death from Cletus and after his from Clemens For he liued as S. Ierome witnesseth 68. yeeres after the Passion of Christ and consequently died in the yeere 101. which according to Baronius was the 9. yeere of Clemens If this be so then there was after the death of Christ while an Apostle liued a greater iurisdiction in the Church then the iurisdiction of an Apostle which cannot be because the Scripture saith that God hath set in his Church first Apostles secondly Prophets c. and Bell. confesseth that the authoritie of the Apostles is Iurisdictio plenissima If S. Iohn had this then he was not Legat a latere to Linus nor Cletus nor Clemens neither so long as he liued could they be called the fountaine of all spirituall iurisdiction If you say they were Christs delegates it is true and so was Saint Peter therefore in this there is no difference But in what respect was he the ordinarie pastor of the Church As an Apostle then they should bee all ordinarie because they were all Apostles If in regard of any other authoritie what should that bee Was it greater theÌ„ the Apostleship or no if it were not how could it giue him iurisdiction ouer the Apostles and greater it cannot bee for the Apostleship is the greatest iurisdiction which Christ left vnto his Church as was proued both by the Scripture and your owne confession But when was he made an ordinarie pastor PHIL. When Christ said vnto him feed my sheepe ORTHO As Christ said to Peter feed my sheepe so hee said to them all goe teach all nations as my father sent me so send I you Doe not these comprehend as much as feede my sheepe PHIL. No. For Christ gaue commission to Peter to feed his sheep euen all his sheepe none excepted but the Apostles were his sheepe so the Apostles themselues were committed to S. Peter Therefore hee was the pastour of the Apostles and consequently the ordinarie pastour of the whole world ORTH. And Christ gaue commission to them all and among the rest to S. Andrew to preach the Gospel to euery creature euen to euery creature none excepted But S. Peter was a creature therefore S. Peter himselfe was committed to S. Andrew What thinke you was S. Andrew S. Peters pastour or the ordinarie pastour of the whole world PHIL. There is not the like reason For the wordes which you alleadge were spoken to them all The commission which I vrge was giuen particularly by name to S. Peter ORTHOD. These words feed my sheepe haue beene so much vexed that now for pitty you should let them alone but to answere you though our Sauiour when he said Feed my sheep directed his speech to Peter yet he did not therein giue any new office or speciall commission to Peter but willed him to looke to his charge alreadie receiued For Peter had bewrayed great want of loue in a threefold denyall of his master therefore Christ to kindle his loue did aske him three times Peter doest thou loue me Whereupon as hee had formerly denyed him thrice so now he protested his loue and confessed him thrice then Christ hauing as it were blowne the fire by a threefold question which began to kindle in Peter by a threefold confession did presently strike while the yron was hot vsing this exhortatioÌ„ Feed my lambs to make the more impression he redoubled the stroake saying Feed my sheepe Feede my sheepe As though he should say if thou loue me deny me no more in word nor deed but shew thy loue by keeping thy station and by feeding the flock which I haue purchased with my precious blood Feed them by doctrine Feed them by example thou shalt meet and encounter with many Beares and lyons yet forsake not thy function for feare but if thou loue me feed my flock As if a Pilot should say to his mariners here is like to be a great storme but if you loue me looke well to your tacklings or a Captaine to his souldiers here may be a hard battaile yet if you loue me be of a good courage or a husband being to goe a farre iourney and leauing at home his yong sonne the hope of his house with his wife which had sometimes shewed herselfe somewhat vnkind should say wife if thou loue me looke well to my child which is not to giue her any new commission or office but to put her in mind to discharge that office which God had formerly committed vnto her And what if Christ said to Peter Feed my sheepe shall he therefore bee the master shepheard and the rest of the Apostles his vnderlings shall hee bee a Bishop and they his Chaplaines Saint Paul denyeth this proclaiming himselfe in nothing inferiour to the chiefe Apostles The Church of Rome denyeth this I meane the ancient Church in the time of S. Cyprian in their Epistle to the Church of Carthage For hauing mentioned these words Feed my sheepe they adde Et caeteri discipuli similiter fecerunt i. the rest of the disciples performed this office of feeding the sheepe in the like manner that Peter did it So S. Ambrose quas oues quem gregem non solum tunc
in the election of Conon wherefore if the people gaue Suffrages by subscription in those times wee neede not doubt that they gaue Suffrages in the time of S. Cyprian neither was it by the Popes permission For S. Cyprian maketh no mention of the Pope but declareth that almost in all Prouinces after the death of a Bishop the Bishops next adioyning did meet about an election in the citie of the Bishop deceased and so the election was performed in their presence by the Suffrages of the whole fraternitie that is both of the Clergie and like wise also of the people Wherefore that which you say concerning the Pope is but a voluntary speech without any ground And surely seeing God hath set downe no certaine rule nor precept in holy Scripture but left it as a thing indifferent it was most fit that in those primatiue times the people should haue a Suffrage for by this meanes it came to passe that they did not only more quietly receiue diligently heare and heartily loue but also more willingly and bountifully maintaine their Bishop wherefore their Suffrage was grounded vpon right and reason PHIL. The Church of God hath had dolefull experience of the tumults which arise from popular elections Euagrius declareth what vprores were at Alexandria about Proterius when the people beate the souldiers into the Church and destroyed a number of them with fier yea they slew Proterius in the Temple vpon Easter day drew his body along the citie hewed it in most miserable manner burned that which was left and scattered his ashes in the wind And Amianus reporteth that at the election of Damasus the people slew in the Church in one day 137. persons so that the holy places did flow with streames of Christian blood These are the fruites of popular elections CHAP. V. An answere to certaine obiections against the election of Bishops by Christian kings and Emperours out of the Councells and other authorities ORTH. IF popular elections bee so dangerous vnto whom should their ancient right rather be translated then vnto the Prince who by the law of God is their Soueraigne to rule them and the Father both of Church and Common wealth to prouide for their good PHIL. The Councell of Paris saith that if any man by ouermuch rashnesse presume to inuade the height of this honour by the Princes commandement let him in no wise be receiued by the Bishops ORTHO The meaning of the Councell appeareth by the words going before let not a Bishop be intruded by the Princes commandement nor by any other meanes against the consent of the Metropolitane and the Bishops of the Prouince so this Councell maketh nothing against our kings of England who vse most orderly lawfull and Canonicall proceeding neuer intruding any against the consent of the Metropolitane and comprouincialls PHIL. In the yere 566. there was a Councell holden at Santonia in France where d Emerius was deposed from his Bishopricke because hee was intruded by King Clotharius ORTHO He was put in contrary to the Canons For he had the decree of the King that he should be consecrated without the aduise of the Metropolitane so this is no paralel for our Princes PHIL. By the second Nicen Councel All elections of Bishops Priests and Deacons made by the Magistrates are voide And the ground of their assertion is that Canon of the Apostles If any obtaine a Church by secular powers let him be deposed and all that communicate with him ORTHO That Canon is to be expounded of secular powers excluding the Clergie or inuading the Church by force and violence and so the Councell tooke it neither did they vrge it any otherwise as may appeare plainely by the very title of their Canon Electiones Episcoporum quae vi Principum procedunt infirmari debent i. the elections of Bishops which proceed by the violence of Princes ought to be infringed PHIL. But you cannot so delude the 22. Canon of the eighth generall Councell being the fourth at Constantinople which is most pregnant to this purpose For there it was decreed That no Lay. Prince or Potentate should interpose themselues in the Election or promotion of a Patriarch Metropolitane or any Bishop especially seeing it is not conuenient that they should haue any power in such things but rather bee silent till the Election bee finished by the Ecclesiasticall Colledge ORTHOD. The 22. Canon is a counterfeit not found in the Greeke copies And the true Canons of the same Councell grounding vpon the Canons of the Apostles and ancient Councels doe iustifie my former answere in these wordes If any Bishop shall receiue the Consecration of Episcopall dignitie by the fraud and tyrannie of Princes let him be deposed Wherefore the intention of the ancient Councels was not to exclude Princes but onely to remooue fraude and compulsion that all things might be done according to the Canons That Hildebrandicall doctrine was not yet knowne to the world PHIL. Athanasius asketh where there is any such Canon that a Bishop should be sent out of a Palace ORTHOD. Athanasius speaketh of the proceedings of Constantius who so farre contemned all Canons that hee would haue had his owne will to bee for a Canon And whereas in those dayes Bishops vsed to be chosen by the consent of the people and Clergie openly created in the Church and ordained if it were possible by all the Bishops of the Prouince at least by three with the consent of the Metropolitane Constantius in stead of the Church would haue it done in his Palace In place of the people there were present three of his Eunuches and for the Bishops of the Prouince three which Athanasius calleth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Bishops but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is spies Thus was one Felix created a Bishop This sending of Bishops out of a Palace was against all Canons this Athanasius misliked neither can any man of wisdome speake well of it But such proceedings as are vsed in the Church of England shall be iustified as agreeable both to the Councels and stories of antiquitie PHIL. Valentinian when the Bishops would haue had him to elect a Bishop of Millan said It is a greater matter then is conuenient for vs but you being indued with diuine grace and shining with the brightnesse thereof shall make the election ORTHOD. The Bishops did shew their duety to their Prince and the Prince shewed his elemencie to his Subiects But what is this to your purpose There is no doubt but a Prince may if it please him relinquish his right for a time and he or his successours may resume it againe when it seemeth good to their Princely wisedomes For that this was anciently acknowledged to be the right of Christian Princes will appeare if we consider the election of Bishops in the Imperiall Cities of Rome and Constantinople as also in the Kingdomes of France and Spaine CHAP. VI.
whole Ecclesiasticall order the 2. a desolation of their country the 3. the impouerishing of the kingdome by wasting their treasure the 4. the ruine and subuersion of Churches The consideration of which things so preuailed with the King that Pope Pius was disapointed of his purpose PHIL. That which Pius could not performe in the daies of Lewis videlicet that the pragmaticall Sanction should be taken cleane away was afterward effected by Leo the 10. in the reigne of King Francis the first therefore in the councell of Lateran the pragmaticall Sanction was abrogated by a publique Decree ORTH. King Francis to vse the words of Duarenus made choice rather to serue the stage and the time with his owne profit as hee himselfe confesseth and remit somewhat of the publique right then to striue so oft with the Popes about this Helena especially seeing he perceiued that some danger from them did hang ouer his head Yet for al this the Sanction cannot be said to bee cleane taken away For the vniuersity of Paris did interpose an appeale to the next general councell which appeale stood with iustice equity for 3. reasons first because the fact of the king was not voluntary but by compulsion Secondly because the Parisians whom it must concerned were neither called nor heard Thirdly because there is no reason that the councell of Lateran and constitution of Leo should derogate from the authority of the councel of Basil. And if we should suppose that it did not onelie derogate from it but also abrogate it yet the verie constitution of Pope Leo yeeldeth to the King the power of nomination in these wordes VVhen a Cathedrall or Metropoliticall Church is vacant let not the Bishoppe bee chosen by the Colledge of Canons but let the King within sixe monethes offer and nominate a graue and fit man to the Pope Thus it is euident that the French Kings retained their right and authoritie in making of Bishoppes euer since their first embracing of the Christian faith And had they this by the indulgence of the Pope Let the Councell of Basill be witnesse let Charles the seuenth bee witnesse let the Court of Paris bee witnesse yea let King Francis himselfe who confessed that when hee went against the sanction hee remitted of the publique right be witnesse And thus much for France CHAP. XII Of the Election of the Bishops of England PHILOD COncerning England King Henry the first did pretend to challenge Inuestitures as vsed by his father and brother before him whereof yet notwithstanding wee finde no expresse proofe or example in any of our histories that they vsed them much lesse that they were lawfully granted vnto them ORTHOD. I will prooue both that they vsed them and that they vsed them lawfully That his brother William Rufus vsed them may appeare by William of Malmesbury who declareth that the King being sicke made mention of the Archbishopricke of Canterbury which was then voide and willed the Bishops to consider of it who answered that whom the King should thinke worthy they all would accept willingly Itaille cubito se attollens hunc ait sanctum virum Anselmum eligo ingenti subsecuto fragore fauentium so he raising himselfe vp vpon his elbowe saide I elect this holy man Anselmus whereupon followed a great applause Now that Bishoprickes in those dayes were giuen by deliuering of a ring and a staffe may appeare by Rafe Bishop of the South Saxons who being threatened by the same King baculum protendit annulum exuit vt si vellet acciperet held out his Crosier put off his ring that the King might take them if hee would intending thereby to resigne his Bishoprick That William the Conquerour vsed the like authoritie is also manifest by the same authour saying Nondum ille efflauerat cum a Gulielmo Rege Lanfrancus Cadomensis Abbas ad Archiepiscopatum electus est Stigandus had not yet breathed out his Ghost when Lanfranck Abbot of Saint Steuens in Cane was elected by King William the Conquerour to the Archbishoprick The like may be shewed before the Conquest where by the way let me tell you that wee stand not so much vpon the ring and the staffe as vpon the thing it selfe that is the Princes power and authoritie for which I will produce some examples as it were a few clusters of a great vintage beginning with Edward the Confessour of whom Malmsbury faith Rex Robertum quem ex Monacho Gemiticensi Londoniae fecerat Episcopum Archiepiscopum creauit the King Edward the Confessour created Robert Archbishop whom before of a Monke he had made Bishop of London And before that King Alfred made Asserio Bishop of Shierburne and Denewulfus Bishop of Winchester and more then two hundred yeeres before that Edelwalke King of the South Saxons promoted Wilfrid to an Episcopall See Thus it is euident that as in other Kingdomes so in England Inuestitures were anciently practised by Princes Wherefore King Henrie the first might haue challenged them not onely as vsed by his father and brother but also as the ancient custome of the Kingdome in the time of the Saxons Wherein onely this was the difference that in ancient time Princes vsed them without contradiction but now the Popes perceiuing that if Princes should haue the bestowing of them after the olde custome it would abate that power to which they themselues aspired beganne to spurne excommunicating both the giuers and takers This was done in the fifth and seuenth Romane Councels vnder Gregory the seuenth but Pope Vrban went further decreeing that not onely the giuers and takers but also all such as consecrated any man so promoted should bee excommunicate At this Councell Anselmus was present by whose aduise and perswasion the decree was made Whereupon when after the death of William Rufus King Henry the first not knowing of this decree much lesse imagining that it was concluded by the meanes of Anselmus had called him home hee well rewarded the kindnesse of so gracious a Prince for first hee would not bee induced to doe his homage to his Lord and Soueraigne was not this a good subiect did hee not well deserue to be canonized for a Saint then he refused to consecrate those whom the King did inuest to Bishoprickes by a staffe and a ring so the King commanded Gerard Archbishop of Yorke to performe that office as Malmsbury Matthew Paris and Roger Houeden doe testifie PHIL. But what followeth in the same authours William Gifford Elect of Winchester refused to receiue Consecration from him and was therefore by the king banished the land Rinelmus Elect of Hereford resigned his Bishopricke into the kings hands being troubled in conscience because hee receiued inuestiture from a lay Prince by occasion of which broiles the rest to whom the king had giuen inuestitures remained vnconsecrated ORTHOD. Whose fault was that not the kings who required no more then was confirmed
this forsooth is the Catholick faith the profession whereof is now required to bee made of all Bishops Thirdly the Popes of latter times will haue Metropolitanes sworne to their obedience yea and Pius the fourth did cunningly conuey this oth into his new coyned creed but we find no such thing exacted in the time of Pelagius PHIL. There is yet extant an Epistle of a Bishop which tooke the oth to Saint Gregory who liued not long after Pelagius Vnde iurans dico per Deum omnipotentem per haec quatuor Euangelia quae in manibus teneo per salutē gentium atque illustrium dominorum nostrorum remp gubernantium me in vnitate sicut dixi Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Rom pontificis sēper sine dubio permanere i. Whereupon I affirme swearing by God Almighty and by the 4. Gospels which I hould in my hands and by the saluation of the Gentiles of our glorious Lords which gouerne the commonwealth that I will remaine alwaies and without doubt as I haue said in the unity of the Catholike Church in the communion of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. You intend to proue that Metropolitanes should sweare to the Pope before their confirmation or receiuing of the palle the example you bring concernes no such matter For first he was only a Bishop not a Metropolitan Secondly this oth was voluntary not exacted Thirdly it was not vpon a confirmation or receiuing of a palle but vpon an abiuration of his heresie Neither doth it appeare that this oth was in the time of Gregory though some haue gone about to ascribe it to the time of Pope Pelagius wherein behold and you shal see the cunning of Popish proctors For whereas Pelagius reproued some Metropolitanes because they did delay fidem suam exponere and thereupon made this decree that those which did not send within three monthes ad fidem suam exponendam should be depriued Remundus Rufus a Popish Lawier of Paris writing for the honor of the Pope doth change these words ad exponendam fidem i. To make profession of their faith into dandae fidei causa i. To make a faithfull promise or oth so the profession of the faith of Iesus Christ was by a strange Metamorphosis transformed into an oth of the Popes supremacy Now least the Spanish Lawiers should come short of the French in shewing their zeale for their Lord the Pope Franciscus Vargas king Philips Councellor and Ambassador to Pope Pius the fourth affirmeth that Pelagius declared the Popes supremacy by this decree in that he would haue all Metropolitanes sworne vnto him Marke what he saith sworne vnto him whether deceiued by Rufus or purposing to make an officious lie for his holy Fathers aduantage I cannot tell Howsoeuer this oth cannot bee referred to Pope Pelagius but rather to Pope Paschall the second who would haue forced Archbishop Panormitane to take it and vpon his refusal set out the decret all Epistle recorded by Gregory the ninth in the Canon-law the title whereof is this Electo in Archiepiscopum sedes Apostolica Pallium non tradet nisi Prius Praestet fidelitatis obedientiae iuramentum 1. The Apostolicall See shall not deliuer the Pall to an Archbishop Elect before he performe the oath of Allegeance and obedience PHIL. Though Pope Paschall made this decree yet it followeth not that he was the author of the oath it might be more anciēt though he renewed it ORTHOD. It appeareth by the Contents of the Decree that he was the authour For first he declareth that Panormitane had signified vnto him that Kings and Nobles were striken with admiration that the Pall should be offered vnder the condition of an oath and the same Pope did write in the same wordes vpon the like occasion to an Archbishop of Polonia who had signified vnto him the like admiration of the King and Nobles of Polonia This deniall of the Archbishops admiration of Princes states doth argue a noueltie 2. Whereas some did obiect that it was not decreed in the councels he reiecteth all Councels with scorn disdaine Aiunt in Concilijs statutū non inueniri quasi Romanae Ecclesiaelegē cōctlia vlla prefixerint cum omnia concilia per Romanae Ecclesiae auctoritatē facta sint robur acceperint in eorū Statutis Romani Pontificis patenter excipiatur auctoritas i. They say that it was not found decreed in Councels as though any Councels could prefix a law to the Church of Rome seeing al Councels are both made and receiue strength by the authoritie of the Church of Rome and the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is manifestly excepted in their constitutions Thus he doth not refer the oath to former Popes and Councels but relyeth onely vpon his owne authoritie So it seemeth that this weede did spring 1100. yeeres after Christ. Neither did they stay in Metropolitanes but Innocent the third in the Councell of Lateran imposed the like oath of allegeance and obedience vpon the foure Patriarches Yea all Bishops are bound by solemne oath to promise obedience and faith to Saint Peter the Church of Rome and their Lord the Pope and to put to their helping hand which is an essentiall point of their obedience to defend and maintaine the Papacy By which pollicie it came to passe that the soueraign was defeated of his subiect the bramble did mount aloft aboue the cedars of Libanus So he which was first admitted among vs of curtesie continued by custome that is by right humane began now to challenge of dutie and by lawe diuine And not content with the honour of a Patriarch he tooke vpon him to domineer through the Christian world as Pope Parramount flashing out his excommunications like lightning interdicting kingdomes trampling Princes and Emperours vnder his feete yea and dispensing with vowes oaths and the euerlasting Commandements of God himselfe Is not this to sit in the Temple of God as though he were God Wherefore by all right reason equitie and law of God and man he was to be banished I will conclude this point with the saying of a reuerend Bishop As for his Patriarchship by Gods law he hath none In this realme for 600. yeeres after Christ he had none for the last six hundred as looking to greater matters he would haue none aboue or against the sword which God hath ordained he can haue none to the subuersion of the faith and oppression of his brethren in reason right and equitie he should haue none you must seeke further for subiection to his tribunall this landoweth him none THE FIFTH BOOKE OF THE SECOND AND third controuersie concerning Priests and Deacons CHAP. I. Wherein the second controuersie is proposed diuided into two questions the former about Sacrificing the latter about Absolution the state of the former is set downe and the methode of proceeding PHIL. WHatsoeuer you haue as
order of a Deacon is not essentiall to the order of Priesthood and therefore though wee had bene ordained per saltum yet you could not deny vs the true order of Priesthood But we are not ordained per saltum Our Church hath decreed that there may be euer some time of triall of their behauiour in the office of Deacons before they be admitted to the order of Priesthood And for the Ordination after due knowledge of the vertuous conuersation and examination of the sufficiencie of the person it is performed with religious praier by a Bishop vpon a Sunday or holy day in the face of the Church in these words Take thou authority to execute the office of a Deacon c. PHIL. The office of a Deacon is to assist the Priest in saying of Masse Do your Deacons so ORTHOD. That the Deacon should assist the Priest in the administration of holy things concerning his office is graunted on both sides but for your Popish massing and sacrifising we haue proued that it is a profaning of Christs ordinance and that it is neither lawfull for you to do it nor for the Deacons to assist you wherefore seeing wee haue already iustified both our Bishops which ordaine the office or function of our Presbyters or Priests wee conclude that as our Bishops and Presbyters so our Deacons also are lawfull in the Church of England Thus haue we examined your obiections against the ministery of the Church of England and find them to be meere cauilles Neither can you proue that our calling is in any thing contrarie to the Scripture or to the practise of reuerend antiquity but your sacrifising Priesthood appeareth not onely to bee the inuention of man but also sacrilegious and abominable in the sight of God Wherefore I beseech you repent of your sinnes renounce your Antichristian practise returne to your deare Country cease to bee Philodox and become an Orthodox CHAP. XII Wherein is declared that though wee deriue our calling from such Bishops as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull and theirs vnlawfull PHIL. WEll I perceiue one thing that howsoeuer you speake against Popish Priests calling them sacrilegious and abominable yet when your owne calling is put to the trial you are glad to deriue it from such Bishops as were Popish Priests which you so disdainefully call sacrilegious and abominable ORTHOD. And I perceiue another thing that howsoeuer you exclaimed against Cranmer as a Schismaticke and burned him for an Heriticke yet when the glorious succession of your Bishops in Queene Maries time is put to the trial you are forced to deriue it from him whom you so scornefully call a Schismatike and an Hereticke But if our forefathers deriued their orders from such Bishops as were Popish Priests what inconuenience will follow PHIL. Then either confesse your calling to bee vnlawfull or accknowledge ours to be lawfull from whence you deriue it You cannot gather figges of thornes nor grapes of thistles neither is it possible for a rose to spring out of a nettle ORTHOD. But a garden of Roses may be ouergrowne with nettles For the Ministery planted by Christ was a sweete rose without any nettle and so it continued in the Church for certaine ages but when Antichrist began to reueale himselfe in the Temple of God as though hee were God the Romish Priesthood became a monstrous birth strangely compounded halfe rose halfe nettle the Church of England in the beginning of reformation did borrow from the Church of Rome the rose but left the nettle PHIL. What will you make of vs are we Ministers or lay men if we bee Ministers then so acknowledge vs. If wee be lay men then I pray you what was Cranmer who had no Cousecration but in our Church what were all the Bishops in Kings Edwards time which were Consecrated by Cranmer what was Mathew Parker Grindall Sands Horne which were all ordained Priests in our Church were they all lay men what are all the Ministers of England at this day which deriue their orders from the former are they all lay-men ORTHOD. Your Popish Priests are neither the true ministers of the Gospel nor merely lay-men For your ordination consisteth of two parts the former in these words take thou power to offer sacrifice and to celebrate masse for the quick and the dead which you account the principall function of Christian Priesthood but in truth it maketh you not the Ministers of Christ but of Antichrist the latter in these words receiue the holy ghost whose sins thou forgiuest they are forgiuen whose thou retainest they are retained in which Euangelicall words there is deliuered a ghostly ministeriall power to forgiue sinnes which according to the true meaning of Christ is performed by the ministery of reconciliation therefore whosoeuer hath receiued this power hath withall receiued the ministery of reconcilation consisting as was before declared in the due administration of the word and sacraments PHIL. If it be so then you must confesse that the Priesthood of the Church of Rome hath the ministeriall function because these words are vsed in our ordination ORTHOD. Though these words as they were spoken by Christ practised in the primitiue Church and are vsed at this day in the Church of England imply the substance of this holy function yet as you abuse them in the Church of Rome to maintaine Popish shrift the gold is couered with drosse and the sweet flower ouershadowed with noysome weeds Wherefore if we consider your Priesthood as it is a totum aggregatum consisting of sacrifising and absoluing it is vnlawfull and contrary to the Scripture If wee come to the parts thereof your massing and sacrifising is simply abominable the other part so farre as it relieth vpon the words of Christ taken in their true sense and meaning is holy and implieth a ministerial power which notwithstanding by your construction and practise is greatly depraued PHIL. I will proue our Priesthood to be lawfull by the practise of your owne Church which against you is as good as a thousand witnesses For when any of our Priests forsake the Catholike Church ioyne themselues with you you do not giue thē new orders but presently receiue thē into the bosome of your Church suffering them to execute the ministeriall function by vertue of those orders which they receiued in the Church of Rome ORTH. None can bee admitted with vs to execute the office of a minister before he subscribe to the articles of religion as may appeare by this act of Parliament That the Churches of the Queens Maiesties dominions may be serued with pastours of soūd religion be it enacted by the authority of this present Parliament that euery person vnder the degree of a Bishop which doth or shal pretend to be a Priest or Minister of Gods holy word and Sacraments by reason of any other forme of institution Consecration or ordering then the forme set foorth by Parliament in the time
hoped That all such shall receiue singular comfort when they see our Calling iustified not onely in it selfe as the true Ministerie of the Gospel but also in regard of the deriuation to vs by such Bishops and in such maner as is most correspondent to the sacred Scripture and the practise of Primitiue Antiquitie And if any vpon this surmise bee fallen away to our aduersaries who knoweth what effect God may worke in them when they shall plainely perceiue how they haue bene deluded with Popish stratagemes Or who can tell whether this may bee a gracious meanes to stay others from yeelding to the inticements of subtill serpents Finally the defence of innocencie in a matter of so high a nature must needes reioyce the hearts of the godly when Popish polititians shall bee forced to hide their faces for shame and confusion These motiues induced mee to wish that some great Master in our Israel would haue vndertaken this eminent Argument which now the Diuine prouidence so disposing is befallen vnto me One of the children of the Prophets Which my labours concerning the Ordination of the Pastours of England to whom should I rather present then to your Grace whom God by the meanes of a most prudent and Religious Soueraigne hath to the singular comfort of all that sincerely loue the Gospel aduanced to bee the chiefe Pastour and chiefe Ordainer in the Church of England Especially seeing I proceeded in this Argument with your graces fatherly direction and incouragement Now the Lord so direct and sanctifie your endeuours That as the Rod of Aaron did bud and blossome and bring foorth ripe Almonds so the Church and Ministerie of England by the meanes of your Grace as of Gods blessed instrument may prosper flourish and bring foorth fruits of Righteousnesse to the glory of God and the comfort of all true Christian hearts Your Graces in all humble duetie at command FRANCIS MASON THE CONTENTS OF THE BOOKES FOLLOWING THE first booke containeth the entrance and diuision of the whole worke into three controuersies with their seuerall Questions as also the handling of the first Question whether three Canonicall Bishops be absolutely necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop The second is of the Consecrations of the Bishops of England from the first planting of Christianitie till the last yeere of Queene Marie The third is of the Bishops consecrated in the Reigne of Queene Elizabeth and of our Gracious soueraigne King Iames. The fourth intreateth of Episcopall Iurisdiction The fift is of the second and third controuersie concerning Priests and Deacons ¶ The particular Contents of the first Booke CHAP. 1. THe entrance wherein is described the proceeding of the Popish Priests in winning of Proselytes by praising Rome the Romane Religion the Popes loue the English Seminaries As also by dispraising the Vniuersities Church Religion and Ministery of England Pag. 1. CHAP. 2. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministery is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops The second of Presbyters The third of Deacons Pag. 8. CHAP. 3. Wherein they descend to the first branch concerning Episcopall Consecration whereupon arise two Questions The former whether three Bishops be required of absolute necessitie to the Consecration of a new Bishop the state whereof is explained out of Popish writers Pag. 14. CHAP. 4. Wherein the Popish Arguments drawne from the Canons of the Apostles and the decretall Epistles are proposed vrged and answered Pag. 21. CHAP. 5. Wherein their Argument drawne from the Councels is propounded vrged and answered Pag. 26. CHAP. 6. Wherein their Arguments pretended to be drawne from the Scripture are answered Pag. 30. CHAP. 7. That the presence of three Bishops is not required of absolute necessitie Pag. 34. ¶ The Contents of the second Booke CHAP. 1. WHerein they descend to the second Question whether the Consecrations of the Bishops of England be Canonicall Pag. 39. CHAP. 2. Of the first conuersion of this Land in the time of the Apostles Pag. 44. CHAP. 3. Of the second conuersion as some call it or rather of a new supply of Preachers and a further propagation of the Gospel in the time of K. Lucius and Pope Eleutherius Pag. 51. CHAP. 4. Of Austine the first Bishop of Canterbury sent hither by Pope Gregorie Pag. 56. CHAP. 5. Of the Bishops from Austin to Cranmer Pag. 61. CHAP. 6. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie Pag. 64. CHAP. 7. Of the abolishing of Papall Iurisdictions by K. H. 8. which the Papists iniuriously brand with imputation of Schisme Pag. 67. CHAP. 8. Whether to renounce the Pope be schisme heresie Pa. 74. CHAP. 9. Whether schisme heresie annihilate a Cōsecration Pa. 78. CHAP. 10. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Henry the eight after the abolishing of the Popes Iurisdiction Pag. 88. CHAP. 11. Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Edward the sixt Pag. 91. CHAP. 12. Of the B. Cōsecrated in the dayes of Q. Mary Pag. 97. ¶ The Contents of the third Booke CHAP. 1. OF the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some antecedents and consequents of their depositions Pag. 99. CHAP. 2. The deposition of the Bishops iustified by the example of Salomon deposing Abiathar Pag. 106. CHAP. 3. Of the oath of the Princes Supremacy for denying whereof the old Bishops were depriued Pag. 113. CHAP. 4. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend Father Archbishop Parker Pag. 121. CHAP. 5. Of the rest of the Bishops Consecrated in the second and third yeere of Queene Elizabeth Pag. 132. CHAP. 6. A briefe view of all the Bishops of some of the principall Sees during the whole raigne of Queene Elizabeth Pag. 135. CHAP. 7. Of the Bishops in the Prouince of Canterbury Consecrated since our gracious Soueraigne K. Iames did come to the Crowne with a little touch concerning the Prouince of Yorke Pag. 138. CHAP. 8. The Episcopall line of the most reuerend Father in God George Lord Archbishop of Canterbury particularly declaring how he is Canonically descended from such Bishops as were Consecrated in the dayes of King Henry the eight which our aduersaries acknowledge to be Canonicall Pag. 140. ¶ The Contents of the fourth Booke CHAP. 1. WHence the Bishops of England receiue their Iurisdiction Pag. 143. CHAP. 2. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all spirituall Iurisdiction Pag. 147. CHAP. 3. Whether the Pope succeede Saint Peter in all his right by Law Diuine Pag. 155. CHAP. 4. Of the election of Bishops in the Primitiue Church before there were any Christian Princes Pag. 158. CHAP. 5. An answere to certaine obiections against the election of Bishops by Christian Kings and Emperours out of the
hitherto God be thanked he hath missed the Chesnut PHIL. NOw I plainely perceiue That you are deepely ingaged in the schisme and heresie of England O England England thou wast sometimes a most famous and flourishing Church thy faith and Religion shining like a Diamond of true lustre thy zeale and deuotion burning like the flaming fire the sparkling Starres in the firmament were not so glorious but now alas since Caluinisme came in thou hast lost thy lustre thy glory is eclipsed there remaineth no sparkle of thy ancient loue no faith no Religion no Church ORTHOD. You tread in the steps of your foâ—efathers and helpe to fill vp the measure of their iniquitie For it hath bene alwayes their custome to lay odious imputations vpon our Religion that by this stratageme they might win Proselytes vnto their owne Rich. Bristow affirmed that our Religion is proued by experience to be indeed no Religion Cardinall Allen speaking of our Sacraments Seruice and Sermons calleth them things which assuredly procure damnation William Reinolds hath blazed to the world that our Religion is worse then the Turkish The bookes of Sanders and Parsons haue bene as full of slanders as a serpent is of poison To passe ouer Harding Stapleton and others the latter brood is as venemous as the former One example for all may be that lewd Libeller which exclaimeth That the Protestants haue no faith no hope no charitie no repentance no Iustification no Church no Altar no sacrifice no Priest no Religion no Christ. What shall we say to these intemperate spirits If they speake of malice then I say with Michael the Archangel The Lord rebuke them but if they speake of ignorance as I hope they do then I say with the holy Martyr S. Stephen Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Or with our blessed Sauiour Father forgiue them they wote not what they do For that faith and Religion which is agreeable to the Scripture is true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke But the faith and Religion publickly professed at this day in England is in euery Article and branch thereof agreeable to the Scripture therefore it is in euery Article and branch thereof true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke Moreouer where the Gospel is truely preached and the holy Sacraments rightly administred there is a true Christian visible Church but both these dueties are religiously performed in England what reason haue you then to say that we haue no Church PHIL. BEcause you haue no Ministerie for there cannot be a Church without Pastors and bishops as S. Cyprian teacheth who defineth the Church to be a people vnited to a Bishop And S Hierome when he saith That it is no Church which hath not Priests This doeth appeare euidently by S. Paul who declareth that Christ gaue Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints the worke of the Ministerie and the edification of the body of Christ vntill we meet all in the vnitie of faith into a perfect man and the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ. In which place as our learned Cardinall hath obserued the Apostle teacheth That there shall be Pastours in the Church till the day of Iudgement for then we shall meet the Lord in the vnitie of faith Behold saith father Hessius till the number of the Elect bee accomplished in the end of the world the Church shall alwayes haue Pastors and teachers Neither doeth Luther deny this but rather put it among the Notes of the Church And Caluin affirmeth That the Church can neuer want Pastors and teachers From this plaine approued principle thus I dispute Where there is no true Ministerie there is no true Church but among the Protestants in England there is no true Ministerie therefore among them there is no true Church CHAP. II. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministerie is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops the second of Presbyters The third of Deacons ORTHODOX WHat mislike you in our Ministerie PHIL. Not one thing or two but the whole frame of it absolutely and altogether for to deale plainly your Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay men Neither is this my priuate opinion but the generall iudgement of our learned diuines which affirme the same As for example Ri. Bristow Consider what Church that is whose Ministers are but very Lay men vnsent vncalled vnconsecrated and therefore executing their pretended Office without benefit or spirituall comfort of any man yea to the certaine and great damnation of themselues and others vnfit and vnworthy by this onely that they bee called to that fond function of any seruice in the Church of God holding therefore amongst vs when they repent and come againe no other place but the place of Lay-men in no case admitted no nor looking to minister in any Office vnlesse they take our Orders which before they had not M Harding In this your new Church Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons or any inferior Order you haue none D. Sanders The new Clergie in England is composed partly of our Apostataes partly of meerely Lay-men M. Houlet That either all or the most part of the Ministers of England be meerely Lay men and no Priests and consequently haue no authoritie in these things it is euident Cardinall Allen with our learned diuines at Rhemes All your new Euangelists which haue intruded themselues into Church and Pulpit be euery one from the highest to the lowest false prophets running and vsurping being neuer lawfully called D. Stapleton They being sent of no man nor hauing Ordination haue inuaded the Ecclesiastical Chaires D. Kellison Forasmuch as the inferior Ministers are made by those Bishops and are children of those fathers they also are no true Priests hauing neither Order nor Iurisdiction William Reinolds There is no feeder of sheepe or oxen in all Turkie which doeth not vndertake the gouernment of his flocke or droue vpon better reason and greater right order and authoritie then these your magnificent Apostles and Euangelists can shew for this their Propheticall and Apostolicall and most diuine and most high Office of gouerning soules reforming Churches teaching heauenly Trueth and declaring the minde and will of God to men And finally the Catholicke Priests in their supplication to King Iames Neither is any of your Protestant Ministers comming to our Catholicke fraternity reputed other then meerely Lay-men without Orders Thus you see how we all agree in this point Neither is this the opinion of vs English Exiles onely but other Catholicke doctors are of the same minde The Hereticks of our age saith Bellarmine haue neither Ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and Office of a Bishop more
immodestly then euer did any other heretickes And other reuerend diuines vse almost the same words Gregory de Valentia saith Certainely it is apparent that in the Catholicke Romane Church there are lawfull Ecclesiasticall Ministers as being rightly ordained of true Bishops but in the Synagogues of Sectaries it is euident that there are not lawfull Ministers for they are not ordained of lawfull Bishops and therefore it is manifest that they haue no Church seeing that a Church cannot want lawfull Ministers Likewise father Turrian saith That the Donatists and Luciferians had after a sort some fashion of a Church because they had Bishops though schismaticall and other Ministers whom Bishops ordained But the Protestants haue no forme or fashion of a Church at all because they haue no Ministers at all of the Church or word but meere Lay men Mattheus Lanoius hath proued that onely the Romane Church hath lawfull vocation And D. Tyreus hath written of the false calling of the new Ministers but these are sufficient And that this is the iudgement of holy Church may appeare by the practise for as you haue heard out of Rich. Bristow Your Ministers returning to vs are not admitted to minister vnlesse they take our Orders which sheweth that in the iudgement of the Church they are not lawfull Ministers but meerely Lay-men ORTHOD. Our Ministerie is agreeable to the blessed booke of God and therefore holy and I doubt not but when the chiefe Shepheard shall appeare those that haue instructed many vnto righteousnesse shall shine as the starres for euer and euer But how proue you that our Ministers are no lawfull Ministers PHIL. CAn there be a lawfull Minister without a lawfull calling ORTHOD. It is impossible For no man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but hee that is called of God as was Aaron It is written of Iohn the Baptist There was a man sent from God The Apostles did not preach before they had this warrant Behold I send you And S. Paul saith How can they preach except they be sent And the Lord in the Prophet Ieremie reproueth such as ranne before they were sent Therefore though a man were wiser then Solomon and Daniel he must expect till the Lord send him he that teacheth without a calling how can he hope that Christ will be with him This is an order saith Beza appointed in the Church by the Sonne of God and obserued inuiolably by all true Prophets and Apostles That no man may teach in the Church vnlesse he be called PHIL. If there cannot be a lawfull Minister without a lawfull calling then I must demaund how the Ministers of England can iustifie their calling Might not a man say to euery one of you as Harding said to Iewell How say you sir you beare your selfe as though you were Bishop of Salisburie but how can you proue your vocation by what authoritie vsurpe you the Administration of Doctrine and Sacraments what can you alledge for the right and proofe of your Ministerie who hath called you who hath laied hands on you by what example hath he done it how and by whom are you consecrated who hath sent you who hath committed vnto you the Office you take vpon you be you a Priest or be you not if you be not how dare you vsurpe the name and Office of a Bishop if you be tell vs who gaue you Orders ORTHOD. You please your selues and beat the aire with a sound of idle and emptiâ— words but leaue your vaine flourishes and let vs heare what you can say against our calling PHIL. Then I demand whether you haue an inward or an outward calling ORTHOD. We haue both PHIL. An outward calling must either bee immediatly by the voyce of Christ as was the calling of the Apostles or mediatly by the Church ORTHOD. We are called of God by the Church For it is he which giueth Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints PHIL. All that are called of God by the Church deriue their authoritie by lawfull succession from Christ and his Apostles If you doe so then let it appeare shew vs your discent let vs see your pedegree If you cannot then what are you whence come you If you tell vs that God hath raised you in extraordinary maner you must pardon vs if we be slow in beleeuing such things there are many deceiuers gone out into the world and Sathan can transforme himselfe into an Angel of light In a word euery lawful calling is either ordinary or extraordinary if yours be ordinary let vs see your authoritie if extraordinary let vs see your miracles If one take vpon him extraordinary authoritie as an Ambassadour from a King he must produce his commission vnder the Kings seale If you will challenge the like from God then we require a miracle that is the Seale of the King of heauen But to vse the words of Doct. Stapleton In the hatching of the Protestants brood no ordinary vocation nor sending extraordinary appeareth so the ground and foundation being nought all which they haue builded vpon it falleth downe ORTHOD. The Ministers of England receiue imposition of hands in lawfull maner from lawfull Bishops indued with lawfull authoritie and therefore their calling is Ordinary PHIL. Your Bishops themselues whence haue they this authoritie ORTHOD. They receiued it from God by the hands of such Bishops as went before them PHIL. But your first reformers whence do they deriue their succession ORTHOD. Archbishop Cranmer and other heroicall spirits whom the Lord vsed as his instruments to reforme Religion in England had the very selfe-same Ordination and succession whereof you so glory and therefore if these argue that your calling is Ordinary you must confesse that theirs likewise was Ordinarie PHIL. We must not onely examine Cranmer and such others consecrated in King Henries time but them also which were in King Edwards and in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths as Parker Grindall Sands Horne and the like which were Priests after the Romane rite but leaped out of the Church before they were Bishops ORTHOD. As the first Bishops consecrated in King Edwards time deriued their Spirituall power by succession from those that were in King Henries so the first that were aduanced vnder the Raigne of Queene Elizabeth receiued theirs from such as were formerly created partly in K. Henries dayes partly in King Edwards And the Bishops at this day vnder our gracious soueraigne King IAMES haue the like succession from their predecessours as may be iustified by Records in particular and is confessed in generall by â—udsemius who came into England in the yeere of our Lord 1608. to obserue the state of our Church and the Orders of our Vniuersities Concerning the state saith he of the Caluinian sect in England it so standeth that it may either indure long or be changed suddenly and in a trâ—ce in regard of the Catholicke order there in a
and substantiall parts of Priesthood For your Church giueth no authoritie to offer the soueraigne sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ and though you haue a kind of absolution yet to small purpose For you neither vse auricular confession nor sufficient inioyning of pennance nor satisfaction for sinne but haue turned the true iudiciall absolution into a declaratory LAst of all your Deacons are no Deacons not onely because your Bishops haue no authoritie to ordaine but also because they are defectiue in the maine point of their function for though the Bishops say Take thou authoritie to execute the office of a Deacon yet he meaneth nothing lesse for the chiefe office of a Deacon is to assist the Priest in saying of Masse which you scorne and contemne By this it appeareth that you haue not one Bishop one Priest one Deacon in all the Church of England that hath a lawfull ordinarie vocation therefore your pretended Ministers are meerely lay men All these things with euery branch thereof shall bee iustified to your faces from point to point if you or any of your Rabbines dare incounter vs in a scholasticall combat either priuately or rather publickly in the face of an Vniuersitie or rather solemnly in Court in the Princes presence This is the thing that we desire ORTHOD. THe world is well enough acquainted with your boasting bookes and vaine glorious vaunts Wee haue heard the bragges of Bristow and of Parsons the great Polypragmon but especially wee cannot forget Campian the glorious Iesuite who comming into England to display the Popes Banner like a worthie Champion cast out his gantlet and braued both our Vniuersities But the successe of this proude popish challenger may call to your minde the saying of the King of Israel to Benhadad King of Syria Let not him that girdeth on his harnesse boast as hee that putteth it off You exclaime against our ministery as though wee had neither Bishops Presbyters nor Deacons whereupon it followeth that the whole controuersie about our ministerie consisteth of three particular controuersies the first concerning Bishops the second concerning Presbyters and the third concerning Deaccâ—s Againe in our Bishops you disanul both their consecration and iurisdiction Wherefore the first particular controuersie is diuided into two branches the former of Episcopal consecration the latter of iurisdiction concerning which for mine owne part I doe not professe my selfe a champion to accept your challenge our Church God be thanked is farre better furnished and our two famous Vniuersities are like to the Tower of Dauid built for defence a thousand shieldes hang therein and all the Targets of the strong men Yet I must needes confesse that my soule is grieued to heare the hoast of Israel the armie of the liuing God reuiled Wherfore in regard of my dutie to God and the Church I will not keepe silence Yet one thing I admonish you if you meane to dispute with reproach and disdaine the garland is yours I will yeeld you the bucklers before we beginne but if you desire in singlenes of heart to find and follow the trueth if to this ende you will compare reason with reason and argument with argument in meekenes and mildnes of spirit if you hold the trueth of God in that precious account that you will suffer it to ouer-ballance all popular applause and worldly respectes then I am content to bee partaker with you in the search thereof The Lord giue vs wisedome and grace to knowe his will and to doe that which is acceptable in his sight If it please you to embrace these conditions then propose and prosecute your arguments in order PHIL. I will begin and proue that your Bishops are no Bishops CHAP. III. Wherein they descend to the first branch concerning Episcopall consecration wherevpon arise two questions the former whether three Bishops hee required of absolute necessity to the consecration of a new Bishop the state whereof is explaned out of Popish writers ORTHODOX WHerein are they defectiue Are they bare titularie Bishops without any Sees or are they Bishops without the Bishoply office and function The first you cannot affirme because wee consecrate none but such as are assigned to the administration of a certaine place according to the Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon But whether you haue offended in this or no witnesse your owne famous Panormitane Nota quod multi sunt Episcopi sine administratione Episcopatuum vt sunt illi qui vulgariter Nullatenenses appellantur i. Note that there are many Bishops without the administration of Bishoprickes as are they which are commonly called Bishops of Vtopia These pretend great titles and please themselues in that sweet humor which is nothing else but a vaine dreame and meere mockery They are like vnto the mad man which when any shippes arriued at Athens cried out al is mine and tooke an Inuentory of their goods yet was he neuer one penny the richer Of this frantike crue were Olaus Magnus and blind Robert Archbishops in conceite the one stiled Vpsalensis the other Armachanus both sent to the Councell of Trent to fill vp the number So Robert King the last Abbot of Osney was entituled Episcopus Roanensis whose episcopall See was supposed to bee in the Prouince of the Archbishoprike of Athens but hee was glad to bee translated from thence to Oxford Thomas Merkes Bishop of Carlile was remooued by the Pope from his owne bishopricke which yeelded him conuenient maintenance to the imaginarie bishopricke of Samos in Greece whereof he knew hee should neuer receiue one penny of profit but as one hath well obserued Hee was so happie as neither to take benefit of the guift of his enemie nor to bee hurt by the masked malice of his counterfeit friend Anthonie Beck Bishop of Durham was aduanced by the Pope to be Patriarch of Ierusalem but if hee had reaped no better maintenance from the Bishoprick of Durham then from Ierusalem for all his glorious title he might haue starued For the Pope as B. Iewel hath told you beeing forsaken of the foure principall Patriarches of the world appointeth out foure of his ordinary Chaplaines or other Prelates whom it pleaseth him and giueth them the names of foure Patriarches the first for Constantinople the second for Alexandria the third for Antioch the fourth for Ierusalem and thus hauing these foure at command in this pleasant fancie hee ruleth and gouerneth the whole world In such a solemne brauery the great Cham of Tartary at this day after he hath dined himselfe soundeth out a trumpet and giueth all the Emperours and Kings of the world leaue to goe to dinner in which imagination and iollitie he continueth his claime to the possession of the world So the Pope maketh painted Patriarches filling their ambitious heads with emptie titles like to great bladders blowne full of wind Such Vtopian Bishops may iustly be called no
prosecute an vnanswerable Argument Euery true Bishop must of necessitie be Consecrated by 3. Bishops at the least But the Bishops of England are not so therefore the Bishops of England are no true Bishops ORTHOD. The Bishops of England are so as in due place shall appeare And if in case of necessity they were not so What then The presence of 3. is required onely to the well-being not simply to the being It is no essentiall part of Episcopall Consecration but an accidentall ornament a comely complement of singular conueniencie no substantiall point of absolute necessitie CHAP. IIII. Wherein the Popish Arguments drawen from the Canons of the Apostles and the Decretall Epistles are proposed vrged and answered PHIL. I Will prooue the contrary by sundry arguments and first by the Canons of the Apostles which were collected and set out by Clemens Saint Peters scholar ORTH. If those Canons were made by the Apostles then the Church of Rome is much to blame for the 84. Canon alloweth the 3. Booke of Maccabecs as also 2. Epistles of Clemens and his eight bookes of constitutions for Canonicall Scripture which the Church of Rome reiecteth againe it omitteth the Sonne of Sidrach Wisdome and diuers others which your Church imbraceth for Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth probable saith Bellarmine that this Canon was not set out by Clemens yea it is Apocryphus and Surreptitius as is affirmed by Binius ORTH. What say you then to the 65. Canon which forbiddeth to fast vpon the Saturday excepting one onely that is as Binius declareth the Paschall Saturday PHIL. I say with Baronius it is counterfeite ORTH. But what say you to Pope Gelasius who in a councell at Rome of 70. Bishops saith Liber Canonum Apostolorum Apocryphus the booke of the Canon of the Apostles is Apocryphall And in what sence he called it Apocryphall is expounded by Bellarmine Eos libros vocat Apocryphos qui sunt aediti ab auctoribus haereticis vel certè suspectis Gelasius calleth those bookes Apocryphall which were set out by such authors as were either hereticall or at least suspected PHIL. Gelasius did not call the booke Apocryphall as though all the Canons therein conteined were Apocryphall but as Bellarmine thinketh Propter aliquos vel corruptos vel additos ab haeretâ—cis that is in respect of some which were either corrupted or added by heretikes of which stampe were those two which you alleadged But the first 50. conteining nothing but Apostolike and Orthodoxe doctrine approued of auncient Popes Councels and Fathers Velut authentici recipiuntur are receiued as authenticall saith Binius ORTH. Pope Zephirine allowed 70. or at least 60. for there are diuerse readings how doth this agree PHIL. Well ynough for Pope Zephirine speaketh not of Canons but of Sentences and you must know that those 60 or 70. sentences are all conteined in the 50. Canons as Binius affirmeth out of Father Turrian ORTHOD. Bellarmine expoundeth these sentences to bee so many Canons in these words Zephirine the fifteenth from Peter deliuereth in his first Epistle that there were onely 70. Canons of the Apostles PHIL. Pope Leo alloweth onely fifty Apostolorum Canones numerant patres inter Apochrypha exceptis 50. Capitulis The fathers doe recken the Canons of the Apostles amongst Apocryphall writings excepting fifty Chapters by which he meaneth fifty Canons ORTHO Then to passe ouer the fifth Canon forbidding a Bishop or Priest to cast off his wife vnder pretence of religion as also the one and thirtith inhibiting all other Bishops to restore a Priest or Deacon excommunicated by his owne Bishop What can you possibly say to the ninth which excommunicateth all those which beeing present at the communion doe not communicate concerning which Binius is forced to confesse Totum hoc decretum non diuine sed humano iure constitutum iam contraria consuetudine est abrogatum that is This whole Decree beeing made not by law Diuine but humane is now abrogated by a contrary custome and alleadgeth for him Bellarmine Zuarez and Turrian which is a notable acknowledgement that such a Canon as you account Apostolicall and Authenticall may not withstanding bee abrogated But not to stand vpon these and the like exceptions let vs heare what the Canons say concerning the consecration of Bishops PHIL. THe words are these Let a Bishop bee ordained of two or three Bishops ORTHO Doth the Canon require two or three Then ordination by two is canonicall as well as by three PHIL. Not so for the Canon meaneth that there should be two or three assistants besides the Metropolitane as is declared by Cardinall Bellarmine and father Turrian ORTHOD. The Canon saith not two or three assistants but two or three Bishops Neither hath it this clause besides the Metropolitane but pronounceth simply let a Bishop bee ordained by two or three Bishops Wherfore the Canon is satisfied with the presence of two or three Bishops This is the iudgement of your owne Pamelius who saith that conseration or imposition of hands was per Episcopos qui conuenerant quos vt minimum duos esse oportebat i. By the Bishops which were assembled which should bee two at the least Where note that hee doth not say the Bishops assistant but the Bishops assembled should bee two at the least This also was the iudgement of Cardinall de Turrecremata who vrgeth this very Canon against your position and prooueth by it that three are not necessary Neither is the presence of two required of absolute necessity if you will beleeue the Apostolike constitutions of Clemens a booke which for my owne part I would not once name but onely that your chiefe champions doe so commonly alleage it Wherefore as Saint Paul cited a Poet against the Athenians so let mee cite this booke against you which so highly esteeme it I Simon of Chanany appoint by how many Bishops a Bishop ought to be ordained to wit by two or three Bishops but if any shall be ordained by one Bishop let both the ordained and the Ordainer bee deposed but if necessity shall compell to be ordained by one because many cannot bee present for persecution or some other cause let the Decree of the commission of many Bishops be produced If this authority bee of credit then you are confuted for it alloweth consecration by one in case of necessity PHIL. But that one must haue the commission of many ORTHOD. The commission is onely for concord sake and to auoide Schisme for the absent cannot impose hands nor giue the power therefore they doe not ordaine though they consent to the ordination which is performed by him onely that is present Now if in any case a Bishop may bee ordained by one and yet bee a true Bishop then the presence of moe is a matter of conueniency and not of absolute necessity And if you thinke that these
Prophets or Bishops which aduanced Saul and Barnabas from the Presbyteral to the Episcopal office ORT. These are doting dreames not worth the answering For seeing the text faith only that there were in the Church which was at Antioch Prophets and Doctors among whom were Barnabas Simeon Lucius Manahen and Saul why should not we thinke Barnabas to be called a Prophet as well as Simeon Lucius and Manahen seeing hee is first named A point so cleere that it is confessed by Lorinus the Iesuite ascribing the titles of Prophets and Doctors as well to Saul and Barnabas as to the rest If these Prophets were Bishops as Turrian imagineth then it will follow that Barnabas was a Bishop before they laid hands vpon him And consequently that he was reordeined which is absurd Moreouer as it cannot bee proued that those three were Bishops so it is certaine that they did not ordaine Paul and Barnabas Bishops For Paul being an Apostle could not receiue any Episcopal grace from man as hath been declared Wherefore this imposition of hands was not to giue them any new power but as the text saith To set them apart for the worke wherevnto the Lord had called them which when they had fulfilled they sayled backe to Antioch whence they had beene commended to the grace of God It is not said they failed to Antioch where they were made Bishops or where they receiued Episcopall grace but whence they had beene commended with fasting and praier to the grace of God To which truth Suarez the Iesuite giueth testimonie affirming that this imposition of hands was onely precaâ—ory and denying that Saul or Barnabas were heere ordained either Priests or Bishops which seemeth also to bee the opinion of Aloysius de Leon and other late writers These are the onely examples which you produce out of the Scripture yet neither of them is pregnant for your purpose and if they were what then An example may not be vrged as an vnchangeable rule when the matter discouereth it selfe to be contingent and variable CHAP. VII That the presence of three Bishops is not required of absolute necessitie NOw that it is no substantiall point of absolute necessitie may be concluded out of your owne positions and practise For the declaration whereof first I demaund whether Episcopall consecration be a Sacrament or no PHIL. That Ordination is a Sacrament truely and properly is rightly defined by the Councel of Trent For there are three things onely required to a Sacrament as your selues confesse an externall signe a promise of grace and a commandement or diuine institution All which are found in ordination as our learned Cardinall hath proued out of the Scripture who hath also declared that those Scriptures whereby Catholickes doe prooue Ordination to bee a Sacrament are vnderstood of Episcopall Ordination Whereupon he affirmeth that if Episcopall Ordination bee not a Sacrament wee cannot proue euidently out of the Scriptures that Ordination is a Sacrament ORTHOD. If the word Sacrament bee taken somewhat largely for any externall signe instituted of God whereto is annexed a promise of grace then wee will grant with Saint Austine that Order may bee called a Sacrament but if it bee taken strictly for such a signe as is a seale of the righteousnesse of faith whereto is annexed a promise of the grace of Iustification and Remission of sinnes in which sense Baptisme and the Lords Supper are Sacraments then wee may not admit it for a Sacrament For in Baptisme and the Lords Supper the sauing grace of Iustification and Remission of sinnes is signified sealed and exhibited to the worthy receiuer but the grace giuen in Ordination is of another nature respecting not so much the good of the receiuer as of the flocke for which hee receiueth it For the Ministers of the Gospell are salt to season others candles to shine vnto others pipes and conduits to conueigh the water of life vnto others But did you not say that though three Bishops were ordinarily required to the Consecration of a Bishop yet the Pope might dispense with two of the three PHIL. I said so out of Cardinall Bellarmine and Binius ORTHOD. What authoritie hath the Pope to dispense in Sacraments PHIL. That may appeare by the Councell of Trent Moreouer the holy Synod declareth that this power hath alwayes beene in the Church that in the Dispensation of Sacraments it might appoint or change such things as it should iudge to bee most expedient for the profit of the receiuers or the reuerence of the Sacraments themselues according to the varietie of things times and places Salua illorum substantia so the substance of the Sacraments be preserued Whereby it appeareth that the Pope can dispense onely with circumstances and not with substance ORTHOD. Why then did the Church of Rome dispense with the Cuppe in the Communion Can you take away one halfe not diminishing the substance But to let this passe doe you not marke the conclusion which floweth from your premises If Episcopall Consecration bee a Sacrament and the Pope may not dispense with the Substance of a Sacrament and yet hee may dispense with two of the three Bishops required in a Consecration then it followeth that two of the three are not of the Substance of Consecration Secondly your owne present practise doeth proue the same For you professe that in your Church sometimes one Bishop alone assisted with two mitred Abbots doth performe it If this bee sufficient then three Bishops are not required of absolute necessitie Now let vs a little looke backe to former times and consider the iudgement of better ages I Will beginne with the fourth Councell of Carthage and the very place which you your selfe alleadged wherein are prescribed the offices to bee performed by the Bishops when one is to bee consecrated to wit how two should holde the Booke of the Gospels ouer his head one powre out the blessing that is pronounce the words whereby the spirituall power grace and blessing is giuen and all the rest touch his heade with their hands When one alone pronounceth the wordes thenone alone ordaineth For the wordes are confessed on all sides to bee the very essentiall forme of Ordination This is agreeable to the collection of your owne Cardinall Tenent librum c. Ergo videtur quod nihil agatur per illos Episcopos quod sit ad substantiam consecrationis pertinens Ergo eorum assistentia non pertinet ad substantiam consecrationis sed magis ad quandam solennitatem i. They hold the booke c. Therefore it seemeth that nothing is done by these two Bishops which is pertaining to the substance of Consecration Therefore their assistance doth not belong to the substance of the consecration but rather to a certaine solemnitie IN the yeere of our Lord 441. there was a Councell holden at Orenge in France where it was thus decreed Duo si presumpserint
strangers a common courtesie is a token of arrogancie And a proud looke doeth argue a proud heart according to the saying A man may be knowen by his looke PHIL. It is the iudgement of S. Iohn the Apostle That we must vouchsafe such men as are diuided from the Catholicke Church no honour or office of courtesie in these words If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine receiue him not into house neither say vnto him God saue you ORTHO How can you apply this to the British-Bishops who confessed as Bede relateth That they vnderstood that to be the true way of righteousnes which Austin had preached Yea Parsons the Iesuite affirmeth That the faith which S. Austin brought and that which the Britaines had before must needs bee one and the selfe same in all materiall and substantiall points PHIL. They were all Schismaticks and guiltie of departing from the Church of Rome ORTHOD. How could they depart from it seeing they were neuer lincked to it by any bond of obedience For when should Rome haue any such iurisdiction ouer Britaine At the first planting of Religion You cannot proue it In the dayes of Eleutherius it doeth not appeare that euer he chalenged any such thing And euen their maner of Baptizing obseruing Easter and other Ecclesiasticall institutions contrary to the customes of the Church of Rome make more then probable proofe that Britaine was not vnder the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome Wherefore though we cannot excuse the Britaines for refusing to ioyne with him in the conuersion of the Saxons yet wee must needs say they had iust reason to refuse to put their necks vnder his yoke And surely if Austin had not had a proud spirit hee would onely haue requested their helping hand for the Lords worke and not haue sought dominion ouer them for himselfe and for his lord the Pope Yet the pride of his spirit and his aspiring cogitations may further appeare in that he demaunded of Gregorie i How he should deale with the Bishops of Britaine and France thereby affecting not only to haue iurisdiction ouer the Britaines but ouer the French also Which Gregory well ynough perceiuing answered We gaue thee no authoritie ouer the Bishops of France for that of ancient time of my predecessours the Bishop of Arles receiued his Pall whom we must not bereaue of his authoritie Thus much of his pride NOw whether he were the cause of the massacre following I will not define You shall heare the opinion of Amandus Xierixensis a Frier Minorite When the Brittans saith hee were Catholiks the Saxons were Gentiles for the conuersion of whom blessed Gregory sent Austin and Mellitus which conuerted the Saxons but when Austin would haue brought the Bishops and Abbots of the Brittans by Apostolicke authority that they should receiue him as Legate and preach with him to the English discord was mooued for their disobedience to Saint Austin and so warre was raised betweene the Kings of the Brittans and of the Saxons which now beeing conuerted would haue subdued the Brittans to Austin Bede himselfe testifieth how Austin threatfully prophesied that if they would not take peace and bee at concord with their brethren they should receiue warre from their enemies and if they would not preach to the Englishmen the way of life they should suffer at their hand and by their power the vengcance of death Now because the euent did answere to the speech it is called a prophesie For what followed Edilbert King of Kent moued Edelfride King of Northumberland to ioyne with him against the Brittans and there was made a bloudy massacre the narration whereof is thus set downe by Galfridus Monemutensis In a part of the Brittans Christianity yet flourished the which beginning in the daies of Eleutherius neuer failed among them When Austin came hee found seuen Bishopricks and an Archbishopricke supplied with very godly Gouerners and Abbies a great number in which the flocke of Christ was kept in good order Besides other Cities in the Citie of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 21. hundred monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinooch a man marueilously well learned who by diuerse arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to bee subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edilbert therefore the King of Kent as soone as hee saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching stirred vp Edelfride and other Princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and goe to Bangor to destroy Dinooch and his Clergie Who taking the City commaunded the swords of his men to bee turned first vpon the monkes so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with martyrdome entred the kingdome of Heauen If they were martyrs what were they that made them Martyrs If the Saxons were persecutors and did persecute them to that end that they might make them subiect to Austn what then is to bee thought of Austin It had beene the dutie of Austin saith Lelandus to haue admonished the Saxons that perfidious nation that if they would admit Christianity sincerely they should restore to the iust Lords and possessours the Empire of Brittaine which contrarie to the oath of warfare they had occupied by tyranny If Austin sought by any sinister meanes to enlarge his owne iurisdiction hee was farre vnlike to Palladius Bishop of Scotland who as Polydor witnesseth besought Constantine their king with many prayers that hee would not assist with armes the idolatrous nation of the Saxons against the Christian Brittans PHIL. Saint Bede saith that Saint Austin long before that time was taken out of this life to the kingdome of Heauen ORT. That is not Saint Bedes but some false finger hath foysted it in For a learned antiquary skilfull in the Saxon language affirmeth that it is not found in the Saxon copie Hitherto of circumstances incident to his person Now at last let vs come to his ordination and I hope you will confesse him to be a canonicall Bishop PHIL. HEe was most canonicall For as Doctor Stapleton declareth out of Saint Bede hee was sent from the Bishop of Rome the successor of Peter and consecrated by the Bishops of France ORTHOD. Pope Gregory saith hee was consecrated by the Bishops of Germany PHIL. That is the fault of the copie for it should not bee Germaniarum but Galliarum as Baronius thinketh ORT. When did the French Bishops ordaine him PHIL. After he had bin a while in Brittaine and had conuerted diuers ORTHO Baronius is perswaded by a place of Gregory that it was before the conuersion of the English but by whom was hee ordained PHIL. Saint Bede saith that it was performed by Aetherius Archbishop of Arles ORTHOD. Baronius saith that Aetherius was Bishop of Lyons not of Arles and that Virgilius was then Bishop
the English there are none both which branches hee presupposeth as granted the French but when doeth any of them come ouer into England as though hee should say their comming is vncertaine so he concludeth that Austin must make Bishops alone without other Bishops Now from Austin we will proceede to his successours PHIL. They may all be presumed to bee Canonicall ORTH. Yet they came from such as were not canonicall Now from the Saxons wee will proceede to the Normans And here what say you to Lanfranck whom William the Conqueror made Archbishop in stead of Stigandus PHIL. There is no reason to doubt of him or any other till wee come to Cranmer CHAP. VI. Of the Consecration of the most Reuerend Father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie ORTH. THen it remaineth that we consider the Consecration of that most reuerend Father and blessed Martyr Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury concerning whom I expect your iudgement PHIL. My iudgement is that he was a principall cause of all those lamentable alterations which happened in the daies of king Henry the eight and Edward the sixt ORTH. Doe you call them lamentable therein you resemble Enuy in the Poet which lamented because she saw nothing worthy of lamentation For those alterations which ye call lamentable were a gracious beginning of a thousand blessings both to the Church and Common wealth of England But speake directly to the point in question whether Cranmer were a Canonicall Bishoppe Why doe you not answere You are like to one which holdeth a Wolfe by the eares who neither knoweth how to hold him nor how to let him goe faine would you infringe the Consecration of Cranmer but alasâ—e you cannot PHIL. Father Becan directing his speach to the Bishops of England saith thus Legitimè consecrati non estis a quo enim an à rege at is consecrandi potestatem non habet An ab Episcopo Cantuariensi vel aliquo simile ne id quidem Nam Thomas Cranmerus qui sub Henrico 8. Cantuariensem Episcopatum obtinuit non fuit consecratus ab vllo Episcopo sed a solo rege intrusus designatus igitur quotquot ab eo postea consecrati sunt non legitimè sed eâ— presumptione consecrati sunt 1. You are not lawfully consecrated for by whom were you whether by the King but he hath not power to consecrate Or by the Bishop of Canterbury or some like Neither that truly For Thomas Cranmer who vnder K. Henry the 8. obtained the Bishopricke of Canterburie was not consecrated by any Bishop but intruded and designed by the King alone therefore as many as were afterward consecrated by him were not consecrated lawfully but by presumption ORTH. Or rather Becan playeth the part of a presumptuous Iesuite against the Lords annointed in saying that King Henry intruded Cranmer as also in glauncing at his most famous and religious successours as though they themselues had consecrated Bishops For what needed he to moue any such question if it were not to raise a mist and cast a cunning surmise to induce men to thinke that it was so But indeede it was not so for our soueraignes in the aduancing of Bishops do nothing but that which they may lawfully by their Princely right agreeable to the patterne of most religious Kings and Emperours and iustifiable both by the lawes of God and the land as in due place shall appeare And as hee wrongeth the Prince so doth hee traduce Archbishop Cranmer as though he were consecrated either by the King or by none at all and consequently the whole Clergie of England at this day deriuing their consecration from that renowned Martyr But if this accusation were true doe you not marke how it would make a cracke in your golden chaine of succession wherein you so reioyce and glory For if Cranmer were no Bishop then some approoued in Queene Maries time would prooue no Bishops as for example Anthony Kitchen Bishop of Landaff and Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Ely both which deriued their Consecration from Cranmer as may be iustified by records the latter whereof was highly commended by the Pope and made one of his Commissioners in the time of Queene Marie and imploied in the proceedings against that most Reuerend Archbishop If this cannot content the Iesuite I will referre him to Parsons his fellow Iesuite a man who neither loued Archbishop Cranmer nor any other of our Religion and yet clearely confesseth that he was a true Bishop BVt what mislike you in Cranmer was hee not in the order of Priesthood let the Pope be Iudge who in his Bull to Cranmer calleth him Magistrum in Theologia in Presbyteratus ordine constitutum i. Master or Doctor in Diuinitie setled in the order of Priesthood Or was he made Archbishop without the Popes authoritie The Pope himselfe affirmeth the contrary both to the King in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus Henrico Anglorum Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis c. De fratrum eorundem consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus ipsumque illi Ecclesiae Cantuariensi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus c. Bonon 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. Pontif. nostri 10. ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the glorious King of the English We haue made Prouision by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of our said brethren of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury and we haue set him ouer the said Church of Canterbury to be their Archbishop And to Cranmer himselfe in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus dilecto filio Thomae electo Cantuariensi Praefatae Ecclesiae Cantuariensi de eorundem fratrum consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus teque illi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus pastorem curam administrationem ipsius Ecclesiae tibi in spiritualibus temporalibus plenariè committendo ¶ Bon. Anno 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. That is Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We haue prouided by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of the same brethren for the foresaid Church of Canterbury and haue set thee ouer it to be their Archbishop and pastour and fully committing vnto thee the charge and administration of the same Church in things spirituall and temporall Or did the Pope and his Cardinals accept the person of Cranmer vndeseruedly Let your holy Father speake for himselfe ¶ Clemens Episcopus Hâ—n Angl. Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis nobis fratribus nostris ob suorum exigentiam meritorum acceptâ— c. That is ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the most glorious King of England We haue made prouision of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury accepted of vs and our brethren according as his deserts required OR was he Consecrated without the Popes licence Behold the Bull for his Consecration ¶ Clemens Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cant. Tibi vt a quocunque
him by not doing that which hee commaundeth and by hindring him from executing his will yet it is not lawfull to iudge him or punish him or depose him which belongeth to none but the superiour ORTHOD. And you must consider that it is one thing to punish by vertue of Iurisdiction ouer a partie and another thing to hinder the iniuries which the partie endeauoreth actuallie to inferre as the Venetian Doctours haue prooued out of Caietan Turrecremata and Bellarmine Now King Henry did challenge no iurisdiction but ouer his owne subiects and within his owne dominions yet it was fit that in his owne necessary defence hee should remoue papall iniuries by prouiding as it became a vertuous Prince for the quiet of his owne conscience and the good of his subiects Which blessings could neuer haue beene procured if the Pope had still enioyed his vsurped authority in England PHIL. You shall not perswade mee but that King Henry was guiltie both of Schisme and heresie Onuphrius saith that Paul the third did thinke him vnworthie to bee accounted in the number of Christians ob inauditum heresis crimen that is For such a crime of heresie as had not beene heard of ORTHOD. What meant the Pope thinke you when hee condemned him for heresie Sigonius recordeth that in a Councell at Mentz in the presence of the Emperor there was a disputation Vtrum Henricus Regio titulo a Gregorio spoliari potuisset that is VVhether Henry the Emperour might bee depriued of the title of a King by Pope Gregorie Wherein most of the Bishops assented to Geberardus defending the Popes authority So it came to passe that Vecilo Archbishop of Mentz beeing of the contrarie opinion was branded for heresie in an other councell wherein Otho Bishop of Ostia the Popes Legat was present And the same Sigonius saith that the Emperour Henry the fourth renouncing his Fathers heresie did imbrace the obedience of the Pope Not to performe obedience to the Pope was his Fathers heresie but his sonne was a gracious Catholicke for shewing obedience to the Pope though therein hee were an vngracious sonne against his owne father PHIL. Onuphrius saith That king Henry the eight followed Noua nefaria Lutheri dogmata the new and wicked opinions of Luther Bellarmine saith that in England in the reigne of Henry and afterwards in the reigne of Edward the whole kingdome did after a sort slide backe from the faith ORTHOD. That which you call Heresie and Apostacy is true religion and that which you honour with the name of true religion is full of Heresie and idolatry Many papall abuses were discouered in the daies of King Henry moe in the daies of King Edward so the Gospell was like to the light which shineth more and more to the perfect day the brightnesse whereof abolished both the Pope the Popish religion Afterward when Queene Mary had restored both the Lord stirred vp the spirit of Queene Elizabeth who with an inuincible courage reformed religion And that which shee happily begunne our gracious Soueraigne King Iames hath happily continued Neither can any man accuse them of Schisme vnlesse they will accuse the holy Apostle Saint Paul who When certaine were hardened and disobeyed speaking euill of the way of God before the multitude hee departed from them and separated the Disciples As the Apostle practised this in his owne person so hee gaue the like commaundement to others If any man teach otherwise and consenteth not to the wholesome words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to godlinesse c. From such separate thy selfe And the Lord crieth by his Prophet Goe not vp to Bethauen This Bethauen was Bethel but her idolatry made her Bethauen therefore goe not vp to Bethauen If Rome which was sometimes Bethel the house of God become Bethauen the house of vanitie then thou must not goe vp to Bethauen Goe out of Babylon my people goe out of Babylon if Rome which was some times a pure virgine become the whore of Babylon then go out of Babylon my people least you be partakers of her plagues Wherefore al Christian Kingdomes were bound to separate themselues from the erronious and idolatrous Church of Rome PHIL. Thus you say But I rather account of the iudgement of the Church of Rome which noteth both them and you for schismatickes and heretickes CHAP. IX Whether Schisme and Heresie annihilate a Consecration ORTHO WHether we or you be guiltie of those crimes God the righteous iudge will one day reueale In the meane time let vs admit though for al your brags you are neuer able to proue it that Cranmer vpon his reuolte from the Pope did presently become a schismatick and an hereticke Yet tell mee in good sooth Philodox doeth a Bishop falling into schisme and heresie cease to be a Bishop doth hee loose his power of giuing orders PHIL. It is a disputable point and I can tell you that great Clerkes seeme to bee of that opinion Pope Innocent saith that those which are Baptized of heretickes are receiued with their Baptisme but the ordained of heretickes are not receiued with their order And againe the ordained of Heretickes haue their head wounded And againe it is affirmed that hee which hath lost the honour cannot giue the honour and that hee which receiued receiued nothing because there was nothing in the giuer which hee could receiue Which he sealeth vp with this conclusion Aquiescimus verum est We yeeld and it is true Pope Iohn the twelfth caused those which were ordained of Leo 8. a schismaticall Pope to say Pater meus nihil habuit sibi nihil mihi dedit that is my father had nothing to himselfe and nothing he gaue to me Pope Nicolas the first saith No reason doth teach how Gregory who was Canonically and Synodically deposed and excommunicated can promote or blesse any man therefore Photius receiued nothing of Gregory but that which he had but he had nothing he therefore gaue nothing He which stoppeth his ears from hearing the law his prayer shal be abhominable if abhominable then not to be heard if not to be heard then vneffectuall if vneffectuall then verily it bringeth nothing to Photius Wherefore though Cranmer had a lawfull consecration yet it seemeth when hee fell into schisme and heresie hee lost his order and power of ordination Therefore the Bishops in King Edwards time consecrated by Cranmer receiued nothing because Cranmer had nothing to giue And the Bishops in Queene Elizabeths time consecrated by those whom Cranmer did consecrate receiued nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue And those which now succeede them receiued nothing because their predecessours had nothing to giue ORTHO Take heed Philodox least while you goe about to put out our eyes you put out your owne For if your allegations be sound what shall become of Bonner Bishop of London what shall become of
a taste beginning from Cranmer Anno 1533. Thom. Cran. Cons. Arch. of Cant. 30. Mart. by Iohn Lincoln Iohn Exon. Henry Assaph Anno 1534. Rowland Lee Cons. B. of Lichfield 19. April by Thom Cant. Iohn Lincolne Christ. Sidon Anno 1535. George Browne Cons. Arch. Dublin 19. Mart. by Thom. Cant. Iohn Roff. Nich Sarum Anno 1536. Rob. Warton cons. B. of Assaph 20. Iul. by Tho. Cant. Ioh. Bangor Will. Norwic. An. 1537. Rob. Holgate cons. B. of Landaff 25. Mart. by Ioh. Roffen Nich. Sarum Ioh. Bangor An. 1537. Henr. Holbeck cons. B. of Bristow 24. Mart. by Iohn Roff. Hug. Wigorn. Rob. Assaph An. 1538. Will. Finch cons. Suf. of Taunton 7. April by Iohn Roff. Robert Assaph Will. Colchest An. 1540. Tho. Thurlby cons. B. of Westm. 9. Decemb. by Edm. Lond. Nich. Roff. Ioh. Bedf. An. 1541. Ioh. Wakeman cons. B. of Gloucest 25. Sept. by Thom. Cant. Edm. Land Tho. Westmonast An. 1541. Arth. Buckley cons. B. of Bangor 19. Febr. by Ioh. Sarum Will. Meneuensis Ioh. Glocest. An. 1542. Paul Bush cons. B. of Bristow 25. Iun. by Nich. Roff. Thom. Westmon Ioh. Bedf. An. 1545. Ant. Kitchin cons. B. of Lan. 3. Mat. 37. H. 8. by Thom. Westm. Thom. Sidon Suffrag Salop. NOw from the Consecrators let vs proceed to the forme of Consecration and consider whether the ancient Canons which you approue and vrge were altered in King Henrtes time PHIL. It doth not appeare by the Statute that there was any alteration For it was enacted that the Consecration should be solemnized with all due circumstance And moreouer that the Consecrators should giue to the Consecrated all Benedictions Ceremonies and things requisite for the same And surely if there had bene any alteration in things essentiall Doct. Sanders speaking purposely of this very point would not haue concealed it But he saith plainely It was his will speaking of King H. 8 that the Ceremonie and solemne Vnction should as yet be vsed in Episcopall Consecration after the maner of the Church And againe more plainely Primo loco sancierunt vt cum Episcopi ac Presbyteri Anglicani ritu ferè Catholico excepta R. Pontificis obedientia quam omnes obnegabant ad illud vsque tempus ordinati fuissent in posterum alia omnino forma ab ipsis praescripta Ordinationes fierent authoritate à puero Rege adid accepta That is First they decreed speaking of K. Edwards time That whereas the Bishops and Priests of England had bene ordained euen vnto that time almost after the Catholicke rite excepting the obedience of the Bishop of Rome which they all dented hereafter Ordinations should be made altogether after an other forme by them prescribed by authoritie which they receiued to that purpose from the King being a childe But the Statute of Q. Mary putteth all out of doubt Enacting That all such diuine Seruice and Administration of Sacraments as were most commonly vsed in this Realme of England in the last yeere of King Henry the 8. should be vsed and frequented through the whole Realme of England and all other the Queenes dominions and no other in any other maner forme or degree Now the makers of this Statute were perswaded that holy Order was a Sacrament therefore holy Orders were ministred in Q. Maries time as they were in the last yeere of K. Henry But all good Catholicks will confesse that in Q. Maries time the true essentiall forme of Consecration was obserued Therefore I graunt that it was also vsed all the time of King Henry ORTHOD. If the persons were capable and consecrated by a sufficient number of Canonical consecrators according to the forme of your Church then you must needs iudge their Consecration effectuall and them Canonicall Bishops PHIL. Our Church in Q Maries time did so iudge of them for most of her old Bishops were made in Schismate Henriciano Yet they were allowed and the new euen Cardinall Poole among the rest did all deriue their Consecration from the old yet were they all approued by our holy Father the Bishop of Rome and by name B. Bonner and B. Thurlby to whom he giueth honorable testimony in his Commission for the proceeding against Cranmer ORTHOD. Then if we can deriue our Bishops from any three in King Henries reigne before the banishing of the Pope or after you must acknowledge them to be Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth so ORTHOD. Or else Bonner and his coequals must lie in the dust and all the Bishops made in Q. Maries time must eternally be cancelled out of the Catalogue of Bishops Hitherto of K. Henries time Proceed we now to the Bishops in K. Edwards dayes and consider whether those were Gold or lead CHAP. XI Of the Bishops Consecrated in the time of King Edward the sixt PHIL. THe Bishops in King Edwards time we take for no Bishops ORTHOD. No But you must there is no remedie And for the more perspicuitie let vs distinguish them into certaine ranckes The first of such as were made both Priests and Bishops in K. Henries time and were continued in King Edwards The second of such as were Priests in K. Henries time and made Bishops in K. Edwards To these you may adde a third of such if any such you find as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of K. Edward The first you haue confessed already to be Canonicall therefore let vs come to the second in which are those blessed Saints and glorious Martyrs Ridley Hooper and Ferrar concerning whom first I demaund whether they were in the order of Priesthood or no PHIL. Yes father Parsons graunteth it saying Ridley studied at Cambridge and there was made Priest trauailed ouer the sea to Paris and returning againe became King Henties Chaplaine Likewise Iohn Hooper as may be seene by Fox his relation of him was a Priest in Oxford in the daies of King Henry the eight So Robert Ferrar Priest and Chaplaine to Cranmer in King Henries time Thus I confesse that they were Priests but I deny that they were Bishops for father Parsons speaking of the â—oxian Calendar and Saints of the month of Februarie in which number were Hooper and Ferrar saith Among Foxe his Saints there is neither eremâ—â—icall nor monasâ—icall life noâ— solitude either from the worlde or women nor any one so much as pretending the title of vâ—rginitie in any seâ—e nor any true Bishoppe indeed if their ordination bee examined For beside Cranmer other Bishops or Clergie men were there none of all the packe that was burned ORTHOD. What say you then to father â—atimer who was ordained in the same manner in all respects as Bonner was Though hee had now relinguished his Bishopricke yet still according to your owne principles hee was a true Bishoppe 〈◊〉 respect of the Episcopall character But to prosecute the present point what mislike you in Ridley Hooper and Ferrar you haue already confessed that they were
Priests why should you deny them to be Bishops PHIL. The Popes Commissioners Vnpriested them in Queene Maries time but would not Vnbishop them thereby acknowledging their Priestly function receiued in King Henries time but denying their Episcopall receiued in King Edwards as may appeare by the words of Doctor Brooke Bishop of Glocester the Popes subdelegate to Ridley at his degradation Wee must against our willâ—s proceed according to our Commission to disgrading taking from you the dignitie of Priesthood for we take you for no Bishop as Iohn Fox your owne historian recordeth ORTH. Was not hee and all the rest of them Consecrated by a sufficient number PHIL. Yes vndoubtedly for that law was alwaies obserued in King Edwards time as Doctor Sanders confesseth Câ—remontam autem solennem vnctionem more Ecclesiastico adhuc in consecratione illa adhiberi voluit quam postea profiâ—â—â—ns in pâ—â—â—â— Edouardus Sextus sustulit proea Caluinicas aliquot deprecationes substituit serâ—ata tamen semper priori de numero presenâ—â—um Episcoporum qui â—anuâ— ordinando impoâ—erent lege that is It was his will speaking of King Henry the eight that the ceremony and solemne vnction should as yet be vsed in Episcopall consecration after the manner of the Church which King Edward profiting from better to worse did afterward take away and insteed thereof substitute certaine Caluinicall deprecations yet the former law concerning the number of Bishops which should impose hands vpon the ordained was alwaies obserued ORTHOD If you or any other dare deny it it may bee iustified by authenticall records Out of which behold a true abstract of the consecration of those renowned Martyrs Nich Ridley Cons 5. Septemb. 1547. 1. Ed 6. by Henry Lincoln Iohn Bedford Thom. Sidon Rob. Ferrar Cons 9. Septemb. 1549. 2. Ed 6. by Thom. Canterb Henry Lincoln Nich Roff. Iohn Hooper Cons. 8. Mart. 1550. by Thom. Canterb Nich London Iohn Roff. To which let vs adde those worthy confessours Iohn Poynet Iohn Scory and Miles Couerdale Iohn Poynet Cons. 29. Iune 1550. by Thom. Canterb. Nich London Arthur Bangor Iohn Scory and Miles Couerdale Cons. 30. Aug. 1551. by Thom Canterb. Nich London Iohn Bedford NOw seeing the Consecrated were capable and the Consecrators a sufficient number why should not the Consecration bee effectuall For if Cranmer or any other lawfull Bishop by his Commission with sufficient assistants could make canonicall Bishops in the daies of K. Henry as you haue confessed what reason can you giue why the same Cranmer or the like Bishop with the like assistants should not make the like in the daies of K. Ed PHIL. Because the case was altered for in King Henries time Ordinations were made with ceremony and solemne vnction after the Ecclesiasticall manner which king Edward tooke cleane away and in place thereof appointed certaine Caluinicall deprecations as was before declared ORTHO Those which Sanders calleth Caluinicall deprecations are godly and religious prayers answerable to the Apostolicke practise For whereas the Scripture witnesseth that Matthias the Deacons and others receiued imposition of hands with prayers Salmeron the Iesuite expoundeth the places thus intelligendum est de precibus quibus à deo petebant vt efficeret illos bonos Episcopos Presbyteros Diaconos potestatemque illis ad ca munera prestaret that is It is to be vnderstood of prayers whereby they desired of God that he would make them good Bishops Priests and Deacons and would giue them abilitie to performe those offices Such prayers are vsed in the Church of England As for example in the ordering of Priests ALmighty God giuer of all things which by thy holy spirit hast appointed diuers orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold these thy seruants now called to the office of Priesthood and replenish them so with the trueth of thy doctrine and innocency of life that both by word and good example they may faithfully serue thee in this office to the glory of thy Name and profit of thy congregation through the merits of our Sauiour Iesus Christ c. And in the Consecration of Bishops ALmighty God c. Grant we beseech thee to this thy seruant such grace that hee may euermore bee ready to spread abroad the Gospell and glad tidings of reconcilement to God and to vse the authoritie giuen vnto him not to destroy but to saue not to hurt but to helpe so that hee as a wise and a faithfull seruant giuing to thy family meate in due season may at the last bee receiued into ioy c. These and the like are the praiers which Sanders traduceth Wherefore we may with comfort applie to our selues the saying of Saint Peter If wee bee railed vpon for the name of Christ blessed are wee for the spirit of glory and of God resteth vpon vs which on your part is euill spoken of but on our part is glorified Thus that which you impute to them as a blemish is perfect beautie But what else doe you mislike in their ordinations PHIL. They did not obserue the Ecclesiasticall manner ORTHOD. In the third and fourth yeere of Edward the sixth there was an act made to abolish certaine superstitious bookes and among the rest the Ordinals About the same time was made another acte for the ordering of Ecclesiastiall Ministers the effect whereof was that such forme of consecrating Bishops Priestes and Deacons as by six Prelates and sixe other learned in Gods Law should bee agreed vpon and set out vnder the great Seale of England within a time limited should lawfully bee vsed and none other In the fift and sixt of his raigne was made another acte for the explaining and perfecting of the booke of common prayer and administration of the Sacraments which booke so explained was annexed to the acte or statute with a forme or manner of making and consecrating Archbishops Bishops Priestes and Deacons Which as at this day so then was not esteemed another distinct booke from the booke of common prayer but they were both ioyntly reputed as one booke and so established by acte of Parliament In the first of Queene Mary by the repealing of this acte the booke was disanulled but it was established againe in the first of Q. Elizabeth and confirmed in the eight of her reigne so that all the Ministers of England are ordered according to that booke concerning which I would knowe wherein it transgresseth the Ecclesiasticall manner Sanders saith that King Edward tooke away the Ceremony What Ceremony If hee vnderstand the Ceremony of imposition of hands he slandereth King Edward If hee meane their blessing ofrings and Crosiers the grauitie of that sacred action may well spare them as for the solemne vnction your selues confesse it to bee accidentall Other of your Ceremonies being partly superfluous partly superstitious the wisedome of our Church hath discreetly and religiously pared away establishing
Hitherto of the circumstances now we come to the deposition it selfe CHAP. II. The Deposition of the Bishops iustified by the example of Salomon deposing Abiathar PHIL. IN a lawfull Deposition there must be sufficient authority proceeding vpon a iust and sufficient cause Now let me aske you by what authoritie were the old Bishops deposed ORTHOD. And I might aske you by what authoritie Salomon deposed Abiathar PHIL. You are still telling vs of Salomon and Abiathar If a king depriued this high Priest an other high Priest that is Iehoiada depriued Queene Athalia both of her kingdome and life ORTHOD. Q. Athalia No Queene sir by your leaue Ioas the true heire of the kingdome was then aliue and he was the true King by right of inheritance therefore she was no Queene but a wicked vsurper Your Defence of Catholicks might teach you so much which calleth her A pretenced Queene and saith That she vsurped the kingdome Yet behold with what blindnesse and giddines they are stricken which traiterously oppose themselues against their Prince and countrey Cardinall Allen is not ashamed to bring the example of Iehoiada deposing Athalia that vsurping and pretenced Queene to proue that the Pope hath authoritie to depose lawfull Princes Neither did Iehoiada this as being high Priest but whatsoeuer he did in this case he might haue done it though he had not bene high Priest For Iehosheba his wife was daughter to king Iehoram and sister to king Ahazia who was father to Ioas and consequently she was aunt to King Ioas So Iehoiada her husband was of the next alliance that the yong King had Yea and when Athalia like a bloodie Tyger murthered the kings seed Iehosheba the wife of Iehoiada conueyed away her nephew Ioas out of the middest of the kings sonnes which were massacred and hid him and his nurse in a chamber and kept them close 6. yeeres in the House of the Lord. So Iehoiada by Gods prouidence was made Protector of the Kings person yea and when the time came wherein he thought fit to disclose him he first acquainted the Fathers of Israel and the Captaines and so proceeded with their consent Therefore what did hee herein but protect the person age innocencie and title of his Lord and Soueraigne whereto he was bound by the Law of Nature and Nations Therefore when you bring this to proue the Popes Supremacie you mistake the matter you cannot shew vs in Scripture where euer a Priest deposed a lawfull Prince The Kings of Israel were all of them idolaters and so were 14. of the Kings of Iuda yet not one Priest or Prophet did so much as euer offer to depose any one of them but we shew you in Scripture this plaine example where Salomon the Prince remoued Abiathar the lawfull Priest PHIL. IT is one thing to relate the actions of kings and another thing to approue the authoritie ORTHOD. Did the Spirit of God thinke you relate this onely as an Historian and not approue the action or dare you accuse Salomon as proceeding in this case without authoritie If Salomon had no authoritie to depose Abtathar then there must needs be a nullitie in the Deposition For how can any Iudiciall action be of validitie when there is no authoritie in the Agent If the Deposition were a nullitie then Abiathar still retained the true right title and interest to be high Priest But what could there be two high Priests at one time PHIL. Surely no for though S. Luke say that the word of the Lord came vnto Iohn when Annas and Caiaphas were high Priests yet we must not thinke that they were both high Priests in equall authoritie at once For the word Summus Sacerdos or princeps Sacerdotum is taken three wayes First whereas the Priests were diuided into 24. Orders the chiefe of each Order was called Princeps Sacerdotum The Prince of the Priests or high Priest Secondly there was a Colledge of 72. Seniours which was called Synedrin the first or chiefe whereof was also called The Prince of the Priests or high Priest Thirdly it is taken both most properly and most vsually for him that had the first and chiefest place of all to whom the other Princes of the Priests were subiect Now Baronius thinketh that S. Luke called Annas an high Priest because he was both the Prince and highest of his Order and also the Prince and highest of the Synedrin but Caiaphas in his iudgement was called high Priest because he was simply and absolutely highest of all in which sence there can be but one high Priest at once nor euer was Vnum tantummodo non duos simul ante post haec tempora summum Sacerdotem penes Iudaeos fuisse certum exploratumque habeatur That is It is certaine and a tried trueth that there was one onely high Priest among the Iewes not two at once both before and after these times speaking of the time of Annas and Caiaphas Hence Cardinall Bellarmine with other of our learned diuines doe commonly conclude that As there was but one visible gouernour in the Church of the old Testament so there should bee but one in the Church of the New ORTHOD. If there could be but one high Priest at one time and Abiathar notwithstanding that hee was put from the possession still retained the true right title and interest to be high Priest then Sadok was not a lawfull high Priest but an intruder vpon another mans right what say you to this PHIL. It were hard to call Sadok an intruder for Sadok idem est quod iustus reuera fuit Sadok nomine factis that is Sadok doth signifie iust and indeed he was iust both in name and deeds ORTHO If Sadok were no intruder but a lawfull high Priest then Abiathar ceased to bee high Priest for you say there could not bee two at once If Abiathar ceased to bee high Priest then the place was lawfully voide but how was it void Not by death for Abiathar was still aliue not by resignation or voluntary cessation for wee finde no such matter How then no other reason can with reason bee imagined but onely because hâ—e was deposed by Salomon If the place were iustly and lawfully voide by vertue of this deposition then it must needes bee a lawfull deposition and consequently it must bee done by lawfull authority For if the deposer had no authority then could not the deposition bee lawfull wherefore as you confesse that Sadok was lawfull high Priest so you must likewise confesse that Salomon in casting out Abiathar and placing Sadok had lawfull authority PHIL. WHat if he had was he not a Prophet as well as a King ORTHO All the bookes of the old Testament are called by the name of Prophecy because they prophecied of Iesus Christ therefore the pen men thereof which did speake as they were moued by the holy ghost amongst which was
hoc regno Angliae quam alium quemuis externum Episcopum i. At the length we all agreed with one minde and one heart vpon this conclusion to wit That the Bishop of Rome hath not any greater iurisdiction giuen him of God in holy Scripture ouer this kingdome of England then any other forraine Bishop And Bellarmine himselfe telleth vs out of Cheynie the Carthusian Monke that in the yeere 1535. there was a Parliament wherein it was Enacted That all should renounce the Pope and all other forraine powers and acknowledge the King to be head of the Church vpon their oath Thus it is manifest that the Bishops and Clergie did then both approue the Title and take the oath which Bishops were such as your selues commend to bee inferiour to none in Europe for vertue and learning And truely excepting their opinions in Religion wherein they were caried away with the streame of the time it cannot be denied but that generally they were very well learned Erasmus inuited into England by William Warham Archbishop of Canterbury when he had considered what difference there was betweene the Bishops of England and other Nations he published to the world in Print That onely England had learned Bishops Moreouer most of these learned Bishops did openly in the Pulpit at Pauls-Crosse defend the Kings Title and sundry of them by their published writings maintained the same The selfe-same oath was taken againe in the â—aigne of K. Edward PHIL. They changed their minds in the dayes of Q. Mary ORTHOD. Very true But their inconstancie cannot abolish the soliditie of their former confession and though they recalled their opinions yet they neuer answered their owne Arguments which remaine still in Print as a witnesse to the world that their former iudgement was grounded vpon Gods Veritie and that the Princes Title did stand with right and equitie PHIL. THese were Bishops and Synods of our owne nation onely but was there euer any learned man else-where that did approue this Title was there euer any King or Queene Christian or Heathen Catholicke or Hereticke in all the world beside before our age that did practise challenge or accept it ORTHOD. Looke into the godly Kings of Iuda Looke into the proceedings of Christian Emperours Constantine Gratian Theodosius and such like Looke into the Lawes of Charles and Lodowicke and you shall see that they practised as much as euer we ascribed to the Queene in this oath When the Councell of Ephesus by the packing of Dioscorus had allowed the cursed opinion of Eutyches and deposed Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople Pope Leo vpon this occasion wrote thus vnto the Emperour Theodosius Behold most Christian and reuerend Emperour I with the rest of my fellow Bishops make supplication vnto you That all things may stand in the same state in which they were before any of these Iudgements vntill a greater number of Bishops may be gathered out of the whole world Who made this supplication Pope Leo a holy and learned Pope To whom To the Emperour Theodosius For what That the Emperour would command not intreat but command So this is an action of Royall authoritie What should he command That all things might stand in their former state What things meaneth he The highest mysteries of Religion concerning the Natures and person of Christ. But what is it to stand in the former state That it might be lawfull for all men so to iudge and speake of these holy Mysteries as they did before the springing vp of the Eutychian Heresie for then they held the Trueth according to the Apostolicke faith And this he beseecheth the Emperour to command notwithstanding the contrary determination of the Councell of Ephesus The second Councell of Ephesus which apparantly subuerted the faith cannot rightly bee called a Councell which your Highnes for very loue to the Trueth will make voyd by your Decree to the contrary most glorious Emperour I therefore earnestly request and beseech your Maiestie by our Lord Iesus Christ the founder and guider of your Kingdome That in this Councell of Chalcedon which is presently to be kept you will not suffer the Faith to be called in question which our blessed Fathers preached being deliuered vnto them from the Apostles Neither permit such things as haue bene long since condemned by them to be freshly reuiued againe but that you will rather command That the Constitutions of the ancient Nicene Councell may stand in force the interpretation of Hereticks being remooued Here the Pope ascribeth to the Emperour power to ratifie and establish those Councels which are according to the Scripture and to disanull those whose determinations are contrary to the Scripture Yea he acknowledgeth that the Emperour hath authoritie to inhibite and restraine Generall Councels that they call not the Trueth of God in question Which the Emperour Martian practised entring the Councell of Chalcedon in his owne person and forbidding the Bishops to auouch any thing concerning the birth of our Sauiour otherwise then was contained in the Nicene Creed Moreouer when the Councell of Chalcedon was concluded Pope Leo wrote thus againe to the Emperour Because I must by all meanes obey your pietie and most Religious will I haue willingly giuen my consenting sentence to those Synodall Constitutions which concerning the confirmation of the Catholicke faith and condemnation of Hereticks pleased me very well The Emperour required the Pope to subscribe And he cheerefully did so Protesting that for his part he must by all meanes obey the Princes will in those cases Now tell me whether the Pope did not acknowledge the Emperour and the Emperour shew himselfe to be Supreame gouernour ouer all persons euen in causes Ecclesiasticall AS the Emperour Martian did practise this Supremacie so the Emperour Basill did challenge the Title when he said in the Councel of Constantinople That the gouernment of the vniuersall Ecclesiasticall Ship was committed vnto him by the Diuine prouidence PHIL. The words are thus in Surius In exordio Synodi ita locutus est Basilius Cum diuina benignissima prouidentia nobis gubernacula vniuersalis Nauis commisisset c. that is In the beginning of the Synod thus said Basilius the Emperor when the diuine and most benigne prouidence had committed vnto vs the gouernment of the vniuersall ship c. Where by vniuersall ship is meant ciuill administration not Ecclesiasticall as Surius hath well obserued ORTHO Binius relating the acts of the councell telleth how the Emperours Epainagnosticum was read in the councell in these words Diuina clementique prouidentia gubernacula Ecclesiasticae nâ—uis vobis committente that is The diuine and gracius prouidence of God committing vnto you the gouernment of the Ecclesiasticall ship Where you see that he speaketh of the Ecclesiasticall ship PHIL. To whom was the gouernment of the ship committed Vobis to you that is to the Bishops what is this to the Emperour ORTH. Indeed
hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
declaring that euery thing requisite and materiall was done as precisely in her Maiesties time as euer before Thirdly they confirme againe the booke of Common prayer with the forme thereunto annexed enacting that all persons that then had beene or afterwards should be made ordered or Consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priests and Ministers of Gods holy word and Sacraments or Deacons after the forme and order herein prescribed were by authoritie thereof declared and enacted to be Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers and Deacons rightly made ordered and Consecrated any Statute Law Canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding Whereby it is euident that the Parliament did not make them Bishops but being in very deed true Bishops by lawfull Consecration that honourable court did declare and enact them so to be But what say the Papists to all this When they cannot infringe their Consecration for a poore reuenge they call our Religion Parliament Religion and our Bishops Parliament Bishops PHIL. If you will needs haue your matters seeme to depend of your Parliament let vs not be blamed if we call it Parliament Relgion Parliament Gospel Parliament faith ORTHOD. It is a marueile that you said not a Parliament God and a Parliament Christ. Might not we say as well that in Q. Maries time you had a Parliament Masse and a Parliament Pope Was it lawfull for Q. Mary with her Parliament to subiect the kingdome to the Pope and his Canons and was it not lawfull for Q. Elizabeth with her Parliament to submit themselues to Christ and his Gospel Indeed you haue a spite against the Prince and Parliament because they expelled the Pope aduanced true Religion and defended the Preachers and Ministers thereof neither against the persons onely but against the very place wherein the Banner of Iesus Christ was so gloriously displayed A French Historian speaking of the bloody Massacre saith Wise men which were not addicted to the Protestants part seeking all maner of excuse for that fact did notwithstanding thinke that in all Antiquitie there could not be found an example of like crueltie But the English Powder-plot doeth so farre exceed the French Massacre that there is no degree of comparison this cannot be patternd or paraleld It was of such a transcendencie that all the diuels may seeme to haue holden a blacke conuocation in Hell and there to haue concluded such a sulphurious and Acheronticall deuice as was neuer heard of since the world began But the Lord of Heauen did so strangely reueale it as though the birds of the aire had caried the voyce and that which hath wings had declared the matter As for the chiefe instruments thereof the Rauens of the valleys did plucke out their eyes and the yong Eagles did eate them Wherefore if you will not beleeue vs disputing for Religion yet beleeue God himselfe with his owne right hand and with his holy arme defending our Prince and State our Church and Ministerie and that very House wherein the Standard of the Gospel was aduanced maugre the malice of all the diuels in hell All glory be to thee O Lord for this thy vnspeakeable mercie still protect and defend them that Israel may be glad and thy seruant Iacob reioyce PHIL. IF you can iustifie your Bishops produce their Consecrations make it appeare to the world when by whom and how they were Consecrated beginning with the first which was made in the Queenes time That is with Matthew Parker who did beare the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie ORTHOD. You learned this disdainefull speach of Nicholas Sanders who dedicated his rocke of the Church to that reuerend Archbishop in this vnreuerend maner To the right worshipfull Master Doct. Parker bearing the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie Wherein to let passe that right worshipfull and right scornefull title he doeth not stile him Archbishop but bearing the name of Archbishop As though our Bishops were Bishops onely in name But what can you say against him PHIL. I would faine learne of you the place where he was Consecrated I haue read that Maximus was consecrated in the house of a minstrell and it seemeth that Matthew Parker was Consecrated in a Tauerne For doct Kellison saith That hee heard it credibly reported that some of your new Superintendents were made Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheape A fit Church for such a Consecration and it is most likely that Matthew Parker was one of them because he was the first ORTHOD. This of the Nagge 's head doeth call to my remembrance Pope Iohn the 12. who ordained a Deacon in a stable amongst his horses A fit sanctuary for such a Saint Neither is it a tale or fable as yours is but a story Chronicled by Luitprandus who is and euer will be esteemed a learned Historian notwithstanding that Baronius goeth about to discredit him as hee doeth all other writers that make against him And Luitprandus groundeth himselfe not vpon flying reports as Kellison and you doe but vpon two witnesses the one a Bishop the other a Cardinall Iohn bishop of Narnium in Italy and Iohn Cardinall Deacon who did testifie in a Romane Councell in the presence of Otho the Emperour Se vidisse illum Diaconum ordinasse in equorum stabulo i. That they themselues did see him with their owne eyes ordaine a Deacon in a stable of horses But whereas you say that Kellison heard this credibly reported I must tell you that you are very forward in spreading false reports against the Protestants It is credibly reported at Rome that wee in England haue wrapped some Papists in beares skinnes and baited them with dogges That wee inclose dormise in basons and lay them to the sides of the Catholickes to eate out their bowels That wee binde them to mangers and feed them with hay like horses These are shining lies fit Carbuncles for the Popes Miter Neither doe they report them onely but Print them and paint them and publish them with the Popes priuiledge They need a priuiledge which tell such glorious lies This of the Nagge 's head though it goe currant at Rome and bee blazed for a trueth through the world by men of your rancke is cousine germaine to the former as appeareth by the Records of the Archbishopricke which declare that he was consecrated in Capella infra manerium suum de Lambhith That is in the Chappell within his manor of Lambhith Thus you see the falsehood of this fable which was deuised to no other purpose but onely to make our Ministery and Religion seeme odious to all men Is not this strange dealing for men that make such great ostentation of sinceritie and grauitie But for my owne part I doe not maruaile at it your proceedings are but answerable to your doctrines For you teach That an officious lye is but a veniall sin And againe That the Church of Rome is the holy mother Church Therefore to whom should kinde offices rather be performed
vide 18 Edmund Grindall vide 3. Edwin Sands vide 11. 13 Rob. Horne cons. 16. Feb. 1560. by Mathew Parker vide 4. Edmund Grindall v. 3. 14 Tho. Young Cons. 21. Ian. 1559. by Math. Parker vide 4. Edmund Grindall v. 3. Ioh. Hodgskins in the time of H. 8. 15 Rich. Cox with Edm. Grindall v. 3. 16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cons. 24. Mar. 1559. by Mathew Parker vide 4 17 N. Bullinghā cons. 21 Ian. 1559 by Mathew Parker v. 4 Edm. Grindall v. 3 Richard Cox vide 15 Iohn Hodgskins 18 Ioh. Iewell cons. 21 Ian. 1559 by Mat. Parker v. 4 Edm. Grindal v. 3 Richard Cox v. 15 Io. Hodgskins 21 Iohn Young Consecrated 16. Mar. 1577. by Edmund Grindall vide 3 Iohn Elmer vide 10 Iohn Iewell vide 18 22 Ant Rud Consecrated 9. Iun. 1594. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Iohn Young vide 21 23 Richard Fletcher Cons 14. Dec 1589. by Iohn VVhitgift vide 2 Iohn Elmer vide 10 Iohn Young vide 21 24 Iohn Bullingham Cons 5. Sep 1581. by Edmund Grindall vide 3 Iohn Elmer vide 10 Iohn Young vide 21 25 Richard Vaughan Cons 25. Ianuary 1595. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Richard Fletcher vide 23 Iohn Young vide 21 26 Anthony Watson Cons 15. August 1596. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Iohn Young vide 21. Richard Vaughan vide 25 27 Thomas Bilson conse 13. Iune 1596. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Richard Fletcher vide 3 28 William Day consecrated 25. Ianuary 1595. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Richard Fletcher vide 23 Iohn Young vide 21 PHIL. These are domesticall testimonies of your owne neither doe I know whether they be true ORTH. The records alleadged are of such high credit and reputation that they cannot possibly be infringed As for the maine point whereupon all the rest dependeth that is the Consecration of Archbishop Parker as it was solemnly performed in a great assembly so it was published in print in his owne time when all things were in fresh memorie And though some of his spitefull and bitter enemies did then scornefully coment vpon his life yet the trueth of this fact they neuer called in question PHIL. Surely Orthodox I cannot but maruell if your extracts be true how the contrary opinion was so commonly receiued in the English Colledges at Rome and Rhemes ORTH. Truely Philodox that which a man wisheth hee is willing to beleeue the mind sophisticate with malice is ready vpon euery light occasion to imagine the worst yea and somtimes to blaze that for certaine which hath neither shew nor shadow of truth Yet these vaine surmises you receiue for oracles and deliuer one to another by the holy hand of tradition wherein you glory as in an vnanswerable argument So did your fellowes at Framlingham so did Hart in the conference with Doctour Rainolds but when hee had heard his answere iustifying our Bishops by authentical records he would needes haue that whole point left out of the conference saying he would not presse him with it and confessed hee thought that no such thing could haue beene shewed and that himselfe had beene borne in hand otherwise Now Philodox as he was deluded so are you but as he receiued satisfaction so I hope will you THE FOVRTH BOOKE VVHERIN IS INTREATED of Episcopall Iurisdiction CHAP. I. Whence the Bishops of England receiue their iurisdiction PHIL. THough it were graunted that the Bishops of England haue Canonicall Consecration yet it will not follow that they are perfect and complete Bishops For whence haue they their Iurisdiction ORTH. Partly from Christ and partly from the Prince PHIL. From the Prince how can this bee Is Episcopall Iurisdiction of the same nature with the Princely ORTHOD. Betweene the Regall and Episcopall there are many differences but it shall bee sufficient for our present purpose to obserue these two first the Episcopall Iurisdiction is onely spirituall or Ecclesiasticall but the Regall is both Ecclesiasticall and temporall Secondly the King doth gouerne Ecclesiasticall affaires not Ecclesiastically but regally that is with a soueraigne authoritie outwardly coercitiue with temporall punishments The Bishop handleth Ecclesiasticall matters in Ecclesiasticall manner For hee is enabled by himselfe and ex officio ordinario not onely to minister the word and Sacraments but also to performe other holy and eminent actions as for example to ordaine Ministers and to inflict spirituall censures vpon the offendours namely the sentence of excommunication and againe to absolue and restore them to the Communion of Saints Which sacred offices our Church ascribeth not vnto the person of the Prince neither did our Kings or Queenes euer practise them For regall Iurisdiction consisteth not in a ministeriall power nor personall performance of such things but in an outward supreame commanding authoritie as was before declared out of the admonition annexed to the Queenes iniunctions an acte of Parliament and the Articles of Religion Wherefore as it was not lawfull for the Kings of Iudah to take vpon them the Priestly office to burne incense or offer sacrifice and yet they might command the Priestes euen in these things to doe their dutie as it was prooued before by many examples so it belongeth not to the Prince to minister the word and Sacraments to ordaine or excommunicate yet being supreame gouernour ouer all persons and in all causes within his owne dominions hee may make lawes and command that these things bee done by such persons and in such manner as is agreeable to the blessed will of God Iustinian made a lawe that no Bishops nor Priestes should separate any man from the holy Communion before the cause were declared for which the holy Canons command him so to doe inacting there-withall that if any were otherwise excommunicated he should be absolued by a greater Priest and restored to the Communion of Saints When Maximus Bishop of Salonae had incurred Ecclesiasticall censures Pope Gregory the Great did release them secundum iussiones serenissimi Domini imperatoris i. according to the Commandements of his most gracious lord the emperour Which commanding authoritie as Pope Greg. did acknowledge in the Prince so some of your own men ascribe it euen to an Abbot or an Abbatesse Tabiena Armilla scribunt c. i. Tabiena and Armilla write after Panormitane Astensis and others that an Abbatesse may command such Priests as are subiect vnto her to excommunicate her rebellious obstinate Nuns or absolue the same so that the Priests shall be bound to obey her Which kinde of spirituall iurisdiction you giue to a woman not only delegated but ordinary according to the common opinion of the Canonists Canonistae volunt c. i. The Canonists are of this mind that the dignitie of Prelacie and excellencie of office may giue to Ecclesiasticall women spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which they may inioy not onely by right delegated and committed vnto them but also by ordinary Stephanus de Aluin inclineth to the same opinion Dicendum
both the outward court by excommunications absolutions dispensations calling generall councels c. and the court of conscience by forgiuing and retaining sinnes In a word in these keyes all Ecclesiasticall power was comprehended and giuen vnto Peter ORTHOD. The keyes were giuen to the rest of the Apostles as well as to Peter for the occasion of these words was a question of Christ proposed to al his Apostles whom say you that I am this question was answered by Peter Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Wherupon Saint Austin obserueth that Peter alone made answer for all the Apostles and his obseruation is according to the Scriptures which testifie that Peter before this time had answered in the name of them all VVe beleeue and know that thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Now as Peter answered one for all so Christ said to Peter and in him to them all I will giue you the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen Thus the Fathers in terpret the place Austin Peter receiued the keyes together with them al Ierome they did all receiue the keyes Origen Christs promise of building his Church of giuing the keyes of binding and loosing made as to Peter only was common to all Hilarie They obtained the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Ambrose VVhat is said to Peter is said to the Apostles This consent of Fathers should ouer ballance your opinion by the Councell of Trent And here I might iustly returne Campians flourish vpon you Patres admiseris captus es excluseris nullus es If you admit the Fathers you are catched If you exclude them you are no body Indeed my Masters you make the world beleeue that you will be iudged by the Fathers but when it comes to the tryall you commonly forsake them the Fathers must be pretended for a fashion but the holy Father of Rome is the very needle and compasse whereby you saile PHIL. WE confesse that all receiued the keyes but Christ gaue them to Peter immediatly to the rest by Peter so all power both of order and iurisdiction proceedeth from Peter ORTHO Let Bellarmine himselfe iudge the cause betweene vs who proueth by foure arguments That the Apostles receiued their iurisdiction immediately from Christ. First by these words of Christ himselfe As my Father sent me so send I you which exposition he strengtheneth by the authorities of Chrysostom Theophylact Cyrill and Cyprian by the euidence whereof he affirmeth that the same thing was giuen to the Apostles by these words I send you which was promised to Peter by these words I will giue thee the keyes and afterward deliuered by these words Feed my sheepe and addeth Constat autem per illa tibi dabo claues per illud pasce oues intelligi iurisdictionē plenissimā etiam exteriorē i It is cleare that by these words I will giue thee the keyes and by this saying feede my sheep there is vnderstood a most full iurisdiction euen in the outward Court Secondly hee proueth it because Mathias was neither elected by the Apostles nor receiued any authority by them but beeing elected by God was presently accounted amongst the Apostles And verilie saith hee if all the Apostles had their iurisdiction from Peter that should haue beene manifested most of all in Matthias Thirdly he proueth it by Saint Paul who professeth that he had his iurisdiction from Christ and thence confirmeth his Apostleship for he saith Paul an Apostle not of men or by man but by Iesus Christ And that he might declare that he receiued no authoritie from Peter or any other Apostle he saith VVhen it pleased God which had separated me from my mothers womb called me by his grace to reueale his sonne in mee that I should preach him among the Gentiles immediatly I cōmunicated not with flesh and bloud Neither came I againe to Ierusalem to thē which were Apostles before mee but I went into Arabia and turned againe into Damascus Then after three yeeres I came againe to Ierusalem to visite Peter And againe To mee those that seemed to bee something conferred nothing Fourthly because the Apostles were made onely by Christ and yet had Iurisdiction as appeareth First by Paul excommunicating the Corinthian Secondly by the same Paul making Ecclesiasticall lawes Thirdly because the Apostolick dignitie is the highest dignitie in the Church Wherefore it is euident that the rest of the Apostles receiued not their Iurisdiction from Peter but from Christ. PHIL. CHrist promised the keyes to Peter onely therefore in this respect he must haue a preheminence aboue the rest ORTH. Whatsoeuer Christ promised that hee performed but he performed not the keyes to Peter with any preheminence aboue his fellows but alike to all therefore hee did not promise them to Peter by way of preheminence but to him with the rest PHIL. Did he not say I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose c. So they were promised to Peter in the singular number ORTHO Though these wordes bee of the singular number yet they were not spoken to Peter as he was Peter or a singular person but to Peter representing the person of the Church as the Fathers say according to the Scripture For when he said I will giue thee the keyes he added immediately by way of explication and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon earth it shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon earth it shall bee loosed in heauen Vpon which wordes Bellarmine saith thus The plaine sence of these wordes I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose is this that first there is promised an authoritie or a power signified by the keyes and then the actions or office is explained by these wordes to bind and to loose So that to loose and to open to shut and to bind is altogether the same But the Lord expressed the actions of the keyes by loosing and binding not by shutting and opening that we might vnderstand that all these speeches are metaphoricall and that heauen is then opened vnto men when they are loosed from their sinnes which hindered their entrance into heauen But the power of binding and loosing was giuen to all the Apostles by Christ in these wordes whatsoeuer you shall bind on earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heauen PHIL. Cardinall Caietan thinketh that to open and to shut is of a larger extent then to bind and to loose ORTHOD. Bellarmine thinketh this more subtill then sound because there are no keyes in the Church sauing onely of Order and Iurisdiction both which are signified by the actions of binding and loosing as Caietan confesseth and Bellarmine proued before both by Fathers and Scripture PHIL. The power of binding and loosing is
deliuering the incestuous Corinthian vnto Satan by which in the iudgement of Hilarie Hierome and Anselmus followed by Bellarmine Baronius and others both of your side and ours is meant Excommunication And though some doe take it for a miraculous operation whereby the offendours were committed for a time to Satan to be tormented bodily yet they doe not deny that the Corinthian was Excommunicated Let vs therefore see by what authoritie this was done I verely saith S. Paul as absent in body but present in spirit haue determined already as though I were present that hee that hath so done this deed in the Name of our Lord Iesus Christ you being gathered together and my Spirit with you with the power of the Lord Iesus Christ be deliuered vnto Satan c. He saith not the Spirit of S. Peter but my Spirit So your visible head had neither hand nor foote in this action S. Paul acknowledgeth neither subordination to him nor deriuation of authoritie from him And as he had Iurisdiction so had Timothy and Titus to receiue accusations to command them not to teach any other doctrine or if they did to stop their mouthes All which places are to be expounded of iudiciall proceeding in the Consistory and argue a Iurisdiction in Titus and Timothy which so farre as we can learne they receiued from S. Paul and not from S. Peter Wherefore we conclude that S. Peter was not the onely fountaine vnder Christ of Spirituall iurisdiction by Law diuine but the 12. Apostles were 12. fountaines all equally deriued from Christ Iesus the Fountaine of fountaines But if Peter had any such prerogatiue by Law diuine what is that to the Pope CHAP. III. Whether the Pope succeed S. Peter in all his right by Law diuine PHIL. THe Pope is the successour of S. Peter therefore what power soeuer belonged to S. Peter belongeth to the Pope ORTHOD. Was not S. Peter an Apostle can there be succession in the Apostleship PHIL. Doctour Stapleton teacheth that of the Apostleship there is no succession ORTH. Why then do the Popes so adorne themselues with Apostolicke titles his See apostolicke his Legat Apostolicke his pardon Apostolicke his seale Apostolicke his Bull Apostolicke and all Apostolicke yea his office is an Apostleship causes must be heard by his Apostleship weighty matters must be reserued to his Apostleship and Bishops must visite the thresholds of the Apostles vnlesse they be dispensed withall by the Apostles that is by the Pope Yea the Rhemists affirme That certes the roome and dignity of the Pope is a continuall Apostleship And of late the Pope had a title giuen of the first Euangelist and of the 13. Apostle as is related and approued by Baronius But we hope that God wil raise such Angels in our Church as he was in the Church of Ephesus of whom it is written That he had tried them who say they are apostles and are not and had found them liars But if the Pope doe not succeed S. Peter in the Apostleship how is he then his successour PHIL. Not in that he was an Apostle but in that hee was the ordinarie Pastour of the whole Church ORTHOD. If not as an Apostle then the Pope succeedeth him not in all his right But haue not other Apostles successours as well as Peter PHIL. No For their authoritie was extraordinary his ordinary whereupon it followeth That theirs was temporary and died with their persons his perpetuall and liueth with his successours ORTHOD. This you say oft but proue neuer For the clearing whereof we must consider that in the Apostles some things were extraordinary some things ordinary They had 4. extraordinary prerogatiues immediate vocation by Christ himselfe vnlimited Commission ouer all Nations infallible direction both in preaching and writing and power to worke Miracles All which were necessary for the first planting of Churches but were not conueyed to posteritie by succession Other things they had which were necessary for the Church in all future ages in which they had successours They had power to minister the word and Sacraments wherein euery Presbyter succeedeth them They ordained Ministers executed censures and other things belonging to the gouernment of the Church wherein euery Bishop succeedeth them So in the latter the rest haue successours as well as Peter In the former as the rest had no successours so neither had Peter PHIL. Yes the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him in the gouernment of the whole world ORTHO You dare not say that this power in Peter was extraordinary for then it could not go by succession if it were ordinarie in Peter why not in the rest seeing as hath beene proued Christ gaue as ample commission in as ample words to the rest as to Peter But if wee should faigne that Peter had such Monarchicall iurisdiction by what law shall the Pope succeed him in it PHIL. The succession of the Bishop of Rome into the Popedome of Peter is of Christs institution and therefore by Law diuine ORTHOD. Of Christs institution where or when if you alleadge these words feed my sheepe they were spoken onely to Peter yet so that the substance of the precept was not proper to him but common to all And if wee should imagine that Christ did institute a monarchy personally in Peter how commeth it to be locall This certainely cannot be Christs institution because he nameth no place PHIL. It was in Peters power neuer to haue chosen to himselfe any particular See but to haue continued as he did the first fiue yeeres And then after his death neither the Bishop of Rome nor the Bishop of Antioch had succeeded but hee whom the Church had chosen ORTHOD. Then you make it locall by Peters choise and not by Law diuine and if it be local is it tied to the Bishop of Rome by Law diuine PHIL. Was not Saint Peter Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. So men say but can you proue it by Law diuine PHIL. Will you deny a History so famously recorded by Eusebius and other ancient authors ORTH. Not I but now you ground vpon humane history and not vpon Law diuine And as the histories say that he was Bishop of Rome so they say he was Bishop of Antioch before he was Bishop of Rome PHIL. It was in his power to haue continued at Antioch and then without doubt the Bishop of Antioch had beene his successor but because he translated his chaire fixed it at Rome there died thence it comes to passe that the Bish. of Rome succeedeth him ORTH. If the succession depend vpon the fixing of Saint Peters chaire at Rome what shal be said of those Popes which kept at Auinion in France and neuer came at Rome Moreouer this is to build vpon the fact of Saint Peter and not vpon Law diuine PHIL. It is not improbable that the Lord did expresly commaund that Peter should so fix his seat
at Rome that the Romane Bishop might absolutely succeed him ORT. This is your owne coniecture and not Law diuine PHIL. Pope Marcellus saith that Peter came to Rome iubente Domino the Lord so commaunding ORTH. This is your owne tradition and not Law diuine And as your succession so your monarchicall iurisdiction cannot be proued to be by Law diuine This was well knowne to the Fathers of the first generall councell who confined the Bishop of Rome as well as the Bishop of Alexandria ascribing his patriarchical power vnto custome not to Law diuine This was likewise knowne to the Fathers of the second and fourth generall councels who ascribe the preheminence of the Bishop of Rome to the honour of the Imperiall City for so the Fathers of the fourth councell interpret the second and affirme it themselues Antiquae Romae throno quòd vrbs illa imperaret iure patres priuilegia tribuere eadem consideratione moti 150. Dei amantissimi Episcopi sanctissimo nouae Romae throno aequalia priuilegia tribuêre rectè iudicantes vrbem quae imperio senatu honorata sit aequalibus cum antiquissima regina Roma priuilegijs fruatur etiam in Rebus Ecclesiasticis non secus ac illam extolli ac magnifieri secundam post illam existentem The Fathers did rightly giue priuiledges to the throne of old Rome because the City then raigned and the 150. Bishops most earnest louers of God assembled in the second generall councell which was the first at Constantinople mouedâ—y the same consideration gaue equall priuileges to the most holy throne of new Rome rightly iudging that the City which was honoured both by the Empire and the Senate and enioyeth equall priuileges with Rome the most ancient Queene of Cities should bee extolled and magnified euen in things Ecclesiasticall no otherwise then Rome being the second in order after it Thus they hold the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome to bee not Monarchicall because they giue equall priuileges to Constantinople but Patriarchicall which they referre not to the Institution of Christ nor to Peters fact nor to the succession in Peters chaire but to the honour of the Imperiall City in that it was Imperiall therefore as Binius confesseth they hold it to be by Law humane and not diuine PHIL. Baronius Bellarmine and Binius doe tell you that this Canon was not confirmed by Pope Leo. ORTHO Eusebius Bishop of Doryleum did testifie the contrarie openly in the councell in these words Sponte subscripsi quoniam hanc regulam sanctissimo Papae in vrbe Româ relegi praesentibus clericis Constantinopolitanis eamque suscepit i. I haue subscribed willingly because I read ouer euen this Canon to the most holy Pope in the City of Rome in the presence of the Clerkes of Constantinople and hee embraced it But let vs imagine that hee did not embrace it yet I referre this point to any indifferent iudge whether wee should rather beleeue sixe hundred Bishops and vpward speaking vprightly what they thinke and grounding their iudgement vpon the decrees of former generall councels then one man with a few flattering fauorites speaking partially in his owne cause PHIL. This Canon was not made by the councel but Anatolius with the Easterne Bishops made it secretly and by stealth after the Iudges and the Popes Legate were gone out of the Councell ORTHOD. The Church of Constantinople beeing desirous to propose this matter Entreated the Popes Legats to communicate with them in the handling of it who refused because the Pope had giuen charge to the contrary then they made relation of it to the Iudges who commaunded the holy councell then present to looke into it which they did accordingly therefore though it pleased the Iudges to depart yet the councell proceeded by authority from the Iudges And the Popes Legats might haue staied if it had pleased themselues Moreouer The Decrees were read at the next meeting openly in the councell before the iudges who ratified them by their sentence and all the councell cried and redoubled againe and againe that the sentence was iust PHIL. The Popes Legats interposed a contradiction affirming that the Apostolike See ought not to be debased ORTHOD. The Iudges notwithstanding would not relent but concluded the whole businesse thus Tota Synodus approbauit i. The whole Synod hath approuedit wherefore it was the iudgement of the whole Synod that the Popes iurisdiction is not by Law diuine CHAP. IIII. Of the Election of Bishops in the primitiue Church before there were any Christian Princes PHIL. IF wee consider the practise of the Christian world in primitiue antiquitie which was nearest to the fountaine and knew best the meaning of Law Diuine wee shall finde that they were either elected or at least confirmed by the Pope or by authoritie from the Pope either expresly or by his permission or conniuencie and so receiued their iurisdiction ORTHOD. To examine these points in order let vs begin with the election of Ministers concerning which we find three varieties in the new Testament The first by lots the second by voyces the third by the spirit of prophesie Matthias was chosen by lots the Deacons by voyces Timothy and others by the spirit of prophesie For as Chrysostome saith In those dayes the pastours were made by prophesie what is by prophecie by the holy Ghost as Saul was shewed by prophecie when hee lay hid among the stuffe as the holy Ghost said separate vnto me Paul and Barnabas so was Timothie chosen Theodoret thou hast not thy calling from men but thou receiuedst that order by diuine reuelation Oecumenius by reuelation of the spirit Timothy was chosen of Paul to bee a Disciple and ordained a Bishop This kind of election seemeth to bee vsuall in the Apostles times and to haue continued so long as the gift of prophecie and discerning of spirits remained Now of these three the first and third were by God himselfe the second by all the faithfull This is all wee finde in Scripture yet here is no precept but onely example Wherefore it seemeth that the Lord hath left this point as a thing indifferent to bee ordered by the discretion of the Church so all things be done honestly and in order From the Scripture if wee come to the ages following they referred it to the Clergie and people PHIL. To the Clergy I grant by the conniuencie of the Pope but in the Councell of Laodicea elections of B. are forbidden to be made by the people ORTH. The Councell in that place nameth Priestes not Bishops and if vnder the name of Priestes you comprehend Bishops yet you must consider that it being onely prouinciall could not impose lawes to the whole Christian world That Bishops were chosen by popular elections after this Councell may appeare by the great Nicen Councell assembled as Baronius thinketh six yeeres after the Councell of
Laodicea in their Synodall Epistle to the Church of Alexandria and to the beloued brethren of Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis If peraduenture any prelate of the Church doe fall asleepe let it bee lawfull for such as haue beene receiued into the Communion of the Church a litle before to succeed into the place of him that is dead if so bee that they shall seeme to be worthy and if the people shall choose them yet so notwithstanding that the voyce and as it were the seale of the Bishop of the Catholicke Church of Alexandria bee added thereunto And that they inioyed the same libertie before the Nicen Councell is cleare by Saint Cyprian saying The people obeying the Lords commandements and fearing God ought to separate themselues from a sinfull ruler and not to intermingle themselues with the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest seeing they especially haue power either to elect worthy Priests or to reiect vnworthy PHIL. I answere with Pamelius that the people are saide to haue power to elect or reiect because they gaue testimonie of the conuersation of the parties A thing so notoriously knowen that the Emperour Alexander Seuerus as Lampridius reporteth when he would send any rulers to the prouinces or make gouernours proposed their names exhorting the people that if they could obiect any crime they should make iust proofe and vsed to say that it were a shame not to doe that in the rulers of the Prouinces which Christians did in proclaming their Priests that were to be ordained ORTHOD. Was their testimony onely required and not their consent why then saith Leo Teneatur subscriptio clericorum honoratorum testimonium ac ordinis consensus plebis that is let the subscription of the Clergie be obtained the testimony of the honourable and consent of order and people PHIL. It is one thing if the consent of the people bee required in ordination and another if their proper suffrages ORTHOD. But Saint Cyprian calleth it a iust and lawfull ordination which hath beene examined Omnium suffragio by the suffrage or voyce of all that is both of Clergie and people which he exemplifieth in the ordination of Cornelius Bishop of Rome in these wordes Cornelius was made Bishop by the iudgement of God and his Christ by the testimonie of almost all the Clergy by the suffrage of the people which was then present and by the Colledge of ancient Priestes and good men Yea the suffrages of the people are a thing so clearly set downe in antiquitie that Pamelius himselfe cannot deny them wee deny not saith hee the olde rite of electing Bishops by which they are wont to bee chosen the people being present yea rather by the voyces of the people for that it was obserued in Africk is euident by the election of Eradius the successour of S. Austin Concerning which there is extant his 110. Epistle In Grecce in the age of Chrysostome as appeareth by his third booke of Priesthood In Spaine by this place of Cyprian and Isidor in his booke of offices In France by the epistle of Celestinus At Rome by those things which were spoken before vpon the epistle to Antonianus yea euery where else by the 87. epistle of Leo and that this custome continued vntill Gregory the first appeareth by his epistle yea euen vnto the times of the Emperours Charles and Lodowick as it is manifest enough out of the first booke of their chapters and the same Pamelius in another place saith the manner of chusing the Bishop of Rome was often changed first Saint Peter chose his successours Linus Cletus and Clemens then Anacletus and the rest vnto the second Schisme betweene Damasus and Vrsicinus were created by the suffrages of the Clergie the people behold how Pamelius who a litle before interpreted the peoples elections in Cyprian as though they elected onely by way of testimonie a colde and a hungry interpretation is now forced to confesse ô the euidence of trueth that they elected by way of suffrage yea and that the Roman Bishops from Anacletus to Damasus that is from the yeere 103. to the yeere 307. were so elected Wherefore it is most true which is affirmed by our learned Bishop Presentia plebis apud Cyprianum includit testimonium de vita nec excludit suffragium de persona i. The presence of the people in Cyprian includeth a testimonie of their life and excludeth not a suffrage of their person PHIL. There are two kinds of Suffrages the former of petition consent or testimony the latter of power or authoritie the former belonges to the people the latter doth not ORTHO If one make petition giue consent or testimony is this to giue a voice or Suffrage surely this is a deluding distinction PHIL. It is said of Lucius who was intruded into the place of Peter Patriarch of Alexandria Not an assembly of Orthodox Bishops not the Suffrages of true Clergie men nor the desire of the people made him Bishop as it is commanded in the Ecclesiasticall sanctions where you see that Suffrages are ascribed to Clergy men and onely desire or petition to the people ORTHOD. In a Roman Councell holden vnder Syluester it is said that a Priest may be ordained Bishop Sâ— vota populi Cleri concurrerint if the desires of the people and Clergie concurre where you see that desires or requests are ascribed to the Clergie as well as to the people Moreouer you heard out of Cyprian that Cornelius Bishop of Rome was chosen by the testimonie of the Clergie and the Suffrages of the people PHIL. The Clergie gaue Suffrages of power and authoritie so did not the people for the Bishops were not bound to admit whomsoeuer the people required ORTHOD. Neither were the people compelled to receiue whomsoeuer the Bishops elected Pope Leo coÌ„mandeth vt nullus inuitis non petentiâ—us ordinetur that no B. be ordained to the people against their wills and not requiring it PHIL. PAmelius saith It is euident that the Suffrages onely were granted to the people and not the election which vseth to be by subscription ORTHOD. In the dayes of Gregory the great when a Bishopricke was void he vsed to admonish the Clergie and people of that citie to agree in the election which being done there was made a solemne decree strengthened with subscriptions of all and sent to the Consecrators where we must obserue these words the subscriptions of all not of the Clergie alone but of all that is of all the electours both Clergie and people wherefore the people did then chuse with the Clergie euen by Suffrages of subscription PHIL. True but this was by the Popes permission ORTH. What permission had S. Aust. from the Pope in electing Eradius his successor when he desired the people so many as could to subscribe and the people cryed fiat fiat 25. times or the people Romane armie which subscribed
Of the Election of the Bishops of Rome vnder Christian Emperours before the diuision of the Empire PHIL. THe authoritie of Emperours began to bee interposed in the election of Damasus and first of all verely onely in Schisme to pacifie vproares and so the matter was composed by Valentintan betweene Damasus and Vrsicinus By Honorius betweene Boniface and Eulalius And by King Theodoricke betweene Symmachus and Laurentius Afterward Emperours intermedled euen when there was no Schisme to preuent least peraduenture there should be vprores Yea and the matter came by little and little to that passe that Bishops elected durst not receiue Consecration without their assent ORTHOD. The first Christian Emperour was Constantine the Great conuerted according to the calculation of Baronius in the yeere of Christ 312. the second yeere of Pope Melchtades and the 7. yeere of his sitting in the Imperiall Throne In his time succeeded three Bishops of Rome Siluester Marcus and Iulius whose elections Constantine dwelling farre of permitted to be performed as in ancient maner by the Suffrages of the Clergie and people Yet what authoritie he thought himselfe to haue in such matters may appeare by these his words to Athanasius If I shall vnderstand that any man which is desirous to be partaker of the Church shal be hindered or excluded by thee I will presently send one who by my commandement shall cast thee out and giue thy place to another After Iulius succeeded Liberius Anno 352 Constantius being sole Emperour who though he intermeddled not with this Election in the West yet he interposed himselfe before that time in the East For when the people had slaine Hermogenes the Captaine in defence of Proclus he came himselfe in person to Constantinople and cast Proclus out of the Church yet he deferred saith Socrates to pronounce Macedonius Bishop because he was wonderfully incensed against him as for other reasons so because he was chosen without his aduice and counsell notwithstanding hee gaue him licence to execute his function in that Church onely wherein hee was chosen but afterward vnderstanding that Paulus was placed againe he sent one Philip to cast out Paulus and to place Macedonius Thus you see how both Constantine and Constantius interposed their authoritie before the time of Damasus And had not Valentinian done the like Damasus could hardly haue obtained the Popedome because the contrary faction was so strong AFter Damasus who continued vnder fiue Emperours Valentinian Valens Gratian Valentinian the yonger and Theodosius succeeded Siricius in the yeere of Christ 385. being the tenth yeere of Valentinian and the seuenth of Theodosius whose election was confirmed by the Emperour Valentinian as may appeare by his Epistle to Pinianus extant in the Vatican and published by Baronius PHIL. This was extraordinary by reason of Schisme but it was no ordinary matter till the dayes of Iustinian For then as Onuphrius saith After the Gothes were driuen out of Italy which happened in the yeere 553. there grew a custome by the authoritie of Pope Vigilius to wit That so soone as the Pope was dead a new election should presently be made after the ancient maner by the Clergie the Senate and people of Rome but the elected might not bee Consecrated before the Emperour of Constantinople confirmed the election and gaue licence to the Pope elected that he might be ordained and Consecrated Now if this grew by the authoritie of the Pope it doeth not argue any right originally in the Emperour but onely deriued from the Pope ORTHO A constitution was made at that time That the new elected Pope should not onely craue licence of the Emperour to be ordained but also pay him a certaine summe of money which was done to this end as Onuphrius witnesseth That the Emperour might be assured of the behauiour and conditions of the new Popes least any turbulent spirit or enemy to the Emperour beeing ordained the City of Rome and the country of Italy might reuolt from the Easterne Empire for now the authority of the Pope began to bee great by reason that the Emperour liued farre off at Constantinople But though this paying of money begun in the time of Vigilius yet the authority of the Emperor in elections was before his time as witnesseth Platina in the life of Siluerius the Predecessor of Vigilius Siluerius saith he borne in Campania hauing for his father Hormisda a Bishop was created Pope by the commandement of Theodohatus cum antea non regum sed imperatorum authoritas interueniret whereas before that time the authority not of Kings but of Emperours was interposed So hee speaketh of it as a knowne ordinary and vsuall matter Yea and Iustinian tooke it so hainously to be robbed of this right that as Platina declareth this was one of the causes why hee sent Belisarius with an army into Italy Moreouer as it was the custome of the Emperor before Vigilius so it remained long after PHIL. Indeed this Tyranny continued til the daies of Benedict the second at which time Constantine moued with the holinesse of the man sent a Sanction that from thenceforth whomsoeuer the Clergie people and Roman army should choose him they should all presently beleeue to be the true Vicar of Christ not expecting the authority either of the Emperour or of the Exarch of Italy ORTHOD. This is your fashion If the Emperor doe any thing against the Pope it is mere tyranny if the Pope doe any thing against the Emperor it is cleere libertie But you confesse that this custome preuailed from Vigilius to Benedict the second in which space were 21. Popes of thereabout all created by Imperiall authority except Pelagius the second of whoÌ„ Platina reporteth it as a strange accident that he was made Pope iniussu Principis without the Emperours commaund whereof he rendreth this reason That they could not send any man because the City was besieged and withall he affirmeth That whatsoeuer the Clergie then had done were nothing if the Emperor should not approue it wherefore Gregory the Deacon was sent to Constantinople to pacifie the Emperour Afterward when Gregory himselfe was chosen Pope Hee sent letters to the Emperor Mauritius earnestly intreating him to make voide the election of the Clergie and people but his letters being intercepted by the Gouernor of the City were torne in peeces other written to intreate the Emperour to confirme him Moreouer Platina hauing said that Seâ—erinus was confirmed in the Popedome by Isaatius the Exarch giueth this reason For then the election of the Clergie and people was counted vaine vnlesse the Emperours or their Exarehes had confirmed them And this you grant continued till Benedict the 2. but did it then cease Constantine did not absolutely refer it to the Clergy people but ioyned with them the Roman army which being for the gard of the Empire was at the Emperours command And his sonne Iustinian the yonger who presently
time of the Emperour Iustinian vsed to pay for their ordination yet he added this clause vt non debeat ordinari qui electus fuerit nisi prius decretum generale introducatur in regiam vrbem secundum antiquam Consuetudinē vt cum eorum conscientia iussione debeat ordinatio prosperari i. that the party elected ought not to be ordained vnlesse first the generall decree of his election strenthned with the subscriptions of the electors were brought into the imperial city according to the ancient custome that so the ordination might prosperously proceed with the knowledge and commandement of the Emperours Wherefore if we imbrace this sence of the Canon we may iustly say Decretum hoc iuris veteris vel restitutio vel continuatio non concessio noui 1. this decree to speak properly is either a restoring or a continuing of an ancient right not a grant of a new and consequently this was no priuiledge proceeding frō the grace and bounty of the Pope but a voluntary and ingenuous confession of the Princes right But some do follow the other sense extending the decree euen to a sole and plenare power of electing at his owne pleasure without the Clergie and people For Duarenus saith thus In ancient time the Bishop of Rome vsed not to be ordained without the consent and authoritie of the Roman Emperour and all kings vsed in a maner the same power in the Churches of their owne kingdomes yet the right of Electing was not therfore taken away from the Clergie but afterward the right of the electing the Romane Bishops was of their owne accord altogether granted and permitted to the Emperours Charles and Otho And a little after a full power of electing at his owne pleasure was granted to Charles which seemeth more probable because Theodoricke de Niem sayth the Romane people granted to him and translated vpon him all their right and power and according to their example Pope Adrian with all the Clergie people and the whole sacred Synod granted to the Emperour Charles all their right and power of electing the Pope Howsoeuer this is certaine that the Pope and Councell did ascribe vnto him if not a sole and plenary yet at least a principall and preuailing power in electing the high Bishop If we imbrace the first then so farre as they confered vpon him their owne former right it may be called a gift or grant If the latter it was no gift nor grant but an acknowledgement of the ancient right and prerogatiue of the Empire PHIL. Charles in his Chapters appointeth that elections should be free ORTHOD. This may seeme to argue that Adrian and the Councel did yeeld vnto him a plenary power yet notwithstanding hee like a gracious Prince permitted that elections should be free as in former times But what if they were free must the Prince therefore bee excluded Before the diuision of the Empire the Romanes might freely elect whom they list and yet the elected could not be Consecrated till he were approued of the Emperour so Charles might grant freedome of elections and yet reserue to himselfe his royall assent PHIL. If hee had any such power why did not he and his successours put it in practise ORTHOD. To this I will answere first in generall and then descend to some particulars In generall it appeareth that they did by these words of Nauclerus Imperator volens vti consuetudine authoritate praedecessorum suorum petebat sibi seruari ea quae priuilegijs Carolo Magno successoribus in Imperto iam per 300 annos amplius concessa obseruata fuerunt ex quibus priuilegijs licitè per inuestituram annuli virgae Episcopatus Abbatias conferebant i. The Emperour Henr. desirous to vse the custome and authoritie of his predecessors required that those priuiledges should be reserued for him which were granted to Charles the Great and to his successours in the Empire and obserued now for 300. yeeres and more By which priuiledges it was lawfull for the Emperours to conferre Bishopricks and Abbacies by inuestiture of a ring and a staffe And Matthew Paris saith That the Emperour was desirous to vse the priuiledge of his predecessours which they hadenioyed 300. yeeres vnder 60. Popes Thus much in generall PHIL. Anastasius who wrote the liues of 12. Popes succeeding Adrian deliuereth onely that they were chosen by the people and Clergie but saith nothing of the Emperours ORTHOD. Yes by your leaue he saith somewhat But if hee were silent what then Are not other Authors sufficient to witnesse it The next Pope after Adrian and the onely Pope elected in the time of Charles was Leo the third who as Gillius saith so soone as he was Consecrated sent to Charles the Great the keyes of S. Peters Church with the banner of the Citie of Rome and admonished him to send certaine selected persons which might exact the Oath of obedience of the people Was not this a resignation both of the Citie and Church into the Emperours hands Was not this an ingenuous acknowledgement that he would not hold the possession of S. Peters Church that is of the Church of Rome without his Royall assent Which he vndoubtedly obtained For afterwards when a strong faction had deposed Leo hee fled into France to Charles Who sent him back to Rome and restored him againe with great honour AFter Charles reigned his sonne Lodowick in whose time Leo died and Steuen the 4. had the place who as Baronius sheweth out of Aimonius went in person to the Emperour within two moneths of his Consecration To what end Wee may collect that out of his decree in Gratian wherein hee complaineth that the Church of Rome at the death of the Popes suffered great violence because the new Popes were Consecrated without the knowledge of the Emperour neither were the Emperours Ambassadours present as both the Canons and custome required Whereupon he decreeth that the Consecration should be praesentibus Legatis Imperialibus i. The Emperours Ambassadors being present And withall forbiddeth all men to extort any new Oathes whereby the Church may bee scandalized and the Imperiall honour diminished Wherefore it is probable that his hasty going was to excuse the matter because as it seemeth he was Consecrated without the Emperours knowledge Which is yet more likely because the next Pope Paschall being created without Imperiall authoritie sent presently to the Emperour Lodowick to excuse the matter by laying the blame vpon the Clergie and people Whereto he answered That the Clergie and people must keepe the decrees of their ancestours and admonished them hereafter to take heed not to offend the Imperiall Maiestie PHIL. If Lodowick had any such authoritie therein surely he resigned it in his Constitution concerning his donation to the Church of Rome which is partly in Gratian but fully set downe by Baronius out of the Vatican Monuments the summe whereof is that it
shall be lawfull for the Romanes to elect and Consecrate their Pope and that nothing should be required at the hands of the new Pope but onely to send Ambassadours to the Emperour to signifie his promotion and to make loue and peace betweene them ORTHOD. Indeed Platina saith That the keeper of the Library meaning Anastasius writeth that Lodowick gaue free power of Electing Bishops to Pope Pascall whereas before this time the Emperours were consulted withall about the matter If the Emperour gaue it then the Emperour had it And if Anastasius say so then he saith something of the Emperours MOreouer if Lodowick did resigne it surely his sonne Lotharius did resume it In whose time three Popes were created Sergius the 2. Leo the 4 and Benedict the 3 all by Imperiall authoritie To begin with the first Sigebert sheweth how Lotharius sent his sonne Lodowick to Rome to confirme the Election of Sergius PHIL. Ado Vionensis saith He sent him that he might haue the name or title of Emperour and that Sergius being already Pope did set the Crowne vpon his head so he was saluted Emperour and Augustus with the generall applause of all the people by which you may confute the impudencie of Sigebert the Schismaticke as Cardinall Baronius hath notably done ORTHOD. How doeth this confute it These things are not contrary but may stand well together The Emperour sent Lodowick to confirme the Pope the Pope being confirmed did Crowne Lodowick So notably doeth Baronius confute Sigebert The next was Leo at whose Election as the Romanes were not a little glad so Anastasius himselfe saith they began againe not to be a little sad because they durst not consecrate him that should be Pope without the Imperiall authoritie PHIL. When Lotharius and Lodowick did challenge to themselues the Confirmation of the Pope elected or what other right soeuer in his Election or Consecration Pope Leo resisted and so farre preuailed that they themselues consented it should not be done but according to the prescript of the Canons His decree is yet extant in these words Leo 4. to Lotharius and Lodowick Emperours It is decreed and confirmed betwixt vs and you in maner of a Couenant that the Election and Consecration of him that shal be Bishop of Rome ought to be done no otherwise then iustly and Canonically ORTHOD. Iustly and Canonically I hope you will say that S. Gregorie was Elected and Consecrated iustly and Canonically yet hee was confirmed by the Emperour Wherefore this Couenant did not disanull the Imperiall authoritie Which is most cleare in the next Pope Benedict the 3 after whose Election made by the ioynt consent of the Clergie and people Clerus cuncti proceres saith Anastasius decretum componentes proprijs manibus roborauere vt consuetudo prisca exposcit inuictissimis Lothario Ludouico destinauere Augustis i. The Clergie all the Nobles making a decree concerning their election they strengthened it by subscribing with their owne hands and as the ancient custome requireth they did appoint to send it to the most vnconquerable Emperours Lotharius and Lodowick And Platina sheweth how the Emperours Ambassadours were sent to Rome to confirme the Election After Benedict succeeded Nicholas the first who went about to infringe the Emperours authority but could not After him came Adrian the second At whose election the Emperours Ambassadours were in the City but could not haue accesse to enterpose the Emperours authority whereat they were in great indigantion PHIL. They were so but answere was made that it was done vpon this consideration as writeth VVilliam the library keeper who succeeded Anastasius Least a custome should grow of expecting the Ambassadors of Princes in the election of Popes which answer being receiued the Ambassadours were fully calmed and quieted ORTH. This were to cast oile into the fire to kindle not to quench their anger therefore it hath no probability Far more likely is the reason related by Platina That satisfaction was giuen by telling them that in such a tumult they could not rule the people So the Ambassadours went and saluted the Pope perceiuing plainely that the people and Clergie began to chalenge the whole authority in elections vnto themselues not expecting the Emperours consent Yet the Emperour shewed his authority in that so soone as hee heard of the election He wrote an Epistle commending the Romans for their worthy choise Whereupon Binius noteth in the margent Imperator approbat electionem factam i. The Emperour approoueth the election being made And the Canon of Adrian the first did stand vnrepealed till the time of Adrian the third who made a Decree That the authority of the Emperor should not be expected in the creation of the Bishop of Rome 6. PHIL. THe Church which had endured a long bondage vnder the Emperours was then set â—t liberty and enioyed the same till the time of Otho the Emperour the yeere 963. ORTHOD. Liberty doe you call call it or rather licentiousnesse which hath filled the Commonwealth with tumults the Church with monsters the world with iniquity For this is the time when as Baronius complaineth Most filthy harlots did beare all the sway at Rome This is the time when strumpets did thrust their louers into the seat of Peter This is the time when all Canons were put to silence the pontificall decrees choaked ancient traditions proscribed the old custome sacredrites and former vse of chusing the high Bishop vtterly extinguished In this time was Formosus chosen who had beene degraded by a Pope and got the Popedome by periury In this time was Steuen who tooke vp the body of Formosus out of the graue arrained it condemned it cut off the fingers and cast them into Tiber repealing his Decrees and Acts and causing those whom he ordained to bee re-ordained In this time was Romanus Theodorus and Iohn the tenth who disanulled the acts of Stephen and iustified Formosus In this time was Sergius who repealed their acts maintained Steuen condemned Formosus and cast his bodie into Tiber. This was that monster Sergius whom Baronius calleth a villen of all villens affirming that hee had a bad ingresse a worse progresse and the worst egresse And yet Pope Iohn the 12. exceeded him in all monstruous villany He polluted his owne Fathers concubine and made his pallace a stewes hee put out the eyes of his godfather gelded one of his Cardinals plaied at dice inuocating Iupiter and Venus and drunke a health to the diuell This was the monster of all monsters of whom Cardinal Turrecremata following Luitprandus saith Because his life was detestable maruelous offensiue to Christian people therefore Christ himselfe gaue out the sentence of condemnation against him For while he was abusing a certaine mans wife the diuell stroake him sodenly and so he died without repentance Loe these were the fruits
according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Moreouer his noble successours what did they When the rebell Rodolph was slaine in the field they armed the sonnes against their owne father First Conrade the◠Henry who tooke his owne father prisoner and brought him to such misery that hee was glad to begge for victuals in a Church which he himselfe had founded promising to earne them by doing the dutie of a Clerke in seruing the quier which not obtaining he pined away and dyed for sorrow Was this according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Neither did the Popes malice stay here their successour Pope Paschall the second caused him to be digged out of his graue and to lye vnburied by the space of fiue yeeres Was this according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Yet after all these exploits so valiantly performed Pope Paschall was glad to restore againe the priuiledge of inuestitures to his sonne Henry being the fift King and the 4 Emperour of that name PHIL. This priuiledge may be called a prauiledge For the Emperour tooke him prisoner and constrained him to it by force and violence but when he was inlarged he cursed both the priuiledge and the Emperour in two Romane Councells the one holden in the yeere 1112. the other in the yeere 1116. ORTHO The Emperour inforced him not to any thing vnlawfull but to obserue the ancient Canons acording to the custome both of the Church and Empire this the Emperour might iustly require and the Pope might yeeld vnto with a good conscience so Paschal with sixeteene of his Bishops and Cardinals whose names Baronius setteth downe out of Petrus Diaconus bound themselues by a solemne oath sub anathemate to performe it Notwithstanding when he was once set at libertie the Pope played the Pope cursed the Emperour and reuoked his grant with open periurie PHIL. The Emperour himselfe had no great confidence in this grant and therefore he relinquished it to Calixtus the second ORTH. What should he do It was now commonly taught that Inuestitures belonged not to lay men It was imbraced as an article of faith that the Pope might depose Princes for denying whereof Vecilo Archbish. of Mentz was condemned for an Hereticke He saw his fathers example fresh bleeding before his eies he was in danger euery day to be turned out of his kingdome the Popes were continually flashing their excommunications in his face first Pope Paschall then Gelasius after him Calixtus So at last wearied and tired out hee was compelled to redeeme his peace and rather to loose Inuestitures then the Empire it selfe Thus the authoritie which was for many hundreds of yeeres practised by the Greeke Romane and Germaine Emperours ratified by Clement the 2. with a councel by Leo the 8. with a councel by Adrian the 1. with a councel and before them all by Pope Vigilius and before him by the approbation of those ancient and better times was now wrested and extorted from him by periury cursing and banning And as they excluded the Emperour reducing elections to the Clergie and people so afterward they excluded the people and brought them onely to the Clergie after that they excluded the Clergie and brought them onely to the Cardinalls Since which time they haue beene as monstrous Popes as euer were before namely Boniface the eighth who entred like a fox raigned like a lyon and dyed like a dogge Iohn the 23. who was called a diuell incarnate and Alexander the sixt who was worse then they both Of all the Schismes which were in the Church of Rome the 29. saith Onuphrius was the worst and the longest continuing 50. yeares sometimes two Popes sometimes three raigning at once which proceeded frō the ambition of the Cardinals the Emperor being excluded who should haue repressed them and if at last the Emperour Sigismund had not interposed his authoritie calling the Councell of Constance and putting downe 3. Popes by this time as a learned man saith your Church might haue had as many Popes at once as the scarlet coloured beast hath heads Hitherto of Rome CHAP. IX Of the Election of the Bishops of Constantinople WHen Nazianzen had refused the Bishopricke of Constantinople Theodosius the elder commaunded the Bishops to giue him in writing the names of such as they thought fit for the place reseruing to himselfe the power of Electing one out of all It fell out that there was at that time at Constantinople an ancient and reuerend old man Nectarius by name who being about to returne to Tarsus came to Diodorus the Bishop thereof to know whether he would haue any thing thither Diodorus on a sudden liking the behauiour of the man though a stranger vnto him shewed him to the Bishop of Antioch praying him to remember him in the catalogue of names The Bishop of Antioch smiled at the conceit of Diodorus because many men of eminent note were nominated for this Election yet for fashion sake to please Diodorus he put Nectarius in among the rest and placed him last The Emperour hauing read ouer the catalogue made a pause at the name of Nectarius and making a marke with his finger he read them ouer againe and chose Nectarius And when euery man inquired who this Nectarius was it appeared that he was not as yet baptized a thing which was vnknowne to the Emperour vnknowne to the Bishop of Antioch vnknowne to Diodorus Yet the Emperour hauing made his choice would not be remoued and the Councell then assembled pronounced him Bishop of Constantinople euen while he was yet in his Christening vesture After the death of Nectarius the Clergie and people chose Chrysostome the Emperour approued the Election and sent to fetch him from Antioch After the death of Sisinnius though many made sute for Philip and many for Proclus yet it was the Emperours pleasure because of some vain glorious persons to choose none of that Church but to send for a stranger Nestorius from Antioch After the death of Maximianus Theodosius the Emperour lest any tumult should be raised in the Church procured the Bishops then present to install Proclus in the Bishops seat euen while the corps of Maximianus was as yet aboue ground which Socrates commendeth in the Emperour as a point of wisdome PHIL. You should marke what followeth in Socrates to wit that Celestinus Bishop of Rome did consent to these proceedings ORTHOD. When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople was deposed and Proclus in faire possibilitie to obtaine the place some stood vp alledging against him that it was not lawfull to be translated from one See to another whereupon Proclus was repelled and Maximianus chosen Wherefore after the death of Maximianus when Celestine heard that Proclus was installed he wrote to Cyrill and others signifying that translations of Bishops was lawful and not against the Canons So Celestine onely giueth his iudgement but assumeth no authoritie in the Election which was
already performed by Imperiall authoritie Thus you see the practise of the Emperours in the Church of Constantinople no man contradicting them and the very last of these examples was aboue 300. yeeres before the grant of Adrian yea aboue 100. yeeres before Vigilius Now from the Imperiall Cities let vs come to the kingdome of Spaine CHAP. X. Of the Election of the Bishops of Spaine IN the 16. Councell at Tolledo it was concluded That if a Bishop did not set his helping hand to the extirpation of Idolatrie he should be deposed Alio ibidem Principali Electione constituto Another being appointed there by the Princes Election This Councell was holden in the yeere 693. fourescore yeeres before Inuestitures were granted to the Emperour Charles by Pope Adrian And before that it was decreed in the 12. Councel of Tolledo as followeth It hath pleased all the Bishops of Spaine and Galicia That sauing the priuiledge of euery Prouince it shall hencefoorth be lawfull for the Bishops of Tolledo to set vp such Prelates in the Sees of their predecessours and to choose such successours for Bishops departed as the Princely power shall Elect and finde worthy by the iudgement of the foresaid Bishops of Tolledo This Councell was holden in the yeere 681. almost an 100. yeeres before Pope Adrian And yet the Kings of Spaine had authoritie to Elect before this Councel which may appeare by these wordes of Baronius Wee must not be ignorant of this point that the Kings of the Gothes in Spaine did challenge to themselues the nomination of such Bishops as were to bee made which nomination of them made by the King was referred to a Councell that they might iudge of the qualitie of the person whether he were worthy of a Bishoprick These things are euident by the Monuments of ancient writers Now because much time passed before they could be dispatched by reason whereof the Sees were long vacant therefore the Councell made the decree Thus it is euident that the authoritie of the Councell was translated to the Archbishop but the Kings authoritie was the same as before and had so bene from the time of the Gothes PHIL. Indeed in the time of the Gothes it was in the Kings and so hath continued in the Kings of Spaine to this present age by the indulgence of the Popes ORTHOD. The ancient Kings of the Gothes were Arrians and enemies to Christ did they elect Bishops by indulgence of Popes PHIL. They did it by tyrannie will you take a paterne from Arrians and Tyrants ORTHOD. The Arrians of Spaine were conuerted in the yeere 589. and professed the faith in the third Councell of Toledo Yet the Orthodox Kings continued their authoritie in Elections Shall we say that they tooke a patterne from Tyrants and Arrians Neither did the Arrian Kings offend in that they elected Bishops but in that they elected Arrian Bishops Neither is an Orthodox Prince bound to relinquish his owne right because it hath bene abused by hereticall Princes For the right of Princes is most ancient deriued neither from Pope nor Arrian but from the patterne of Salomon who chose Sadok high Priest aboue 1000 yeeres before either Arrian or Papist was borne Hitherto of Spaine CHAP. XI Of the Election of the Bishops of France IN France the Kings had the choise of Bishops almost 300. yeeres before the Empire came to their hands For their first Christian King Clodoueus conuerted in the yeere 499 elected Dinifius Bishop of Turone After him succeeded Childibertus who made his brethren Clodomer Theodorick and Clotharius partakers of his Kingdome all which vsed the same authority for by the commandement of Clodomer Omasius was made Bishop of Turone after Dinifius by the commandement of Theodorick Quintianus was made Bishop of Aruerne by the commandement of Clotharius Cato was appointed to be Bishop of Turone which when he refused and afterward would haue had it the King repelled him After the death of Clotharius raigned his sonne Cheribert who made Pascentius Bishop of Poictiers But why should I reckon vp any moe There is a world of examples recorded by Gregorius Turonensis collected from him by one of our learned Bishops all which were aboue a thousand yeeres agoe Afterward when the French Kings became Roman Emperours Pope Adrian decreed and defined that they should haue not only Inuestitures but also the disposing of the Roman See as hath beene declared And although Lodowick the sonne of Charles bee said to haue renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet as the Court of Paris affirmeth He alwaies retained Inuestitures Neither had the Kings of France of ancient time authority in Bishopricks onely but in benefices also Si ad priscorum institutorum normam saith Duarenus omnia exigere velimus nullum est in Gallia beneficium nullum Ecclesiae ministerium quod absque regis consensu cuiquam deferri possit if wee will examine all things according to the rule of ancient constitutions there is in France no benefice no ministry of any Church which can bee conferred vpon any man without the consent of the King Notwithstanding it came to passe in processe of time that the Pope by his prouisions reseruations and expectatiue graces made lamentable desolation in the Church of God for redresse whereof when the councell of Basill had published most worthy decrees Pope Eugenius went about to disanull them VVherefore Charles the 7. king of France at the supplication of the councell and by the aduice of his owne Bishops assembled in Synod vndertooke to protect them to which purpose hee set out that noble constitution called the pragmaticall sanction which was receiued with such an applause of all good men that the like was neuer heard of in the kingdome of France This pragmatical sanction was fitly called by a great learned man the Palladium of France for as the image of Pallas was said to fall downe from heauen among the Troianes so this sanction seemed to be sent from heauen by diuine prouidence among the Frenchmen And as Apollo did prophesie that the remouing of the Palladium would be the destruction of Troy so wise men presaged that the taking away of this Sanction would portend great calamity to the Church of France Yet for al this the Popes would neuer be quiet till they had if not wholly vanquished yet wonderfully weakened it especially Pius the 2. who was one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil but now beeing Pope hee is become another man neither wanted there some which to please the Pope opposed themselues against it whose subtilties and Sophismes are answered by that famous Canonist Archbishop Panormitan who was himselfe also one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil. Yea the court of Paris offered a booke to Lodowick the eleuenth wherein they declared how by the abrogation of the Sanction foure mischiefs would follow the first A confusion of the
in fewe moneths got great summes of money which so soone as the couragious Captaine Pope Alexander had receiued he let the warres alone and followed his pleasures This yeere of Iubile was indeede to England a yeere of Iubile for it brought to Englishmen so often vexed an end of Papal exactions and robberies Yet there remained a tribute of smoke for him that had fed them so long with smoke In the yeere 1532. inquisition was made of Papall expilations and it was found that in the foure yeeres last past the Romane Court had receiued for inuestitures of Bishops 160000. pounds In the yeere 1533. the Pope had of Cranmer for his Bulles concerning his Consecration and his Pall 900. duckets and the same yeere his vsurped authoritie was banished out of England Thus haue I set before you some part of the fruits of Papall prouisions now I refer it to any indifferent man to ponder how well the world went CHAP. XIIII Whether it belongeth to the Pope to confirme all the Metropolitanes of the world and namely the Metropolitanes of England PHIL. THree things concurre in making of a Bishop by Diuine and Canon Law to wit Election Confirmation and Consecration Now howsoeuer Bishops were elected the confirmation must proceede from the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane vnder him which hath commission from him or else they can haue no iurisdiction ORTHOD. The confirmation of Bishops was a godly constitution for the auoyding of Schisme concerning which the Fathers of the famous Nicen Councel haue ordained that through all Prouinces it shall belong to the Metropolitane they say not to the Pope but to the Metropolitane but all the Bishops of England are confirmed by their Metropolitanes And that by most lawfull and orderly proceeding For when the Deane and Chapter by licence from the King haue made the election certified it vnder their common seale and thereunto haue obtained the royall assent the Metropolitane with other Bishops by commission from the King proceedeth to confirme it according to the Canons sending out a publicke and peremptorie citation to summon all personally to appeare which can obiect any thing either against the partie elected or the forme of election And when after due examination and iudiciall processe they are both found consonant to the ancient Canons he confirmeth the election Thus it is cleare that all the Bishops of England haue Canonicall confirmation and withall that the Pope in challenging this vnto himselfe transgresseth the Canon and vsurpeth the right of the Metropolitane PHIL. Your Metropolitanes haue no such power because they are not confirmed themselues by the Bishop of Rome ORTHO They are not I grant neither is it necessary For what confirmation had Frumētius from him whom Athanasius sent to be Bishop in India What confirmation had Flauianus from him against whom three Bishops of Rome opposed themselues yet he kept his Chaire many yeeres and all the Bishops of the East communicated with him What confirmation had the Bishops of Cyprus from him which were not vnder the Iurisdiction of any Patriarch but gouerned by a Synod of their owne PHIL. THat all the Bishops in the world should deriue their confirmation frō him may appeare by this that the Patriarches themselues were not exempted but did shew their faith vnto him and were confirmed by him as for example Nectarius Patriarch of Constantinople though chosen by a whole Councell yet was he to be confirmed by Damasus as appeareth by Sozomen and Theodoret. ORTHOD. The Bishops o◠the second Councell of Constantinople being summoned to the Councell of Rome by the letters of Theodosius the Emperour wrote to Damasus Ambrose and the rest of the Bishops assembled at Rome to excuse their not comming in respect of the state of their Churches whch had so lately beene pestered with Heresies and stood stil in such termes that the Bishops could not leaue them without extreme danger Yet they thought good to send three Bishops in the name of the rest and withall they make relation both of their doctrine discipline Concerning their doctrine they declare their faith of the Vnitie Trinitie and natures of Christ. Concerning discipline they declare that they choose their Bishops Patriarches according to the Canons of the Nicen Councell and so speake of the election of Nectarius Patriarch of Constantinople Flauianus Patriarch of Antioch and Cyrill Patriarch of Ierusalem Concerning Nectarius whose example you vrge they say that he being a most reuerend and zealous man was chosen in their generall Councell in the presence of the Emperour with the generall applause of all both Clergie and people And this they write not to Damasus alone as though it were in his power to make or to marre the election they were farre from any such cogitation but to him with the rest to reioyce him and the rest by relating their consent in faith and loue So they desire not Damasus onely but Ambrose and all the rest to reioyce with them and to giue their cheerefull assent that the Christian faith being agreed vpon and loue confirmed among them they might keepe the Church from schismes and dissensions Thus though they name Damasus first and giue him preeminence of place yet they giue no more preeminence of power to the Bishop of Rome then to the Bishop of Millen PHIL. What say you then to Proterius Patriarch of Alexandria to Sophronius Patriarch of Ierusalem To Anatolius Nicephorus and Peter Patriarches of Constantinople Did not euery one of them send to the Pope his Synodall letters wherein they declared their faith and consent with the Church of Rome before he confirmed or alowed them for lawfull Patriarches Doth not this prooue the singular and soueraigne power of the Pope in confirming the other Patriarches ORTHOD. As the Patriarch of Rome did not allow the other Patriarches for lawfull till they had signified by letters their soundnesse in faith so the other Patriarches did not acknowledge the Patriarch of Rome till they were likewise informed of his faith And therefore the Patriarches of Rome did vse to send the like Synodall letters to the other Patriarches as may appeare by Gregory who wrote to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople Iohn Patriarch of Ierusalem Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria Gregory and Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch and this was done saith Diaconus according to the ancient custome of his predecessours Doth not this proue the singular and soueraigne power of the other Patriarches in confirming the Patriarch of Rome And as the Romane Patriarch sent his Synodicall letters to the rest and the rest to him so the rest did likewise send one to another As for example Tharasius Patriarch of Constantinople to the Patriarches of Antioch Alexandria and Ierusalem vsing these words For as much as a certaine obseruation or rather an Apostolicall tradition hath long preuailed in the Churches that those which had newly beene taken into the degree of
Vniuersall Patriarch was giuen and that by a Councell to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople In what sence trow you You produced but two sences of it out of Bellarmine In the first which prophanely excludeth all other Bishops they did not giue it for then they should deny themselues to be Bishops contrary to their own subscriptions If in the latter then it was common to him with the Bishops of Rome and so cannot proue your Monarchicall iurisdiction PHIL. How proue you that this title was giuen him by a Councell ORTHOD. Binius saith How oft Iohn Bishop of Constantinople is named in the acts of the Councell of Constantinople vnder Hormisda so oft the title of Vniuersall Patriarch is found added vnto him PHIL. Binius in the same place ascribeth this to the imposture of the latter Grecians which he proueth because though two Popes Pelagius and Gregory condemned this title in the Bishop of Constantinople yet no man obiected against them the authoritie of this Councell which had beene very materiall because the greater part of it was approued by the Church of Rome Wherefore it is certaine that this was not originally in the Councell but foisted in afterward ORTHO But Pope Adrian the first in his Epistle to Tharasius recorded in the second Nicen Councell intitleth him a generall Patriarch PHIL. This seemeth also to be added by some Grecian which I rather thinke because the same Epistle translated by Anastasius hath no such title prefixed ORTHOD. As though Anastasius were not as likely to put it out as the Grecians to put it in But Iustinian in the Authentickes giueth Mennas the very selfe same title of Oecumenicall Patriarch PHIL. It must be affirmed that this also crept in vnlesse we say that he is called Vniuersall in respect of the Orientall Bishops and Priests ORTHOD. So Holoander taketh it when hee translateth it Vniuersi eius tractus Patriarchae i. to the Patriarch of all that circuit But are you now aduised Was he called Vniuersal and yet had not the iurisdictiō of the whole world but was onely an Orientall Patriarch then you must confesse that this title might be giuen to the B. of Rome and yet not imply that hee had iurisdiction ouer the whole world but ouer the whole West and so was the Occidentall Patriarch Wherefore the decree of Pope Pelagius requiring all Metropolitanes to send to Rome to professe their faith and receiue the Pall extendeth not to them of the East but onely to them of the West PHIL. Then you grant that hee was Patriarch of the West and that is sufficient to inferre my conclusion for the Westerne Patriarch must needes haue iurisdiction ouer the Metropolitanes of the West in which compasse is Brittany I need not here speake of the ancient diuision of the Prouinces nor of Saint Peter nor of Eleutherius It is famously knowne that Saint Austin was sent hither by the Bishop of Rome receiued a pall from him and apparently submitted himselfe to his iurisdiction so did his successours for almost a thousand yeeres together Wherfore seeing the Bishop of Rome was in lawfull possession you must tell vs vpon what reason you put him from it ORTHOD. By what title doth the Pope challenge his iurisdiction in England By the law of God you cannot iustifie it By reason of the first conuersion of the Island by Saint Peter You cannot make it manifest that euer he was here Will you fetch it from Eleutherius He onely sent at the kings request and challenged no such authority Wil you deriue it from Austin It was then made appeare by many reasons that the Brittans ought him no subiection And it is euident that he and his associates had first their assemblies in Saint Martins Church in Canterbury by the Kings permission afterward when the king himselfe was conuerted they receiued to vse the words of Bede more ample licence both to Preach through all his dominions and also to build and repaire Churches So you see all was receiued from the king It is true that Gregory sent a supply of Preachers and gaue his aduise for the erection of Bishopricks and sent palls hither yet there can bee no question but all this was done by the kings licence Afterward in succeeding ages when the Popes did play the wild boares in the Church in executing Church censures and giuing Church liuings the kings of England made lawes against them euen in the time of Popery For as it was defended by Cyprian and afterward also by the African councell vnder Celestinus that causes should bee ended where they begunne and not bee carried to tribunalls beyond the sea So it was decreed in England in the raigne of Henry the second as witnesseth Mathew Paris De appellationibus si emerserint ab Archidiacono debet procedi ad Episcopum ab Episcopo ad Archiepiscopum si Archiepiscopus defuerit in iustitia exhibenda ad dominum regē perueniendū est postremò vt praecepto ipsius in curia Archiepiscopi controuersia terminetur ita quod non debeat vltra procedi absque assenssu domini regis i. Cōcerning appeals if any shall spring they ought to proceed from the Archdeacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop if the Archb. shal be defectiue in doing iustice they must come at last to our Lord the king that by his cōmandement the controuersie may bee determined in the Archbishops Court so that there ought not to be any further proceedings without the assent of the Lord the king Thus it is cleare that the Pope could not take to himselfe the handling of causes without the kings license It might also be declared how little his cēsures were here respected vnlesse they receiued strength by the kings permission And whereas hee tooke vpon him to dispose of Church liuings hee was censured for it in the time of Edw. the 3 euen in the high Court of Parliament as an vsurper These points might bee much inlarged but this little touch is sufficient to shew that whatsoeuer iurisdiction hee had in England was by the courtesie of the King whatsoeuer hee tooke vpon him otherwise was by vsurpation Now his challenge by custome is repelled by custome For these sixe hundred yeeres last past hee affecting to bee that which he was not disdained to bee that which he was and aspyring to a Popedome neglected his Patriarchdome so that which he had gotten by vse he hath lost by disusing and by his owne fact hath extinguished his former title Secondly whereas Pope Pelagius required onely a profession of the faith according to the Scriptures and the holy ancient generall councels Pius the fourth hath framed vs a new forme of faith without which no man can bee saued consisting of traditions transubstantiations merits Images reliques and such rotten Romish ragges-which he hath clapt to the Nicen creed as it were a beggers patch to a golden garment And
not onely required to remission of sinnes the Preaching of the Gospell but also baptisme and penance As it is written Doe penance and be euery one of you baptized in the name of Iesus Christ for the remission of sinnes ORTHOD. When wee say that the Minister forgiueth sinnes by preaching wee doe not exclude the Sacraments but include them As when wee referre a pardon to the Kings letters patents wee doe not exclude the seale but meane the letters patents with the seale annexed For as the Apostle saith to vs is committed the ministerie of reconciliation Which is not a ministerie of the word onely but without all controuersie of the Sacraments also Therefore Christ in giuing vs authoritie to forgiue sinnes hath withall giuen vs authoritie to vse the meanes thereof that is the ministery of the word and Sacraments and because wee apply these meanes whereby God forgiueth sinnes therefore we are said to forgiue sinnes This is well expressed by Ferus one of your own Fryers saying Quamuis Dei propriuÌ„ opus sit remittere peccata dicuntur tamen etiam Apostoli remittere non simpliciter sed quia adhibent media per quae Deus remittit peccata haec autem media sunt verbum Dei Sacramenta i. although it be the proper worke of God to forgiue sinnes yet notwithstanding the Apostles are saide to forgiue sinnes not simply but because they vse the meanes by the which God doth forgiue sinnes and these meanes are the word of God and the Sacraments Moreouer it is a cleare case that to this remission there is required faith and repentance after which followeth ministeriall absolution by preaching and applying publickly and priuately the sweete promises of grace to the penitent beleeuer and sealing them by the Sacraments to the soule and conscience This absolution in the court of conscience is agreeable to the Scripture and is not onely practised in the Church of England by Sermons and Sacraments but also solemnly proclaimed in our liturgy and applied both publickly in open penance and priuately in the visitation of the sicke as also to particular penitents whose wounded consciences require the same PHIL. The Councell of Trent pronounceth a curse vpon such as wrest the words of Christ to the authoritie of preaching the Gospell ORTHOD. To apply them to preaching in such sence as hath beene declared is no wresting but the true meaning of the Scripture as you heard out of Saint Paul and therefore in cursing vs they curse Saint Paul wherefore I will say with the Prophet they doe curse but thou o Lord doest blesse But for your better satisfaction in this point you shal heare the iudgement of sundry principall men in your owne Church expounding this absolution in court of conscience as wee doe The maister of the sentences hauing long sifted this point to and fro at last groweth to this resolution In hac tanta varietate quid â—â—nendum hoc sanâ— c. In this great varietie what should we hold truely 〈◊〉 may say and thinke this That God onely forgiueth and retaineth sinnes and yet he hath giuen the power of binding and loosing vnto the Church but he bindeth and looâ—â—th one way the Church another For he forgiueth sin by himselfe alone who both cleanseth the soule from inward blot and looseth it from thâ— debt of eternall death but he hath not granted this vnto the Priest to whom notwithstanding he hath giuen potestatem soluendi ligandi i. Ostendendi homines ligatos vel solutos i. the power of binding and loosing that is of declaring men to be bound or loosed Wherupon the Lord did first by himselfe restore health vnto the leper and then he sent him to the Priestes quorum iudicio ostenderetur mundatus i. by whose iudgement he might be declared to be cleansed so likewise when he had restored Lazarus to life againe he offered him to his Disciples that they might vnbind him And this he prooueth by a place of Ierome which he onely pointeth at but we will set it downe more largely In Leuitico c In the booke of Leuiticus we read of the lepers where they are commanded to shew themselues to the Priests and if they shall haue the leprosie that then they shall bee made vncleane by the Priestes not that the Priestes should make them lepers and vncleane but that they should haue the knowledge of the leprous and not leprous and that they may discerne who is cleane or vncleane Therefore as there the Priests doe make the lepers cleane or vncleane so here the Bishop or Priest doth bind and loose c. Hitherto Saint Ierome Now the master hauing said that in remitting or retaining sins the Euangelicall Priests haue that authoritie and office which in olde times the legall Priests had vnder the law in curing of lepers addeth these words Hi ergo peccata dimittunt vel retinent dum dimissa a Deo vel retenta indicant ostendunt i. therfore these doe forgiue sinnes or retaine them whiles they shew and declare that they are forgiuen or retained of God Hunc modum ligandi soluendi Hieron supra notauit i. this way of binding and loosing Ierom hath obserued aboue Thus farre the master who is followed verbatim by Petrus Parisius as is to be seene in Sixtus Senensis And Occam saith I answere according to the master that Priests bind and loose because they declare men to be bound or loosed Alexander Hales Nunquam sacerdos absolueret quenquam de quo non presumeret quod esset absolutus à deo i the Priest would neuer absolue any man of whom he did not presume that he were already absolued of God If the Priest absolue none but whom God hath first absolued theÌ„ what can his absolution be else but a certificate that the party is already absolued of God And againe Item Augustinus Hugo de sancto victore c. Moreouer Austin and Hugo de sancto victore say that in the raising of Lazarus was signified the raising againe of a sinner But Lazarus was raised of the Lord before he was deliuered to the Disciples to bee loosed ergo absolutio sacerdotis nihil valet antequam homo sit iustificatus per gratiam suscitatus a morte culpae 1. Therefore the absolution of the Priest is of no value before a man be iustified by grace raised from the death of sinne And this he proueth by strong reasons as followeth 1. It is a matter of equall power to baptize inwardly and to absolue from deadly sinne but it was not requisite that God should communicate to any man the power of baptizing inwardly least our hope should be reposed in man therfore by the same reason it was not fit that God should communicate to any man the power of absoluing from actuall sinne And againe Nulla fit remissio culpae nisi per gratiam sed gratiam dare est potentiae infinitae i. There
Councels and other authorities Pag. 161. CHAP. 6. Of the election of the Bishops of Rome vnder Christian Emperours before the diuision of the Empire Pag. 163. CHAP. 7. Of the Election of Popes from the Emperour Charles to Otho Pag. 175. CHAP. 8. Of the election of Popes from the time of the Emperour Otho to Henry the fourth Pag. 173. CHAP. 9. Of the election of the Bishops of Constantinople Pag. 178. CHAP. 10. Of the election of the Bishops of Spaine Pag. 179. CHAP. 11. Of the election of the Bishops of France Pag. 180. CHAP. 12. Of the election of the Bishops of England Pag. 182. CHAP. 13. How lamentable the state of England was when Bishopricks and benefices were giuen by the Popes prouisions Pag. 188. CHAP. 14. Whether it belongeth to the Pope to confirme all the Metropolitanes of the world and namely the Metropolitanes of England Pag. 199. ¶ The contents of the fifth Booke CHAP. 1. WHerein the second controuersie is proposed diuided into two questions the former about sacrifising the latter about absolution the state of the former is set downe and the Methode of proceeding Pag. 207. CHAP. 2. Of their argument drawne from Melchisedec Pag. 208. CHAP. 3. Of their argument drawn frō the Paschal Lambe Pag. 216. CHAP. 4. Of their argument drawne from certaine places of the Prophets Pag. 218. CHAP. 5. Of their argumēt drawne frō the words of institutiō Pa. 222. CHAP. 6. Of their arguments drawne frō the actiōs of Christ. Pa. 234. CHAP. 7. Of their argument drawne from the practise of the Church in the Apostles time Pag. 239. CHAP. 8. Of their arguments drawne from the authority of the Fathers Pag. 241. CHAP. 9. Of the second question which concerneth the power of absolution Pag. 244. CHAP. 10. An answere to the arguments of Bellar. by which he goeth about to proue absolution to be iudicial not declaratory Pag. 249. CHAP. 11. Of the third controuersie concerning Deacons Pag. 259. CHAP. 12. Wherein is declared that though wee deriue our calling from such Bishops as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull and theirs as it is vsed vnlawfull Pag. 260. THE FIRST BOOKE CONTEINING THE ENTRANCE AND DIVISION of the whole worke into three Controuersies with their seuerall Questions As also the handling of the first Question whether three Canonicall Bishops be absolutely necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop Framed in forme of a conference betweene PHILODOX a Seminary Priest And ORTHODOX a Minister of the Church of England CHAP. I. The entrance wherein is described the Proceeding of Popish Priests in winning of Proselytes by praising Rome the Romane Religion the Popes loue the English Seminaries As also by dispraising the Vniuersities Church Religion and Ministerie of England PHILODOX WHat My old friend Orthodox I salute you in the kindest maner and congratulate your comming into France the rather because I hope you are passing this way to Rome as sundry of your fellowes and friends haue done before you ORTHODOX To Rome Philodox Alas Quid Romaefaciam mentiri nescio What shall I doe at Rome I cannot lye I cannot aequiuocate PHILO It seemeth si◠that you are pleasantly disposed but in good earnest there are many inducements which in all reason should draw you to Rome For he that hath seene Rome hath seene all things and he that hath not seene Rome hath seene nothing It is the Queene and Lady of Cities the Store-house of Nature the admiration of Art the Epitome of the world wherein all Excellencies shine in their Orient colours and exquisite beautie In old time men did wonder at the Temple of Diana the Tombe of Mausolus the Colossus of the Sunne the Image of Iupiter Olympicus the Palace of Cyrus the walls of Babylon and the Pyramides of Egypt because these things in their seuerall ages were rare and singular and iustly had in precious account But who would now so esteeme them when he may see in one City so many spectacles which are able not onely to rauish the beholders with admiration but also to strike them with astonishment The Emperour Constantius when hee beheld the Rostra the Capitoll the Bathes the Amphitheatrum the Pantheon the Theater of Pompey his eyes were dazeled with miracle vpon miracle but when he came to the Market place of Traiane he stood cleane amazed at those huge and admirable Fabricks neither imitable by the hand nor vtterable by the tongue of man And though time which weareth all things hath now defaced them yet if new Rome be compared with old Rome wee may say with a learned man Non maior sed melioriam Roma non cultior sed sanctior That is Rome at this present is not bigger but better not more sumptuous but more sacred And we may adde that still it ouershineth all other Cities so farre as the golden Moone doeth the twinkling starres ORTHO Suppose that the buildings of Rome were as glorious at this day as they were in the dayes of Constantius yet what of all this Hormisd◠the Persian being then asked what he thought of Rome made answere That this onely pleased him that he had learned that men doe die euen at Rome also as in other places And surely though the walles of our Cities were of gold and the windowes of Saphire yet while we liue in this vale of vanitie we dwell but in houses of clay whose foundation is in the dust God giue vs grace to seeke a City which hath a foundation whose maker and builder is God God graunt that when our earthly Tabernacle shal be dissolued we may haue an house not made with hands but eternall in the heauens PHIL. You say well sir and the right way to attaine thereunto is to be reconciled to the holy Church of Rome Without it there is no hope of saluation within it is a very Paradise of God and a sanctuary for all distressed soules wherefore if you take this course you shal be a thrice happy man and enioy the precious blessing of a quiet conscience ORTHO In deede a quiet conscience is a iewell of iewels the price of it is farre aboue the Pearle neither can it be valued with the wedge of fine gold But this is a flower which groweth not in the gardens of Rome no not in Beluidêre the Popes Paradise For there is no Religion in the world which can pacific the troubled conscience but that onely which teacheth the penitent spirit the remission of his sinnes and an infallible certaintie of his saluation by the merits of Iesus Christ apprehended by a true and liuely faith and sealed to the sanctified soule by the Spirit of grace But the present religion of the Church of Rome teacheth onely a morall coniecturall and fallible That is an vncertaine certaintie which must needs plunge the poore soule into a thousand perplexities Wherefore the present Romish religion is not a doctrine of comfort but of doubt and distrust so farre from quieting the troubled
such a forme as is holy and acceptable in the sight of God But whereas you grant that the persons were capable and the consecrators Canonicall it behooueth you to discouer some essentiall defect in our forme or else you must of necessitie approoue our consecration PHIL. DOctour Kellison saith that in King Edwards time neither matter nor forme of ordination was vsed and so none were truely ordained much lesse had they commission to Preach Heresie and so could not send others to Preach whence it followeth that all the superintendents and Ministers are without calling and vocation ORTHOD. What meaneth Kellison by the matter of ordination PHIL. According to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church holy order is a Sacrament and euery Sacrament of the newe Law consisteth of things and wordes as the matter and the forme which are so certaine and determined of God that it is not lawfull to change them Now in ordination the matter is a sensible signe as for example imposition of hands which Bellarmine calleth the matter essentiall ORTHOD. Others of your owne men are of another opinion for Salmeron the Iesuite hauing proposed the question bringeth reasons for both sides but seemeth to incline to the contrary Fabius Incarnatus asketh this question how many things are of the substance of order and answereth that six But imposition of handes is none of the six Nauarrus speaking of imposition of handes saith Illa non est de substantia Sacramenti that is it is not of the substance of the Sacrament For which opinion hee alleadgeth Scotus But if imposition of handes bee the matter of ordination then Kellison is guiltie of lying and slandering when hee saith that in King Edwards dayes the matter of ordination was not vsed For Sanders himselfe though a shamelesse fellow yet confesseth that in the dayes of King Edward the former lawe concerning the number of Bishops which should impose handes vpon the ordained was alwayes obserued A point so cleare that it might bee iustified by many records but what neede wee goe to records seeing it is a plaine case that the very booke of ordination which was made and established in the dayes of King Edward commandeth imposition of hands wherefore if the essentiall matter bee imposition of hands then I must conclude out of your owne principles that in King Edwards dayes the essentiall matter was vsed PHIL. In the ordering of a Deacon there is not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the Gospels so in ordering of a Priest not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the instruments that is of the Patten and Challice and both these Ceremonies are essentiall as Bellarmine proueth Therefore why may we not say that in Episcopall Consecration not only imposition of hands but other ceremonies also belong to the essentiall matter ORTHOD. What other ceremonies I beseech you doe you meane the holy oyle wherewith the head of the consecrated is annointed with these wordes Let thy head bee annointed and consecrated with celestiall benediction or the ring which is blessed with prayer and holy water and put vpon his finger with these wordes Accipe annulum fidei signaculum Receiue the Ring the seale of faith or the Crosier deliuered in these wordes receiue the staffe of the Pastorall office If you meane these or the like and vrge them as essentiall you must giue vs leaue to reiect them because they are only human inuentions You told vs before out of Bellarmine that the matter of ordination is certaine and determined of God now where shall wee finde the determinations of God but in the booke of God we finde in holy Scripture imposition of hands and we imbrace it as Apostolicall as for your rings and Crosiers when you can demonstrate them out of the booke of God we will then accept them as the determinations of God in the meane time we cannot acknowledge them for the essentiall matter of ordination But now from the matter let vs come to the forme 4. PHI. IT is agreed vpon that the forme consisteth in the words which are vttered while the sensible signe is vsed and they are the very same whereby the spirituall power is giuen ORTHOD. I hope you will not say that these words receiue the ring or receiue the staffe concerne the essentiall forme tell vs therfore in what words the true forme coÌ„sisteth that so we may the better examine the speech of Kellison PHIL. The words may be diuers yet the sense the same and this diuersitie of words may seuerally signifie the substance of the Sacrament as for example the Easterne Church baptizeth in these words Let this seruant of Christ be baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost The Latin Church in these words I baptize thee c. Here are two formes of words but each of them containeth the true and substantiall forme of baptisme So in ordination the Easterne Bishops instructed of their ancestours conferre the orders of a Bishop Priest and Deacon Per orationem deprecatoriam By the way of prayer whereas we after the manner of the Romane Church doe conferre them Per modum imperandi in the imperatiue moode by way of command and yet the spirituall power may be conueyed by both For Pope Innocent teacheth that the Scripture mentioneth onely imposition of hands and prayer as for other things vsed in ordination he saith they were inuented by the Church otherwise it had beene sufficient if the ordainer had said onely be thou a Priest or be thou a Deacon but seeing the Church hath inuented other formes they are to be obserued ORTHOD. By what words is the Episcopall power giuen in the Church of Rome PHIL. By these words receiue the holy Ghost because they are vsed when the Bishop imposeth hands And therfore as Priests in their ordination receiue the holy Ghost that is as Bellarmin expounds it out of Chrysostome and Cyrillâ—a ghostly power consisting in forgiuing and retaining of sinnes so a Bishop in his Consecration receiueth the holy Ghost that is A ghostly power consisting in the performance of those things which are reserued properly to Bishops amongst which the power of ordination is most eminent ORTHOD. If you call these words the forme of Consecration then you must acknowledge that not only the matter but also the right forme of Consecration was vsed in the dayes of King Edward for these words were then vsed while the Bishops imposed hands as appeareth by the booke and consequently you must confesse that Ridley Hooper and Ferrar were rightly ordained Bishops and moreouer that Kellison is a notorious slanderer 5. THus much of the second rancke Now come we to the third wherein we may place such if any such be found as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of king Edward PHIL. We thinke that no man can possibly haue the order of a Bishop
which hath not the right order of Priesthood but the Priesthood conferred in King Edwards time was no Priesthood because they wanted the authority to offer the blessed sacrifice of the Masse therefore those Priests were not capable of the Episcopall order ORTHO I answere first that seeing that King Edward rained but sixe yeeres and fiue moneths it is likely that most of them which were aduanced in his time to bee Bishops were before his time in the order of Priesthood Secondly if any be produced which were not yet it shal be iustified God willing when we come to the point that the order of Priesthood conferred in the dayes of King Edward Queene Elizabeth and King Iames is the true ministery of the Gospel and that your sacrificing Priesthood is sacrilegious and abominable In the meane time you must giue vs leaue to holde that the ministery of the Church of England is holy in the sight of God and iustifiable in the sight of man CHAP. XII Of the Bishops Consecrated in the dayes of Queene Marie THe lineall descent hath led vs to the Bishops in Queen Maries time concerning which shal I craue your iudgement PHIL. You know it already they were all Canonical ORTHOD. For the more distinct proceeding let vs diuide them into two ranckes the old Bishops and the new the old I cal such as being cōsecrated before her time were continued in her time the new which were Consecrated in her time PHIL. All which were allowed for Bishops in Queene Maries time whether old or new were Canonicall ORTHO The old Bishops were all made in the dayes of K. Henry the eighth and almost all in those very times which you brand with imputation of schisme and heresie when none could bee Consecrated vnlesse hee did sweare to the king against the Pope Wherefore seeing you iudged both Consecrators and Consecrated schismaticall and hereticall and yet esteeme them Canonicall your obiections of schisme and heresie must eternally bee silenced in the question of Canonicall Bishops For if these crimes can frustrate a Consecration then their Consecration was frustrate and they were no Bishops or if they were Bishops and Canonicall then all the Bishops in King Henries time were likewise Canonicall Moreouer some of them whom you so commend were Bishops in King Edwards time as for example Thomas Thurlby whom King Henrie promoted to be Bishop of Westminster was aduanced by King Edward to the Bishopricke of Norwich and afterward preferred by Queene Mary to the Bishopricke of Ely and moreouer to be one of her priuie Councell Yea some of them had the place of a Bishop in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth Namely Anthony Kitchin who in King Henries time was made Bishop of Landaff kept his dignities and place in the dayes of K. Edward continued the same all the reigne of Queene Mary and so till the day of his death which was in the fift yeere of Queene Elizabeth Wherefore in iustifying the old Bishops you iustifie al generally which were Consecrated in King Henries daies and some which continued in King Edwards and Queene Elizabeths But now from the old let vs come to the new PHIL. QVeene Mary aduanced Holiman bishop of Bristow Coates bishop of Chester Watson bishop of Lincolne Morris bishop of Rochester Morgan bishop of S. Dauis Brooke bishop of Glocester Glin bishop of Bangor Christophorson bishop of Chichester Dauid Poole bishop of Peterborow Cardinall Poole bishop of Canterbury and others ORTHOD. And these reuerend Prelats Bush bishop of Bristow Tailor bishop of Lincolne Scory bishop of Chichester Barlow bishop of Bathe and Wells Couerdale bishop of Exeter and Harly bishop of Hereford with sundry others were at that time forced to leaue their bishopricks For what cause partly for not yeelding to the Pope and Popish Religion partly because they were married which Greg. Martin calleth a polluting of holy Orders though S. Paul saith it is honourable among all men and the bed vndefiled But let vs see the Consecration of your new bishops PHIL. I will begin with that renowned Prelate Cardinall Poole whose Consecration followeth Anno 1555. Reginald Poole cons. Archb. Cant. 22. Mart. by Nichol Arch. Ebor. Thom. Eltens Edmund Lond. Rich. Wigorn. Ioh. Lincoln Mauric Roff. Thom. Asaph Anno 1557. Thom Watson Dauid Pole Cons. B. 15. Aug. by Nich. Ebor. Thom. Eli. Wil. Bangor Anno 1557. Ioh. Christophorson cons. B. 21. No. by Edmund Lond. Tho. Elien Mauric Roff. ORTHOD. All these deriue their Consecration from bishops which were made in the time of the pretended Schisme and some of them from Cranmer himselfe therefore you must either acknowledge all them and namely Cranmer for Canonicall or neither Cardinall Poole nor any of the rest made in Queene Maries time can be Canonicall THE THIRD BOOKE OF THE BISHOPS CONSEcrated in the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth and of our gracious Soueraigne King IAMES CHAP. I. Of the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some Antecedents and Consequents of their Depositions PHIL. THe reuolution of times hath brought vs to the raigne of Queene Elizabeth euen to that blacke and dolefull day wherein all the Bishops of England all I say one onely excepted were deposed from their degrees and dignities For a great penaltie was inflicted vpon such as should after the Feast of S. Iohn Baptis◠1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesiasticall Office whatsoeuer after the old rite or administer any Sacrament after the Romane maner to wit That hee which offended against that Law for the first time should pay 200 Nobles or be in bonds sixe Moneths for the second 400. Nobles or a yeere in bonds for the third he should be in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods By which meanes it came to passe That at the day prescribed the holy and diuine Offices ceased to be performed publikely through the whole Kingdome And because the Bishops would not consent to those impieties nor affirme vpon their Oathes that they beleeued in their consciences That the Queene onely was the Supreame gouernesse of the Church of England vnder Christ they were all saue one shortly after deposed from their Degree and dignitte and committed to certaine prisons and custodies whereupon they are all at this day dead with the long tediousnesse of their miseries The names of which most glorious Confessours I will set downe that the thing may be had in euerlasting remembrance First of all Nicholas Archbishop of Yorke and a little before that time Lord Chancellour of England then Edmund Bonner Bishop of London and Tunstall of Durham Iohn of Winton Thomas of Lincolne Thurlby of Ely Turberuill of Exeter Borne of Bath Pole of Peterborow Baine of Lichfield Cuthbert of Chester Oglethorp of Carlile and Thomas Goldwell of S. Asaph c. ORTH. Here are two things to be discussed The deposing of the old Bishops and aduancing of the new Concerning the first