be reputed an aduersary while he sitteth in the throne And Saint Paul directly teacheth that the personall line and continuall propagation of Prophets Euangelistes Pastours and Doctours was instituted by God for the perpetuall succession and continuance Ephes 4. v. 11. 12. 13. Ibid. v. 14. of truth That now we be not children wauering and caryed about with euery winde of doctrine c. Therefore the true personall succession cannot be where the succession of doctrine wauereth much lesse where it fayleth which M. Reynolds M. Whitaker and sundry of our Protestant Reynolds in his conference ca. 7. diuis 9. VVhitak contr 1. q. 5. cap. 6. folio 271. aduersaries earnestly auowe and diligently demonstraty to our handes thereby to defeate if they could possible the prerogatiue of our succeeding Bishops But albeit it maketh nothing agaynst vs nay vpholdeth the right of our clayme who agree with our auncestours in al points of fayth yet it vtterly ouerthrowneth the vsurped title they newly challenge to the pedigree of our Bishops froÌ„ whome they dissent in the very many articles of our beliefe For by their owne arguments no participation can they haue with them in chayres no affinity or succession in Priestly thrones agaynst whome they bray forth defiance in doctrine 6. Now as touching Election the third thing which is defectiue in the Protestant ministery that is a priuiledge only due to ecclesiasticall persons For although secular ProtestaÌ„t Bishops want the electioÌ„ of Deane chapter of all clergy persoÌ„s Princes or such as haue auowsans might somtyme present and nominate their Prelates although the consent and approbation of people for greater vnion and peace hath beene also required yet the Election which interesseth the elected entitleth him to his dignity and giueth him a certayne right to his calling This is and euer was only proper to the Pope to the Deane and Chapter or some other of the Clergy and flatly forbidden to the laity vnder payne of excommunication in In Concil gener 8. can 22. ap Grat. distinc 63. c. Hadrian In Syno Niâ— 2. can 3. the eight generall Councell vnder Basil the Emperour and Adrian the Pope Likewise in the second Nicen Synod it is declared That euery Election of Bishop Priest Deacon made by secular powers let it be inualide and of no force And amongst the Canons of the Apostles the thirtith Canon hath these wordes The Bishop who by the fauour of the Princes and Potentates of the world hath gotten his Church let him be deposed But our English Protestant Bishops haue inuaded their Seas by the fauour of Princes by their letters patents without the canonicall election of Pope Deane and Inter can Aposto ca. 30. Chapter or any ecclesiasticall person Therefore they are to be deposed as wolfes vsurpers entring in at the window and not at the dore This defect is not fayned by coniectures as Barlowes consecration is by Mayster Mason nor proued by secret partiall and vnknowne Recordes MasoÌ„ l 3. c. 4. pag. 127. as he doth the ordination of others But it is publikely set downe in the common receaued lawes or Statutes of the Realme For in the first of King Edward the 1. Edward chapter 2. sixt an Act of Parlament was made for disanulling the election of Archbishops and Bishops by the Deane and Chap. taking away the writ of Conge-deslier grauÌ„ted to that purpose The wordes of the Statute are these The writ of Congedeslier was not to be graunted in King Edwards dais whose lawes Queene Elizabeth reestablished 8. Eliza. 1. 7. Be it enacted by the King with the assent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and the Commons in this present Parlament assembled by the authority of the same that from henceforth no such Conge-deslier be graunted nor election of any Archbishop or Bishop by the Deane and Chapter made but that the Kinge may by his letters Patentes at all tymes when any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke be voyde conferre the same to any persons to whome the Kinge shall think meete Can there be a more euident proofe that the Bishops of King Edwards dayes when this Statute was in force wanted their canonical electioÌ„ And after when his lawes repealed by Queene Mary were reestablished by Queene Elizabeth at least in the beginning how beit since they make shew of returning to the auncient custome Can there be likewise a more vehement suspition willfull forgery in M. Masons registers which testify the Writ of Conge-deslier to be graunted forth when by the tenour of that law it could not be graunted 8. Notwithstanding although their Bishops election Mason lib. 2. chap. 10. fol. 88. 89. The ordination of Protestant Priests Bishops vnlawfull inualide noneat all was inualide and succession of no account yet M. Mason stifly vrgeth that their ordination or consecration was good vnlesse we can name some defect eyther in the consecrated or consecratours I answere that the consecratours after their reuolte from the Catholique Church obstinat persisting in schisme heresy were excommunicated and suspended from the due execution and practise of their functions So that although they had beene before true lawfull Bishops as none excepting Cranmer were of the whole Protestant ranke yet then their authority being taken away by the Catholike Church which as she had power to giue had power also to restrayne and disanull their iurisdiction they could not lawfully communicate vnto others that which was suspended in themselues For this cause Saint Athanasius accouÌ„teth them not in the number of true Bâ—shops who are consecrated by heretikes saying By what right can they Athanasius in Concil Arimi Seleuc. § Quae auteÌ„ Seieâ—ciae be Bishops if they receaued their ordination from heretikes as they theÌ„selues accuse them to be Likewise writing in another place in the person of Pope Iulius It is impossible quoth he that the ordinations made by Secundus being an AriaÌ„ could haue any force in the Catholike Church 6. But M. Mason our Protestants Attorney will reply Apol. 2. that S. Athanasius is to be vnderstood of the legitimate and lawfull vse not of the validity of ordination For that euery Bishop communicateth not by reason of his inherent grace or out ward vnion with the Church but by vertue of his episcopall character which no schisme quoth he by deduction out of our writinges no sinne no Mason l. 2. c. 10. fo 88. heresy no censures of the Church no excommunication suspension interdiction degradation nothing nothing at all sauing only death if death can dissolue it Thus he I graunt that the character is indeleble and that alone is sufficient in the consecratour if his intention also be right and if he vse the true matter and forme essentially required thereunto But our English Superintendents after their fal from the Roman Church neyther intended to giue those holy orders which were instituted by Christ neyther did the ordeyned intend to receaue them
Christ who was to come in flesh Thou art a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech Of Saint Ambrose Christ is declared to offer in vs whose speach sanctifyeth the sacrifice which is offered Of Epiphanius The Priesthood of Melchisedech now florisheth in the Church Theophilact Christ is called a Priest for euer because there is dayly offered there is perpetually offered an oblation by the mynisters of God hauing Christ our Lord both the Priest and sacrifyce Of Saint Leo Eucherius Primasius and the rest whose testimonyes togeather with the Priestly function of Melchisedech which they mayntayne M. Fulke and his felow-protestants vtterly contemne Insomuch as Fulke sayeth this bringing forth of bread and wine was no part of Melchisedeches Priesthood therfore those Fathers were deceaued that iudged that act to pertayne to his Priesthood Marke the arrogancy of this yesterday-vpstart in censuring the Fathers for allowing a Priesthood which he with his adherentes flatly detest Well then seing they renounce both these orders I know not in what ranke to place them vnlesse it Tully in Philip. be in the order of Asinius the voluntary Senatour as Tully iesteth at him himselfe being made by himselfe Or of the order of Don-Quixote knighted in an Inne by the good fellow his host For so they are eyther voluntary Priestes arrogating that dignity without commission or created at the Nags-head in Cheape by them that had as much authority to make them as the Inkeeper to dub a knight Or at the most they can be no other then Parlamentall Priests ordayned by the new deuised forme of that temporall Court authorized by the letters patents first of a Child then of a woman which although it may giue more shew and countenance to the vsurpation of their titles yet it giueth no more right then the former to the dignity of their functions 13. Moreouer no secular Princes or temporall Magistrates No secularprinces haue power to coÌ„ferre ecclesiastical orders haue authority to confer Ecclesiasticall orders But the order of Mynistery which our ghospellers challenge was both in Kinge Edward and Queene Elizabeths dayes wholy deuised and primarily conferred by the is secular and temporall authority It was therefore no true Episcopall Priestly or Ecclesiasticall order The Maior or first Proposition is apparant in nature For no man can imparte vnto others that which he hath not himselfe Secular persons neyther a part nor assembled togeather in publike Parlament haue any ecclesiasticall order or iurisdiction much lesse can they communicat it vnto others Then Ciuill Magistrates haue only Ciuill power in Ciuill affayres ordeyned to Ciuill and naturall endes The Episcopall or Priestly order is a spirituall dignity touching spirituall functions directed to a spirituall and supernaturall end which can no more be deriued from a Ciuill Magistrate then white from blacke day from night The Minor or second Proposition I proue by the Parlament lawes other testimonyes vnanswerable In the first of King Edward a Statute was made That Archbishops Bishops should not send out their sommons citations other processes in their own names but in the name and stile of the Kinge Seeing as the law it selfe speaketh that all authority of iurisdiction spirituall Edward 1. chap. 2. and temporall is deriued and deducted from the Kinges Maiesty as supreme head of these Churches and Realmes of England and Ireland and so iustly acknowledged by the Clergy of the sayd Realmes Then you heard before how by the Kinges letters Patentes Archbishoprickes and Bishopprickes were conferred And Fox testifyeth that King Henry 8. imparted to the Fox in his Monu pag 522. 1. Eliz. 1. c. 1. Lord Cromwell the exercise of his supreme spirituall regimeÌ„t making him in the Church of England vicegerent for concerning all his iurisdiction ecclesiasticall In the first likewise of Queenâ— Elizabeths raygne a Statute was enacted whereby all spirituall or ecclesiasticall power or authority is vnited and annexed to the Imperiall crowne of her Realme c. all sorrayne vsurped power iurisdiction preheminence cleerly extinguished c. and by solemne oath renounced forsaken in so much as Doctour Whitgift placed in the Queene the fulnes of VVhitg tract 8. c. 3. d. 33. all ecclesiasticall gouernement from whome all ecclesiasticall power and authority is deriued to Bishops and mynisters she hauing in her as he writeth the supreme gouernment in al causes ouer all persons as she doth exercise the one apportayning to matters Ciuile and temporall by the Lord Chauncelour So doth she the other concerning the Church religion by the Archbishops 14. As this power was straunge and neuer heard of before in any Christian heathen or Turkish commonwealth So the maner of consecrating the mynisters of those dayes was new and before vnasuall For another Act was made in the third of King Edwards raign 3. Edward c. 12. fol. 15. wherein it is sayd Be it therefore enacted by the Kinges Highnes with the assent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and the Comâ—ons of this present Parlament assembled and by the authority of the same That such forme and manner of making and consecrating of Archbishops Bishops Priests Deacons and other Mynisters of the Church as by sixe Prelats and sixe other men of this Realme learned in Gods law by the Kinges Maiesty to be appointed and assigned or by the most number of them shal be deuised for that purpose and set forth vnder the great seale of England before the first day of Aprill next comming shall by vertue of this present Act be lawfully exercised and vsed and none other any Statute law or vsage to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding Further when this new deuised forme of consecrating Bishops Priests c. bred many doubtes of the inualidity of their consecration and ordering Queene Elizabeth in publique Parlament decreed that all persons that haue been or shal be made ordered or consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priestes after the forme and order prescribed by Kinge Edward in the same forme and order be in very deed 8. Elizab. 1. and also by authority hereof declared and enacted to be and shal be Archbishops Bishops Priests c. and rightly made ordered and consecrated Any Statute law canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding 15. What meaneth this Statute Were your Bishops lawfully ordeyned and consecrated before Why then are they not only declared as M. Mason would excuse the manner of speach but enacted to be and shal be Archbishops c In vayne was this Act if they needed it not and Mason lib. 3. c. 4. p. 122. if they needed it it auayled them nothing as I haue already proued Or to speake more clearely Eyther the Lordes of the Parlament with their Queene had authority to install their Bishops in Episcopall dignity and make their inauguration lawfull in case it had beene inualid or they had no power to doe it Which of these M. Mason will you graunt For
Church as a flatterer stileth him wrote directly agaynst them Where was that ordinary succession ordinary calling common consecration of Protestant superintendents of which M. Mason braggeth so much by three of our Bishops or such as were ordeyned by them when Whitaker denyed their Prelates and ministers to be ordeyned by Papisticall Bishops When he â—aught that they ought not to be created by them That the manner of consecrating by three Bishops Ibid. f. 308. did not take place in their lapsed Church That Catholique Bishops could not be induced to lay hands vpon Ricard Stock in dedicatory epist to my them That their succession was extraordinary not according to the receaued manner Were Masons ordinations then a foote His forged consecrations euery where practised when Whitaker so often and so aduisedly Lord Knowles protesteth the contrary But into such contradictions they are wont to fal who wrongfully lay claim to false pretended titles Mason lib. 1. 2. 3. 22. The chiefe reason which moued Mayster Whitaker Mayster Fulke and their consortes thus to disclaime froÌ„ the ordination of Catholike Bishops was because VVhitak contro 2. q. 3. cap 1. folio 184. Episcopi qui secuti GregoriuÌ„ magnum verifuerunt Antichristi Fulke in c. 20. Apo. sect 2. Sparke in his answere to M. Iohn d' Aâ—bins p. 23. they most iniuriously accounted them antichristian Prelates The Bishops sayth Whitaker which followed Gregory the great were true Antichrists They were as Fulke miscalleth them Prelates of the Antichristian Church Right Priests of Antichrist sayth D. Sparke yea nothing is more common among them then to cal our people the limmes of Antichrist our Church the congregation of Antichrist our Priests Fulke in c. 2. ad Thess sect 9. and in c. 17. Apo. sect 1. 4 in other of his works and Bishops the slaues and shauelinges of Antichrist our Popes euen Antichrists themselues Which although they be most malicious and spiâ—ifull calumniations howsoeuer Mayster Powell belieueth the letter as an article of faith Yet see the misery of English Superintendents when to the condemnation of all their neighbour brethren who want that calling they are fayne to begge their spirituall power from such as they misdeeme Antichristian Gabriel Powel in tract de Antichristo p. 2. Bishops when they cannot enter the folde of Christ but by the back-dore of Antichrist nor minister his Sacraments but by ordination from Antichrist nor feede his sheepe but by commission from Antichrist nor receaue holy orders and conferre them to others but by the authority ProtestaÌ„ts aredriuen to great extremityes wheÌ„ they beg from Antichrist all their christian rites of Antichrist Was the sonne of God so needy The Church his spouse become so bankrupt as not to haue any power or iurisdiction left but what it borrowed from Antichrist her deadly enemy Was Christ disrobed of all his inheritance and after so many ages did he repaire to you to restore him his right by the meanes of Antichrist By his slauish army by his Antichristian Idolatours O M. Mason how base are your thoughts how miserable your clergy when you are forced to run to this miserable refuge To go on Protestant mynisters want true mission or vocatioÌ„ to preach 23. The last defect of Protestant ministery is mission or vocation to preach which is so necessary to the function of a lawfull Pastour and duâ—y of the faythfull as Saint Paul sayth How shall they belieue him whome they haue not heard And how shall heare without a preacher But how shall they preach vnlesse they be sent In which words he chaineth together in a linke inseparably these fower thinges Fayth Hearing Rom. 10. v. 14. 15. Preacher and Mission and as Hearing is requisite in the belieuer that â—e may rightly belieue so Mission in the preacher that he may lawfully preach This mission or calling is of two sortes the one immediatly from God which is called an extraordinary Mission ought to be proued by apparant miracles the irreproueable seales conformations of Gods will The other mediatly only by authority communicated vnto them from Apostolicall men the vicegerents of Christ vpon earth which is tearmed an ordinary vocation the vsuall Mission now Matth. 28. Rom. 10. Eph. 4. Luther Tom. 5. â— VViteÌ„ in c. 1. ad Galat. folio 376. practised in the Church and which hath continued according to the promise of Christ and testimony of the Apostle confessed by Luther and shall continue euen to the end of the world without which whosoeuer arrogateth the name of a Preacher he is an vsurper an intruder that rusheth in at the window and entreth not at the dore he is a wolfe a theefe who cometh not but to steale kill destroy 24. Wherefore although we should bestow vpon Protestants the almes of ordination they so importunatly begge although they could deriue a true consecration Eavocatio durauit vsque ad nostra teÌ„pora durabit vsque ad finem muÌ„di which they shall neuer be able from Catholique Bishops yet their Commission and warrant to preach their Caluinisticall doctrine their vocation thereunto they can neuer shew For let them tell me who called them to that office Who gaue them authority to preach their Protestant fayth Temporall Princes and secular people whome Mayster Whitaker assigneth They cannot communicat that spirituall power they cannot preach themselues much lesse enable others to discharge that office VVhitak contro 2. q. 5. ca. 6. f. 36â— Agayne what Princes or people might they be No Catholike Princes would giue them commission to preach Protestant doctrine No Protestant Princes or people were heard of vntill Luther and his disciples had publiquely In vayne do ProtestaÌ„t mynisters pretend their calling from temporall Princes or secular magistrates preached their Protestant Ghospell In vayne then doe they seeke their calling from these Will they pleade it from some ecclesiasticall persons Priestes or Bishops But I haue often inculcated that there was not any Protestant Priest or Bishop in the world when these Sectaryes first beganne and as for Catholique Bishops they were so farre from giuing them any Commission to preach or power to mynister Sacraments after their manner as they excommunicated and forbad them all pulpits and oratoryes renounced all society and participation in Sacraments with them laboured by all meanes possible to hinder suppresse their false and new coyned Gospell Therefore M. Mason striueth to vnderprop their Mission not by letters of credit from any secular magistrates or orthodoxall Bishops but by the broad seale forsooth as he falsly supposeth of holy Scripture the common warrant to which euery heretique seemeth to lay clayme saying Cranmer the rest receaued Mason l. 2. c. 2. folio 11. from you the shell of succession without the kernell of doctrine For though our Church did giue men power to preach the truth yet being bewitched with Antichrist in many things it did not reueale the
the euill are constrayned to deliuer true things for they aâ—â— Fox actes monuments pag. 999. 464. 1401. 1436. 1286. The Puritans in their discouery in a sermon preached 1588. by Bancroft pag. 34. The Protestants Apology tract 3. sect 7. n. 68. not their owne things which they deliuer but Gods who hath placâ—â— the doctrine of verity in the chayer of vnity We want not heerin the suffrages of Protestants of Foxe himselfe and sundry of his Martyrs of M. Bancroft late Bishop of Canterbury the Puritans not forbearing to carpe and reprehend him for it and of others mentioned in the Protestantâ— Apology for the Roman Church which in euery Chapter so victoriously triumpheth ouer our Reformers innouation by the irrefragable testimonyes of Reformers themselues as M. Morton astonished with the euidence brought against him was suddainly beaten backe from his rash attempt which he neuer since had the hart to prosecute or any other presumeth to take pen in hand to answere that excellent and euer vnanswerable worke 7. The reasons which perswade the infallibility of the Church are sundry and they most forcible For what could moue any Infidell or Atheist to forsake his errours and come vnto the Church if that might also beguile him with errour what meanes had we to condemne an Heretike or disproue his errours if the Church might erre Diuers reasons which coÌ„uince the infallibility of the Church in disprouing of them How should we know where to rest whome to consult in doubts of fayth if the highest Iudges might iudge amisse What assurance haue we of our beliefe religion scripture sacraments of Christ himselfe and all other articles of fayth if the Church which teacheth them might erre in teaching The same inconueniences the same confusion would ensue supposing it If the Church could erre fayth it selfe all things els were vncertayne were limited not to erre only in fundamentall points necessary to saluation For then the vnconstant and wauering Christian might still cast as many doubtes whether the thinges defined where fundamentall or not Whether necessary or not necessary to saluation Then the people might call their Pastours doctrine and definition in question they might examine whether the arâ—â—cles deliuered be substantiall and such wherein their â—â—eachers be freed from errour or no Then new schisms â—â—d contentions would dayly breake forth all things â—ill remaine vncertaine 8. To prosecute a little further one of these reasons For â—t were too much to enlarge them all The tradition or â—estimony of our Church in deliuering the whole canon of scripturs vpon whose authority also most Protestants receaue it of what account do you make it If fallible the An argument vnanswerable fayth you gather from thence the Religion you ground thereon must likewise be fallible vncertayne and no way autenticall For the truth gleaned from the scripturs cannot be more sure then the Scriptures themselues from which it is gathered If infallible You grant what we require For the promises of God the assistance of the holy Ghost which warranteth the testimony of our Church to be of inuiolable authority in this point being generall and without restriction must warrant it also in The same promises of God which assure the Churches infallibility in one thing assure it in all all other traditions interpretations doctrines whatsoeuer and so you that forsake her sentence renounce her definitions renounce the Oracles of truth and decrees vndeceiuable or els shew what exception what limitation the holy Ghost hath made where he restrayned her priuiledge of infalibility to that particuler more then to other articles of our beliefe This is a Gordian knot which breake you may vnty you cannot For suppose you should reply as a Protestant once answered me that it appertayned vnto the prouidence of God to keep safe his holy writ and challenge it from corruption I would further inquire of you whether God hath greater care of the letter or sense of the inward kernell or outward rine of the bone or marrow of his word Of the marrow no doubt Then he preserued that more safe in the harts of his faythfull then the other in the rolles of paper and so as you take the barke and outward letter from the tradition of our Church much more ought you to borrow from her the true sense and sap and heauenly iuyce Finally to what end do Protestants striue so much ProtestaÌ„ts according to their owne groundes haue neither any fayth or religion for the Churches erring but only to depriue themselues therby of Church faith religion For wheras neither religion nor Church can staÌ„d without supernatural faith nor supernaturall faith be atteyned without infallible certeinty of the thinges beleeued if their preachers their Ministers their Church be not vndoubtedly fenced from all daunger of errour the articles they beleeue haue not that inerrable warrant which is necessary to faith Faith saith S. Bernard hath nothing ambiguous or doubtfull if it hath any thing ambiguous it cannot be faith Whereupon it is defined Heb. 11. v. 1. Aug. l. 13. de Trinit c. 10. tract 79. in loan Chrysost in bunc locuÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil in explicat psal 115. Chrysost in hunc locuÌ„ Dyonil c. 7. de diuin nom by the Apostle to be the substance c. the argument of thinges not appearing that is a demonstration or conuiction by which our vnderstanding is acerteyned conuineed of the truth or as the greek importeth it is the basis grounde or foundation firme sure stedfast imoueable either of the hoped reuealed verities as S. Basil with S. Iohn Chrysostome indgeth or of them that hope beleeue fastning them in the truth the truth in them according to S. Denis S. Augustine from whence the comon schoole of diuines gather this principle that faith cannot be subiect to falsity no nor to any feare or suspition therof This infallible ground of assurance Protestants haue not beleeuing only vpon the credit of their Church which may beguile them Therefore howsoeuer they bragge of their all-sauing faith not any faith haue they or Church or religion at all August tract 7â— in loan Fidei non potest subesse falsum 9. Heer my aduersaryes cauill with vs that they haue as much fayth as we who rely vpon the definitions of our Popes and Prelates for they are men and euery man is a lyer as the scripture reporteth I answere our supreme Bishops are by nature men by infirmity subiect to lyes deceits yet as they are by faith Christians by inward vnction heyres of heauen so they are by Pastorall authority gouernors of the church officers of God organs of the holy ghost by whose perpetual assistaÌ„ce they caÌ„not erre they cannot in their publique decrees or generall assemblyes deliuer vnto the faithfull what is subiect to vncerteinty because that which they speake Christ speaketh in them that which they deliuer the spirit
of God deliuereth 2. Cor. 1â— v. â— Psal 8. â— Hier. l. â— comm in 6. â— ad Gal. Dâ—os eos esse manifestum est qui auteâ— Dij sunâ— tradunt Dei Euangelium non hominis In which respect S. Ierome doubteth not to call S. Peter S. Paul such as enioy their priuiledg after the phrase of scripture by the name of Gods thereupon maketh this illation But they that are Gods deliuer the Gospell of God not of man 10. Yet let vs view some other allegations which these erring and lying Ministers bring in to find the church guilty of errour Marry VVhitaker Reynoldes depose that which befalleth to one may befall to the whole but euery one in particuler may erre therefore the whole may erre which is a most false deposition plaine Sophisme arguing from each deuided member of the Church to the whole body ioyntly considered as if a cauiller should say This stone it self cannot be sufficient to raise a tower nor this nor that VVhitak contr 2 q. 4. c. 3. fol. 274. Reynoldes in his secoÌ„d conclusion fol. 628. as it is printed togeather with his conference nor any one a part Therefore a whole huge heap together cannot suffice It is a meere sophisticall kind of reasoning For we see that many do raise that which one or a few cannot Many forces of men vnited are able to draw that which no man in particuler can mooue A whole Army of souldiers vanquisheth a kingdom which on one the most valiaÌ„t captaine can annoy So the whole Church may preserue the truth vnspotted which no pâ—rticuler can doe Chiefly because the whole is guarded by Gods promise assisted by the holy Ghost the shield of her defence which deuided Churches want but the holy ghost saieth Whitaker and Fulke is also promised to euery one in particuler Christ prayed to sanctify euery one confirme him in D. VVhit contro 2. q. 4. c. 2. f. 168. Fulk in c. 16. Ioan. sect 5. in c. 3. 1. Tim. sect 9. verity as he did for the whole for the laity aswell as for the Clergy for the people as much as for the Priestes It is true he prayed for all and each particuler promised the holy ghost to euery one but in a diuers manner according to euery ones seuerall state degree he praied for the Apostles and Bishops their Successours he assured theÌ„ the holy ghost as to parentes maisters shepheards of his fold to the laity euery one of the faithfull as to children schollers and sheep to be directed by them They haue the holy ghost 〈◊〉 their mouthes to teach preach instruct anâ— How the spirit of God in â—â—â—â—ised to the whole Church and how to 〈…〉 particular member VVhitak cont 2. q. â— c. ap 3. fol. â—8â— Seueruâ— l. 2. Theod. c. 19. Ream linguam non facis nisi rea mens VVitnes S. Athan. epist ad â—rancâ—s â—â—â—erne these in their hartes to obey beleeue keep vnity peace submission They his publique assistance for the publique function profit of the Church these his priuar direction for their owne priuate comfort particuler saluation Therefore as the Pastours Gouernours cannot erre in teaching defining or publiquely condemning false opinions so neither any one of the faithfull in beleeuing obeying or shunning those whom the Church hath censured Thus the whole and euery part securely trauayleth towardes the coast of heauen with the safe conduct of the holy ghost for the edificatioÌ„ complement and full perfection of the misticall body of Christ 11. Whitaker obiecteth againe that all Churches Arianized and consequently erred when the whole world aâ— S. Ierome reporteth groaned wondred to see â— selfe an Arian But S. Ierome by the figure Synecdoche vseth the whole for a great parte who were deceaued in the Councell of Arimine partly by the fraude of Valens the Arian Bishop partly by imbecillity of wit yet diuers of them materially only Wherefore seeing it is â—n Axiome in the law that the tongue it not made guilty but by the guilty mind they reteyning the true Catholique faith in their hartes formally also in open profession yeilded not properly to Arianisme but stil preserued the true state of the Church which was likewise at the same time inuiolably maynteyned in the West especially in those renowned Bishops and their flock S. Hilary S. Ambrose S. Eusebius of Verselles in Athanasius and others of Greece And that boysterous tempest continued but three yeares for then as S. Hierome relateth the beast dyed there succeeded Hier. dial aduer Lucifer a calme From the Church our aduersaryes flye to the Councells representing the Church and draw bills of enditement to conuict them of errour but their allegations are voyd and insufficient For such Councells as they meane were either vnlawfull conuenticles tumutuously assembled or if lawfully gathered not lawfully continued or not wholy approued or falsly accused or they erred only in some matter of fact not in any point of doctrine or article of beliefe 12. At least say they the old Church and Synagogue of the Iewes wholy erred when Aaron and the Two other obiections of aduersaries answered Exod. 3â— Mar. 14. whole multitude adored the golden Calfe and when Caiphaâ— the chiefe Bishop and whole Councell of Priestes adiuged Christ to death I answere that Aaron was not then inuested with the authority of high Priest but that office was imparted long after vnto him as appeareth out of the last of Exodus Then the Leuits neuer consented to that Idolatry nor Moyses in whome the supreme Priestly dignity still remayned To the second obiection I answere The infalibility of the Sinagogue when christ bad established his Church that the Councell of the Scribes Pharisces was tumultuously gathered not to interpret the law or teach the people but to pronounce sentence in a matter of fact against the Sonne of God or if they did erre in a chiefe point of faith it maketh nothing against vs for Christ had then planted his Church preached his doctrin Therfore the infallible assistance of the Holy Ghost was no longer tyed to the Synagogue Christ being present the head of his Church and hauing sufficiently promulgated his Ghospell 13. Therfore to draw to an end seeing the true Church neuer did or euer can stray from the truth as the Scriptures The Protestants Church cannot be the true Church of Iesus Christ by their own confessioÌ„ Fathers reasons conuince And seeing Protestants confesse that their Church may erre or goe astray for a tyme we must needs conclude that their Church is not the inerrable spouse of Iesus Christ but the harlot of Sathan the Temple of Baal the Stewes of an aduoutresse or if they now recant and yield vnto vs that the true Church cannot step awry in any one generally receaued point of beliefe it necessarily followeth that all their pretended reformations of her errours haue beene innouations
remission of sinnes is only to be had apart by themselues nor together with vs vnles they acknowledge our church to be true Which if they graunt as needs they must vnlesse they precipitate their forefathers into hell by diuiding them from the band of Gods spirituall campe they ought to returne their chiefest ringleaders all their complices for blasphemous slaunderers in calumniating the spouse of Christ in calling his Virgin with a sacrilegious Hieron in dialogâ— ad Luciferia cap. 8. tongue for these be Saint Hieromes wordes the strumpet of the Diuell the whore of Babilon the seat of Antichrist the â—inagogue of Sathan c. They are bound as Field counsayleth â—hem to imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her Field in his dedicatory Epistle to the arhâ—Arhâ—bishop of CaÌ„terbury â—â—dgements They are bound to belieue Transubstantiation â—â—rgatory inherent Iustice Intercession of Saints worship of Images â—â— all other articles which she in her generall Councells out of the word of God by lawfull authority hath publikely enacted or els they are to be accounted heathens publicans who obey not the Church they are to be ceÌ„sured as heretiks who rebell agaynst it 11. Yf ours were the true Church howsoeuer they imagine it to be stayned with errours yet their separation from her is an Apostacy from Christ a diuorce from his spouse a dismembring from his body and a most execrable disunion and schisme from the vnity of Gods chosen flocke Which cannot by any ignorance be excused in you nor by any ill liues of our Prelates tyranny of publike or abuses of our priuate men be warranted to be lawfull For Saint Paul repreheÌ„ded Aug. l. 3. coÌ„t ep Par. cap. 4. Incests Contentions and many other faultes in the church of Corinth The Prophets did the like in the church of the Iewes yet they neuer presumed to separate themselues from them in fellowship and communion Moyses hâ—â—h cryed sayth Saint Augustine Isay hath cryed Ieremy hath cryed let vs see whether they deuided the people of God how â—oatly did Ieremy rebuke the wicked liuers of his people yet he was amongst Aug. l. 2. cont lit Petil. c. 51. them he entred the Temple togeather with them he frequented the same Sacraments in that Congregation of the wicked he liued In another place writing of the Prelates faults which ought not to cause any schisme in the people he thus challengeth the Donatist PetiliaÌ„ the CaluiniaÌ„ ProtestaÌ„t VVhy doest thou call the Apostolike chayre the chayre of pestilence Yf for the meÌ„ why Did our Lord Iesus Christ for the Pharises any wrong to the Chayre wherin they sate Did he not commend that Chayre of Moyses and preseruing the honour of the Chayre reprooue them For he saith They sate vpon the Chayre of Moyses that which they say do ye These thinges if you did well consider you would not for the men whome you defame blaspheme the Sea Apostolike wherewith you do not communicate Ibid ca 61. And a few Chapters after Neyther for the Pharisees iâ— whome you compare vs not of wisdome but of malice did our Lord coÌ„maund the Chayre of Moyses to be forsaken In which Chayre verily he figured his own For he warneth the people to do that which they say not to do that which they doe and that the holines of the Chayre be in no case forÌ„saken nor the vnity of the flocke deuided for the naughty pastours Caluin lib. 4. instit c. 1. §. 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 12. Yea Caluin also discoursing of this matter sayth There may some faultines creepe into the Church in the administration of the doctrine and of the Sacraments which ought not to estraunge vs from the communion of it A little after For as much as there is no man which is not wrapped with some little cloud of ignorance eyther we must leane no Church at all or we must pardon a being deceaued in such thinges as may be vnknown without violating the sum of Religion Where he proueth by the testimony of S. Cyprian by the former example of Saint Paul of the Prophets of Christ himselfe That neyther the pestilence of vices nor corruption of manners doctrine in matters of such moment as do not endanger saluation should euer withdraw vs from the fellowship of Christs flock yea he there auerreth that the departing from the Church is a denying of God and of Christ c. Neyther can there be imagined sayth he a fault more Caluin â—b cap. 1. §. 10. haynous then with wicked breach of fayth to defile the mariage which the only begotten sonne of God hath vouchsafed to contract with vs. Hitherto Caluin 13. By which you see that if the Roman Church was at Luthers rising the true Church of Christ he should not haue forsaken the band of her communion Yf it was not no Church remayned by which he might be â—â—â—ne or you propagated none in which the truth was â—â—eached Sacraments ministred so no Church can â—ou find by your own essentiall propertyes of finding the Church In liew of which I shall display such euident â—â—parent marks as al both rude learned simple wise â—ay manifestly discouer the true Church of Christ And â—â—rst I will handle fowre most honourably meÌ„tioned both â—n the Nicen Constantinople creed that it is one holy Caâ—holike Apostolicall wherin vnity consent in fayth sanâ—â—ity in doctrine manners the name Catholike with â—â—e sense meaning therof Apostolicall succession are â—lainly intimated as the vndoubted notes badges of the Church CHAP. XIIII In which Vnity is explayned and strongly proued to be a marke of the Church Agaynst Doctour Whitaker and Doctour Fielde AS the soueraigne and incompatable goodnes the prime verity and truth it selfe is one the same constant vnchaungeable So whatsoeuer parâ—â—keth most of vnity constancy and integrity that approacheth neerest to the perfection of truth and whatsoeuer is variable chaungeable seuered by schisme rent by diuision that proceeds from obliquity of errour that iâ— infected with the corruption of falshood Hence it commeth that vnity is a cleere and manifest token of the true Church a note of Christes Kingdome whereas diuision schisme and variance is the brand of heresy a proper peculiar blot of the peruerse wicked and Sathanicall synagogue by which it falleth vpon a sudayne to irreparable ruine and vtter desolation as our Sauiour diuinely witnessed saying Euery Kingdome deuided agaynst it selfe shal be made desolate and house vpon house shall fall So we read that discorde and rebellion hath beene the generall destruction Luc. 11. 17. and bane of common wealthes and vnion peace and concord hath beene alwayes the stay and preseruation of them 2. I speake not heere of that which the Philosophers call numericall or indiuiduall vnity by which the Church is on it selfe and deuided from all false or hereticall assemblies but of the vnity of
Nestorians Donatistes and diuers other sectaryes and haue they not beene euer since cassiered hated as arrant heretikes Are any of their Monumentes now extant Is there any memory left of them but only amongst the Catholike writers who confuted them For where I pray are the Psalmes of Valentinus and his Sophia The fundamentall Epistle What is become of all the eloquent works of former heretiks of the Manichees The Antithesis of Marcion Where is Arius Thalia Apollinaris great volume of 30. bookes Where are the Rules of Taconius the letters of Petilian the eloquent writings of other heretikes Are they not all trodden vnder feete and consumed by the Roman church So in short tyme the Protestants Harmony of consessions Caluins Institutions Bezas theologicall treaties Willets synopsis Spalatens Stan. Resc in Euang. sect Cent. Commonwealth and all such moderne writings with their professours wil be cleane worn out by that euer flourishing and abiding Sea For thus about a hundred eyghty and one furious raging and principall sects besides innumerable braunches springing from them before Luther and his Protestant broode was hatched haue beene vtterly vanquished and destroyed by her And what hope may these Gospellers haue to stand in battayle where so mighty aduersaryes are fallen to the ground Yf it be a treachery to God a disloyalty to his spouse to resist the Roman sea how tremble not they who storme agaynst it Yf all those whome she hath hitherto censured haue euer after beene adiudged for heretikes in what case are The RomaÌ„ Church neuer as yet condeÌ„ned any for heretikes but alwayes after they were held for such Protestants whome her highest and grauest Senate hath publikely condemned in the Councell of Nice 10. Yf others who had Emperours to support them Councells to fauour them Bishops Patriarches and a great part of the world to ayde them are notwithstanding quite abolished by the power of that Church haue not Protestants reason to feare the like destruction abolishment of their sect which by her owne often chaunges diuisions mutuall disagreements and endles brawles hasteâ—â—eth apace to ruine and decay whilest our Roman Religion perpetually vpholden by Gods protection standeth inuiolable and euer flourishing in the eye of the world from the Sea Apostolike by succession of Bishops heretikes vaine barking about it hath gotten sayth S. Augustine the height of authority hath assembled so many Councells condemned so many heresies wonne so many victories so often Aug. li. de vtilit cred vanquished the gates of hell Wherefore to conclude this marke Euen as when the Esquire of King Darius body had ended his discourse all the people cryed out Great is truth it preuayleth so all indifferent and iudicious readers will I doubt not giue sentence witâ— me and say Great is Esdras 3. c. 4. the Roman Church Great is the Sea of Peter Great is that rocke and highest throne it subdueth all her rebellious aduersaryes CHAP. XVIII In which the Name of Catholike is proued to a marke of the Church Agaynst D. Whitaker D. Fulke and D. Field NOvv I come to the great character of our glory and renowned title of our profession the name Catholique a name famous in the Primitiue Church famous in the Apostles dayes and inserted by them amonge the Articles of our Creed famous after in all succeeding ages and vsed comonly by the Fathers not so much to make a difference which some thinke betwixt the Iewish Sinagogue and the Christian Church as to CasauboÌ„ in his answ to the Ep. of Cardin. Peron fol. 6. in Eng. seuere and distinguish the false named Christians themselues from the true and vnfayned beleeuers Which Pacianus that eloquent Bishop of Barcelona giueth vs to vnderstand in these wordes VVhen after the Apostles heresies sprung vp and with diuers names endeuoured to rend the doue of God and teare his Queene in peeces did not the Apostolicall people engraue a surname Pacianus Epist 1. ad Simpro which might distinguish the vnity of the flocke incorrupted least the errour of some diuided into parts should rend and disseuer the vndefiled Virgin of God c. I entring sayth he a populous Citty where I find the Marcionists Apollinaristes Cataphrigians Nouatians who entitle themselues Christians how shall I know the congregation of my people vnles it were called Catholike And then he addeth Christian Ibidem stian is my name Catholike my surname that entitleth me this sheweth who I am Likewise S. Cyrill of Ierusalem If thou go into any Citty aske not where the Church is where the house of God is for Cyril cate 8. the very heretikes challenge them but aske where the Catholike Church is that is the proper name of our holy Church of vs all And Saint Augustines estimation hereof was such as he auoucheth The very name of Catholike keepeth we in the bosome of the Church The testimony of these three Fathers Whitaker obiecteth agaynst himselfe and to the former two he answereth Cyrill and Pacian in the name alone put no force Hath this man any conscience or regard what he sayth Peruse their Aug. con Ep. Fund cap. 4. wordes and passe your censure To S. Augustine he replyeth more bathfully but as friuolously altogeather Augustine sayth he attributeth something to the name but not so much as the Papistes And why not Because Bellarmine placeth that name VVhitak contro 2. q. 5 cap 2. in the first rancke Augustine in the last And is not the last place good Sir as respectfull and more honourable often then the first Is it not a precept also in Rhetorike to propose the most forcible arguments in the last place Therefore VVhitak Ibid. Saint Augustine recounting the motiues which held him in the bosome of the Church doth he make lesse account of the name Catholike because he placeth it last what childish stuffe is this You a diuine M. Whitaber and once Barl in his Answere pag. 269. Iren. l. 1. c. 10. Ierom. contra Lucifer ca. 7. Lactan. li. 7. diuin c. 30. Atha serm 2. coÌ„ Aria Field in his 2. booke of the Church ca. 9. publike Reader in Cambridge You he whose name though dead as M. Barlow braggeth is a terrour to Bellarmine yet dispute so idly 2. To proceed As the name Catholike hath been alwayes a peculiar note of the true beleeuers so to be stiled after the names of men as Lutherans of Luther Caluinistes of Caluin hath beene euer as Saint Irenaeus Saint Ierome Lactantius and Saint Athanasius teach a marke of heresy a token of schisme which M. Field likewise confesseth saying The name of a Cathelike was a note and distinctiue marke or character to knowe and discerne a Catholike from an heretike or schismatike by and the naming after the name of any man a note of particularity and hereticall or schismaticall faction The same he proueth a little after by the authority of S. Ierome Wherefore least he and his sectmates
Church c. 39. pag. 156. 157. 158. 159. Sparke in his answere to M. Iohn d'Albins du Plessis and M Doctour Field in some causes eagerly defend Some fly to extraordinary vocation and calling immediatly from God or from the priuiledge of truth which they pretend to deliuer as M. Sparke D. Fulke and D. Whitaker with diuers of the Puritan sect Fulke against Stap. and Martial pag. 2. VVhitak contr 2. c. 6 fol. 368. 371. Some others to the letters Patentes of their Prince and general consent of the Parlament house as many English Protestants did in the dayes of King Edward and at the beginning of Queene Elizabeths raygne But now their new Attorneyes finding the plea of their predecessours cleane ouerthrown in al the former cases they lay clayme to the pedegree of our Bishops to the row of our auncestours So cleare resplendent is this shining marke of our Roman succession as it maketh the very children of darkenes to runne vnto it and seeke to sunne themselues in the beames of her light like forlorne traytours who rebelling agaynst their soueraygne challenge his title to dispoâ—sesse him of his throne So Mayster Francis Mason M. FraÌ„cis Mason l. 1. cap. 2. folio 10. hath set forth a booke in folio to authorize the ordinary calling of their Protestant Ministery by the Canonicall consecration of our Roman Prelates The Mynisters of of England sayth he receaue imposition of handes in lawfull manner from lawfull Bishops indewed with lawfull authority therefore their calling is ordinary Thus he We aske by whome He answereth by the hands of such Bishops as went before them whome he confesseth to be vndoubted Bishops of the Roman Church And therefore telleth vs Archbishop CraÌ„mer and other heroycall he should say diabolicall spirits whoÌ„ the Lord vsed as his instruments to reforme religion in England had the very selfe same ordination and succession whereof you so glory 3. A desperate case when heretikes fly to Catholiques tentes when meere oucrastes eyther degraded or titularyes only would begge nobility from the stocke of such as degraded them But what hope can they haue to draw their lineage from them from whome they deriue Protestant Bishops Priestes haue neyther true successioÌ„ election ordinatioÌ„ or missioÌ„ not as I shall declare any Apostolicall succession canonicall election true ordination lawfull mission or authenticall vocation All which are necessary to an orthodoxall and Catholique Clergy And yet neyther of these maugre M. Masons large bulke to the contrary can be found amongst Protestants For first to an Apostolicall succession besides Election and Ordination of which hereafter two thinges are requisite 1. A place A priuiledge in chartamagna by which Catholike Priests are exempted from all secular power voyde eyther by depriuation voluntary resignation or naturall death Secondly a conformity in fayth with him that went before But when Younge for example Grindall Horne Pilkinton Bullingham c were intruded in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth into the Bishopricks of Yorke London VVinchester Durham Lincolne the true Bishops of those Seas to wit Heath Bonner VVhite Tunstall VVatson were liuing not resigning their dignityes vnto theÌ„ nor yet lawfully depriued of them Therfore the former had no vacant piaces wherein to succeede but were wolues theefes and vsurpers of other mens chayres That Hebr. 13. vers 17. they were not lawfully depriued I proue because Queene Elizabeth her Peeres and other officers who concurred to their dispositioÌ„ were of the layty not coÌ„petent Iudges Matth. 18. v. 18. eyther of ecclesiasticall Prelates or of their causes For such persoÌ„s were euen in criminall matters by the lawes of the Realme by the immunityes of Charta magna not Luc. 10. v. 16. then repealed exempted from subiection to secular Tribunalls vntill they were adiudged and giuen ouer vnto them as none of the former were by the authority of the Matth. 23. v. 3. Ioan. 21. v. 18. Nazian in or at ad ciuestimore perculsos Church Then the Apostle commaundeth all secular people Princes also for his wordes be general without restriction to obey their Prelates and be subiect vnto them Christ chargeth vs to heare them vnder payne of damnation To heare them as himselfe To do what they shall prescribe To be fed and gouerned by them Whereupon Saint Gregory Nazianzen speaking of Emperours saith The Law of Christ hath subiected you to my iurisdiction and to my tribunall For we Athanasius Ep. ad soli vitam agentes Ambros Ep. 32. ad Imp. Val. iuniorem Hosius ap Atha loco citato haue also an Empire yea a greater and more perfect then that of yours vnlesse it be fit to prostrate the soule to the body and heauenly thinges to earthly Saint Athanasius Saint Ambrose and the learned Hosius of Corduba testify the same in such serious manner as Saint Athanasius calleth it the abhomination of desolation foretold by Daniel for an Emperour to preside in ecclesiasticall affayres 4. Yea many zealous and godly Emperours haue wholy disclaymed from all power of intermedlinge with the decision or iudgmeÌ„t of ecclesiasticall matters as Valentinian the first Theodosius the younger Constantine the great whose words are these related by Ruffinus Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 7. Theodorus Ep. ad syn Ephes Bar. Tom. 1. pag. 732. God hath made you Priestes and hath giuen you power to iudge vs and therefore are we rightly iudged by you But you cannot be iudged by men How cleere then is our case that the foresayd Catholike Bishops could not be iudged by Queene Elizabeth and her Councell much lesse haue sentence of deposition pronounced agaynst them without which the ProtestaÌ„t intruders could not be inuested in their rooms nor be lawfully installed in their Episcopall dignity 5. Secondly as those pretended Bishops had no vacant Seas to inherite so they wanted conformity of doctrine which is likewise necessary to true succession they swarued from the fayth of their Catholique predecessours in sundry essentiall pointes And the lineall descent of persons the possession of place if it were truly vacant or resigned is of no force vnlesse it be ioyned with continuance of doctrine which made Saint Irenaeus to Irenaeus l. 4. aduer haere c. 42. Tertullian l. de praes forewarne vs with this caueat You ought to obey those who togeather with the succession of their Bishoprike charge haue receaued the giftes or priuiledges of truth And Tertullian auoucheth the Church to be called Apostolicall not only by reason of her personall succession of Bishops but propter consanguinitatem doctrinae by reason of the consanguinity or conformity Ambrose l. 1. de poeni c. 6. Gregorius NazianzeÌ„ oratione 21. of doctrine Because as Saint Ambrose sayth They enioy not the inheritance of Peter who retayne not the fayth of Peter He sayth Saint Gregory Nazianzen who maynteyneth the same doctrine is also partaker of the same chayre But he who imbraceth a contrary or aduerse fayth is to
one you must needes Had they authority Then no other ordination at that time to the validity of their orders was essentially required in their opinions but the royall assent of the Queene approbation of her Nobility Had they no authority or power to do it It was an vniust act theÌ„ of vsurpation in that honourable assembly a great want of Wisdome to make a law not appertayning to their office and nothing Mason pa. 132. 8. Eliz. c. 1. profitable to their cause 16. The like absurdityes ensew of the dispensation her Maiesty vsed to make good the consecrations of D. Paprker and other intruders ordeyned in the second or third of her raigne For if their consecrations were sound as Mayster Mason obiecteth to himselfe why did the Queene in her letters patentes directed for the consecrating of them vse diuers generall wordes and sentences whereby she dispensed with all causes or doubtes of any imperfection or disability that could or might be obiected in any wise agaynst the same as may appeare by â—â— Act of Parlament referring vs to the sayd letters Patents remayning vpon record Whereupon I conclude that seeing no man can dispense in the disabilityes of holy orders but such as haue authority to giue and conferre them eyther M. Maiesty who graciously dispensed to vse Mayster Masons wordes with Mason l. â— c. 5. p. 132. all causes or doubtes in their orders was the chiefe collatour and giuer of them or she iniuriously challenged to her selfe that which no law neyther of God nor man could possibly affoard her All the dawbinges which M. Mason applyeth to couer these faultes are pithily and iudiciously cast of by Mayster D. Champney For wheras he one while sayth that the Queene dispensed with the trespasses Doctour Champney in his answ to Mayster Mason c. 13. agaynst her owne lawes It is answered that there were no lawes of hers transgressed in consecrating of any before that tyme she hauing repealed in her first Parlament the lawes of Queene Mary which disanulled that new inauguration deuised by the twelue deputed by King Edward and hauing enacted no new lawes her selfe any way violable in that kinde before she practised that supreme power of her spirituall soueraygnty in graunting dispensations which was about the second yeare of her raygne Then when Mason dallyeth that she dispensed not in essentiall pointes of ordination but only in accidentall Mason l. 3. c. 5. p. 133. 8. Eliz. c. â— not in substance but in circumstance the wordes of the Queenes letters patents giue testimony agaynst him that she dispensed with all causes or doubtes of any imperfection or disability that can or may be obiected in any wise agaynst the same Now the doubtes were not about any accidentall ceremony or other not essentiall circumstance but as appeareth No man caÌ„ dispeÌ„se in the disabilityes of holy orders but he that hath power to coÌ„ferre theÌ„ by the Statute made in the Eight of Queene Elizabeth and by other most learned lawyers of the Realme as I shall declare by by they were about the very substance it selfe of their ordination whether they were true Bishops or no Likewise it belongeth only to them to dispense euen in accidental disabilities of holy orders to whome it belongeth to conferre the orders Therfore if Queene Elizabeth had power in M. Masons iudgemeÌ„t to doe the one she had authority to confer the other and that collation thogh voyde in it selfe was iudged sufficient amongst the Protestants Besides whereas M. Mason sayth That the wisdome of their Church discreetly and religiously pared away all superfluous and superstitions ceremonyes in ordination Mason l. 2. c. 11. p. â—4 What ceremony vnbeseeming What circumstance vnfitting remayned amongst them which needed dispeÌ„sation Especially seeing as M. Doctour Champney wel vrgeth agaynst him It is not to be thought that the Queene would dispense with those which the wisdome of their Church retayneth as good lawfull 17. In fine the ordination ministred in Queene Elizabeths raygne was no other then such as was deuised in the dayes of Kinge Edward ratifyed and confirmed by her But that inauguration was no validity as 8. Eliz. 1. appeareth by an Article of Queene Maryes made by the consent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and thus Fox in his Acts and Monum p. 1295. related by Mayster Fox Touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to any orders after the new sort and fashion of orders considering they were not ordered in very deed the Bishop c. The same Fox reporteth that Doctour Brook Bishop of Glocester proceeding to the degradation of Ridley consecrated Bishop after that new forme yet made Priest after the ancient tolde him That they were to degrade him only Fox pag. 1604. of Priesthood for they did not take him to be a Bishop Agaynst which Ridley neuer excepted Howbeit Cranmer being truly consecrated was degraded as Archbishop Then the opinion of the Iudges and censure of the common law disallowed that new ordination In the great Abridgement of the common law it is sayd Que Euesques c. That the Bishops in King Edward the sixt dayes were not consecrated Brookes Nouell cases placito 463. fol. 101. printed 1604. and therefore were not Bishops For which cause a lease for yeares made by them and confirmed by the Deane and Chapter shall not binde the Successour for such were not Bishops Contrarywise of a Bishop depriued which was Bishop in fact at the tyme of the letting confirmation made by the Deane and Chapter These were the Iudges words which are yet further strengthned by the case of Bishop Bonner who was certified into the Kings Bench by Doctour Horne supposed Bishop of Winchester for refusing the new oath appointed to ecclesiasticall persons by the statute of the first of Queene Elizabeth 1. Elizab. c. 1. vnto him offered in Southwarke in the Bishops howse there and his addition was Legum doctor in sacris or diuibus constitutus non clericus nec Episcopus And therefore the certificate was challenged sed non alocatur Also the sayd certificate was challenged for that the oath was sayd to be tendred vnto him by Robert Horne Bishop of Winchester who was no Bishop And Bonner was endited vpon this certificate in the County of Midlesex according to the Statute he pleaded thereunto not guilty And it was holden that the triall should not be made by a iury of Midlesex but by a Iurry of Surry and the venew of Southwarke c. It was also much debated amongst 6. 7 Eliz. Diar folio 234. al the Iustices in the Lord Catlins chamber if Bonner might giue in euidence vpon this issue not guilty that the said Bishop of VVinchester non fuit Episcopus teÌ„pore oblationu Sacramenti and resolued by all that the verity and matter being so indeed he should be well receaued vpon this issue and that the Iury should trye it The triall was
such as Bonner was discharged and neuer called more in question about that matter But it was presently after ordeyned in Parlament That all actes heretofore made or 8. Eliz. 1. 39. Eliz. 8. done by any person about the consecration confirmation or inuesting of any person elected to the dignity of an Archbishop or Bishop by vertue of the Queenes letters patents or commission since the beginning of her raigne shal be adiudged good 18. Which lawes had beene superfluous and not beseeming the dignity of that place if the sayd Bishops had been sufficiently made before especially seeing it is prouided in the same parlament that all tenders of the sayd 8. Eliz. c. 1. circa fineÌ„ â—ath made by any Archbishop or Bishop aforesayd or before the last day of this present Session to be made c. all refusalls of the same oath so tendred or before the last day of this present Session to be tendred by any Archbishop or Bishop c. shal be voyde and of no effect or validity in the law What better proofes What more forcible arguments to conuince the nullity of their Bishops former ordination then these Acts of Parlament these decisions of the Iudges That acquittance of Bishop Bonner This disanuiling of the oath tendred and refusall Abridgement of Diars reports 7. Eliz. 23. 4. thereof vntill that present Session in which their Bishops were adiudged authorized and enacted to be lawfull Otherwise it had belonged to that high Court to haue defended and maynteyned their Bishops precedent inauguration their tendring of the oath according to Sand de schis Angli pa. 166 D. Harding in his coÌ„fut of the Apol. par 2. cap. â— the Statute of the first of Queene Elizabeth condemned others refusall contrary thereunto 19. Further if Protestant superintendents had that vndoubted ordination which Mayster Mason fancieth why did their Ministers after Queene Elizabeth had vniustly deposed her lawfull Pastours seeke to Antony Kitchen Bishop of Landasse to be consecrated by him who by reason of his pretended blindnes auoyded the taske Why did they repayre to the Irish Bishop in the Tower Fulk in his answ to a counter Cashol p. 50. VVhitak contr 1. q. 5. cap. 6. Sutcliffe answere to exceptions pag. 87. Sparke in his answere to M. Iohn d' Albinsc 1. p 20 23. 24. 26. who likewise refused to lay hands vpon them and therfore were constreyned to ordeyne one another at the Nagge 's head in Cheapeside in such ridiculous manner as they are now ashamed of it Or if they had receaued their consecration from our Catholik Bishops what iniury doth Doctour Fulke both to his owne Prelats ours in saying vnto vs You are much deceaued if you think we esteeme your offices of Bishops Priestes and Deacons any better then laymen and you presume too much to thinke that we receaue your ordering to be lawfull What wronge doth Doctour Whitaker to himselfe and his collegues when he affirmeth our Catholique Bishops not to be lawfull Bishops eyther by diuine ecclesiasticall or Ciuill law And Sutcliffe in like manner The Romish Church is not the true Church hauing no Bishops nor Priestes at all but only in name what disgrace did Doctour Sparke cast on the glory of their Clergy when writing agaynst vs he presumeth to auow that our Bishops and Priestes haue no ordinary calling but wholy vnlawfull That infinite haue had their coÌ„secrations and orders from such as were no true Popes or Bishops during the tyme of the Papall schismes and thereupon inferreth how can we count those right Bishops and Priestes 〈◊〉 were made by such as had no right to make any or how shall we 〈◊〉 them from such as fetch their pedigree from right Popes This 〈◊〉 will trouble the whole Church of Rome to cracke 20. But now M. Sparke not the Church of Rome alone but your reformed Church of England is put to the trouble of cracking that nut Now you your selfe must cracke it or els you are a wolfe an intruder who commeth to kill and destroy the sheepe of Christ For as Socrates in the like case pithyly reasoned By the Nicen Fathers Socrates in hist Eccl. l. c. 32. all later Bishops are ordeyned if they had not the holy Ghost who might descend by ordination into euery one neyther haue these receaued the function of Priesthood For how could they receaue it when it 〈…〉 giuen by them who had it not So I dispute with Mayster Mason if our Bishops and Priestes had no ordinary calling no right to ordeyne any Yf they were wholy vnlawfull and meere laymen as his fellowes weene what calling haue their superintendents What ordination What spirituall iurisdiction deriued from such as had no authority to ordeyne them Doctour Whitaker therefore VVhitak contr 2. q. 5. c. 6. folio 35â— more ancient and neerer the beginning of Protestant profession then Maister Mason flatly denyeth the ordination or calling of their Mynistery to proceed from the Catholique Clergy which went before them saying Our Bishops and ministers although they be not ordeyned by Papistical Nostri Episcopi ministri si non sunt a Papisticis Episcopis ordinati tamen rite legitime ordinaÌ„tur Ibidem folio 357. IbideÌ„ folio 36. Bishops yet they are orderly and lawfully ordeyned A little before Truly amongst them Catholiques only they are lawfull Pastours who are called and created according to their order But we say their Ministery was corrupted and therefore that we ought not to be made and created Bishops by them Immediatly after being vrged with a Canon of the first Nicen Councell That a Bishop ought to be created by two or three Bishops he answereth That law was enacted by the Bishops and it was pious if it may be commodiously done and if there be godly Bishops from whome ordination may be had otherwise not which constitution in the flourishing Church may be reteyned not in the lapsed Agayne Touching ordination by three Bishops that constitution is to be obserued as longe as thinges remayne whole and entire and as longe as the Bishops were good otherwise not 21. Besides Yf he Bellarmine graunt our vocation saith Whitaker to be lawfull which neuer any Catholique did Ibid. f. 361. for ordination we 〈◊〉 contend because they that haue authority to cal haue authority also to ordeyne of lawfull ordination cannot be â—â—tayned c. But touching the Bishops of those tymes they neuer could be drawn Ad Episcopos veròillorum â—emporuÌ„ quod attinet illinuÌ„ quam induci potuerunt vt quemquaÌ„ ordinareÌ„t nisi qui illis per oÌ„niafaueret to ordeyne any vnlesse it were such a one as in all thinges fauoured theÌ„ For this cause he flieth at the end to an extraordinary successioÌ„ agaynst the common fashion and vulgarly receaued custome c. This quoth he our Church had because the ordinary succession was corrupt Where I pray Mayster Mason where lay your Registers hid when this glorious light of your
Truth But when God by the Scriptures reuealed it vnto them they both preached it themselues commended it to posterity So that the thinges reuealed vnto them in Scripture was all the Our Ghospellers haue no certayne rule to know their reuelation froÌ„ Scripture to be true warrant they had to preach such Protestant articles as they now maynteyne contrary to the approued doctrin of the Church 25. But I inquire of M. Mason what reuelation it was they had from Scripture Was it the priuate interpretation they made thereof That is fallible and subiect to errour That reuelation euery heretique challengeth and with as much reason maynteyneth it as any Protestant doth his Was it as others pretend the publique voyce of God which spake in Scripture But this In the first part of the Antidote in the first second chapter is a meere collusion of words to beguile the simple For the voyce of God speaking in Scripture is nothing els but the very text of Scripture the wordes and sentences vttered in Scripture as I haue elsewhere often declared Was it their industry labour in conferring reading finding out the true sense of Scripture But this industry was also deceauable as I haue inuincibly demonstrated Our Ghospellers haue not the true Christian fayth concerning any article whatsoeuer in the first controuersy of my Antidote Therefore Protestantes could haue no reuelation from Scripture wherreby they might be infallibly certayn which is necessary to sayth of the truth they deliuered Yea although they should haue lighted vpon the true meaning of some essentiall article of beliefe yet that article so taught and belieued because they so interprete that place of Scripture was not any article of Christian fayth not that diuine fayth which we are commanded to imbrace but a meere humane verity a humane fayth The reason is In the 9. chapter of this third part because the thing belieued causeth not fayth but the infallible motiue for which we belieue it that motiue in Protestants is altogeather fallible as hath been elswhere more largely conuinced Therefore the reuealed truth Luther in expo Ep. ad Galat. cap. 1. folio 215. printed ad VVittemberge by Ioan. Luâ—â— 1954. which they belieue is also fallible 26. Besides Truth reuealed to Protestants in holy Scripture is not sufficient for their Legantine power vnles the legacy also or charge of preaching be coÌ„mitted vnto them It is not inough sayth Luther their chiefe Patriarch for a man to haue the word and purity of doctrine but also he must be assured of his calling not of his calling oÌ„ly to Prieststood by the shell as you tearme it of succession or ceremony of ordination but of his calling and commission giuen to preach and recommend vnto posterity the kernell of Luther ibidem folio 276. doctrine This Mission this vocation he must also haue and that from men or els although thou wert as Luther sayth wiser then Salomon wiser then Daniell if thou be not called more then hell beware thou cast not out a word And many leaues Ierom. 23. v. 21. after he protesteth of himselfe that although he could deliuer soules from errour and damnation by his holesome doctrine yet he ought to commit the matter to God and not to preach Ezech. 13. v. 6. vnlesse he be called by men For such as do otherwise he tearmeth them impostors miscarryed not with a good but a wicked spirit They are those of whome Ieremy and Ezechiell fore warned vs I sent not the Prophets and they ranne I spake not vnto them they prophesied They see vayne thinges and they diuine lyes saying our Lord sayth whereas our Lord sent them not 27. Therefore albeit we should suppose that these new Gospellers had as Mayster Mason insinuateth power from vs to preach truth which notwithstanding is most false yet when they beganne to preach other doctrine then was deliuered vnto them other then was put into their mouthes by their predecessours therein they lost their calling ranne of themselues preached of themselues not sent from God with extraordinary miracles nor yet from men with ordinary commission to publish that fayth For as he who hath authority Aâ— Ambassadourâ— who alter the legacy of their Prince are not therein to be tearmed his Ambassadours no more can ProtestaÌ„ts be sayd to be sent to alter the coÌ„mission of those that sent them Optatus l. 2. contra Parmen from his Kinge to deliuer an Embassage if he alter or change the Massage of his Prince he cannot therein be truly sayd to be his legate or Ambassadour especially if the King recall or countermaunde whatsoeuer he proposeth contrary to his minde No more can Protestant Ministers though rightly ordered and lawfully called maynteyne their calling or vocation to preach any other truth then such as was commended vnto them much lesse if our Bishops reuerse their commission contradict their doctrine labour by al meanes vtterly to suppresse it For who doubteth but that such as haue power to communicate haue power also to reuoke moderate and restreyne the authority which they giue And whosoeuer persisteth after the reuocation or whosoeuer altereth the tenour of his commission he runneth not sent he prophesieth that which our Lord neuer sayd nor any of his seruants deliuered vnto him he is therein as Optatus wittily iesteth at Victor the Donaeist A sonne without a Father a Nouice without an instructour disciple without a mayster follower without a predecessour prodigiously borne a preacher of himselfe teaching a lesson which he neuer learned of any before For to go backe and say with M. Mason that God by Scriptures reuealed it vnto him is no authenticall or sufficient calling because generally all heretiques boast of the like reuelation all pretend their Mission and calling by Scripture That the Donatistes the Circumcellians the Arians arrogated and had as good warrant God leaueth not Scripture to euery ones priuat exposition but to the interpretation only of his Church for the true meaning of Scripture as any Protestant hath for his exposition Wherefore to auoyd the confusion occasions of errour which might ensue of leauing the Scripture to the particuler interpretations of priuat men it pleaseth God to vnfold the true sense meaning of his will to the publike Pastours preachers of his Church to them he infallibly deliuereth the inheritance of truth of them only we must seeke it to them we are bound to repayre to haue it opened vnto vs from them alone we can haue our vocation to preach it Otherwise euery mad and fanaticall spirit might fondly deuise as Protestants doe what constructions what reuelations he list 28. This reason Iohn Caluin the chiefe Architect of M. Masons religion assigneth why God teacheth not eyther by himselfe or by Angells but by the voyce and Caluin in c. 59. Isa speach of men This order quoth he God hath setled in his Church that they may vaunt themselues in
he then Constantine the Emperour gaue to the sayd Pope Siluester the towne of Rome and gaue vnto him the triple Crowne to be crowned therewith in token that he made him supreme head ouer all the Churches in Asia Africa and Europe as his gift conteyned in the decrees distin 96. For the like challenge of supremacy Zosimus Leo Gregory and Boniface are accused as the destroyers of the Church and first vsurpers according to Protestants of that vniuersall and Antichristian dominion Howbeit I haue apparantly conuinced in the second booke of my Antidote That the Supremacy was neyther giuen by Emperours eyther by Constantine to Saint Siluester or Phocas the Emperour to Boniface the third nor yet vsurped by Zosimus Leo Gregory or any other but that it was imparted immediatly from God to S. Peter and made hereditary to his Successours Which Constantine the Great plainly coÌ„fesseth in the very deed of gift or Charter of donation which he madâ— when resigning to the Pope the Citty of Rome Italy the westerne Prouinces In ipso Edicto donationis quod habetur Tomo 1. Concil fo 296. apud Binium Quoniam vbi principatus sacerdotum Christianae religionis caput ab Imperatore caelesti iustum non est vt illic Imperator terrenus habeat potestatem he departed to Constantinople Because sayd he Where by the heauenly Emperour the principality of Priests head of Christian Religion is placed it is not meete the earthly Emperour should beare any sway Therefore not the spirituall dignity or supreme headship which Constantine a little before deduceth out of the wordes of our Sauiour spoken to Peter whome he there calleth the Vicar of Christ but the temporall territories landes and reuenues were the endowments of the Roman Sea which he bestowed vpon S. Siluester 7. And the very Centuristes testify that before CoÌ„stantine the great the supremacy of Peter consequently of his successours was acknowledged by Tertullian of whome they write Tertullian doth seeme not without errour to thinke that the keyes of the Church were only giuen to Peter and that the Church was built vpon him They blame also S. Cyprian for affirming that the Roman Church is the Chayre of Peter from which all the vnity of Priesthood proceedeth Likewise Cyprian say they hath diuers other perilous opinions about this matter as for example that he tieth the office of true Pastorship to ordinary succession A little before they accuse him and three other Fathers of his tyme saying Cyprianus Maximus Vrbanus and Salonius doe thinke that one Bishop must be in the Catholike Church to wit one chiefe as head of the rest All these flourished before the dayes of Constantine So did Origen and Hipolitus Matth. 16. versus 18. 19. Martyr who subscribed to the primacy of one supreme Pastour Agayne if S. Siluester were the first Prelate by whome beganne as M. Napper blattereth the horrible detestable Kingdom of Antichrist the first general CouÌ„cel Centur. 3. c. 4. col 84. of Nice authorized in England by Act of Parlament in which he presided by his legats Hosius Vitus Vincentius which he after ratifyed and confirmed did fauour and Ibidem col 84. 85. vphold his Antichristian tyrranny If Zozimus were the man S. Austine was a limne of Antichrist who notwithstanding he was Bishop of Africa obeyed his iniunction Origen ho. 5. in Exod. ho. 7. in Lucam Hiâ—ol in ora deconsum mundi Napper p. 67 Cedrenus in compend histo Photius libro de 7. concilijs Damasus in Pont August Epist 157. of necessity as comming from his superiour The African Bishops likewise ouer whome our aduersaryes accuse him of encroachment for challenging the right Prosper Con. collat cap. 41. of appellations euen they I say were abettours of Antichrist to whose decrees Pope Zozimus as Prosper writeth added the authority or strength of his sentence and to the cutting of the wicked with the sword of Peter armed the right handes of all other Prosper in chronicis Prelates A Councell held at Carthage of 217. Bishops and the whole worlde did partake with Antichrist for that Councell sent vnto Zozimus their synodicall decrees CoÌ„cil CalcedoÌ„ in relation ad Leonem quae habetur Tomo 2. Conci act 16. paâ— 139. apud Binium Leo Sermo 2. in anniassuÌ„p sâ—u which being approued sayth Prosper throughout the whole world the Pelagian heresy was condemned 8. Yf Leo were the first by whome the Church was ruined and throne of Antichrist aduaunced why doe Protestants allow of the Oecumenicall sacred Councell of Chalcedon Which three tymes gaue him the title of holy acknowledged him their head and themselues his members humbly supplicated vnto him to ratify and confirme their Canons How doth Leo write thus of himselfe VVhen our exhortations are sounded forth in the eares of your Sanctity imagine him to wit S. Peter whose person we represent to speake vnto you because with his loue and affection we admonish Libro 1. ep 1. libro 6. ep 19. libro 1. ep 76. l. 4. ep 33. libro 7. iud 2. ep 2. l. 7. ep 32. l. 1. ep 72. 75. l 11. ep 50. 53. l. 7. indic 2. ep 112. libro ep 15. libro 9. indict 4. ep 61 l. 4. ep 15. 50. 55. libro 1. ep 19. l. 4. epist 9. you and we preach no other thing vnto you then that which he taught With what face could he haue deliuered this in such a publike assembly if he had coyned any new Gospell or taught any other doctrin then that which was preached by S. Peter But if S. Gregory as most Protestants accord was the last good and first Antichristian Pope then in his dayes some monstrous innouation was brought not only into the Roman diocesses but into al the Prouinces and Churches of Christendome which communicated with him as appeareth out of his Epistles to the Bishops of all countryes of Sicily Corsira Sardinia Africa Numidia Hispania Gallia Anglia Hibernia Grecia Dalmatia ouer whome he exercised the soueraygnty of his supreme iurisdiction yet he innouated nothing therin nor deliuered any other new doctrine not taught before as I demonstrate 1. By all these and other Bishops of his age who neuer appeached S. Gregory of any vsurpation of right or nouelty in doctrine to which they would either haue opposed themselues or haue complayned of it or would haue mentioned it at least 2. By S. Gregory himselfe who findeth no fault with any of his Roman predecessors for want of challenging their due or for not agreeing with him in all pointes of fayth as Protestants euery where reprehend and taske their auncestours with variance from them in sundry assertions 3. By diuers learned Fathers of the precedent ages out of whose writings I haue already among my Thirty Controuersyes cleerly proued and out of Scriptures also deduced euery article of importance of which our Gospellers attach S. Gregory 4. By the Magdeburgian and other Protestants