beatus suscepit Petrus sed nobiscum eas cum illo nos suscepimus omnes i. which sheepe and which flocke not onely blessed Peter did then vndertake but both he hath vndertaken them with vs and all we haue vndertaken them with him And S. Austin Cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur amas me pasce oues me as i. when it is saia to Peter it is said to al louest thou me Feed my sheepe I will conclude this point with a memorable saying of one of your owne friends Non me latet recentiores vt sua priuâ—legia expeditius propugnent obtendere dominum hac voce pasce oues meas vni soli Petro totam detulisse Iurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam quo â—am deinceps pro animi sui arbitrio quibuscunque vellet dispartiretur At sacrae scripturae oraculis omnium antiquoruâ—i doctorum monumentis nec non etiam praxi veteris Ecclesiae tam plane atque aperte confutantur vt mirum sit illos tam absurda comminisci audere i. I am not ignorant that late writers that they may defend their priuileges with greater expedition doe pretend that the Lord by these wordes Feed my sheepe did giue all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to Peter alone that he might afterward bestow it vpon whomsoeuer he would according to his owne discretion But they are confuted so plainely and so openly by the oracles of the holy Scripture by the monuments of all ancient learnedmen yea also by the very practise of the old Church that it is a marueile they dare imagine such absurd things PHIL. I will prooue it by the practise ORTH. BY the practise Nay the practise doth proue the contrary For as Christ did not erect any peculiar tribunall in a singular maner to Peter Neither said he Dic Petro tell it to Peter but he established a tribunall for the Church and said Dic Ecclesiae i. make thy complaints and tell thy grieuances to the Church so other Apostles did exercise the Iurisdiction belonging to this tribunall as well as Peter whether we consider them assembled in Synodes or seuerally by themselues PHIL. Not so for in the Synode holden at Ierusalem in the yeere 34. immediatly after the ascension of Christ S. Peter was president For his act in prescribing to the Apostles and the rest this election of Matthias and the maner thereof is so euident for his Supremacie that our aduersaries confesse that he was Antistes the chiefe of the whole Colleage and company ORTHOD. His proposing the matter argueth a primacie of place not of Iurisdiction or power For though he alone proposeth the matter yet he alone had not the appointment the text saith plainely they appointed two and of the two God himselfe made choice and elected Matthias as appeareth by these words they prayed saying thou Lord which knowest the hearts of all men shew whether of these two thou hast chosen and when the lot fell vpon Matthias S. Peter gaue him no Iurisdiction neither did they expect till S. Peter sent him a Pall but he was presently counted among the Apostles therefore his authoritie was not from man or by man but from Iesus Christ. Moreouer that the Scripture ascribeth no more to him in elections then to the rest may appeare by the second Synod as Binius calleth it wherein the Deacons were chosen For who called the multitude together the text saith the twelue not S. Peter alone but the twelue and who chose them Not S. Peter but the multitude as the Scripture witnesseth The saying pleased the whole multitude and they chose Stephen a man full of faith and the holy Ghost and Philip and Prochorus and Nicanor and Timon and Parmenas and Nicholas a proselyte of Antiochia which they set before the Apostles and they prayed and laid their hands on them So it is euident that though the Apostles ordained them yet the whole multitude chose them PHIL. The election of Deacons was giuen to the people ex concessione Apostolorum by the grant of the Apostles as Luke himselfe doth testifie ORT. Then it seemeth there is great difference betweene the Apostles and the Pope for the Apostles did not challenge their owne right they did gratifie the people and grant it vnto them but the Pope will rake all vnto himselfe though hee rob Prince Priest and people Now whereas you say they did that by the grant of the Apostles it is true if by grant you meane the consent and counsel of the Apostles For they exhorted the multitude to looke out seuen men of honest report but if you meane that the whole right belonged so absolutely to the Apostles that they might totally haue excluded the people you must consider that in this case the consent of the people depended vpon the grounds of humane society For there was then speciall reason why the whole Church should haue interest in the choice of Deacons because the treasure of the whole Church was coÌ„mitted to their trust But admit it were absolutely by the grant of the Apostles yet marke what you say by the grant of the Apostles not of Peter alone but of the Apostles Thus it doth not appeare that Peter had any prerogatiue more then other Apostles no not so much as in the choice of a Deacon PHIL. That he had Iurisdiction more then they is manifest by the third Synod holden at Ierusalem in the yeere of Christ 51. where indeed S. Peter shewed himselfe for he spake first and last and S. Iames and all the rest yeelded to his sentence ORTHOD. Not one of all these points is true That S. Peter spake not first is cleare by these words When there had bene much disputation Peter rose vp and said c. That he spake not last appeareth also for the Text mentioneth no speach of his but one After him spake Paul and Barnabas after them S. Iames and the Councell concluded the matter according to the words of S. Iames yea according to a speciall point not mentioned by S. Peter Neither were the Actes of the Counsell set out in the name of S. Peter but a Synodall Epistle was sent in the names of them all Neither did S. Peter subscribe vnto it I Peter the Vicâ—r of Christ the Prince of the Apostles the visible head and ordinarie Pastour of the Church but he was only put in among the rest It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and vs. Where is now his super-eminent authoritie If euer hee should haue shewed it this was the time this was the place especially seeing he was present not by his Legate but in his owne person If now he had chalenged it his successours might for euer quietly haue enioyed it What did he meane thus to forget himselfe and to preiudice posteritie And as the Apostolicall Synods receiued not their authoritie from him so neither did the Apostles themselues seuerally considered As is euident in S. Paul
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
Land in the time of the Apostles PHIL. OVr Countrie of great Brittaine hath beene three times conuerted to Christianitie by three Bishops of Rome First by Saint Peter Secondly by Eleutherius Thirdlie by Pope Gregory Saint Peter came hither in person Eleutherius and Gregorie by their Legates ORTHOD. The first conuersion may bee considered in generall or in particular In generall it is most cleare that our countrey receiued very anciently the Christian faith Theodoret saith Neither the Aethiopians which border vpon the Egyptian Thebes nor many other nations of the Ismaelites not the Lazi not the Sammi not the Auasgi not many other barbarians hauing yeelded themselues to the dominion of the Romans doe vse in their trafficke any of the Roman Lawes but these our fishermen and Publicans and this our tent maker haue brought the Euangelicall law vpon all nations neither haue they induced the Romans onely and those which liue vnder the Roman Empire but the Scythians Sauromatae also the Indians Persians Seres Hyrcans Britans Cymmery Germans and to speake in one word all kinde of men and all nations to receiue the lawes of Christ crucified not vsing any armour not an infinite number of chosen souldiours not the violence of Persian crueltie but the perswasion of wordes setting before them the commoditie of the Lawes which they preached Thus farre Theodoret. And before him Saint Hierome France and the Brittaines and Affricke and Persia and the East and India and all Barbarous nations adore one Christ and obserue one rule of trueth And before him Saint Chrysostome Whithersoeuer thou shalt goe to the Indians to the Moores to the Brittaines to the Spaniards yea to the furthest end of the world thou shalt finde in the beginning was the word and the word was with God c. And before Chrysostome Athanasius To which Fathers of the Nicen Councell all Churches euery where haue giuen their consent in Spaine Britaine France c. And before Athanasius Tertullian the places of the Britanes whereunto the Romans could not haue accesse are subiect vnto Christ. And before Tertullian Origen When did the land of Britaine consent to the Religion of one God before the comming of Christ when did the land of the Moores when did the whole world at once but now the whole earth prayeth to the Lord of Israel with ioy because of the Churches which are in the vtmost cost of the world To these agreeth that which Polydor Virgil bringeth out of Gyldas the most ancient Writer of our nation That Britaine receiued the faith ab initio orti Euangelij from the first springing of the Gospell So at the very dawning of the day to them that were in darkenesse and in the shadowe of death the euerlasting light appeared and the Sunne of righteousnesse did shine vpon them The barren wildernesse of Britaine became a fruitfull garden and was graciously watered with the dew of heauen Thus it was in part fulfilled which was foretold by the Psalmist I will giue thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the vttermost parts of the earth for thy possession HItherto in generall Now in particular who were the first golden pipes and Conduits to conueigh the water of life vnto them is not so certaine PHIL. Some thinke it to be Saint Peter some Saint Paul some Simon Zelotes some Aristobulus some Ioseph of Arimathea But the best opinion is that it was Saint Peter which father Parsons hath prooued by sundry authorities First by Simeon Metaphrastes ORTHODOX This authoritie deserueth small credit as you may learne of Baronius in these speeches If any credit bee to bee giuen to Metaphrastes And againe In many other things by him set downe it is certaine that he erreth PHIL. This matter seemeth to bee somewhat confirmed by that which Innocentius the first Bishop of Rome hath left written aboue a thousand and two hundred yeeres agoe saying That the first Churches of Italy France Spaine Africa Sicilia and the Ilands that lye betwixt them were founded by Saint Peter or his schollers or successors ORTHOD. Parsons proposeth this very faintly not daring to say it is but it seemeth to bee neither seemeth to bee confirmed but seemeth to bee somewhat confirmed and yet this somewhat is neuer a whit for Innocent saith not that these Churches were all founded by Saint Peter but by Saint Peter or his schollers and successors Neither doth it appeare that hee speaketh of Britaine either expresly or by consequence for though it bee an Iland yet it lyeth neither betweene Italy and France nor Italy and Spaine nor Italy and Africk nor betweene France and Spaine nor France and Africk nor betweene Spaine Africk neither is it neere to Sicily What then is the meaning of Innocent hauing named on the one side of the Mediterranean sea Italy France and Spaine and on the other side Africk hee addeth Sicily and the Ilands that lye betweene them as though hee should haue saide Sicily and the other Ilands in the Mediterranean sea howsoeuer the scituation will not suffer vs to vnderstand it of Britaine PHIL. Gulielmus Eysengrenius in his first Centurie or hundred yeeres doth write also that the first Christian Churches of England were founded by Saint Peter vnder Nero. ORTH. Eysengrenius a man liuing in our owne age for he wrote Anno. â—566 cannot bee of great authoritie especially in a matter of antiquitie and yet hee is of lesse because hee leaneth on such rotten reedes as Metaphrastes saying Metaphrastes affirmeth that many Churches were built by Peter the standard bearer of the Apostles through Britaine PHIL. To this founding of Churches in England by Saint Peter it may bee thought that Gildas had relation when expostulating with the Britaine Priestes of his time for their wickednesse for which the wrath of God brought in the English Saxons vpon them hee obiecteth among other things Quod sedem Petri apostoli inuerecundis pedibus vsurpassent That they had vsurped the seate of Saint Peter with vnshame fast feete meaning thereby either the whole Church of Britanie first founded by him or some particular place of deuotion or Church which hee had erected ORTH. Neither is Parsons peremptory in this point For he saith not it is to be thought but it may be thought wherefore in his owne iudgement it is not a consequence of necessitie but a collection of probabilitie and to any indifferent man it will not appeare so much as probable if hee ponder the place of Gildas Sedem Petri Apostoli inuerecundis pedibus vsurpantes sed merito capiditatis in Iudae traditoris pestilentem Cathedram decidentes they occupy the seate of Peter with vnshame fast feete but by the desert of their couetousnesse they fall into the pestilent chaire of the traitour Iudas If the chaire of Iudas doe not argue that Iudas was in England why should the seate of Peter argue that Peter was in England And the
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
send mee thither Marry quoth the King and to him will I send you So hee was sent with the Earle of Wiltshier Embassadour to the Pope who thrust out his glorious foote to bee kissed of them which they refusing the Earles spanniell running somewhat too familiarly did catch and bite him by the great toe Then the cause of their Embassage being declared the Earle deliuered Cranmers booke to the Pope and with all tolde him that hee had brought with him learned men out of England which were ready to defend by Scriptures Fathers and Councels whatsoeuer was contained in that booke against all that should contradict it The Pope promised sundry times a day of disputation but dallied out the matter as his Legates had done before in England so giuing them honourable entertainment hee made Cranmer his penitentiarie and dismissed them Then the rest returning Cranmer was sent by the kings appointment Embassadour into Germany to the Emperour where hee drewe many vnto his side and among the rest Cornelius Agrippa Moreouer the King did not onely consult with the most learned Diuines and Lawyers in the whole kingdome but also caused the question to bee publiquely disputed in the Vniuersities of Oxford and Cambridge both which did vtterly condemne the marriage Neither did hee thus rest but sent Bishop Bonner to the Vniuersities of France and Italie which affirmed vnder their seales that the marriage was vnlawfull and that no man might dispense with it Where it is to be obserued that some of these Vniuersities professe that they tooke an oath euery man to deliuer and to study vpon the foresaide questions as should bee to the pleasure of God and according to conscience After these determinations were reade in open Parliament there were shewed aboue an hundred bookes drawne by Doctours of strange regions which all agreed the kings marriage to bee vnlawfull Now to proceed the King considering the Popes dealing forbad all suites to the Court of Rome by proclamation in September 1530. which Sanders calleth the first beginning of the manifest schisme About the same time Cardinall Wolsey was cast in a premunire and all the Bishops of England for maintaining the power Legatine of the Cardinall But the Bishops beeing called into the Kings Bench before the day of their appearance concluded an humble submission offered the King I 18000. pounds to pardon the premunire and withall gaue him the title of Supreme head of the Church of England Yea Archbishop Warham told him that it was his right to haue it before the Pope and that Gods word would beare it Which proceedings in England did so kindle and enflame the Popes choller that neither the bookes of learned men nor the determinations of Vniuersities nor the offering of disputation nor his owne former Bull and Decree could now hinder him from giuing a contrary publick definitiue sentence dated in his consistorie at Rome the twentie third of March Anno 1532. ABout this time dyed Archbishop Warham while Cranmer was Embassadour in Germany and vpon the vacancie of the Archbishopricke the King sent for him home with purpose to aduance him to that great dignitie but he pretended matters of great importance requiring his abode in Germany by which meanes he deferred his comming for halfe a yeeare And being come home and perceiuing that the place was reserued for him hee imployed his greatest friends to shift it off When the King did personally impart his intent vnto him hee disabled himselfe by all possible meanes vsing all perswasions to alter the Kings determination When he saw the Kings constant resolution he humbly crauing pardon of his grace franckly opened his conscience vnto him declaring that if hee accepted that office then hee must receiue it at the Popes hand which he neither would not could doe for that his highnesse was the onely supreme gouernour of this Church of England as well in causes ecclesiasticall as temporall that the donation of Bishoprickes belonged to the King and not to any forraine authoritie whatsoeuer All which proceedings doe not argue any ambitious or aspiring cogitations but rather an humble and lowly minde preferring the sinceritie of a good conscience before all glorious pompe and worldly dignities The King seeing the tendernesse of his conscience consulted with the learned in the law how hee might bestow the Bishopricke vpon him and yet not enforce him to any thing against his conscience In conclusion hee tooke the oath to the Pope but not after the manner of his predecessours as Sanders slanderously affirmeth For then hee should haue taken it simply and absolutely which hee did not but with a protestation expressing the condition and qualification Neither did hee make his protestation priuately in a corner and then take the oath in publicke as Sanders would make the world beleeue for if this could bee proued then had you reason to condemne him of fraud and periurie but it was not so He did not vse his protestation in any secret and concealed manner like to equiuocating Papists which take oaths in absolute words and yet delude them with mentall reseruations but he made it plainely and publickly first in the Chapter house secondly kneeling before the high Altar in the hearing both of the Bishops and people at his consecration Thirdly in the very same place and in the very same forme and tenour of wordes when by commission from the Pope they deliuered him the Pall. And the summe of the protestation was this that hee intended not to binde himselfe to anything which was contrary to the lawe of God or contrary to the king or common wealth of England or the Lawes and prerogatiues of the same nor to restraine his owne libertie to speake consult or consent in all and euery thing concerning the reformation of Christian religion the gouernment of the Church of England and the prerogatiue of the Crowne or the commodity of the Common wealth and euery where to execute and reforme such things which he should thinke fitte to be reformed in the Church of England and according to this interpretation and this sence and no otherwise he professed and protested that he would take the oath Now if you censure Cranmer because he qualified his oath with such a protestation what censure shal be giuen of your Popish Bishops before Cranmer which took two absolute othes to the King and to the Pope containing manifest contradiction as K. Henry himselfe declared causing thē both to be read in open Parliament And Cranmer hath made the point plaine both in his answere to B. Brookes and in his letters to Queene Marie Or if you censure Cranmer for swearing to the Pope with Qualification what censure will you giue of Heath Bonner Thurlby and the rest that in King Henries daies tooke absolutely the oath of Supremacie which euidently excludeth the Popes authoritie BVt to returne to K. Henry who seeing
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
iust experience it prooueth otherwise As for the Popes if you meane the ancient Bishops of Rome wee regard them with reuerence and if their true writings were extant wee would willingly embrace them but as for your late Popes wee litle respect them Moreouer if your Bishops had for them the former definitions of Fathers and Councels they might more easily haue conuinced their aduersaries in disputation this should haue beene a spurre vnto them and not a bridle PHIL. As it was not fit to call the former definitions in question againe so much lesse was it fit that those things which ought to haue beene discussed in the Vniuersities by certaine order before the learned and iudicious should bee handled before the people which was vnskilfull and desirous of noueltie which vseth to define euery thing rather by outcryes then by arguments ORTHOD. As though this disputation had beene intended before the rude and barbarous multitude and not rather before the most honourable graue wise and iudicious in the whole Kingdome The trueth is that the Bishops doubted the cause they feared that they were not able to defend it by the Scriptures PHIL. They saide that against the contentious and such as would not rest in the iudgement of the Church little good could bee done by disputation And verily no maruell if they were loth to haue triall by disputation when the Iudge was Nicholas Bacon a layman an Hereticke altogether ignorant of Diuinitie the most reuerend Archbishop of Yorke assisting for fashion sake onely The day came which was the third of April there was infinite concourse vnequall lawes of disputation were prescribed of the Heretickes onely nothing was done with order and reason the time slipped away with declamations on both sides the prophane iudge moderateth all things as it pleaseth him all comes to nothing and so the Heretickes proceede in their madnesse ORTH. These are figures of rehetoricke wherewith you vse to embellish your speeches as it were with precious stones Whosoeuer will hold with the Pope is presently with you a good Catholicke and a very learned man but let him bee neuer so wise learned and iudicious if hee loue God his Prince and countrey better then the Pope hee shall bee reproached with ignorance and heresie as appeareth in that honourable personage Sir Nicholas Bacon Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England a man famous for wisdome pietie and the zeale of Gods glory But why doe you blemish him because hee had the fauour of a gracious Prince you might haue learned of Salomon Hee that loueth purenesse of heart for the grace of his lippes the King shall bee his friend can you blame him for that hee was designed by his Soueraigne to bee a moderatour at the disputation you should rather haue considered the Queenes great mildenesse and gracious proceeding in that shee vouchsafed to ioyne with him an assistant as Sanders confesseth one of your owne Religion a man of eminent note in Church and common wealth who stoode not for a cipher or for fashion sake but was armed with authoritie and had power to prouide that the Papistes should haue full libertie to speake their mindes before that great and honourable assembly How was it possible that the businesse should bee contriued with greater equalitie and indifferencie PHIL. Should a lay man iudge of Bishops and profound Diuines ORTH. Did not Basil Bishop of Ancyra and other Bishops dispute with Photinus before certaine noble men which the Emperour had appointed to bee Iudges did not Saint Austine dispute with the Donatists Marcellinus the tribune being Iudge did hee not dispute with Pascentius the Arrian Laurentius a secular man being Iudge And if it please you to looke into the volumes of Councels you shall finde that in the fourth generall Councell being the first at Chalcedon noble men of the Laity were appointed Iudges whose names are set downe in the beginning of the first action The like is to bee found in the sixt generall Councell being the third at Constantinople And in the third generall Councell being the first at Ephesus Theodosius and Valentintan appointed Candidianus an Earle to bee the Iudge PHIL. These were Iudges after a sort But how that may appeare by the wordes of the Emperour concerning Candidianus Ad Sacram vestram Synodum abire iussimus sed ea lege conditione vt cum quaestionibus controuersijs quae circafidei dogmata incidunt nihil quicquam commune habeat i. wee haue commanded him to goe vnto your sacred Synode but vpon this condition that hee haue nothing at all to doe with questions and controuersies of faith ORTHOD. Very true But first to remoue all such persons as might be troublesome to the sacred Synode Secondly not to suffer those which were of the Synode to depart before the consultation were ended Thirdly not to let them dispute any by-matters before the principall were fully discussed and concluded Fourthly to prouide that the disputation might be peaceable without tumult Fiftly to see that euery man might haue libertie without offence to propose what he thought good and to confute the contrary In like manner Sir Nicholas Bacon was appointed to these and the like offices and not to decide or determine any controuersie of faith PHIL. Hee was a capitall enemie of the Catholickes ORTHOD. All that was done or said at those meetings is extant to bee seene whereby it may appeare that all his proceedings about that businesse were most milde moderate honourable and Christian though the Bishops did shew themselues very obstinate PHIL. The Protestants would haue had them to dispute vpon such Articles proposed for questions as seemed to haue a greater shewe of proofe in the Scriptures for the Heretickes as of the Communion vnder both kindes of publique prayers to bee had in the vulgar tongue and such like ORTHOD. In the publique reformation of a Church the first thing to be considered is the due ordering of diuine seruice and Sacraments therefore the questions were chosen with singular discretion one concerning the prayers whether they should bee in the vulgar tongue another concerning the Lords Supper whether it should bee ministred in both kindes In both which points you had done great iniurie to the people of God But you say that the Protestants made choise of such questions as seemed to haue a greater shew of proofe in the Scripture and haue we thinke you but a seeming shew of proofe no sound substantial proofe indeed If the Bishops had bin of this opinion it should rather haue incouraged them to the incounter then haue caused them to flie the field Is the holy Scripture for vs in these questions onely if the disputation had beene about the worshipping of images inuocations of Saints iustification by faith and such like could not wee haue produced as pregnant proofes out of the Scriptures for these as for the former but now one may
Binius out of Baronius Thus much for the prophane title As for the thing it selfe The Scripture witnesseth that Salomon was King ouer all Israel if ouer all Israel then ouer the tribe of Leui and consequently euen ouer Abiathar the high Priest if he be their king why are not they his subiects If they be his subiects and he their Soueraigne how can they bee exempted from his Iurisdiction A point so cleare that sundry of your learned writers haue confessed it IOhannes Parisiensis saith that in the old Testament the Priests which annointed kings without all doubt were subiect vnto kings Your owne Iesuite Salmeron affirmeth that potestas spiritualis legis naturae vel Moisisminor erat Regia potestate in veteri testamento ideo etiam summi Sacerdotes regibus subdebantur that is the spirituall power of the Law of nature and of the law of Moses was lesser then the princely power in the old Testament therefore euen the high Priests were subiect vnto kings Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith Non mirum esset si in veteri Testamento summa potestas fuisset temporalis that is It were no maruell if in the olde Testament the chiefe power were the temporall Dominicus a Soto in veteri Testamento dubio procul Sacerdotes a principibus secularibus iudicati that is In the olde Testament without doubt the Priests were iudged by the secular princes Fryer Paule This doctrine that Ecclesiasticall persons vnlesse they be free by priuiledge and fauour should be subiect to secular Magistrates is demonstrated and confirmed by examples of the old Testament whereby it appeareth that all the kings did command iudge and punish Priests and that this was done not onely of bad kings or indifferent but of the most holy and religious Dauid Salomon Ezechias and Iosias Carerius in veteri Testamento Rex super Sacerdotes potestatem habebat eosque pro crimine occidere multo magis officijs dignitatibus spiritualibus eos priuare poterat that is In the old Testament the king had power ouer the Priests and might for their offences kill them much more depriue them of their offices and spirituall dignities Hitherto Carerius out of Tostatus PHIL. IF the kings of Israel had such authoritie doth it follow that Christian Princes must haue the like ORTHOD. What else You must consider that the new Testament doth yeeld vs no examples of Christian kings therefore when the question is concerning the power of kings in the Church of God wee must goe to the fountaine that is the old Testament where there was both a Church and kings in the Church religiously performing the office of kings and what Princely authoritie they exercised for which they are approoued by the spirit of God the same without all question belongeth in like maner to Christian Princes therefore what authoritie Salomon had ouer Abiathar the same haue Christian Princes by the law of God ouer their owne Clergie CHAP. III. Of the Oath of the Princes Supremacy for denying whereof the old Bishops were depriued PHIL. IS not the deposing of a Bishop a spirituall censure how then can it be performed by the secular powers ORTH. The secular powers doe noâ— depose a Bishop by degradation nor by vtterly debarring him from his Episcopall function but onely by excluding him from the exercise of Episcopallactes vpon their subiects and within their dominions And this godly Princes haue performed from time to time in the best and primatiue ages against the Arrians Nestotians and other heretickes as might be declared by many examples PHIL. Shall a Prince take that from them which he cannot giue them ORTH. Hee cannot giue them an intrinsecall power to minister the word and Sacraments which proceedeth from the key of order but he may giue them an extrinsecall power that is a libertie to execute their function within his dominions This he may doe by vertue of the scepter which God hath giuen him though he meddle not with the keyes which God hath giuen to the Church and as he may giue this libertie so he may take it away vpon iust cause as Salomon did when he deposed Abiathar PHIL. If we should admit that Queene Elizabeth had so much authority as king Salomon yet this would not iustifie her proceedings For it belongeth not to Parliaments or secular Princes to make lawes concerning the depositions of Bishops or to inflict any such punishments ORTHOD. Did not the Emperour Martian make a law that such Bishops as went about to infringe any of those things which were enacted by that holy and generall Councell of Chalcedon should be deposed Did not Iustinian make a constitution that if any Patriarch Metropolitane Bishop or Clerke should violate his decrees made for the preseruation of holy order and estate he should be excluded from the Priestly function Did not Theodosius the yonger likewise make a law that the Nestorian Bishops should be expelled and deposed PHIL. The lawes of these Emperours concerning the deposing of Bishops were not put in execution by laymen as Queene Elizabeths were but by Bishops ORTH. Gratian the Emperour made a lawe against the Arrians commanding them like wilde beastes to be driuen from the Churches and the places to be restored to good pastours the execution whereof he committed to Saporas the most famous captaine of that time If this were allowable in the Emperour Gratian then much more in Queene Elizabeth for he did it when there was plentie of good Bishops within his owne dominon Queene Elizabeth did it onely in case of necessitie Neither did she send a captaine to driue them away by violence as Gratian did but appointed honourable commissioners to tender the oath vnto them vpon the obstinate refusall whereof their places were voyd by vertue of the Statute PHIL. GRatian had for him the determination of Synods which had already coÌ„demned the Arrians therefore in this case it was lawfull for him both to make a Law and to commit the execution of it to Lay-men ORTHOD. So had Q. Elizabeth For a Synod of Bishops professing your owne Religion among whom was Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester gaue to K. Henry the title of Supreame head of the Church of England as may appeare by the Acts of the Synod it selfe About two yeeres after the same was renewed in another Synod and about two yeeres after that the two Vniuersities deliuered their iudgement That the Pope had no more to doe in England by the Law of God then any other Bishop The determination of Cambridge is already extant in print The like of Oxeford remaineth in Record wherein after long deliberation and much disputation with all diligence Zeale and conscience they make this profession Tandem in hanc sententiam vnanimiter omnes conuenimus ac concordâ—s fuimus viz. Romanum Episcopum maiorem aliquam iurisdictionem non habere sibi à Dâ—o collatam in sacra Scriptura in
then to the Church of Rome And what office will she take more kindly then the discrediting of those whom she accounteth Heretickes therefore I doe not wonder that you put it in practise I feare nothing but that shortly it shall grow with you a point meritorious Well the Stripe of the rodde maketh markes in the flesh but the stripe of the tongue breaketh the bones But let them remember That the tongue which lyeth slayeth the soule And that all lyers shall haue their portion except they repent in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone PHIL. WHatsoeuer is to be thought of the place yet I will proue by the Lawes of England That neither he nor any of his associats were lawfull Bishops ORTHOD. By the lawes of England how proue you that PHIL. It was ordained by the Parliament in the daies of Henry the eight that no man should be acknowledged a Bishop vnlesse he were Consecrated by three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane which law was reuiued by Queene Elizabeth and in full strength at the time of the Consecration of Mathew Parker but Mathew Parker was not so Consecrate and therefore by the lawes of England he was not to bee acknowledged for a Bishop For what Archbishop was either present at his Consecration or consenting vnto it Cardinall Poole then late Archbishop of Canterbury was dead and Parker elected into his place Nicholas Heath then last Archbishop of Yorke was deposed Indeed there was a certaine Irish Archbishop whō they had in bonds prison at London with whom they dealt very earnestly promising him both liberty and rewards if so be he would bee chiefe in the Consecration But hee good man would by no meanes be brought to lay holy hands vpon heretikes neither to be partaker of other mens sinnes Wherefore hauing neither Archbishop of their owne religion nor being able to procure any other the Consecration was performed without a Metropolitane cleane contrary to the lawes of England ORTHO What if both Sanders and you abuse the lawes of England in this point as indeed you doe For the words are these And if the person bee elected to the office dignity of an Archbishop according to the tenour of this act then after such election certifyed to the kings highnesse in forme aforesaid hee shal be reputed and taken Lord elect of the said office and dignity of Archbishop whereunto hee shal be so elected and after he hath made such oth and fealty onely to the kings Maiesty his heires and successours as shal be limited for the same the kings highnesse by his letters patents vnder the great seale shall signifie the said election to one Archbishop and two other Bishops or else to foure Bishops within this Realme or within any other the kings Dominions to be assigned by the kings highnesse his heires or successours requiring and commaunding the said Archbishop and Bishops with all speed and celerity to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrate the said person so elected to the office and dignity that he is elected vnto and to giue and vse to him such pall benedictions ceremonies and other things requisite for the same without suing procuring or obtayning any Bulls Briefes or any other things at the See of Rome or by authority thereof in any behalfe Where it is cleare that the King his heires and successours might by the statute send letters patents for Consecration of an Archbishop either to an Archbishop and two Bishops or else to foure Bishops therefore it might be performed without an Archbishop and yet not contrary to the lawes of England PHIL. ADmit this were true yet it auaileth you nothing for Math. Parker was Consecrated neither by three nor by two much lesse by foure though by your owne confession the law required foure ORTHOD. How know you that were you present at his Consecration or did you learne it of any that were present PHIL. I cannot say so but it is very likely because the Catholike Bishops being required to crowne Queene Elizabeth refused all except one ORTHO That one was Owen Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill but hee was none of the Consecrators of Archbishop Parker For he continued in your Popish religion refused the oth of the supremacy was therefore depriued PHIL. That was the common case of them all but one For one alone I must confesse was made to breake vnity of whom a right good and Catholike Bishop said to a Noble man wee had but one foole amongst vs and him you haue gotten vnto you little worthy of the name of a Bishop and Lord whose learning was small and honour thereby much stained And hee as it seemeth was the onely Bishop which you had therefore Math. Parker could not be Consecrated by three ORTHO Hee whom you meane was Anth. Kitchin Bishop of Landaffe who was in the commission but was none of the Consecratours therefore you shoot at randome and misse the marke PHIL. Whence then had you your Consecrators Surely you did not goe to the Churches of the Caluinistes and Lutherans if peraduenture they had any ORTHOD. We did not PHIL. Then you must bee glad to runne to your vsuall refuge that you had one from Greece Alas my masters you are narrowly driuen when you are forced to flie to such miserable shifts ORTHOD. This tale proceeded not from Eudaemon but from Cacodaemon the father of lies No Sir wee needed no Grecian though it pleaseth you to play the Cretian PHIL. If you had neither Bishops of your owne nor procured any either from the Catholike Church or from the reformed Churches or from the Greekish Church then it is true which Doctor Kellison reporteth out of Sanders That they made one another Bishops ORTHO Though Sanders in that booke hath almost as many lies as lines yet he hath not this loude lie it is the inuention of Kellison himselfe you promise demonstratiue reasons and when your argument comes to the issue where all your strength should lie you bring nothing but slender surmises flying reportes and detestable lies Doe these goe at Rome for demonstrations But I will answere you with euidence of truth which may be iustified by monuments of publike record QVeene Mary died in the yeere 1558 the 17. of Nouember and the selfe same day died Card nall Poole Archb. of Canterbury the very same day was Queene Elizabeth proclaimed The 15. of Ianuary next following was the day of Queene Elizabeths Coronation when Doctor Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill was so happy as to set the Diadem of the kingdome vpon her royal head Now the See of Canterbury continued voide till December following about which time the Deane and Chapter hauing receiued the congedelier elected maister Doctour Parker for their Archbishop Iuxta morem antiquum laudabilem consuetudinem Ecclesiae praedictae ab antiquo vsitatam inconcusse obseruatam i. proceeding in this
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
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
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
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.
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
Aimonius alleadged both by Baronius and Binius Wherefore either hee was no monster or if hee were the Romanes must impute the blame of his election rather to themselues then to the Emperour PHIL. Whether hee were or no Doctour Genebrard declareth that there were fiftie monsters intruded by the tyrannie of the Germane Emperours ORTHOD. I will answere this in the wordes of a learned man Genebrard without all reuerence both of God and man doth raile lye and falsisie stories to deface the Emperours and crosse the Writers of the Centuries For hee saith that the Emperours did as wilde boares eate vp the vineyard of the Lord the stories say that they deliuered it from wild boares The stories say that the monsters of the Popes were chosen by the Romanes themselues hee saith that they came in by intrusion of the Emperours The stories say that the Emperours who hunted out those beastes were vertuous and lawfull Princes hee calleth them tyrants not onely them but also many good Emperours moe who medled with the Popes election Finally the stories say that the Emperours were allowed by Popes and councels to doe it hee saith they vsurped it by the right of Herod And yet himselfe recordeth and that in the same Chronicle too that Pope Adrian with a Councell Pope Leo with a Councell Pope Clemens with a Councell did grant it vnto Charles Otho and Henry the Emperours No Philodox it was not the Emperour but the Romanes which intruded the monsters as I haue alreadie shewed at large and you may further see by Benedict the ninth Syluester the third and Gregory the sixt which Platina calleth tria teterrima monstra i. three most vglie monsters and were all chosen by the Romanes Yea the Emperours were so farre from intruding that they did extrude them Otho Iohn the twelfth and Henry the second Gregory the sixth For the Emperour Henry went into Italy vpon purpose to prouide for the Church which Gregory vnderstanding met him and to winne his fauour offered him a crowne of golde But the Emperour put on iustice as a robe and a crowne It was dearer vnto him then a crowne of golde So he called a councell wherein Gregory being conuented and conuicted resigned the place as some say or rather was deposed as others affirme and one Swidiger a Germaine a man famous for honestie and learning named by the Emperour and approued by all was chosen in his place and called Clement the second by whom Henry being crowned Emperour caused the Romanes to sweare that they would not medle at all with Elections but by the Emperours commond For hee sawe that the world was come to that passe that euery factious fellow were hee neuer so base so hee were rich and potent might corrupt their voyces and obtaine the place by bribes And the new Pope with a Councell as Genebrard confesseth gaue the same to Henry which was giuen before to Otho PHIL. CLement the second was no true Pope in the iudgement of Genebrard ORTHOD. But he was a true Pope in the iudgements of Baronius and Binius for they both put him into the Catalogue Wherefore you must confesse that this authoritie was yeelded to the Emperour by a true Pope And as it was yeelded by him so it was practised by the Emperour For the next foure Popes Damasus the second Leo the ninth Victor the second and Stephen the ninth are called of Onuphrius most holy and good men well deseruing of the Church of God and he proueth by the Histories of that time that they were all created by the authoritie of the Emperour Which is most cleare in Leo the ninth For after the death of Damasus the Romanes sent to Henry to intreat him to send them a good Pope who presently offered them one Bauno a Bishop a good and well meaning man PHIL. This Embassage was sent from the Cardinals not that the Emperour should elect a Pope but that he should send one to be elected at Rome according to the custome by the Councell of the Cardinalls as Benno our aduersarie cannot deny And Leo Ostiensis witnesseth that he was chosen by the Romanes Therefore whereas some say that he was chosen by the Emperour you must vnderstand that hee was delected by the Emperour but elected by the Cardinals For Otto Frisingensis recordeth that as Leo passed through France in his Pontificall robes Hildebrand came and told him that it was vnlawfull for a Pope to enter violently per manum laicam by the helping hand of a lay Prince or as Platina saith that Henry had no power from God to create a Pope so he put of his purple and entred Rome as a priuate man Whereupon the Romane Clergie elected him the rather because by this his fact hee had translated all the authoritie of chusing the Pope from the Emperour to the Clergie ORTHO If he translated it from the Emperour then it was inuested in the Emperour as indeed it was euen by their owne iudgement for else why did they send vnto him yea both the Emperour and the Pope did so take it as appeareth because he put on his pontificall robes in the presence of the Emperour Otto Frisingensis did so take it when hee said that Leo was appointed to the seat of Peter authoritate regalis excellenciae i By the authoritie of the regall excellency Onuphrius did so take it in the words before alleadged Wherefore howsoeuer you distinguish betweene delecting and electing It is cleare that they sent to the Emperour as to one that had authoritie yea they had bound themselues by oath not to meddle with elections but at his command wherfore their election was either by his authority or they were al periured Which Imperiall authoritie continued till Gregory the seuenth for Platina saith that the Emperour and Gregorie were made friends eundemque in pontificatu confirmauit vt tum Imperatorūmos erat i. He confirmed him in the Popedome as then it was the custome of Emperours PHIL. Now are you come to a worthy man indeed a most couragious maintainer of the liberties of the Church who was not afraid to renew and defend the holy and Ecclesiasticall lawes namely the 22. Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon For in a Councell holden in the yeere 1080 hee excluded all secular Potentates whatsoeuer from inuestitures reseruing the elections onely to the Clergie and people Wherein he was seconded by his noble successours Victor and Vrban ORTHO Ancient and holy lawes which are these Bellarmine nameth but one and that a counterfet contrary to the custome of the Church which was ancient and holy Indeed your couragious Champion did not onely exclude all secular Potentates from inuestitures but also in the same Councell he deposed his owne lord and soueraigne who confirmed him in the Popedome and gaue away the Empire to Rodolph a rebell promising forgiuenesse of sinnes to all that obeyed him Was this
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
the example of Robert of Lincolne humbly intreating him that hee would mittigate the vsuall tyrranies by following the humilitie of his holy Predecessors and vsed these words Dixit dominus Petro Pasce oues meas non tonde non excoria non euiscera vel deuorando consume that is The Lord said to Peter feed my sheepe hee said not vnfleese them nor flea them nor vnbowel them nor consume them by deuouring But the Pope scorned these admonitions that were so holy In the yeere 1260. the Barrons sent foure Knights to the Pope To complaine of Aimer elect of Winchester and his Brethren of their murthers rapines iniuries and oppressions and with all commanded such as farmed their Churches of the Romans to pay them no rent so the Land was quiet by the space of three yeeres Anno. 1316. Lewis Beaumont a French man at the instance of the kings of England and France obtained of the Pope the Bishoprike of Durham he was so vnlearned that hee could not read the Bulles and instruments of his Consecration but comming to the word Metropoliticae after hee had stood long puffing and blowing and could not hit vpon it he said soit pour dit i. Let it stand for spoken and an other time comming to this dangerous word aenigmate hee said to the by standers in French Pâ—r Saint Lowys il n'est pas courtoys qui ceste parolleyci escrit that is By Saint Lewis hee was not a courteous man that wrote this word here but though he had small Latin yet hee brought the Pope the more gold for he entred bond to pay him more then he was able to discharge in fourteene yeeres Anno. 1343. Pope Clement the 6. hauing made 12. Cardinals Made Prouisions in England for two of them of so many benefices next vacant as should amount to two thousand markes yeerely whereupon the king wrote thus to the Pope VVe doubt not but it is come to publike knowledge after what maner from the beginning of the Church when it had the first birth in our Kingdome of England the ancieÌ„t stock of famous memory of our progenitours Kings of England and of the nobles and faithfull people of the said kingdome for the exercise of diuine worship built Churches and endowed them with ample possessions and fenced them with priuileges placing in theÌ„ fit ministers which happily set forward Catholike faith in languages people subiect vnto them by whose care diligence the vineyard of the Lord of hosts was then very fertil in beauty and fruit But which is to bee lamented the plants of that vineyard are degenerated into wildshrubs and the beares of the wood roote it out wild beasts deuoure it while by impositions and prouisions of the See Apostolike which grow more grieuous theÌ„ they were accustomed the hands of vnworthy persons especially of strangers seize vpon the Lords inheritance contrary to the godly will ordination of the donors the dignities thereof fat benefices are conferred vpoÌ„ persons born out of the Land many times suspected vnto vs which are not resident vpoÌ„ the same benefices know not the faces of the sheep coÌ„mitted vnto theÌ„ nor vnderstood their language but neglecting the cure of souls like hierlings seek only temporal gaine by this means the worship of Christ is diminished the cure of souls neglected hospitality is withdrawn the rights of Churches are lost the houses of Clerkes are ruinated the deuotion of the people is lessened Clerkes of the kingdome men of great learning and honest conuersation which might well performe the charge and gouernment and were fit men for our affaires and publicke Councels forsake their studie because hope of fit preferment was taken away hitherto the kings letter But the Pope tooke this in great dudgion and called the kings dealing rebellion Anno 1345. The king directly contrary to the tenour of his former letters and the desires of his nobles wrote to the Pope that his Secretary Thomas Hatfield might bee made Bishop of Durham against whom when some of the Cardinals tooke exceptions for his insufficiencie the Pope answered si rex hac vice supplicasset pro asino obtinuisset that is If the King at this time had made request for his asse he should haue obtained it Anno 1364. being the thirtie eight of Edward the third there was held a Parliament wherin was made the statutes of prouisoes and premunire by which the power of the Court of Rome in England being bridled did neuer preuaile afterward with such licentiousnesse and impunitie Anno 1367. Vpon a view taken it was found that some had aboue twentie Churches and dignities by the authoritie of the Pope and that they were further priuiledged to hold so many more as they could get without measure or number Anno 1399. The Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Arundel intreated the King in the name of the Clergie that he would take away by his regall authoritie the papall prouisions whereby it was come to passe that learned men studying in Vniuersities seeing the rewards giuen to vnworthy and ambitious fellowes seeking them at Rome did forsake their studies So ignorance expelled learning About the yeere 1419. Pope Martin the fifth bestowed in England 13. Bishoprickes by translations and prouisions in the space of two yeeres while Henry the fifth was in the warre Anno 1420. The same Pope translated Richard of Lincolne to Yorke but the Deane and Chapter standing vpon the lawes enacted against papall prouisions resisted till the Pope was constrained by newe Bulles to bring the said Richard backe againe to Lincolne by which example of the Yorkeshire men the papall authoritie in prouiding Bishoprickes against which neither the Lawes of the kingdome nor the Kings Proclamations nor the threatnings of the Nobles and Commons preuailed was broken and weakened Anno 1424. Henry Chichly Archbishop of Canterbury and Cardinall was made the Popes Legate but the Kings Attorney appealed from him and the Pope to the next generall Councell then the Archbishop made a protestation that he would not exercise it without the Kings licence Anno 1497. Pope Alexander sent Iohn de Egles into England with large commission but it seemeth that there was nothing to bee gotten and therefore he sent his Notary Robert Castilensis with new mandates who required of euery Curate an English noble About the yere 1499. The Pope translated Thomas Merkes from the Bishoprick of Carlill to the imaginarie Bishopricke of Samos in Greece Anno 1500. Pope Alexander kept a yeere of Iubile promising remission of sinnes to all that went to Rome or redeemed their iourney with money and at the same time to make them more liberall hee gaue out that there should bee a great expedition against the Turkes and that the Pope would goe thither in person as the Generall of the field The Popes Proctor in England for this purpose was Gasper a Spaniard who
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
though Christ saith S. Gregorie liuing immortally now dieth not yet hee dieth in this mysterie and his flesh suffereth for the saluation of the people That is saith the Glosse his death and Passion is represented And you heard before out of the Master of the Sentences that that which is offered and Consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a memoriall and representation of the true sacrifice and holy oblation made vpon the Altar of the Crosse. And Bellarmine granteth that Thomas and other Schoolemen doe commonly answere that it is called an oblation because it is a representation of the oblation PHIL. Peter Lombard when he asketh the question whether that which the Priest doth be properly called a sacrifice or an oblation taketh the name of sacrifice or oblation for occision or killing as though he had asked Whether that which the Priest doth be a killing of Christ and answereth most rightly that Christ was truely offered that is slaine but once and that now he is not properly offered that is slaine but only in a Sacrament and representation ORTHOD. First I referre it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether this answere of Bellarmine be not a meere shift and cauill Secondly neither will this shift serue his turne for if the Priest doe not so he cannot be said properly to sacrifice him because in a sacrifice there must be the destruction of the thing sacrificed as is before declared out of Bellarmine PHIL. THe Councell of Trent pronounceth a curse against all those which deny that a true and proper sacrifice is offered in the Masse And they haue reason for as the Apostles so all the Fathers of the Primitiue Church were Masse-Priests For S. Ambrose testifieth That imposition of hands is certaine mysticall words whereby hee that is elected into the Priesthood is confirmed receiuing authoritie his conscience bearing him witnesse that he may bee bold to offer sacrifice to God in the Lords stead ORTHOD. S. Ambrose elsewhere expoundeth himselfe saying Quid ergo nos nonne per singulos dies offerimus offerimus quidem sed recordationem facientes mortis eius That is What therefore doe we doe we not offer dayly truely wee offer but so that wee make a remembrance of his death And againe Ipsum semper offerimus magis autem recordationem sacrificij operamur That is Wee offer him alwayes or rather we worke a remembrance of his sacrifice PHIL. S. Chrysostome saith In many places there is offered not many Christs but one Christ euery where being full and perfect both here and there ORTHOD. S. Chrysostome expoundeth himselfe in the same place Wee offer him saith he or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is We worke a remembrance of the sacrifice Where by the way you may see that S. Ambrose did borrow his former speech from this place of Chrysostome PHIL. S. Augustine saith That Christ commaunded the Leper to offer a sacrifice according to the Law of Moses Quia nondum institutum erat hoc sacrificium sanctum sanctorum quod corpus eius est That is Because this Sacrifice the Holy of holies which is his body was not yet instituted And elsewhere Quid gratius offerri aut suscipi posset quà m caro sacrificij nostri corpus effectum sacerdotis nostri That is What can be offered or accepted more gratefully then the body of our Priest being made the flesh of our Sacrifice And Cyrill Leo Fulgentius and other Fathers haue commonly the like ORTHOD. Then the answering of Austine will be the answering of all Now what his meaning was let himselfe declare Was not Christ once offered or sacrificed in himselfe And yet he is offered in a sacrament not onely at all the solemnities at Easter but euery day to the people Neither doth he lye that being asked doth answere that he is offered For if sacraments haue not a certaine resemblance of those things whereof they are sacraments they should not be sacraments at all And for this resemblance they take the names commonly of the things themselues therefore as after a certaine maner the sacrament of the Body of Christ is the Body of Christ the sacrament of the Blood of Christ is the Blood of Christ so the sacrament of faith is faith And elsewhere The flesh and blood of the sacrifice of Christ was promised by sacrifices of resemblance before hee came was performed in trueth and in deed when he suffered is celebrated by a sacrament of remembrance since he ascâ—nded PHIL. YOu cannot so delude the ancient Fathers of the Church For the Nicen Councell in that Canon which Caluine and all other receiue saith plainely That the Lambe of God offered vnbloodily is layde vpon the holy Table ORTHOD. The Lambe Christ Iesus which was offered vpon the Crosse for the sinnes of the world is layd vpon the holy Table not substantially but Sacramentally PHIL. But the Councell meaneth substantially for they say It is come by relation to the holy Councell that in certaine places and Cities the Deacons do reach the sacraments to the Priests Neither the Canon nor the custome hath deliuered this That those which haue not the power to offer sacrifice should reach the body of Christ to those that offer it Where you may see that they doe not onely call it the body of Christ but they plainely describe a Priest by hauing a power and authoritie to offer it and distinguish him from the Deacons which haue no such power ORTHOD. Who can better tell the meaning of the Councel then those which were present and subscribed vnto it One whereof was Eusebius PHIL. Very true and hee telleth how when Constantine dedicated the Temple at Ierusalem some did pacifie the diuine Maiestie with vnbloody sacrifices and mysticall Consecrations Who were these but Masse-priests and what were the vnbloody sacrifices but the sacrifice of the Masse for the Body and Blood of Christ are there offered vnbloodily ORTHOD. Let Eusebius expound Eusebius Christ hauing offered himselfe for a soueraigne sacrifice vnto his Father ordained that we should offer a remembrance thereof vnto God in stead of a sacrifice Is not this a plaine demonstration that in the iudgement of Eusebius there is not in the Lords Supper a sacrifice properly so called but onely a remembrance in stead of a sacrifice And this remembrance hee thus describeth VVhich remembrance wee celebrate by the signes of his Body and Blood vpon his Table He calleth it not a sacrifice but a remembrance celebrated not by the substance of his Body and Blood but by the signes and that not vpon an Altar but vpon a Table and this he calleth an vnbloodie sacrifice as appeareth by his owne words And pleasing God well wee offer vnbloodie sacrifices and reasonable and acceptable to him So it is as cleere as the noone day that Eusebius knew not your Massing sacrifice but expoundeth the
is no remission of sinne properly except onely by grace but to giue grace proceedeth from an infinite power whereof man is not capable and therefore no man can forgiue sins properly And if you be not yet perswaded how generally this is receiued I will let you see it by the words of Suarez the Iesuite Fuit grauium doctorum opinio per â—anc potestatem non posse remitti peccatorum culpas sed solum declarari remissas remitti paenas in hoc vltimo est quaedam diuer sitas Nam quidam dixerunt hanc potestatem solùm esse ad â—â—â—â—ttendam paenam temporalem alij vero ad aeternam i. It was the opinion of graue Doctours that by this power the sinners offences are not remitted but onely declared to be remitted and that the punishments are remitted and in this last point there is some diuersitie for some said that this power is onely for the remission of temporall punishment others for eternall And he saith that the former opinion is maintained by the master Altisiodorensis Alex. de Hales Bonauenture Gabriel Maior Thomas de Argent Occam Abulensis and others MOreouer Bonauenture writing of the miracles which were done by the intercession of Saint Francis after his death telleth of a certaine woman which when she was ready to be put into the graue was by vertue of his prayers restored from death to life to that end shee might reueale in confession a certaine sinne which she neuer had confessed before Which Bellarmine relateth as an argument to prooue that auricular confession is approued by God himselfe If you beleeue this lying Legend that the woman was shriuen after her death then you may like wise beleeue that the Priest absolued her For by what reason could he denie her absolution if God raised her by miracle to make confession Now I would demaund whether this woman dyed in the state of damnation or saluation if in state of damnation then the priest could neither iustifie her nor declare her to be iustified because they which die in their sinnes shall perish in their sinnes but if she dyed in the state of saluation and yet was raised by miracle to confesse some sinne for the clearing of others or for some other reason we know not then the Priest did not properly forgiue her sinnes but onely pronounce that they were forgiuen I will close vp this point with a memorable saying of Ferus vpon these wordes Whose sinnes you forgiue c. Non quod homo propriè remittit peccatum sed quod ostendat ac certificet a deo remissum neque enim aliud est absolutio quam ab homine accipis quam si dicat En fi lt certifico te tibi remissa esse peccata annuncio tibi te habere propitium deum quaecunque Christus in Baptismo Euangelio nobis promisit tibi nunc per me annunciat promittit i. Not that man doth properly forgiue sinne but that he sheweth and certifieth that it is forgiuen of God for the absolution which thou receiuest from man is nothing else then if hee should say Behold my son I certifie thee that thy sins are forgiuen I declare vnto thee that thou hast God fauourable and what thing soeuer Christ hath promised vs in baptisme and in the Gospel he now declareth and promiseth to thee by me WHerefore seing we haue in our ordination these words receiue the holy Ghost and take them in the true sence according to the Scripture the consciences of our aduersaries bearing vs witnesse we conclude that the Church of England hath such an absolution as Christ hath left vnto his spouse consisting in the publike and priuate vse of the word and Sacraments CHAP. X. An answere to the arguments of Bellarmine by which he goeth about to prooue absolution to be iudiciall and not declaratory PHIL. THat Christ gaue vnto his Church a true iudiciall power to absolue with authority and consequently that Priests are not onely as heraulds to proclaime and declare but also as iudges in the Court of conscience truely and really to forgiue sinnes Cardinall Bellarmine hath proued by seuen arguments fiue wherof are collected out of the Scripture the sixt is drawne from the authoritie of the Fathers and the seuenth from reason all which I will prosecute in order The first is collected from the Metaphor of the keyes of which it is said I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen For a key vseth not to be made or giuen to signifie that the doore is open or shut but to open and shut it indeed Now that which was promised by the keyes was performed in that place of Iohn and therefore here he gaue them power not onely to declare vnto men that their sinnes are forgiuen but also to forgiue them indeed ORTHOD. As Adam for his sinne was shut out of Paradise so all his posterity proceeding from him by carnall generation considered in their naturall corruption are shut and locked out of heauen into which no vncleane thing can enter For as the Prophet saith Your iniquities haue made a separation betweene you and your God Neither is there any hope of saluation vnlesse the kingdome of heauen bee vnlocked againe But what is the key to open this locke There is a threefold key the first of authoritie the second of excellency and the third of Ministery The key of authoritie belongeth onely to God For seeing euery sinne is a transgression of Diuine law he only hath soueraigne authoritie to remit it against whom it is committed and when he doth remit it then he setteth open the gates of heauen The key of excellency belongeth onely to Christ God and man who by his most soueraigne sacrifice hath made satis faction to God the Father purchased an eternall redemption for vs and meritoriously opened the kingdome of heauen to all beleeuers The key of Ministery was giuen to the Apostles aud their successours to whom was committed the Ministery of reconciliation Which is well expressed by S. Ambrose saying Homines in remissionem peccatorum ministerium suum exhibent non ius alicuius potestatis exercent neque enim in suo sed in patris filij spiritus sanctinomine peccata dimittunt isti rogant diuinitas donat humanum enim obsequium sed munificentia supernae est potestatis i. Men doe performe a seruice or Ministery for the forgiuenesse of sinnes but they doe not exercise the authoritie of any power for they doe not forgiue sins in their owne name but in the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost They make request the dietie bestoweth the gift An office or seruice is performed by man but the bountiful gift is from supernal power This supernall power is the key of authoritie this humane office is the key of Ministery For as a key is made and giuen to open the doore indeed So God gaue the key
of Ministery vnto his stewards to open the doore of heauen indeed But how not by authority as God the Father nor by excellencie as God the Son but by a ministeriall forgiuenes of sins which is not to be restrained onely to the hearing of priuate confessions as though in that one point lay all the vertue and vse of the Keyes but consisteth in reuealing and applying the merits of Christ publikely and priuately to the soule and conscience and in assuring those that beleeue and repent of their eternall saluation Now whereas you say that a Key is not giuen to signifie or declare that the doore is open it is true Yet you may know that similitudes must not be extended to euery circumstance it is sufficient if there be a correspondencie in the maine point What though a Key cannot declare that the doore is open Yet it is the Ministers duety to declare that heauen is opened to all that beleeue and repent and this very declaring is an effectuall meanes of opening it indeed For as when Christ vnfolded the Scriptures the hearts of the two Disciples did burne within them so when the Ministers declare the glad tidings of the Gospel God kindleth faith and repentance in the hearts of his chosen and when they doe beleeue and repent then the Minister may safely pronounce the forgiuenesse of their sinnes by the Blood of Iesus Christ. Thus he is Gods effectuall instrument to accomplish it and his Herald to proclaime it PHIL. Keyes vse to be giuen to Magistrates to signifie that they haue power to locke and vnlocke the gates of the Citie ORTHOD. And Christ gaue the Keyes to his Ministers to signifie that they haue a Ministeriall power to locke and vnlock the kingdome of heauen PHIL. VVhen it is said of Christ he hath the Key of Dauid he openeth and no man shutteth he shutteth and no man openeth all men vnderstand by the Key a true power and properly so called by which Christ may absolue and binde by iudiciall authoritie and not signifie or declare who is bound or loosed Wherefore seeing Christ doth communicate his Keyes with the Apostles and their successours they also shall haue true power to bind and loose by iudiciall authoritie ORTHOD. First your owne men distinguish betweene the Key of excellencie and the Key of Ministerie Secondly euen those things which are most proper vnto Christ are ascribed to his Ministers as for example the saluation of mens soules For S. Paul saith to Timothy In doing this thou shalt saue both thy selfe and them that heare thee In like maner they may be said to forgiue sinnes and open the Kingdome of heauen But this is spoken by a figure whereby that which belongeth to the principall agent is ascribed to the instrument And that no marueile seeing a man by turning from wickednes and doing that which is right is said to saue his owne soule PHIL. A second Argument may be collected from the Metaphor of binding and loosing which doth not signifie to declare that one is bound or loosed but to lay on or take off bonds and fetters indeed ORTHOD. This is in effect the same with the former therefore I referre you to the former answere PHIL. A third Argument may be drawne from this very place of S. Iohn For Christ expresly giueth them power not only to forgiue sinnes but also to retaine Retinere autem quid est nisi nolle remittere i. What is it to retaine but to be vnwilling to forgiue therefore remission is denied to them whom the Priest will not forgiue ORTHOD. True if the will of the Priest be guided by the rules of true Religion For he should be vnwilling to forgiue none but onely those that are vnbeleeuing and vnrepentant from absoluing of whom he should be so farre that it is his duety to denounce Gods wrath and iudgment against them if they continue obstinate PHIL. The Lord saith not Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they were forgiuen which he would haue said if by remission he had meant declaration but he saith They are forgiuen because Christ doeth ratifie the sentence which the Priest pronounceth in his Name ORTHOD. But the Priest must absolue no man sauing those whom God hath first absolued as you heard before and is plainely deliuered by Pope Gregorie Quos omnipotens Deus per compunctionis gratiam visitat illos pastoris sententia absoluat Tunc enim vera est absolutio praesidētis cum aeterni arbitrium sequitur iudicis i. Let the sentence of the Pastour absolue them whom Almighty God doth visit with the grace of compunction for then is the absolution of the Spirituall ruler a true absolution when hee followeth the will of the Eternall Iudge And againe Nos debemus per Pastoralem authoritatem soluere quos authorem nostrum cognoscimus per suscitantem gratiam viuificare i. Wee ought absolue those by our Pastorall authority whom we know that our Authour Christ Iesus hath reuiued with his quickening grace Otherwise his absolution is vaine For as the Legall Priest did not properly cleanse the Leper yet he is said to cleanse him because hee declared him cleane whom the Lord had cleansed so the Euangelicall Priest though hee doe not properly absolue from sinnes yet hee is said to absolue because he declareth him absolued whom the Lord hath absolued Wherefore the meaning of Christs words is this Whose sinnes you forgiue that is whose sinnes according to the rules of my Gospel you shal pronounce to be forgiuen they are forgiuen That is they are so certainly forgiuen that the sentence you pronounce in earth shall be ratified in Heauen as it is written Whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall be bound in Heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heauen So here are three things First God the Father for Christs sake forgiueth sinnes Secondly the Minister declareth that God hath forgiuen them Thirdly this declaratory sentence is ratified in Heauen PHIL. A fourth Argument may be drawne from this word Quorum in this maner The Gospel is preached indefinitely to all men But it is not the will of God that this absolution should be giuen to all men but to certaine persons only whom the Priest iudgeth fit as appeareth by these words Quorum peccata c. Whose sinnes you forgiue c. ORTHOD. The Gospel is preached generally and indefinitely to all men Whosoeuer beleeueth and repenteth shall be saued yet so that in the generall is included this particular If thou beleeue and repent thou shall be saued Now a mans conscience sanctified by the Holy Ghost doth say I beleeue and repent Therefore to him the generall promise of the Gospel is made particular by particular application and to such onely making a sincere profession of their faith and repentance the Minister ought to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes PHIL. A fift Argument may be drawne from
it is granted to our Priests not to purge the leprosie of the body but the spots of the soule I doe not say to examine them being purged but altogether to purge them In this place to vse the words of Cardinall Bellarmine Saint Chrysostome doth so plainely condemne the opinion of our aduersaries that nothing at all can be answered for them ORTHOD. Doth the Priest altogether purge the spots of the soule then it seemeth when the penitent is presented before the Priest his soule is spotted but by vertue of the Priestes absolution the spots are presently washed away but I pray you tel me whom doth the Priest forgiue and absolue him whom the Lord hath absolued or him whom the Lord hath not absolued if the Priest absolue him whom the Lord hath absolued then hee doth not altogether purge the spot of the soule no nor properly purge them at all but onely declare that the Lord hath purged them If you say that the Priest absolueth him whom the Lord hath not absolued then hee shall bee forgiuen whom the Lord hath not forgiuen which is most absurd Againe doeth the Priest before hee pronounce absolution see any tokens of faith and repentance If hee see none then how dare he pronounce absolution and if hee see any then the party is already purged Whereby it appeareth that the absolution of the ministerie is onely declaratorie Therefore the speech of Chrysostome cannot bee taken properly but his meaning must bee this that the Priest seeing him brought by the ministery of the Gospell to faith and repentance and consequently purged certifieth his conscience that he is altogether purged and his sinnes washed away by the blood of Iesus Christ. PHIL. GRegorie Nazianzen saith that the law of Christ hath subiected temporall gouernours to his authoritie and throne and that his power is more ample and perfect then theirs ORTHOD. The Prince as supreame gouernour may by his royall authoritie establish true religion command both Priest and people to doe their dutie and punish those which doe otherwise by temporall punishments but the ministration of the Word Sacraments and the exercising of spirituall censures belong to the Bishop and as the prelate ought to bee subiect to the sword in the hand of the Prince so a vertuous Prince submitteth himselfe to the word of God in the mouth of the prelate But doth this prooue that the Priest forgiueth sinnes properly PHIL. SAint Ambrose proueth that Christ gaue to the Priests power to forgiue sinnes and it is plaine that he speaketh of true power and not of the ministerie of preaching both because the Nouatians did not denie that the Gospell might be preached to all men but they denied that the Priest might forgiue sinnes by authoritie and also because Saint Ambrose saith that Christ hath communicated to the Priests that power which he himselfe hath ORTHOD. The Nouatians did thinke that the Church had authoritie to bind but not to loose as may appeare by S. Ambrose in the same place And S. Cyprian being requested by Antonianus to vnfould the heresie of Nouatian sheweth that hee denied that such as were fallen should be admitted any more into the Church Baronius saith that he grew to such rashnesse as to deny that the remission of sinnes which is in the Apostles Creed was to be found in the Church Therfore as they denied that Priests might forgiue sinnes by authoritie so they denied that they might forgiue sinnes by way of declaration for they denied that there was any forgiuenesse of sinnes in the Church Wherefore Saint Ambrose in confuting the Nouatians hath no more confuted our opinion then hee hath confuted yours PHIL. SAint Ierom speaking of Priests saith Claues regni caelorum habentes quodam modo ante diem iudicij iudicant i. hauing the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen they iudge after a sort before the day of iudgement S. Austin expounding these wordes I saw seates and them that sate vpon them and iudgement was giuen them saith thus Wee must not thinke that this is spoken of the last iudgement but the seates of prelates and prelates themselues by whom the Church is now gouerned are to be vnderstood neither can we better apply it to any iudgement giuen then to that of which it is said whatsoeuer you bind in earth shall be bound in heauen Whereupon the Apostle saith what is it to me to iudge of them that are without doe not you iudge of them that are within ORTHOD. According to Saint Ierom the Bishop or Priest doth bind or loose as the Leuitical Priests did make the lepers cleane and vncleane Which in his iudgement was not properly but because they had the knowledge of leprous and not leprous and should discerne who was cleane and vncleane This is that which Saint Ierom meaneth when hee saith they iudge after a sort before the day of iudgement which kind of iudgement wee acknowledge PHIL. In iudgement there are two things causae cognitio sententiae dictio the knowledge of the cause and the pronouncing of the sentence Haue you these two ORTHOD. Wee haue for first the partie maketh a profession of his faith and repentance vnto the Minister here is causae cognitio and then the Minister by the authoritie which Christ hath committed vnto him pronounceth forgiuenesse of his sinnes here is sententiae dictio This is the practise of the Church of England agreeable to the law of God and the ancient Fathers But if by causae cognitio you meane a particular enumeration of all their sinnes as a matter necessarie to saluation and by sententiae dictio vnderstand such a sentence as imposeth workes of penance satisfactorie to God when you can proue them out of the Scripture we will embrace them in the meane time wee knowe them not Hitherto of Saint Ierom. The same answere also may serue for the place of Saint Austin if he meane the same iudgement PHIL. POpe Innocent the first saith De pondere aestimando delictorum sacerdotis est iudicare c. 1. It is the office of the Priest to iudge what sinnes are to be esteemed heauiest ORTHOD. He must discerne the deepenesse of the wound before hee can apply the medicine But how doth this prooue the point in question to wit that the Priest forgiueth sinnes properly PHIL. SAint Gregorie saith principatum superni iudicij sortiuntur vt vice Dei quibusdam peccata retineant quibusdam relaxent i. the Disciples obtaine a principalitie of iudgement from aboue that they may in Gods stead retaine the sinnes of some and release the sinnes of others ORTHOD. They are iudges to discerne sinne that so they may applie the medicine according to the qualitie of the offenders yea wee doe not deny but the Church may enioyne an outward penance for the further mortifying of sinne testifying their inward remorse and for the more ample satisfaction both of
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
some pernicious errour as for example If they deny the Godhead of the Sonne or of the holy Ghost shall this hinder the validitie of the Baptisme PHIL. No for you must consider that there is a visible Priest and an inuisible It is required to the substance of Baptisme that the visible Priest apply water to the baptized In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost If he faile in any of these points the Baptisme is frustrate And therefore it was decreed in the great Councell of Nice that the Paulianists should be rebaptized where they take the word rebaptised improperly meaning that the former was not performed in the true wordes and therefore was in deed no Baptisme But if it were duely performed in water with such words as Christ hath appointed their priuate opinions and misconstruction cannot hinder the validitie of the Baptisme Satis ostendimus saith S. Austin ad Baptismum qui verbis Euangelicis consecratur non pertinere cuiusquam vel dantis vel accipientis errorem siue de Patre siue de Filio siue de Spiritu sancto aliter sentiat quam coelesiis doctrina insinuat i. We haue sufficiently declared that 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 For whosoeuer be the Minister Christ the inuisible Priest is the principall Baptizer and therefore if the right Element and forme of words be vsed we regard not the erronious sense of the seruant but the true sense of the Lord and Master ORTHOD. So I say to you there is a visible Bishop and an inuisible if the visible shall impose hands vpon a capable person vsing those Euangelicall words which Christ hath sanctified his owne priuate opinions cannot hinder the validitie of the Ordination for so that right and sufficient words be vsed we will not respect the erronious construction of the seruant but the true sense and meaning of the Lord and Master Therefore though Cranmer and Parker were ordained in the rite of the Church of Rome though both the ordainers gaue the power and the ordained receiued it in the erronious sense of the Church of Rome yet neither the error of the ordainers nor of the ordained pertaineth to the Ordination As Christ is the chiefe Baptizer so he is the chiefe Ordainer for hee giueth Pastours and teachers for the consummation of the Saints Wherefore when God vouchsafed to take away the scales of ignorance from the eyes of his blessed instruments which he vsed in the reformation of Religion it was their duetie not to follow the erronious sense of the visible Bishop but the true meaning of the inuisible Bishop who was the authour of these holy and admirable words Receiue the holy Ghost c. In which words of Christ that was accomplished which was promised by the keyes which keyes the Fathers call the knowledge of the Scripture the interpretation of the Law the word of God And Pope Adrian the key of ministery so whosoeuer is ordained by these words receiueth the keyes and may open the kingdome of heauen by the Word and Sacraments Wherfore seeing these words were retained in the Ordination of Priests euen in the darkenesse of Poperie it followeth that the Church of Rome had power by these words rightly vnderstood according to the Scripture to minister the word and Sacraments But that which in it selfe was lawfull to them was made vnlawfull by adding the abhomination of sacrifising and by wresting the words of Christ to their Popish shrift Thus though the Church of Rome gaue her Priests authority to preach the truth yet she did not reueale the truth vnto them but plunged them in ignorance and errors Therefore whereas those words of Christ in themselues a Rose by corruption of time were ouergrowne with nettles those heroicall spirits which reformed religion did weede away the Romane nettles and so there remained onely the sweet Rose of Iesus Christ. Thus it came to passe that that which was practised in the Church of Rome vnlawfully as beeing polluted with wicked humane inuentions was by the goodnesse of God purged and restored to the orient colour and natiue purity To conclude in the primitiue Church the ministeriall power was receiued purely and deliuered purely In the beginning of Popery it was receiued purely and deliuered corruptly During the sway of Popery it was receiued corruptly and deliuered corruptly In the beginning of the reformation it was receiued corruptly and deliuered purely Now in the sun shine of the Gospell it is receiued purely and deliuered purely Thus it appeareth that although we receiued our Orders from such as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull which was to be declared Now the Lord of his mercy so blesse his owne ordinance that we may vse this holy function to his glory and the winning of many thousand soules Amen LAVS DEO ¶ AN APPENDIX WHen this worke had almost passed the Presse there came to my hands certaine scandalous Bookes made by our Popish aduersaries reproching the Consecrations of some Bishops of blessed memory Who in their life time powred out such precious ointment as still filleth the Church with the sweetnes of the odour Among which Iewels Bishop Iewell is first produced who like another Shammah stood in the middest of the field and defended it and slew the Philistims so the Lord gaue great victory In regard wherof they being filled with malice and enuie and not beeing able with dint of Argument to encounter him and the rest of his fellow Souldiers those worthies of Dauid which fought the Lords battels haue sought by all meanes to disgrace their Calling disgorging their poison against them without any respect of conscience or truth in these opprobrious and scurrilous words Of M. Iewels being Bishop we haue not so much certaintie yea we haue no certaintie at all For who I pray you made him who gaue him his Iurisdiction who imposed hands vpon him what Orders had they what Bishops were they 136. True it is that both he Sands Scory Horne Grindall and others if I mistake not their names in the beginning of the Reigne of Queene Elizabeth met at the Horse-head in Cheape side a fit signe for such a Sacrament and being disappointed of the Catholicke Bishop of Landaffe who should there haue bene to Consecrate them they vsed the like art that the Lollards once did in another matter who being desirous to eate flesh on Good-Friday and yet fearing the penalties of the Lawes in such cases appointed tooke a Pigge and diuâ—ng him vnder the water said Downe Pigge and vp Pike And then after constantly auouched that they had eaten no flesh but fish So I say these graue Prelates assembled as afore said seeing the Bishop whom they expected
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
perpetuall line of their Bishops and the lawfull succession of Pastors receiued from the Church for the honor whereof we vse to call the English Caluinists by a milder terme not hereticks but schismaticks Behold he confesseth we haue the Catholick order a perpetuall line of Bishops a lawfull succession of Pastors that deriued from the Church But withal I would haue you to know that though we receiued it froÌ„ the Church of Rome yet with a double difference For first Crâ—nmer and the rest receiued their Orders from Popish Bishops in a Popish manner that is defiled with many Popish pollutions but when it pleased God to open their eyes they pared away the pollutions and retayning onely that which was good deliuered it vnto posteritie So we succeed you in your Orders not simply but so far as they are agreeable to the Scripture for the man of â—in did â—it in the Temple of God and Antichrist had vsurped the chaire of Christ so that now in the Church of Rome good things and bad things were mingled together therefore in that which you receiued from Christ wee willinglie succeed you in that which you haue from Antichrist we renounce and disclaime you Secondly Cranmer and the rest receiued from you a shell of succession without the kernell of Doctrine For though your Church did giue men power to preach the truth yet being bewitched with Antichrist in many things it did not reueale the truth but when God by the Scriptures reuealed it vnto them they both preached it themselues and commended it to posterity Neither was this to leape out of the Church but out of the corruptions in the Church euen as the wheate kernel when it is clensed leapeth not out of the barne but out of the chaffe Moreouer though our Doctrine may seeme to you extraordinarie because it differeth from the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome yet as our calling and function so our Doctrine is the same which the spirit of God hath deliuered in holy Scripture to be ordinary in the Church till the end of the world and therefore you haue no reason to require any Miracles at our hands PHIL. These points shal be further skanned I warrant you In the meane time As Tigellius in Horace had nothing certaine and setled in all the course of his life but was alwaies distracted into contrary affections In respect of his pace some times he ran most swiftly as though hee had fled from his enemie some times hee mooued so slowly as though hee had carried the sacrifices of Iuno In respect of his traine he had many times two hundred attending him againe sometimes he had onely two And in his speech now he imitated Kings and Tetrarches and spake nothing but all bigge words an other time hee would stoope to very meane matters So that nothing was more vnlike and vnequall in the course of life then this poore wretch was to himselfe euen so your Dâ—ctors some times they creepe vpon the ground by and by they catch at the clouds and starres Now they refuse all miracles and â—nock at such at require them on a suddaine they challenge to themselues all the miracles since the beginning of the world ORTHOD. And herein they doe nothing but what may stand with reason For if you speake of our doctrine we professe and are readie to prooue that wee teach the same doctrine for substance which Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles both taught and confirmed by Miracles And in this sence all the Miracles of Moses and the Prophets Christ and his Apostles are ours because they are so many seales and confirmations of that Doctrine which we teach But if the question bee concerning our persons then wee confesse that wee can worke no miracles wee take no such matter vpon vs neither is it necessarie because both our calling and doctrine are Ordinary PHIL. I will proue that you haue no lawfull ordinarie calling in the Church of England And first you challenge to your selues no other ministers but either Bishops or Priests or Deacons for other inferiour orders you haue none But neither your Bishops nor your Priestes nor your Deacons haue any lawfull ordinary calling For first to the ordinarie calling of a Bishop ordination or consecration is requisite by precedent Bishops hauing episcopal power of order and iurisdiction but your Bishops are descended from such progenitours as had neither of these no Episcopall power of Order because either they had no consecration at all or at least such as is not able to abide the touchstone no Episcopall iurisdiction because they are neither elected nor confirmed by our holy Father the successour of Peter to whom onely Christ gaue the Keyes and in them the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power Therefore your Bishops are no Bishops and consequently all ordinations deriued from them are mere nullities SEcondly your ordination of Priestes is most intollerable for according to holy Church this sacred action consisteth of two parts answerable to the two principal functions of Priesthood the former is garnished with these seemely ceremonies First of all the Bishop with all the Priestes present layeth his hands vpon the head of the person to be ordained then he inuesteth him in a sacred stoale so fitted and fashioned that it maketh a Crosse vpon his brest after this he anointeth his hands with holy oile and lastly he deliuereth him the Chalice with wine and the Paten with the hoast saying Accipe potestatem offerre sacrificium Deo Missasque celebraretam pro viuis quam pro defunctis in nomine domini that is take thou power to offer sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses as well for the quicke as for the dead in the name of the Lord. This is the first part of the ordination which graceth him with the principall function of Priesthood whereby he is made interpres mediator dei hominum That is an Interpreter and mediator of God and man Yea higher then a King happier then an Angell creator of his Creator This is that which maketh the holy Priesthood to be honoured because no King nor Emperor no Angel nor Archangel is able to do as we doe that is with pronouncing of a few words to make the body of Christ flesh blood and bone as it was borne of the Virgin Mary Moreouer after Masse the Bishop imposeth hands saying Accipe spirituâ—â— sanctum quorum peccata remiseris remituntur cis quorum retinueris retenta sunt that is Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes thou forgiuest they are forgiuen them and whose thou retainest they are retained This is the second part wherein hee receiueth the second function of Priesthood that is the power of absolution Such are the rites of holy Church wherein you are notoriously defectiue To passe ouer with silence your contempt of the sacred ceremonies of Crossing and anointing which are but accidentall you want the very essentiall
Binius hath Vobis but it should be Nobis which may appeare first because the Emperor himself in the words shortly after following in Binius said Nos proratione datae nobis in Ecclesiasticis rebus potestatis non tacebimus that is We in regard of the power giuen vnto vs in Ecclesiasticall matters will not hold our peace Where it is cleare that the Emperor did think himselfe to haue power giuen him from God not only in matters ciuil but also in Ecclesiasticall Therefore when the Emperor said That the diuine prouidence had committed vnto him the gouernment of the vniuersall ship hee must needs be vnderstood as well of causes Ecclesiasticall as ciuill Which may yet appeare further by the Emperors words as they are in Surtus immediatly following in the same sentence Omne studium arripuimus ante publicas curas Ecclesiasticas dissoluere i. When the diuine prouidence had committed vnto vs the gouernment of the vniuersall ship we vsed all diligence to dispatch Ecclesiasticall cares before the publike affaires of the Commonwealth So if Surius wil be iudged by his owne Edition and giue the Emperour leaue to expound himselfe then Ecclesiasticall affaires must be comprehended in the gouernment of the Vniuersall ship Wherfore though Surius would raze out the word Ecclesiasticall and Binius foist in Vobis instead of Nobis yet whether we compare either of them with himselfe or each of them with other it is euident that the Emperor Basil did challenge the gouernement of the vniuersal ship both Ecclesiastical and Ciuil and that in a generall Councell no man resisting him What doth this differ from Supreme gouernour as it is vsed in the Church of England AS Basill did challenge this gouernment no man resisting so sundry Synods haue giuen the like to Princes not refusing it There was a Councell holden at Mentz in Germany the yeere 814. In the time of the Emperour Charles the great and Pope Leo the third the Synodall acts whereof Binius professeth that he compared with a manuscript sent him out of the Emperours library at Vienna Now the Bishops assembled in this Synode begin thus In the Name of the Father of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost To the most glorious and most Christian Emperour Carolus Augustus gouernour of the true religion and defender of the holy Church of God c. And a little after We giue thanks to God the Father Almighty because hee hath granted vnto his holy Church a gouernor so godly c. And againe About all these points we greatly need your aide and sound doctrine which may both admonish vs continnally and instruct vs curteously so farre that such things which we haue briefly touched beneath in a few Chapters may receiue strength from your authority if so bee that your piety shall so iudge it worthy whatsoeuer is found in them worthy to be amended let your magnificent and imperiall dignity command to amend In the yeere 847. there was holden another Synode at Mentz in the time of Leo the fourth and Lotharius the Emperor where the Bishops begin in the like manner Domino Serenissimo Christianissimo regi Ludouico verae religionis strenuissimo rectori i. To our most gracious Lord and Christian king Lodowick the most puissant gouernor of true religion The like was ascribed to King Reccesuinthius in a Councell holden at Emerita in Portugale about the yeere 705. in these words Whose vigilance doth gouerne both secular things with greatest piety and Ecclesiasticall by his wisdome plentifully giuen him of God So they acknowledged him gouernor both in causes secular and Ecclesiastical This Councel of Emerita receiued much strength and authority from Pope Innocent the third in his Epistle to Peter Archb. of Compostella as witnesseth Garsias Thus you see that most famous Bishops assembled in Synods haue giuen vnto Princes such titles as are equiualent to the stâ—le annexed to the imperiall crowne of this kingdome To which we might adioyne the iudgement of other fathers Tertullian Colimus imperatorem vt hominem à Deo secundum solo Deo minorem i. We reuerence the Emperour as a man next vnto God and inferiour onlie to God Optatus Super imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit imperatorem Aboue the Emperour is none but onely God who made the Emperour So Saint Chrysostome saith that the Emperor hath no peere vpon earth and calleth him the head and crowne of all men vpon earth If he be next vnto God and inferiour only to God If none be aboue him but God onlie If he haue no peere vpon earth as being the head and crowne of all men vpon earth then must hee needs bee the supreme gouernour vpon earth according to the iudgement of the fathers This is agreeable to the Scripture which testifieth that most godly kings commanded both Priests and high Priests euen in cases of religion as was before declared Neither is this authority taken away in the New Testament but continueth the very same As may appeare by Saint Paul who lifteth vp his voice like a trumpet proclayming Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers which words euery soule comprehend all persons both Ecclesiasticall and Temporal yea though they were Euangelists Prophets or Apostles as Saint Chrysostome doth truly expound them If euery soule be subiect to the higher powers then the Prince is superiour to all and consequently supreme within his owne dominions But why doe I stay so long vpon this point which hath beene of late so learnedly and plentifully handled that to say any more were but to cast water into the sea or to light a candle at noone day PHIL. HOw vnreasonable it is may appeare by the absurdities which follow thereupon for if the Prince be supreme gouernour in causes spiritual then he may command what religion he list and we must obey him ORTHOD. Not so for he is supreme gouernour in causes temporal yet he may not command a man to beare false witnesse or to condemne the innocent as Iesabell did or if he should we must rather obey God then man so in cases of religion Nabuchodonosor had no warrant to erect his image nor Ieroboam to set vp his golden calues For the king as king is supreme vnder God not against God to commaund for truth not against truth And if hee shall command vngodly things we may not performe obedience but submit our selues to his punishments with patience PHIL. Doe not you by this title ascribe as much to the King as wee doe to the Pope ORTHO Wee are farre from it For when some malicious persons did wrest the words of the oath of supremacy to a sinister sense notifying how by words of the same oath it may be collected that the Kings or Queenes of this realme possessours of the crowne may challenge authority and power of ministery of diuine seruice in the Church Queene Elizabeth in the first yeere of
her raigne admonished all her louing subiects not to giue credit to such persons professing that she neither did nor would challenge any other authority then was challenged and vsed by king Henry the 8. and Edward the 6. and was of ancient time due to the imperiall crowne of this realme that is vnder God to haue the soueraignty and rule ouer all manner persons borne within her realmes dominions and countries of what estate either ecclesiasticall or temporall soeuer they be so as no other forraigne power shall or ought to haue any superiority ouer them And that no other thing was is or should bee meant or intended by the same oath Which was also further declared man act of Parliament the fifth yeare of her raigne with relation to the former admonition and moreouer fully explained in the Articles of religion in these words We giue not to our Princes the ministring either of Gods word or of the Sacraments which things the iniunctions lately set foorth by Queene Elizabeth doe most plainely testifie but onely that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwaies to all godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himself that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they bee ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuill sword the stubborne and euill doers This is the substance of the title due to the imperiall crowne of the Kingdome PHIL. If it be due to the imperiall crowne then it skilleth not whether the Prince be man woman or child nor of what religion For the Princely power was no lesse in Traiane then in Theodosius in K. Henry then in Q. Mary In Q. Mary the enemy of the new Gospellers then in Queene Elizabeth their protectour yea it was no lesse in King Lucius before hee was baptized then after And consequently the Emperour of the Turkes may bee called supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiasticall within his owne dominions ORTHOD. Here are two things to be considered First the princely power and authority Secondly the ability rightly to vse and exercise the same The princely power and authority is giuen immediatly froÌ„ God both vnto Christian Princes and also vnto Ethnickes which are guided only by the light law of nature and by constitutions thence deduced by the wit of man For this is true in all By me kings raigne And Daniell said to Nabuchodonosor O king thou art a king of kings for the God of Heauen hath giuen vnto thee a kingdome power and strength and glory But the ability rightly to vse and exercise this authority by refering it to the true end that is the glory of God for all our riuers should run into that Ocean the eternall good of the subiects is communicated from the Lord aboue onely to such as know him in Christ Iesus and are guided by his grace The fountaine therefore of al power is God himselfe as the Apostle witnesseth saying there is no power but of God To which purpose it is well said of Saint Austin Qui dedit Mario ipse Caesari qui Augusto ipse Neroni qui Vespasiano vel patri vel filio suauissimis imperatoribus ipse Domitiano crudelissimo ne per singulos ire necesse sit qui Constantino Christiano ipse Apostatae Iuliano i. He that gaue it to Marâ—â—s gaue it to Caesar hee that gaue it to Augustus gaue it to Nero he that gaue it to Vespasian the Father or his sonne most sweete Emperours gaue it also to Domitian the most cruell And that I should not neede to recken vp the rest in particular hee that gaue it to Constantine the Christian gaue it also to Iulian the Apostata But though domination and power were in the law of nature yet the right vse of it is not from nature but from grace A Prince as a Prince be he good or bad Christian or Pagan in respect of his princely calling hath sufficient power and authoritie to gouerne his people according to the will of God And it is his dutie so to doe The Lord said vnto Cyrus I will goe before thee and make the crooked streight I will breake the brasen doores and burst the Iron barres And I will giue thee the treasures of darkenesse and the things hid in secret places that thou maiest know that I am the Lord. Vpon which wordes Saint Ierom noteth that God giueth kingdomes vnto wicked men not that they should abuse them but as for other reasons so for this that being inuited by his bountie they should bee conuerted from their sinnes So it is their dutie to serue God not onely as they are men but as they are Kings And Kings saith Saint Austin doe in this serue God as Kings when they doe those things to serue him which none but Kings can doe But what is that It may appeare by these wordes Seruiant reges terrae Christo etiam leges ferendo pro Christo. i. Let the Kings of the earth serue Christ euen by making lawes for Christ. For though the immediate end of humane societes be peace and prosperitie yet the last end of all and most principally to bee respected is the glory of God and eternall happinesse For which purpose it is the dutie of all subiects to pray for their Prince though hee bee a Pagan that vnder him they may liue a godly and peaceable life in all godlinesse and honestie But though euery Prince in that hee is a Prince hath authoritie to serue God as a Prince yet for the due execution thereof there is required grace Authoritie is in a Pagan the due execution requireth a Christian. The King of Niniuie had authoritie long before to proclaime a fast Nabuchodonosor had authoritie to commaund that all nations and languages should worship the God of Daniel but they put it not in execution till God touched their hearts and when they put it in execution it was not by any new authoritie but by vertue of their former Princely power heretofore abused but now vsed rightly by direction of Gods Spirit and assistance of his grace The truth of which answere that you may see in another glasse let vs a little remooue our speech from the Prince to the Priest I demande therefore if the Priestes the sonnes of Aaron were not the messengers of the Lord of hosts PHIL. Yes verely as saith the Prophet Malachy ORTH. But he may be a false prophet an Idolater an Apostata he may turne Pagan or Atheist Is such a Priest the messenger of the Lord of hosts PHIL. A Priest in respect of his office ought so to be ORTH. But the Prophet speaking of the wicked Priest which seduceth the people saith not he ought to be but he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts PHIL. A Priest as a Priest be he good or bad in respect of his priestly calling and authoritie is the messenger of the Lord of