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
Salomon may rightly be called Prophets PHIL. I say that Salomon deposed Abiathar not as a king but as a Prophet and executer of diuine iustice ORTHOD. As though the King as a King were not an executer of diuine iustice yes Philodox it is the King as King which beareth not the sword in vaine it is the king as king which is The minister of God and a râ—uenger of wrath to him that doth euill therefore the King as King is the executer of diuine iustice And so when you say not as a king but as an executer of diuine iustice you put those things asunder which the Lord hath put together againe when you say that hee did it As a Prophet and an executer of diuine iustice you put those things together which the Lord hath put a sunder for a Prophet as a Prophet is the mouth of the Lord the executer of diuine iustice is not the mouth but the hand of the Lord the hand and the mouth must be distinguished PHIL. I will proue that Salomon did it as a Prophet For in the same place it is sayd that Salomon put out Abiathar that hee might fulfill the words of the Lord which he spake against the house of Eli in Shilo ORTHOD. Doe you thinke that such like speeches import the finall cause and the intents of the Agents The souldiours seeing the coate of Christ to be without seame wouen from the top throughout said one to another Let vs not diuide it but cast lots for it whose it shal be that the Scripture might bee fulfilled which saith they parted my garments among them and on my coate did they cast lots doe you imagine that the soldiours had any intent hereby to fulfill the Scripture Euen iust as much as Iudas had when hee sold his master for thirty peeces of siluer or Herod when hee slue the infants or the Iewes when they gaue him vineger to drinke They had no purpose in so doing to fulfill the Scripture yet God so disposed that by their action the Scripture was fulfilled Likewise your owne Bishop Tostatus may teach you that in this place the particle vt doth not signifie the finall cause but the consecution But what if Salomon had done it to that very end and purpose that the word of the Lord concerning the house of Eli might be fulfilled would this prooue that he did it as a Prophet Iehu when he had slaine Iehoram said to Bidkar a Captaine Take him and cast him in some place of the field of Naboth the Iezrelite for I remember that when â— and thou rode together after Ahab his father the Lord laide this burthen vpon him surely I haue seene yesterday the bloud of Naboth and the bloud of his sonnes sayd the Lord and I will render it thee in this field saith the Lord now therefore take and cast him into the field according to the word of the Lord The casting of him into the field was not onely a fulfilling of the prophesie but it was also commaunded to bee done euen directly to that end that the prophesie might bee fulfilled yet I thinke you will not say that Iehu was a Prophet so farre are you from prouing that Salomon did it as a Prophet PHIL. Either as a King or as a Prophet not as a King and therefore as a Prophet ORTHOD. NOt as a King why so the Lord had promised that Salomon should sit vpon the Throne of Dauid his father so Salomon was heire apparant to the crowne by Gods owne appointment yet for all this Adonias exalted himselfe and sayd I wil be king and Ioab and Abiathar helped him forward they said God saue King Adonias Whereupon all three were guilty of high treason against the king and all three were punished by the king PHIL. True by the king but not by kingly power ORTHO Yes by kingly power the king did it as a king And to beginne with Adonias the king granted him a conditionall pardon that If hee shewed himselfe a worthy man there should not a haire of him fall to the earth but if wickednesse were found in him hee should die and therefore when hee desired Abisha to wife the wisdome of the King reaching into the profoundnesse of the policie did interpret it as a meanes of aspiring to the kingdome So King Salomon sent by the hand of Benaiah the sonne of Iehoiada and hee smote him that hee died Who did this the spirit of God saith that King Salomon did it so it is ascribed to the King yea it is cleare that the King did it as a King for who could pardon treason but a King as a King Or who should draw the sword of iustice against malefactors but he that beareth not the sword in vaine that is the King by the power and authoritie of a King Concerning Ioab it was tolde Salomon that he was fled to the Tabernacle of the Lord and Benaiah sayd thus saith the King come out and hee sayd nay but I will die here and Benaiah brought the King word againe and the King said doe as hee hath said and smite him in all which there was nothing but the execution of iustice which belongeth to a King as a King Now to come to Abiathar his offence against the King was the same and the Scripture ascribeth the punishment in the same tenour of wordes vnto the king Then the King said vnto Abiathar the Priest euen the king who in the former verse commaunded Adonias to bee slaine that is the King as a King which may appeare further by that which hee said Goe to Anathoth to thy owne fields in which words hee confineth him which is the action of a King And againe thou art worthy of death but I will not this day kill thee because thou barest the Arke of the Lord God before Dauid my Father and because thou hast suffered in all things wherein my Father hath beene afflicted In which wordes hee granteth life to one that had deserued death and who could doe this but a King So Salomon cast out Abiathar from being high Priest vnto the Lord Where wee see death changed into depriuation All which doe argue the power of a King yea it is said that the King put Benaiah the sonne of Iehoiada in the roume of Ioab ouer the hoast which vndoubtedly belonged vnto the King as hee was King and it followeth immediately in the same verse and the King set Sadok the Priest in the roume of Abiathar Thus you see that the whole course of Scripture ascribeth it to the King as a King and why should you thinke otherwise PHIL. BEcause in the old Testament the Leuites were free by the law of God from the power of secular Princes For in the third of Numbers God doth not once but often repeate that the Leuites are properly his owne and that he hath chosen them
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
hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
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
already performed by Imperiall authoritie Thus you see the practise of the Emperours in the Church of Constantinople no man contradicting them and the very last of these examples was aboue 300. yeeres before the grant of Adrian yea aboue 100. yeeres before Vigilius Now from the Imperiall Cities let vs come to the kingdome of Spaine CHAP. X. Of the Election of the Bishops of Spaine IN the 16. Councell at Tolledo it was concluded That if a Bishop did not set his helping hand to the extirpation of Idolatrie he should be deposed Alio ibidem Principali Electione constituto Another being appointed there by the Princes Election This Councell was holden in the yeere 693. fourescore yeeres before Inuestitures were granted to the Emperour Charles by Pope Adrian And before that it was decreed in the 12. Councel of Tolledo as followeth It hath pleased all the Bishops of Spaine and Galicia That sauing the priuiledge of euery Prouince it shall hencefoorth be lawfull for the Bishops of Tolledo to set vp such Prelates in the Sees of their predecessours and to choose such successours for Bishops departed as the Princely power shall Elect and finde worthy by the iudgement of the foresaid Bishops of Tolledo This Councell was holden in the yeere 681. almost an 100. yeeres before Pope Adrian And yet the Kings of Spaine had authoritie to Elect before this Councel which may appeare by these wordes of Baronius Wee must not be ignorant of this point that the Kings of the Gothes in Spaine did challenge to themselues the nomination of such Bishops as were to bee made which nomination of them made by the King was referred to a Councell that they might iudge of the qualitie of the person whether he were worthy of a Bishoprick These things are euident by the Monuments of ancient writers Now because much time passed before they could be dispatched by reason whereof the Sees were long vacant therefore the Councell made the decree Thus it is euident that the authoritie of the Councell was translated to the Archbishop but the Kings authoritie was the same as before and had so bene from the time of the Gothes PHIL. Indeed in the time of the Gothes it was in the Kings and so hath continued in the Kings of Spaine to this present age by the indulgence of the Popes ORTHOD. The ancient Kings of the Gothes were Arrians and enemies to Christ did they elect Bishops by indulgence of Popes PHIL. They did it by tyrannie will you take a paterne from Arrians and Tyrants ORTHOD. The Arrians of Spaine were conuerted in the yeere 589. and professed the faith in the third Councell of Toledo Yet the Orthodox Kings continued their authoritie in Elections Shall we say that they tooke a patterne from Tyrants and Arrians Neither did the Arrian Kings offend in that they elected Bishops but in that they elected Arrian Bishops Neither is an Orthodox Prince bound to relinquish his owne right because it hath bene abused by hereticall Princes For the right of Princes is most ancient deriued neither from Pope nor Arrian but from the patterne of Salomon who chose Sadok high Priest aboue 1000 yeeres before either Arrian or Papist was borne Hitherto of Spaine CHAP. XI Of the Election of the Bishops of France IN France the Kings had the choise of Bishops almost 300. yeeres before the Empire came to their hands For their first Christian King Clodoueus conuerted in the yeere 499 elected Dinifius Bishop of Turone After him succeeded Childibertus who made his brethren Clodomer Theodorick and Clotharius partakers of his Kingdome all which vsed the same authority for by the commandement of Clodomer Omasius was made Bishop of Turone after Dinifius by the commandement of Theodorick Quintianus was made Bishop of Aruerne by the commandement of Clotharius Cato was appointed to be Bishop of Turone which when he refused and afterward would haue had it the King repelled him After the death of Clotharius raigned his sonne Cheribert who made Pascentius Bishop of Poictiers But why should I reckon vp any moe There is a world of examples recorded by Gregorius Turonensis collected from him by one of our learned Bishops all which were aboue a thousand yeeres agoe Afterward when the French Kings became Roman Emperours Pope Adrian decreed and defined that they should haue not only Inuestitures but also the disposing of the Roman See as hath beene declared And although Lodowick the sonne of Charles bee said to haue renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet as the Court of Paris affirmeth He alwaies retained Inuestitures Neither had the Kings of France of ancient time authority in Bishopricks onely but in benefices also Si ad priscorum institutorum normam saith Duarenus omnia exigere velimus nullum est in Gallia beneficium nullum Ecclesiae ministerium quod absque regis consensu cuiquam deferri possit if wee will examine all things according to the rule of ancient constitutions there is in France no benefice no ministry of any Church which can bee conferred vpon any man without the consent of the King Notwithstanding it came to passe in processe of time that the Pope by his prouisions reseruations and expectatiue graces made lamentable desolation in the Church of God for redresse whereof when the councell of Basill had published most worthy decrees Pope Eugenius went about to disanull them VVherefore Charles the 7. king of France at the supplication of the councell and by the aduice of his owne Bishops assembled in Synod vndertooke to protect them to which purpose hee set out that noble constitution called the pragmaticall sanction which was receiued with such an applause of all good men that the like was neuer heard of in the kingdome of France This pragmatical sanction was fitly called by a great learned man the Palladium of France for as the image of Pallas was said to fall downe from heauen among the Troianes so this sanction seemed to be sent from heauen by diuine prouidence among the Frenchmen And as Apollo did prophesie that the remouing of the Palladium would be the destruction of Troy so wise men presaged that the taking away of this Sanction would portend great calamity to the Church of France Yet for al this the Popes would neuer be quiet till they had if not wholly vanquished yet wonderfully weakened it especially Pius the 2. who was one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil but now beeing Pope hee is become another man neither wanted there some which to please the Pope opposed themselues against it whose subtilties and Sophismes are answered by that famous Canonist Archbishop Panormitan who was himselfe also one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil. Yea the court of Paris offered a booke to Lodowick the eleuenth wherein they declared how by the abrogation of the Sanction foure mischiefs would follow the first A confusion of the
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
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
the English there are none both which branches hee presupposeth as granted the French but when doeth any of them come ouer into England as though hee should say their comming is vncertaine so he concludeth that Austin must make Bishops alone without other Bishops Now from Austin we will proceede to his successours PHIL. They may all be presumed to bee Canonicall ORTH. Yet they came from such as were not canonicall Now from the Saxons wee will proceede to the Normans And here what say you to Lanfranck whom William the Conqueror made Archbishop in stead of Stigandus PHIL. There is no reason to doubt of him or any other till wee come to Cranmer CHAP. VI. Of the Consecration of the most Reuerend Father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie ORTH. THen it remaineth that we consider the Consecration of that most reuerend Father and blessed Martyr Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury concerning whom I expect your iudgement PHIL. My iudgement is that he was a principall cause of all those lamentable alterations which happened in the daies of king Henry the eight and Edward the sixt ORTH. Doe you call them lamentable therein you resemble Enuy in the Poet which lamented because she saw nothing worthy of lamentation For those alterations which ye call lamentable were a gracious beginning of a thousand blessings both to the Church and Common wealth of England But speake directly to the point in question whether Cranmer were a Canonicall Bishoppe Why doe you not answere You are like to one which holdeth a Wolfe by the eares who neither knoweth how to hold him nor how to let him goe faine would you infringe the Consecration of Cranmer but alasâ—e you cannot PHIL. Father Becan directing his speach to the Bishops of England saith thus Legitimè consecrati non estis a quo enim an à rege at is consecrandi potestatem non habet An ab Episcopo Cantuariensi vel aliquo simile ne id quidem Nam Thomas Cranmerus qui sub Henrico 8. Cantuariensem Episcopatum obtinuit non fuit consecratus ab vllo Episcopo sed a solo rege intrusus designatus igitur quotquot ab eo postea consecrati sunt non legitimè sed eâ— presumptione consecrati sunt 1. You are not lawfully consecrated for by whom were you whether by the King but he hath not power to consecrate Or by the Bishop of Canterbury or some like Neither that truly For Thomas Cranmer who vnder K. Henry the 8. obtained the Bishopricke of Canterburie was not consecrated by any Bishop but intruded and designed by the King alone therefore as many as were afterward consecrated by him were not consecrated lawfully but by presumption ORTH. Or rather Becan playeth the part of a presumptuous Iesuite against the Lords annointed in saying that King Henry intruded Cranmer as also in glauncing at his most famous and religious successours as though they themselues had consecrated Bishops For what needed he to moue any such question if it were not to raise a mist and cast a cunning surmise to induce men to thinke that it was so But indeede it was not so for our soueraignes in the aduancing of Bishops do nothing but that which they may lawfully by their Princely right agreeable to the patterne of most religious Kings and Emperours and iustifiable both by the lawes of God and the land as in due place shall appeare And as hee wrongeth the Prince so doth hee traduce Archbishop Cranmer as though he were consecrated either by the King or by none at all and consequently the whole Clergie of England at this day deriuing their consecration from that renowned Martyr But if this accusation were true doe you not marke how it would make a cracke in your golden chaine of succession wherein you so reioyce and glory For if Cranmer were no Bishop then some approoued in Queene Maries time would prooue no Bishops as for example Anthony Kitchen Bishop of Landaff and Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Ely both which deriued their Consecration from Cranmer as may be iustified by records the latter whereof was highly commended by the Pope and made one of his Commissioners in the time of Queene Marie and imploied in the proceedings against that most Reuerend Archbishop If this cannot content the Iesuite I will referre him to Parsons his fellow Iesuite a man who neither loued Archbishop Cranmer nor any other of our Religion and yet clearely confesseth that he was a true Bishop BVt what mislike you in Cranmer was hee not in the order of Priesthood let the Pope be Iudge who in his Bull to Cranmer calleth him Magistrum in Theologia in Presbyteratus ordine constitutum i. Master or Doctor in Diuinitie setled in the order of Priesthood Or was he made Archbishop without the Popes authoritie The Pope himselfe affirmeth the contrary both to the King in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus Henrico Anglorum Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis c. De fratrum eorundem consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus ipsumque illi Ecclesiae Cantuariensi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus c. Bonon 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. Pontif. nostri 10. ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the glorious King of the English We haue made Prouision by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of our said brethren of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury and we haue set him ouer the said Church of Canterbury to be their Archbishop And to Cranmer himselfe in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus dilecto filio Thomae electo Cantuariensi Praefatae Ecclesiae Cantuariensi de eorundem fratrum consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus teque illi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus pastorem curam administrationem ipsius Ecclesiae tibi in spiritualibus temporalibus plenariè committendo ¶ Bon. Anno 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. That is Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We haue prouided by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of the same brethren for the foresaid Church of Canterbury and haue set thee ouer it to be their Archbishop and pastour and fully committing vnto thee the charge and administration of the same Church in things spirituall and temporall Or did the Pope and his Cardinals accept the person of Cranmer vndeseruedly Let your holy Father speake for himselfe ¶ Clemens Episcopus Hâ—n Angl. Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis nobis fratribus nostris ob suorum exigentiam meritorum acceptâ— c. That is ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the most glorious King of England We haue made prouision of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury accepted of vs and our brethren according as his deserts required OR was he Consecrated without the Popes licence Behold the Bull for his Consecration ¶ Clemens Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cant. Tibi vt a quocunque
malueris Catholico Antistite gratiam Communionem Apostolicae sedis habente accitis in hoc sibi assistentibus duobus vel tribus Episcopis similem gratiam Communionem habentibus munus Consecrationis recipere valeas c. Concedimus facultatem Dat. Bonon 1532. Pontificatus nostri decimo That is ¶ Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We grant licence to thee that thou mayest receiue the gift of Consecration of whatsoeuer Catholick Prelat thou wilt so he enioy the fauour and Communion of the Apostolicke See two or three Bishops enioying the like fauour and communion being sent for and assisting him in this businesse Or was he entangled with any Ecclesiasticall censures which might peraduenture be imagined to hinder his Consecration That is more then we find or if he were behold his absolution ¶ Clem. dil fil Thom. Cran. Archidiac de Tanuton in Ecclesia Wellensi Magistro in Theol. salutem Te a quibusuis excommunicationis suspensionis interdicti alijsque Ecclesiasticis sententijs censuris poenis a iure vel ab homine quauis occasione vel causa latis si quibus quomodolibet innodatus existis c. tenore praesentium absoluimus c. Dat Bonon 1532. 9. Mart. That is ¶ Clement to our welbeloued sonne Thomas Cranmer Archdeacon of Tanuton in the Church of Wells Master or Doctor in Diuinity Salutation We absolue thee by the Tenor of these presents from whatsoeuer sentences of excommunication suspension and interdiction and other Ecclesiasticall sentences censures and punishments inflected by the Law or by man vpon any occasion or cause if by any meanes thou be intangled with any Or was he not Consecrate by so many and such Bishops as the Popes Bull prescribed The time place and persons are extant in Record against which you can take no exception The briefe extract whereof I will communicate vnto you for your better satisfaction Tho. Cran. consecrated 30. of March 1533. 24. H. 8. by Iohn Lincolne Iohn Exon. Henry Assaph OR was it not performed with wonted Ceremonies according to the vsuall forme of your Church But those continued all the dayes of K. Henry the 8. euen when the Pope was banished as Sanders confesseth ¶ Sand. de schis p. 297. Ceremoniam autem solennem vnctionem more Ecclesiastico adhuc in consecratione illa Episcopali adhibere voluit That is It was the will and pleasure of King Henry the eight That the Ceremony and solemne vnction should be vsed after the maner of the Church in that Episcopall consecration Or did he want the Pall which if we may beleeue you containeth the name of an Archbishop with the fulnesse of Bcclesiasticall power But this was sent him from your holy father ¶ Clem. Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cantuar. Pallium ipsum de corpore beati Petri sumptum per venerabiles fratres nostros Archiep. Ebor. Episcop Londin Tibi assignandum per praefatum nuntium tuum duximus destinandum vt ijdem Archiepiscopus Episcopus vel eorum alter illud tibi postquam munus consecrationis acceperis assignent c. Dat. Bonon 1532. 5. Non. Mart. That is We thought good that it should be appointed by your foresaid messenger That the Pall it selfe taken from the body of blessed Peter should be assigned vnto you by your venerable brethren the Archbishop of Yorke and the Bishop of London that the said Archbishop and Bishop or either of them may assigne it vnto you after you haue receiued the gift of Consecration PHIL. I deny not that Cranmer was truely ordained because Catholicke Bishops consecrated him and so I confesse that hee liued and died a true Bishop but peraduenture he was neuer any lawfull Archbishop of Canterburie ORTHOD. Why so hee was Canonically chosen by the Church of Canterburie with the consent of the King and the Popes approbation appearing both by his Bulls and the Pall which hee sent him hee was Canonically consecrated by his Comprouincials with the Popes consent who stiled him Thomam Cranmerum olim Archiepiscopum Cantuariensem i. Thomas Cranmer sometimes Archbishop of Canterburie both in his Bull of Commission to the Bishops of London and Ely authorising them to proceed against him And likewise in his Bull of prouision for Cardinall Poole Neither did he onely giue him the title of an Archbishop but he tooke order also for his Degradation which was openly performed by the Commissioners Concerning which it is famously knowen That whereas they did onely Vnpriest Ridley Hooper and Farrer as taking them for no Bishops they did Vnbishop Cranmer taking from him both his Episcopall and Archiepiscopall robes In the doing whereof Cranmer said vnto them Which of you hath a Pall to take away my Pall To whom they answered That they did it by the Popes Commission Wherefore you must of force confesse without all peraduenture That he was not onely Bishop but also truely Archbishop of Canterburie PHIL. Let all this be granted yet I must needs adde that his proceedings were Schismaticall and opened a way for the great Schisme of Henry the eight CHAP. VII Of the abolishing of Papall Iurisdictions by King Henry the eight which the Papists iniuriously brand with imputation of Schisme ORTH. FOrasmuch as it is the custome of Papists to brand the raigne of King Henry the eight with the odious name of Schisme let me a little dispell those clouds and mists wherewith they darken the glorie of that Heroicall Prince When the time was come that it pleased the Almightie to deliuer England from the vsurped authoritie of the Bishop of Rome the beginning of it did grow from a detestable dispensation For whereas Prince Arthur elder sonne to Henry the 7. had married the Lady Katherine daughter to Ferdinando King of Spaine it pleased God that the said Prince Arthur shortly after deceased without issue so his yonger brother Henry Duke of Yorke was proclaimed Prince of Wales Now Ferdinando King of Spaine being disappointed of his former hope and still desirous to make his daughter Queene of England after long suite with great cost and charges in the life time and with the consent of Henry the 7. obtained a dispensation that she being wiâ—e to the one brother might lawfully be married to the other This matter was referred first to Pope Alexander the sixt then to Pius the third both which died before it could be accomplished After them succeeded Iulius the second the noble warriour who brake through al difficulties couragiously granted the dispensation contrary to the opinion of all the Cardinals of Rome being Diuines By vertue whereof Prince Henry being yet of tender yeeres was contracted to his brothers wife While the marriage was expected it pleased God that in Spaine Elizabeth mother to the Lady Katherine and in England Henry the seuenth departed this life so the kingdome descended to Henry the eight who was
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
his former mariage condemned by such a world of witnesses so grounding their iudgements vpon the blessed word of God as was sufficient to settle any mans conscience proceeded the 14. of Nouember in the 24. yeere of his reigne to marrie the Lady Anne Bullen who the seuenth of September following brought forth the Ladie ELIZABETH the Ioy of England the Starre of Europe and the Phoenix of the world a Glasse of Gods prouidence and the Mirrour of his mercie When the Royall infant was yet in her mothers wombe Pope Clement the seuenth the base borne sonne of Iulianus Medices the Florentine fauouring the Lady Katharine Dowager sought by all meanes to dissolue the lawfull mariage of Queene Anne and to make her issue vncapable of the crowne For which purpose being inraged like a Dragon hee disgorged his poyson and spit fiery flames against the king the Queene the Realme the blessed babe before she was borne But death closed vp his eyes with darkenesse while the yong Lady beganne to behold the light of heauen arysing like a luckie starre in the middest of a storme shining to the Church of God with tokens of ioy and deliuerance but to the Pope and his adherents like a blazing or fatall Comet portending the ouerthrow of Antichrist Which in part came to passe about a yeere after that the yong Lady was borne For whereas the Bishop of Rome like the daw in Aesop had decked and adorned himselfe with the faire feathers of other birds and ietted vp and downe with pride and disdaine tyrannizing ouer all the foules that flie in the midle of heauen King Henry the eight the Eagle of England plucked his owne feather out of the Popes wing and resumed to himselfe the rich plume of the Princes supremacy that is the lawful authoritie which God had giuen him Then Paul the third flashed out his excomunications like lightnings and interdicted the kingdome hoping thereby to reduce it to his obedience or at least to disable the yong Lady for the succession of the crowne Yet after a while the angrie old man withered away but the yong Lady did grow vp like the lilly and flourished like the Rose plant of Prouince Now though for extirpating the Popes iurisdiction this renowned King had the honour before and aboue all Christian Princes yet the glorie of abolishing Popish religion was by diuine prouidence reserued to his blessed children Edward and Elizabeth They pulled vp superstition by the very roots whereas their father for God reuealed his truth by degrees did onely hew at a few branches Hitherto of the Popes expulsion NOw for as much as Archbishop Cranmer was a principall meanes thereof the Papists did hate him worse then a scorpion heaping vpon him whatsoeuer wit sharpened with malice could possibly deuise Hee resorted sometimes to the Dolphin in Cambridge where hee placed his wife the mistresse of the house being her cousin therupon they blazed abroad that he was an Hostler and vnlearned He kept his wife secret for feare of the law they reported that she was caried vp and downe in a Chest and that at Graues end the wrong end of the Chest was set vpward And surely King Henry did foresee that one day if they might preuaile they would haue his blood and burne him at a stake Therefore whereas hee gaue the three Cranes the ancient armes of his house the King caused him to change them into three Pelicanes presaging that he should feed the flock of Christ with his deerest blood and dye a Martyr which came to passe in the dayes of Queene Mary when they disgorged all their poisoned malice vpon him They disrobed him of his Episcopall ornaments and put him into a lay mans gowne they cited him to appeare at Rome within eightie dayes and put him to death before twentie of them were expired They caused Alphonso the Spanish Fryer to draw him to a recantation by sweet promises of life yet they had a setled purpose to put him to death They had no intention by Alphonso to do him good but sought a colour by his recantation to iustifie themselues so they clapped their hands and reioyced at his fall But as hee sinned and denyed his Master with Peter so God gaue him grace to repent with Peter And as he lamented all his sinnes so especially he bewailed his subscribing to Popery with his vnworthy right hand Wherefore when he came to the fire for a godly reuenge hee thrust it like another Scaeuola into the flame and did not so much as draw backe his arme till it was wholly consumed thus lifting vp his eyes to heauen in the middest of the furious flames hee said Lord Iesus receiue my spirit and so gaue vp the Ghost When his bodie and the wood were consumed to ashes behold his heart was found whole and perfect as hauing escaped the force of the fire concerning which these verses were written by a learned man Ecce inuicta fides cor inuiolabile seruat Nec medijs flammis corda perire sinit Cranmer amid the fiery flames thy heart vnscorcht was found For why behold vndaunted faith preseru'd it safe and sound CHAP. VIII Whether to renounce the Pope be Schisme and Heresie PHIL. WEll though you and your crew commend Cranmer yet I will proue in spite of all Hereticks that when he reuolted from the Pope both he and all his consorts became notorious Schismaticks ORTHOD. Then you will proue in spite of all Hereticks that Stephen Gardener was a Schismaticke Edmund Bonner a schismatick Cutbert Tunstall a schismaticke Nicholas Heath a schismaticke Iohn Stokesly a schismaticke and in a word that all the Bishops of your Catholicke Church which were in England after the banishing of the Pope till the end of the raigne of King Henry by the space of 12. yeeres were notorious schismatickes For they all reuolted from the Pope Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester onely excepted who was then lately made Cardinall but lost his head before his Hat came ouer What will you proue that there were so many schismaticks at once in your Catholicke Church PHIL. They were not then of the Catholicke Church for that worthy Bishop of Winchester Stephen Gardener affirmed That when K Henry did first take vpon him to be head of the Church it was then no Church at all And Doct. Sanders saith That Bishops were made in Schismate Henriciano extra vel potiùs contra Ecclesiam 1. in the schisme of Henry the 8. without the Church or rather against it ORTHOD. Pope Nicholas defineth the Catholicke Church to be a congregation of Catholicks PHIL. When they renounced the Pope they were no Catholicks ORTHOD. They were Masse-priests and professed that faith which you call Catholicke Why then should you deny them the name of Catholicks PHIL. Because they did not professe it vnder the Bishop of Rome from whose communion whosoeuer renteth himselfe is a schismaticke
him by not doing that which hee commaundeth and by hindring him from executing his will yet it is not lawfull to iudge him or punish him or depose him which belongeth to none but the superiour ORTHOD. And you must consider that it is one thing to punish by vertue of Iurisdiction ouer a partie and another thing to hinder the iniuries which the partie endeauoreth actuallie to inferre as the Venetian Doctours haue prooued out of Caietan Turrecremata and Bellarmine Now King Henry did challenge no iurisdiction but ouer his owne subiects and within his owne dominions yet it was fit that in his owne necessary defence hee should remoue papall iniuries by prouiding as it became a vertuous Prince for the quiet of his owne conscience and the good of his subiects Which blessings could neuer haue beene procured if the Pope had still enioyed his vsurped authority in England PHIL. You shall not perswade mee but that King Henry was guiltie both of Schisme and heresie Onuphrius saith that Paul the third did thinke him vnworthie to bee accounted in the number of Christians ob inauditum heresis crimen that is For such a crime of heresie as had not beene heard of ORTHOD. What meant the Pope thinke you when hee condemned him for heresie Sigonius recordeth that in a Councell at Mentz in the presence of the Emperor there was a disputation Vtrum Henricus Regio titulo a Gregorio spoliari potuisset that is VVhether Henry the Emperour might bee depriued of the title of a King by Pope Gregorie Wherein most of the Bishops assented to Geberardus defending the Popes authority So it came to passe that Vecilo Archbishop of Mentz beeing of the contrarie opinion was branded for heresie in an other councell wherein Otho Bishop of Ostia the Popes Legat was present And the same Sigonius saith that the Emperour Henry the fourth renouncing his Fathers heresie did imbrace the obedience of the Pope Not to performe obedience to the Pope was his Fathers heresie but his sonne was a gracious Catholicke for shewing obedience to the Pope though therein hee were an vngracious sonne against his owne father PHIL. Onuphrius saith That king Henry the eight followed Noua nefaria Lutheri dogmata the new and wicked opinions of Luther Bellarmine saith that in England in the reigne of Henry and afterwards in the reigne of Edward the whole kingdome did after a sort slide backe from the faith ORTHOD. That which you call Heresie and Apostacy is true religion and that which you honour with the name of true religion is full of Heresie and idolatry Many papall abuses were discouered in the daies of King Henry moe in the daies of King Edward so the Gospell was like to the light which shineth more and more to the perfect day the brightnesse whereof abolished both the Pope the Popish religion Afterward when Queene Mary had restored both the Lord stirred vp the spirit of Queene Elizabeth who with an inuincible courage reformed religion And that which shee happily begunne our gracious Soueraigne King Iames hath happily continued Neither can any man accuse them of Schisme vnlesse they will accuse the holy Apostle Saint Paul who When certaine were hardened and disobeyed speaking euill of the way of God before the multitude hee departed from them and separated the Disciples As the Apostle practised this in his owne person so hee gaue the like commaundement to others If any man teach otherwise and consenteth not to the wholesome words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to godlinesse c. From such separate thy selfe And the Lord crieth by his Prophet Goe not vp to Bethauen This Bethauen was Bethel but her idolatry made her Bethauen therefore goe not vp to Bethauen If Rome which was sometimes Bethel the house of God become Bethauen the house of vanitie then thou must not goe vp to Bethauen Goe out of Babylon my people goe out of Babylon if Rome which was some times a pure virgine become the whore of Babylon then go out of Babylon my people least you be partakers of her plagues Wherefore al Christian Kingdomes were bound to separate themselues from the erronious and idolatrous Church of Rome PHIL. Thus you say But I rather account of the iudgement of the Church of Rome which noteth both them and you for schismatickes and heretickes CHAP. IX Whether Schisme and Heresie annihilate a Consecration ORTHO WHether we or you be guiltie of those crimes God the righteous iudge will one day reueale In the meane time let vs admit though for al your brags you are neuer able to proue it that Cranmer vpon his reuolte from the Pope did presently become a schismatick and an hereticke Yet tell mee in good sooth Philodox doeth a Bishop falling into schisme and heresie cease to be a Bishop doth hee loose his power of giuing orders PHIL. It is a disputable point and I can tell you that great Clerkes seeme to bee of that opinion Pope Innocent saith that those which are Baptized of heretickes are receiued with their Baptisme but the ordained of heretickes are not receiued with their order And againe the ordained of Heretickes haue their head wounded And againe it is affirmed that hee which hath lost the honour cannot giue the honour and that hee which receiued receiued nothing because there was nothing in the giuer which hee could receiue Which he sealeth vp with this conclusion Aquiescimus verum est We yeeld and it is true Pope Iohn the twelfth caused those which were ordained of Leo 8. a schismaticall Pope to say Pater meus nihil habuit sibi nihil mihi dedit that is my father had nothing to himselfe and nothing he gaue to me Pope Nicolas the first saith No reason doth teach how Gregory who was Canonically and Synodically deposed and excommunicated can promote or blesse any man therefore Photius receiued nothing of Gregory but that which he had but he had nothing he therefore gaue nothing He which stoppeth his ears from hearing the law his prayer shal be abhominable if abhominable then not to be heard if not to be heard then vneffectuall if vneffectuall then verily it bringeth nothing to Photius Wherefore though Cranmer had a lawfull consecration yet it seemeth when hee fell into schisme and heresie hee lost his order and power of ordination Therefore the Bishops in King Edwards time consecrated by Cranmer receiued nothing because Cranmer had nothing to giue And the Bishops in Queene Elizabeths time consecrated by those whom Cranmer did consecrate receiued nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue And those which now succeede them receiued nothing because their predecessours had nothing to giue ORTHO Take heed Philodox least while you goe about to put out our eyes you put out your owne For if your allegations be sound what shall become of Bonner Bishop of London what shall become of
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
which hath not the right order of Priesthood but the Priesthood conferred in King Edwards time was no Priesthood because they wanted the authority to offer the blessed sacrifice of the Masse therefore those Priests were not capable of the Episcopall order ORTHO I answere first that seeing that King Edward rained but sixe yeeres and fiue moneths it is likely that most of them which were aduanced in his time to bee Bishops were before his time in the order of Priesthood Secondly if any be produced which were not yet it shal be iustified God willing when we come to the point that the order of Priesthood conferred in the dayes of King Edward Queene Elizabeth and King Iames is the true ministery of the Gospel and that your sacrificing Priesthood is sacrilegious and abominable In the meane time you must giue vs leaue to holde that the ministery of the Church of England is holy in the sight of God and iustifiable in the sight of man CHAP. XII Of the Bishops Consecrated in the dayes of Queene Marie THe lineall descent hath led vs to the Bishops in Queen Maries time concerning which shal I craue your iudgement PHIL. You know it already they were all Canonical ORTHOD. For the more distinct proceeding let vs diuide them into two ranckes the old Bishops and the new the old I cal such as being cōsecrated before her time were continued in her time the new which were Consecrated in her time PHIL. All which were allowed for Bishops in Queene Maries time whether old or new were Canonicall ORTHO The old Bishops were all made in the dayes of K. Henry the eighth and almost all in those very times which you brand with imputation of schisme and heresie when none could bee Consecrated vnlesse hee did sweare to the king against the Pope Wherefore seeing you iudged both Consecrators and Consecrated schismaticall and hereticall and yet esteeme them Canonicall your obiections of schisme and heresie must eternally bee silenced in the question of Canonicall Bishops For if these crimes can frustrate a Consecration then their Consecration was frustrate and they were no Bishops or if they were Bishops and Canonicall then all the Bishops in King Henries time were likewise Canonicall Moreouer some of them whom you so commend were Bishops in King Edwards time as for example Thomas Thurlby whom King Henrie promoted to be Bishop of Westminster was aduanced by King Edward to the Bishopricke of Norwich and afterward preferred by Queene Mary to the Bishopricke of Ely and moreouer to be one of her priuie Councell Yea some of them had the place of a Bishop in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth Namely Anthony Kitchin who in King Henries time was made Bishop of Landaff kept his dignities and place in the dayes of K. Edward continued the same all the reigne of Queene Mary and so till the day of his death which was in the fift yeere of Queene Elizabeth Wherefore in iustifying the old Bishops you iustifie al generally which were Consecrated in King Henries daies and some which continued in King Edwards and Queene Elizabeths But now from the old let vs come to the new PHIL. QVeene Mary aduanced Holiman bishop of Bristow Coates bishop of Chester Watson bishop of Lincolne Morris bishop of Rochester Morgan bishop of S. Dauis Brooke bishop of Glocester Glin bishop of Bangor Christophorson bishop of Chichester Dauid Poole bishop of Peterborow Cardinall Poole bishop of Canterbury and others ORTHOD. And these reuerend Prelats Bush bishop of Bristow Tailor bishop of Lincolne Scory bishop of Chichester Barlow bishop of Bathe and Wells Couerdale bishop of Exeter and Harly bishop of Hereford with sundry others were at that time forced to leaue their bishopricks For what cause partly for not yeelding to the Pope and Popish Religion partly because they were married which Greg. Martin calleth a polluting of holy Orders though S. Paul saith it is honourable among all men and the bed vndefiled But let vs see the Consecration of your new bishops PHIL. I will begin with that renowned Prelate Cardinall Poole whose Consecration followeth Anno 1555. Reginald Poole cons. Archb. Cant. 22. Mart. by Nichol Arch. Ebor. Thom. Eltens Edmund Lond. Rich. Wigorn. Ioh. Lincoln Mauric Roff. Thom. Asaph Anno 1557. Thom Watson Dauid Pole Cons. B. 15. Aug. by Nich. Ebor. Thom. Eli. Wil. Bangor Anno 1557. Ioh. Christophorson cons. B. 21. No. by Edmund Lond. Tho. Elien Mauric Roff. ORTHOD. All these deriue their Consecration from bishops which were made in the time of the pretended Schisme and some of them from Cranmer himselfe therefore you must either acknowledge all them and namely Cranmer for Canonicall or neither Cardinall Poole nor any of the rest made in Queene Maries time can be Canonicall THE THIRD BOOKE OF THE BISHOPS CONSEcrated in the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth and of our gracious Soueraigne King IAMES CHAP. I. Of the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some Antecedents and Consequents of their Depositions PHIL. THe reuolution of times hath brought vs to the raigne of Queene Elizabeth euen to that blacke and dolefull day wherein all the Bishops of England all I say one onely excepted were deposed from their degrees and dignities For a great penaltie was inflicted vpon such as should after the Feast of S. Iohn Baptis◠1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesiasticall Office whatsoeuer after the old rite or administer any Sacrament after the Romane maner to wit That hee which offended against that Law for the first time should pay 200 Nobles or be in bonds sixe Moneths for the second 400. Nobles or a yeere in bonds for the third he should be in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods By which meanes it came to passe That at the day prescribed the holy and diuine Offices ceased to be performed publikely through the whole Kingdome And because the Bishops would not consent to those impieties nor affirme vpon their Oathes that they beleeued in their consciences That the Queene onely was the Supreame gouernesse of the Church of England vnder Christ they were all saue one shortly after deposed from their Degree and dignitte and committed to certaine prisons and custodies whereupon they are all at this day dead with the long tediousnesse of their miseries The names of which most glorious Confessours I will set downe that the thing may be had in euerlasting remembrance First of all Nicholas Archbishop of Yorke and a little before that time Lord Chancellour of England then Edmund Bonner Bishop of London and Tunstall of Durham Iohn of Winton Thomas of Lincolne Thurlby of Ely Turberuill of Exeter Borne of Bath Pole of Peterborow Baine of Lichfield Cuthbert of Chester Oglethorp of Carlile and Thomas Goldwell of S. Asaph c. ORTH. Here are two things to be discussed The deposing of the old Bishops and aduancing of the new Concerning the first
Hitherto of the circumstances now we come to the deposition it selfe CHAP. II. The Deposition of the Bishops iustified by the example of Salomon deposing Abiathar PHIL. IN a lawfull Deposition there must be sufficient authority proceeding vpon a iust and sufficient cause Now let me aske you by what authoritie were the old Bishops deposed ORTHOD. And I might aske you by what authoritie Salomon deposed Abiathar PHIL. You are still telling vs of Salomon and Abiathar If a king depriued this high Priest an other high Priest that is Iehoiada depriued Queene Athalia both of her kingdome and life ORTHOD. Q. Athalia No Queene sir by your leaue Ioas the true heire of the kingdome was then aliue and he was the true King by right of inheritance therefore she was no Queene but a wicked vsurper Your Defence of Catholicks might teach you so much which calleth her A pretenced Queene and saith That she vsurped the kingdome Yet behold with what blindnesse and giddines they are stricken which traiterously oppose themselues against their Prince and countrey Cardinall Allen is not ashamed to bring the example of Iehoiada deposing Athalia that vsurping and pretenced Queene to proue that the Pope hath authoritie to depose lawfull Princes Neither did Iehoiada this as being high Priest but whatsoeuer he did in this case he might haue done it though he had not bene high Priest For Iehosheba his wife was daughter to king Iehoram and sister to king Ahazia who was father to Ioas and consequently she was aunt to King Ioas So Iehoiada her husband was of the next alliance that the yong King had Yea and when Athalia like a bloodie Tyger murthered the kings seed Iehosheba the wife of Iehoiada conueyed away her nephew Ioas out of the middest of the kings sonnes which were massacred and hid him and his nurse in a chamber and kept them close 6. yeeres in the House of the Lord. So Iehoiada by Gods prouidence was made Protector of the Kings person yea and when the time came wherein he thought fit to disclose him he first acquainted the Fathers of Israel and the Captaines and so proceeded with their consent Therefore what did hee herein but protect the person age innocencie and title of his Lord and Soueraigne whereto he was bound by the Law of Nature and Nations Therefore when you bring this to proue the Popes Supremacie you mistake the matter you cannot shew vs in Scripture where euer a Priest deposed a lawfull Prince The Kings of Israel were all of them idolaters and so were 14. of the Kings of Iuda yet not one Priest or Prophet did so much as euer offer to depose any one of them but we shew you in Scripture this plaine example where Salomon the Prince remoued Abiathar the lawfull Priest PHIL. IT is one thing to relate the actions of kings and another thing to approue the authoritie ORTHOD. Did the Spirit of God thinke you relate this onely as an Historian and not approue the action or dare you accuse Salomon as proceeding in this case without authoritie If Salomon had no authoritie to depose Abtathar then there must needs be a nullitie in the Deposition For how can any Iudiciall action be of validitie when there is no authoritie in the Agent If the Deposition were a nullitie then Abiathar still retained the true right title and interest to be high Priest But what could there be two high Priests at one time PHIL. Surely no for though S. Luke say that the word of the Lord came vnto Iohn when Annas and Caiaphas were high Priests yet we must not thinke that they were both high Priests in equall authoritie at once For the word Summus Sacerdos or princeps Sacerdotum is taken three wayes First whereas the Priests were diuided into 24. Orders the chiefe of each Order was called Princeps Sacerdotum The Prince of the Priests or high Priest Secondly there was a Colledge of 72. Seniours which was called Synedrin the first or chiefe whereof was also called The Prince of the Priests or high Priest Thirdly it is taken both most properly and most vsually for him that had the first and chiefest place of all to whom the other Princes of the Priests were subiect Now Baronius thinketh that S. Luke called Annas an high Priest because he was both the Prince and highest of his Order and also the Prince and highest of the Synedrin but Caiaphas in his iudgement was called high Priest because he was simply and absolutely highest of all in which sence there can be but one high Priest at once nor euer was Vnum tantummodo non duos simul ante post haec tempora summum Sacerdotem penes Iudaeos fuisse certum exploratumque habeatur That is It is certaine and a tried trueth that there was one onely high Priest among the Iewes not two at once both before and after these times speaking of the time of Annas and Caiaphas Hence Cardinall Bellarmine with other of our learned diuines doe commonly conclude that As there was but one visible gouernour in the Church of the old Testament so there should bee but one in the Church of the New ORTHOD. If there could be but one high Priest at one time and Abiathar notwithstanding that hee was put from the possession still retained the true right title and interest to be high Priest then Sadok was not a lawfull high Priest but an intruder vpon another mans right what say you to this PHIL. It were hard to call Sadok an intruder for Sadok idem est quod iustus reuera fuit Sadok nomine factis that is Sadok doth signifie iust and indeed he was iust both in name and deeds ORTHO If Sadok were no intruder but a lawfull high Priest then Abiathar ceased to bee high Priest for you say there could not bee two at once If Abiathar ceased to bee high Priest then the place was lawfully voide but how was it void Not by death for Abiathar was still aliue not by resignation or voluntary cessation for wee finde no such matter How then no other reason can with reason bee imagined but onely because hâ—e was deposed by Salomon If the place were iustly and lawfully voide by vertue of this deposition then it must needes bee a lawfull deposition and consequently it must bee done by lawfull authority For if the deposer had no authority then could not the deposition bee lawfull wherefore as you confesse that Sadok was lawfull high Priest so you must likewise confesse that Salomon in casting out Abiathar and placing Sadok had lawfull authority PHIL. WHat if he had was he not a Prophet as well as a King ORTHO All the bookes of the old Testament are called by the name of Prophecy because they prophecied of Iesus Christ therefore the pen men thereof which did speake as they were moued by the holy ghost amongst which was
to himselfe out of all his people and he commanded them to be giuen for a gift vnto Aaron and his sonnes that is to the high Priest and his successours for it was his will that they whom hee himselfe had chosen to the ministerie of the Temple and holy things should bee subiect to the high Priest onely who represented the place of God on earth and by this he freed them from the iurisdiction of earthly Princes for Clergy men are the Ministers of God and offered to God by the whole people whereupon they are called Clerici as belonging to the inheritance of the Lord as Saint Hierom teacheth in his Epistle to Nepotianus Now surely secular Princes can haue no authoritie ouer those things which are offered and consecrated vnto God and made as it were proper vnto God himselfe which both the light of reason sheweth and God himselfe declareth not obscurely in holy Scripture when he saith in the last of Leuiticus Whatsoeuer shall be consecrated vnto the Lord it shall bee holy of holies vnto the Lord. ORTHOD. As houses and lands dedicated to God remained his proper and euerlasting possession so the tribe of Leui being once consecrated vnto God became for euer his peculiar inheritance But doth it therefore followe that they are all exempted from the iurisdiction of Princes the whole nation of the Iewes are called an holy nation and a kingdome of Priests all the males of Israel had the seale of the liuing God set vpon them in the Sacrament of circumcision yet not one of them were exempted from the power of their Prince It is true that by the lawe of God in matters concerning their office the Leuites were subordinate to the Priestes and the Priestes to the high Priest but both Priest high Priest were vnder the authoritie of the ciuill Magistrate Iehosaphat sent Priests Leuites to instruct the cities of Iudah and did he this without authoritie he sent Priestes and Leuites to be iudges and Delegates Amariah the high Priest to bee chiefe ouer them in the matters of the Lord did hee this also without authoritie when the house of God was defiled Hezechias called the Priestes and Leuites commanding them to sanctifie themselues and the house of the Lord and they did so according to the Kings commandement then hee commanded the Priestes the sonnes of Aaron to offer sacrifice vnto the Lord and they did so he appointed all the Leuites in the house of the Lord with Cymbals with Viols and with Harpes and the Leuites stood with the instruments of Dauid and the Priestes with Trumpets and Hezechias commaunded the Priestes to offer the burnt offering vpon the Altar and they did so then the King and the Princes commanded the Leuites to praise the Lord with the wordes of Dauid and Asaph the seer so they praised with ioy Then hee commanded the Priestes to offer the sacrifice of praise and they did so yea the King this holy King appointed the courses of the Priestes and Leuites by their turnes which things hee did well and vprightly before the Lord his God therefore wee must not thinke he passed the bounds of his authoritie If Priest or high Priest were exempted from the iurisdiction of Kings why did Iosias commande Helkiah the high Priest and the Priests of the second order to fetch out of the Temple all the instruments prepared for Baal for the groue and for all the hoast of heauen which hee burned without Hierusalem in the fieldes of Kedron and caused the dust of them to bee carried vnto Bethel If Priestes were exempted why did hee bring all the Priestes of the high places out of the cities of Iudah and all such of them as were Ieroboams Priests of which the man of Iudah prophecied hee sacrificed vpon the Altars the rest which were of the line of Aaron but yet had offered in the high places hee brought backe from Hierusalem though they were not suffered to sacrifice vnto the Lord but were thrust out of their Priesthood to the meanest offices amongst the Leuites Now from Kings let vs come to Nehemias the Viceroy who relating how Eliashib the high Priest had made a great chamber in the house of the Lord for Tobias the Ammonite addeth immediately But all this time was not I in Ierusalem signifying that if hee had beene there hee would not haue suffered such abomination And when hee came hee cast out the vessels of Tobias and commanded the Priestes to cleanse them and bring againe the vessels of the Lord. When one of the nephewes of the high Prieste had married the daughter of Sanballat Nehemias chased him away With what face now can you say that Princes in the olde Testament had no authoritie ouer the Priestes If Kings had no authoritie then they should not haue enioyned appointed commaunded and punished but onely haue aduised admonished and exhorted them If Priestes had any such priuiledge it is strange that in all the storie of the olde Testament wee finde not one Priest once pleading his priuiledge If they submitted themselues when their conscience tolde them that they had offended yet why did they not plead their immunitie when they were iniuriously handled Zacharias the Priest was slaine at the commandement of the King and yet neuer mentioned any priuiledge When Saul slew Abimelech and aboue eightie Priestes which wore a linnen Ephod Abimelech declared his innocency and acknowledged the Kings iurisdiction ouer him by calling the King his Lord and himselfe the Kings seruant but spoke not a word of any priuiledge Therefore all the world may see that there was no such matter these are but fictions of idle braines wherefore we may truly conclude that the tribe of Leui was not exempted from secular iurisdiction but the King might conuent command reprooue and punish them and yet not transgresse the law of God PHIL. Who dare affirme that a prophane person hath any authoritie or iurisdiction ouer those things which haue deserued to bee called holy of holies that is most holy ORTHOD. Who but a prophane Iesuite durst bee so bold as to call the light of Israel the annointed of the Lord the Minister of God a prophane person The ancient sages of the Christian world did vse to speake of Princes with all reuerence not onely of those which professed the true faith but of others also The third Romane councell vnder Symmacus calleth Theodoricus who was knowen to bee an Arrian a holy Prince whereupon Binius writeth thus An Arrian king is named most holy and most godly not according to his merites but according to custome like as Valerian and Gratian Ethnicke Emperours were called most holy by Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria as witnesseth Eusebius Which was done by the example of the Apostle Paul who called Felix being a wicked man but then in authoritie by the vsuall stile of most noble Hitherto
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
videtur c. It seemeth we may say seeing an Abbot gouerneth his Monastery by ordinary Iurisdiction and an Abbatesse is equall vnto him in freedome of administration that she hath ordinarie Iurisdiction as well as the Abbot Yea the same Stephen striueth to attibute vnto her the power of excommunication which is more then the Church of England ascribeth to Princes For it attributeth vnto them onelie that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwayes to godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed vnto their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuil sword the stubborne euill doers When the B hath vsed his spirituall censures he can proceed no further but as Iosias compelled all that were found in Israel to serue the Lord So may euery Prince by his royall authority compell all his subiects to do their duty and those which refuse to be reformed by the Church he may restraine with the ciuil sword inflicting tēporal punishments as the qualitity of the offence requireth When Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed in the Councell of Antioch he did notwithstanding hold his Church and chaire by violence whereupon the Councell knowing that of themselues they could proceed no further were forced to seeke the aide of Aurelian the Emperour by whose commandement he was expelled PHIL. IF the Iurisdiction of the Prince and the Prelate be so different how then is the Prelates deriued from the Prince ORTHOD. Heere wee must consider the matters handled in the consistories of Bishops and the manner The matters originally and naturally belonging to those Courts are onely such as are originally and naturally Ecclesiasticall the manner to ratifie their iudgements is not properly vnder any corporall mulct but onely by spirituall censures as suspension excommunication and such like In both which respects the Iurisdiction of Bishops hath beene much inlarged by the fauour and indulgence of Christian Princes Concerning the matter Constantine the Great gaue libertie to Clerkes to decline the iudgement of ciuill Iudges and to bee iudged by their owne Bishops By occasion whereof many Ciuill Causes were brought to the cognisance of Ecclesiasticall Courts Hee made also a law to ratifie those iudgements As though they had beene pronounced by the Emperour himselfe Now all the Iurisdiction which Bishops haue in Ciuill Causes is meerely from the Prince Concerning the manner it seemeth sometimes expedient to annex coactiue power to the Episcopall office both for the honour of Prelacie and also to make their spirituall censures the more regarded which also without controuersie must bee acknowledged to proceede from the Prince For as the Lord hath compacted the light into the body of the Sunne that thence it might be communicated to Moone and Starres So hee hath put all ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction into the person of the Prince from whom as from a glorious Sunne or fountaine all other inferiour lampes doe borrow their light But if wee speake of that Episcopall Iurisdiction which both in respect of matter and manner is meerely spirituall the immediate fountaine of it is God himselfe as our most learned and religious King with his royall Penne hath thus witnessed to the world That Bishops ought to bee in the Church I euer maintained it as an Apostolicke institution and so the ordinance of God contrary to the Puritanes and likewise to Bellarmine who denyeth that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction immediately from God If his Maiesties iudgement bee contrary to Bellarmines who holdeth the negatiue then his Princely wisedome embraceth the affirmatiue to wit that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction meerely spirituall immediately from God Notwithstanding for so much as they exercise the same in a Christian Common wealth at the holy direction and command and vnder the gracious protection of a religious King within the kings dominions vpon the Kings subiects according to the Canons and statutes established by the Kings authoritie wee may iustly call those Courts the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts and the Archbishops and Bishops the kings Ecclesiasticall iudges Wherefore though this spirituall power in regard of it selfe be immediately from God yet in these respects it may rightly be said to be deriued from the king So it is a Christo tanquam ab authore conferente a Rege tanquam a iubente dirigente promouente protegente PHIL. If your Bishops haue their spirituall Iurisdiction immediately from God when doe they receiue it ORTHO When they are made Bishops that is in their Consecration For the partie to be Consecrated is presented to the Archbishop in these words Most reuerend Father in God wee present vnto you this godly and well learned man to be Consecrated Bishop Where the word Bishop is taken in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sense for a Timothy or a Titus an Angel or gouernour of the Church And the Archbishop with other Bishops present imposeth hands saying f Take the holy Ghost that is such ghostly and spirituall power as is requisite to aduance a Presbyter to the office of a Bishop so here is giuen him whatsoeuer belongeth to the Episcopall office as the prayers going before the pronouncing of these words and following after doe declare wherein humble petition is made for Gods blessing and grace that hee may dulie execute the office of a Bishoppe faithfullie serue therein and minister Episcopall discipline PHIL. If it be giuen in Episcopall Consecration how then is it giuen immediatly from God ORTHOD. I will answere you if you will answere me a few questions And first I demaund whence is the power of Order PHIL. It is immediatly from God because it requireth a Character and grace which onely God can effect For though it be said to be giuen with Imposition of hands yet the meaning is not that either the Imposer or the Imposition of hands doeth giue it but God himselfe while hands are Imposed To which purpose it is excellently said of S. Ambrose O brother who giueth the Episcopall grace God or man Thou answerest without doubt God but yet God giueth it by man Man imposeth hands God giueth the grace The Priest imposeth an humble hand and God blesseth with a mightie hand ORTHOD. And whence commeth the grace of Baptisme PHIL. This also without question is immediatly from God ORTHOD. And whence commeth faith in the hearing of the Gospel PHIL. It is likewise immediatly from God ORTHOD. And doeth not God in all these vse the ministerie of man PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTHOD. Then you see a thing may be giuen immediatly from God though in giuing it he vse the meanes and ministery of man for in such like speeches the word Immediatly is not so taken as excluding meanes but as distinguishing the action of God from the meanes When the children of Israel were stung of the fierie serpents God in healing them vsed the
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.
to the Emperours by 3. Popes with 3. Roman Councels practised commonly and anciently by all kings through the whole Christian world yeelded to his predecessours in the time of the Saxons vsed by his own father and brother and neuer denied in England before Anselmus began to broach the Hildebrandicall Doctrine PHIL. This cause was handled at Rome where the kings Proctour boldly affirmed that his master the king would not loose inuestitures for the losse of his kingdome to whom Pope Paschall answered if as thou saiest thy king will not indure to lose the donations of Churches for the losse of his kingdome knowe thou precisely I speake it before God that I would not suffer him to obtaine them without punishment for the redemption of my head Thus the cause was determined against the King ORTH. No maruell for the Pope was Iudge in his owne cause such a cause as was not a litle both for his pride and profit such a Pope as within 8. yeeres after periured himselfe in the like matter But notwithstanding the Popes determination the king disdaining to bee so deluded sent to Anselmus forbidding him to enter the land vnlesse he would obserue the customes of William the Conquerour and William Rufus so he was absent three yeeres PHIL. Yet at his returne he got a glorious victory for Edinerus writeth thus rex antecessorum suorum vsu relicto nec personas quae in regimen Ecclesiae sumebantur per se elegit nec eas per dationem virgae pastoralis Ecclesijs quibus praeficiebantur inuestiuit the king leauing the vse of his predecessours did neither himselfe elect such persons as were assumed to the gouernment of the Church nor inuested them to the Churches ouer which they were set by the deliuering of the pastorall staffe ORTHOD. Here is a cleare confession that inuestitures belonged to the king by the vse of his predecessours yet such was the violence and fury both of the Pope and the Archbishop that he thought good to redeeme his quiet by releasing of his ancient right PHIL. If he had any right he did yeeld it vp for Malmsbury saith Venit Rex sublimi trophaeo splendidus triumphali gloria Angliam inuectus inuestiturasque Ecclesiarum Anselmo in perpetuum in manum remisit The king came out of France glistering with a stately trophee entred England with triumphall glory and released the inuestitures of Churches to Anselmus into his hands for euer ORTHOD. True to Anselmus here was a finall and perpetuall end betweene them two neither did the king intermeddle any more in the matter while Anselmus liued but after his death Anno 1113. hee gaue the Archbishopricke to Rodolph Bishop of London and inuested him with a Ring and a Staffe and Anno 1123. he gaue the said Archbishopricke to William Corboll he gaue also the Bishopricke of Lincolne to Alexander the Bishopricke of Bath to Godfrid the Bishopricke of Worcester to Simon the Bishopricke of Cicester to Sifrid After the raigne of Henry the first though the Popes were still busie especially when the state was troubled or the king out of the Realme yet the succeeding Princes would not suffer themselues to bee robbed of this right and royaltie but from time to time put it in practise and maintained their prerogatiue King Edward the third told Pope Clement the fift That his progenitors and other noble and faithfull men had founded and indowed Churches and placed Ministers in them euer since the first planting of religion in the Realme of England and that the kings did of ancient time freely conferre Cathedrall Churches iure suo Regio by their Princely right so oft as they were vacant he doth not say by the Popes permission but by their princely right so the collation of Bishopricks is the ancient right of the kings of England Moreouer he told him that whereas now Deanes and Chapters elect this proceeded from the graunt of the kings at the request and instance of the Pope he doth not say from the graunt of the Pope but from the grant of the kings at the request of the Pope with which concordeth that famous act of Parliament made in the 25. of Edw. the third Our Soueraigne Lord the king and his heires shall haue and inioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which be of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted Sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitors vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund license of the King to chuse and after choice made to haue his royall assent And in the dayes of Richard the second statutum est saith Thomas Walsingam in eodem insuper Parliamento vt de caetero nullus transfreâ—aret ad obtinendum prouisiones in Ecclesijs vel Ecclesiam si quis contrarium faceret si posset apprehendi caperetur vt Regi rebellis incarceraretur A statute was made in the same Parliament that from henceforth none should passe the seas to obtaine prouisions in Churches or to obtaine any Church and if any should do contrary if he could be catched he should be apprehended as a rebell to the king and cast in prison The next yeere the same king set out a Proclamation that all such as were resident in the Court of Rome and had benefices in England should returne by the feast of S. Nicholas vnder paine of forfeiting all their benefices When the Pope heard all this thundering he sent a Nuncio with great complaints for answere wherof the king referred him to the Parliament following which would by no meanes consent that Rome-runners should get their benefices as in former time In the dayes of Henry the fift when the Pope by his bulles translated Richard of Lincolne to Yorke the Deane and Chapter standing vpon the lawes of the land refused to admit him as hereafter shall be declared Shall wee now say that the kings of England conferre spiritual promotions by the Popes indulgence let king Edward the first be witnesse let the Parliament in the raigne of Edward the third be witnesse let the like Parliament in the time of Richard the second be witnesse let the Deane and Chapter of Yorke be witnesse all which were of the Popish religion and yet referred this to the king and not to the Pope Hitherto that the kings of England vsed Inuestitures NOw I will prooue that they vsed them lawfully by a double right as Princes as Patrons As Princes for many reasons First if we looke into the old Testament we find that Salomon set Sadock in the roume of Abiathar by what authoritie Verely by the same by which he cast out Abiathar Which I haue already prooued to be done by the lawful and ordinary power of a Prince If this be a perpetuall patterne for all posteritie then the collation of spirituall dignities is the Princes right Secondly it was prophesied of
conscience are suerties for the freedome of their choice These are the sayings of the learned Bishop among which he interlaced a memorable example of Guntchrannus King of France who when one offered him money for a Bishoprick returned this answere It is not our Princely maner to sell Bishopricks for money neither is it your part to get them with rewards lest wee be infamed for silthy gaine and you compared to Simon Magus A fit Embleame for a Prince and worthy to be written in letters of Gold Most safely for how dangerous a thing it is to commit such matters to popular Elections the Primitiue Church had lamentable experience What vprores also followed the Elections by the Clergie alone let the longest Schisme that euer was in the Church of Rome testifie And for the Popes prouisions whereby hee hath incroached vpon the Princes right they haue bene such as haue giuen both Kings Nobles Clergie and people iust cause of lamentation But since the nomination rested in the Princes hands all tumults and grieuances Gods Name be blessed are vtterly extinguished Now I will adde a word or two of their singular moderation in this behalfe In ancient time our Kings had the collation before free Election was granted as was declared out of the Statute of Edward the 3. whereby it is manifest that they had then in themselues a plenarie power And though this were not without presidents of former ages yet as Charles the Great granted freedome of Elections vnto the Church so haue our Princes established the like by the Lawes of the land according to which they proceed most mildly and graciously doing all things agreeably to the patterne of famous Princes and laudable Canons of ancient Councels With vs the King hath the nomination of Bishops and so had good Theodosius as was plainely to bee seene in the aduancing of Nectarius With vs the Deane and Chapter make the election of their Bishop and so did the Presbyters of Alexandria in Saint Ieroms time which custome had continued there euer since the time of Saint Marke the Euangelist With vs the Deane and Chapter elect him whom the king hath nominated So the Clergie of Constantinople with the whole generall Councell there assembled did thinke it their duetie solemnely to elect Nectarius whom the Emperour had nominated With vs the electours signifie their election to the king humbly crauing his royall assent so the Romane Clergie 1000. yeeres agoe did vse to signifie their election to the Emperour that he might ratifie it by his Imperiall authority And because the ancient Canons giue the power of confirmation to the Metropolitane therefore our King granteth him a commission to confirme the election according to the Canon Finally with vs none can bee consecrated before the king giue commission by his letters pattents neither might the Bishops of Rome in ancient time till the Emperour gaue license and that as Onuphrius saith by his letters pattents Where yet I will confesse there was a difference because the Popes gaue money vnto the Emperour but our Bishops giue none vnto the King Thus much of elections CHAP. XIII How lamentable the State of England was when Bishopricks and Benefices were giuen by the Popes prouisions PHIL. WEE referre all men to the pondering of this one point specially amongst many concerning the nominations and elections of Bishops Abbats and other Prelats whether the world went not as well when such things passed by Canonicall election or the Popes prouision as it hath don since or euer hereafter is like to doe ORTHOD. Concerning the Popes prouisions this is most certaine that howsoeuer the Church of God was prouided for hee prouided for himselfe and licked his owne fingers For the demonstration whereof I will beginne with king Canutus who about the yeere of grace 1031. Returning from Rome wrote thus to the Archbishops Bishops and States of the Realme Conquestus sum iterum coram domino papa mihi valde displicere dixi quod mei Archiepiscopi in tantum angariebantur immensitate pecuniarum quae ab eis expetâ—bantur dum pro pallio accipiâ—ndo secundum morem sedem Apostolicam expeterent decretumque ne id deinceps fiat that is I complained againe before the Lord the Pope and told him that it displeased me much that my Archbishops were so much vexed with huge sums of money which were demaunded of them while for receiuing the palle they went according to custome to the See Apostolike and it was decreed that it should be so no more Here by the way you must vnderstand that a Palle is a little â—yppet three fingers broad made of the wool of two white Lambs which are offered vpoÌ„ the Altar of Saint Agnes while Agnus dei is sung in the solemn Masse and laied all night vpon the bodies of Peter and Paul vnder the great Altar from whence receiuing this vertue to containe the fulnesse of all pontificall power it becommeth the Ensigne of a Patriarch or Archbishop Which glorious ensigne who will weare Must fetch it farre and buy it deare In the daies of Henry the first when Anselmus was at Rome he made supplication to Pope Paschall the second for certaine Bishops and Abbats deposed whereupon saith Mathew Paris The most gentle See which vseth to bee wanting to none so they bring either white or red did mercifullie recall the said Bishops and Abbats and sent them with ioy to their owne Sees In the daies of Richard the first Hugh Bishop of Durham who of an old Bishop was become a young Earle hauing made a voluntary vow to goe to Ierusalem procured a dispensation from the Pope for which hee paied an infinit summe of money In the daies of the same king William Bishop of Ely was made Legat by a gentle Pope vpon the gentle consideration of a thousand pounds In the daies of king Iohn Pope Innocent the third went about to swallow all England and Ireland at a morsell For Hubertus Archbishop of Canterbury being dead the Monkes elected first Reinold their subprior and afterward at the kings request Iohn Gray Bishop of Norwich by means of which double election the Pope tooke occasion to disanull both charging the Canterb. Monkes then at Rome vnder paine of a curse to chuse Steuen Langton a Cardinal which they did and brought him vnto the Altar with a Te deum The king proclamed those Monkes traytors the rest that lurked at Canterb hee prescribed and banished he forbad Steuen Langton to come into England and confiscated the goods and lands both of the Archbishoprik of the Church of Canterb whereupon the Pope authorised certaine Bishops to interdict the kingdome excommunicated the king set out a sentence declaratory to depriue him and committed the execution of it to Philip the French king By which papall meanes bereaft of the loue of his people abandoned of his nobles hated of his Clergie forsaken of his friends behold hee
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
Vniuersall Patriarch was giuen and that by a Councell to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople In what sence trow you You produced but two sences of it out of Bellarmine In the first which prophanely excludeth all other Bishops they did not giue it for then they should deny themselues to be Bishops contrary to their own subscriptions If in the latter then it was common to him with the Bishops of Rome and so cannot proue your Monarchicall iurisdiction PHIL. How proue you that this title was giuen him by a Councell ORTHOD. Binius saith How oft Iohn Bishop of Constantinople is named in the acts of the Councell of Constantinople vnder Hormisda so oft the title of Vniuersall Patriarch is found added vnto him PHIL. Binius in the same place ascribeth this to the imposture of the latter Grecians which he proueth because though two Popes Pelagius and Gregory condemned this title in the Bishop of Constantinople yet no man obiected against them the authoritie of this Councell which had beene very materiall because the greater part of it was approued by the Church of Rome Wherefore it is certaine that this was not originally in the Councell but foisted in afterward ORTHO But Pope Adrian the first in his Epistle to Tharasius recorded in the second Nicen Councell intitleth him a generall Patriarch PHIL. This seemeth also to be added by some Grecian which I rather thinke because the same Epistle translated by Anastasius hath no such title prefixed ORTHOD. As though Anastasius were not as likely to put it out as the Grecians to put it in But Iustinian in the Authentickes giueth Mennas the very selfe same title of Oecumenicall Patriarch PHIL. It must be affirmed that this also crept in vnlesse we say that he is called Vniuersall in respect of the Orientall Bishops and Priests ORTHOD. So Holoander taketh it when hee translateth it Vniuersi eius tractus Patriarchae i. to the Patriarch of all that circuit But are you now aduised Was he called Vniuersal and yet had not the iurisdictiō of the whole world but was onely an Orientall Patriarch then you must confesse that this title might be giuen to the B. of Rome and yet not imply that hee had iurisdiction ouer the whole world but ouer the whole West and so was the Occidentall Patriarch Wherefore the decree of Pope Pelagius requiring all Metropolitanes to send to Rome to professe their faith and receiue the Pall extendeth not to them of the East but onely to them of the West PHIL. Then you grant that hee was Patriarch of the West and that is sufficient to inferre my conclusion for the Westerne Patriarch must needes haue iurisdiction ouer the Metropolitanes of the West in which compasse is Brittany I need not here speake of the ancient diuision of the Prouinces nor of Saint Peter nor of Eleutherius It is famously knowne that Saint Austin was sent hither by the Bishop of Rome receiued a pall from him and apparently submitted himselfe to his iurisdiction so did his successours for almost a thousand yeeres together Wherfore seeing the Bishop of Rome was in lawfull possession you must tell vs vpon what reason you put him from it ORTHOD. By what title doth the Pope challenge his iurisdiction in England By the law of God you cannot iustifie it By reason of the first conuersion of the Island by Saint Peter You cannot make it manifest that euer he was here Will you fetch it from Eleutherius He onely sent at the kings request and challenged no such authority Wil you deriue it from Austin It was then made appeare by many reasons that the Brittans ought him no subiection And it is euident that he and his associates had first their assemblies in Saint Martins Church in Canterbury by the Kings permission afterward when the king himselfe was conuerted they receiued to vse the words of Bede more ample licence both to Preach through all his dominions and also to build and repaire Churches So you see all was receiued from the king It is true that Gregory sent a supply of Preachers and gaue his aduise for the erection of Bishopricks and sent palls hither yet there can bee no question but all this was done by the kings licence Afterward in succeeding ages when the Popes did play the wild boares in the Church in executing Church censures and giuing Church liuings the kings of England made lawes against them euen in the time of Popery For as it was defended by Cyprian and afterward also by the African councell vnder Celestinus that causes should bee ended where they begunne and not bee carried to tribunalls beyond the sea So it was decreed in England in the raigne of Henry the second as witnesseth Mathew Paris De appellationibus si emerserint ab Archidiacono debet procedi ad Episcopum ab Episcopo ad Archiepiscopum si Archiepiscopus defuerit in iustitia exhibenda ad dominum regē perueniendū est postremò vt praecepto ipsius in curia Archiepiscopi controuersia terminetur ita quod non debeat vltra procedi absque assenssu domini regis i. Cōcerning appeals if any shall spring they ought to proceed from the Archdeacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop if the Archb. shal be defectiue in doing iustice they must come at last to our Lord the king that by his cōmandement the controuersie may bee determined in the Archbishops Court so that there ought not to be any further proceedings without the assent of the Lord the king Thus it is cleare that the Pope could not take to himselfe the handling of causes without the kings license It might also be declared how little his cēsures were here respected vnlesse they receiued strength by the kings permission And whereas hee tooke vpon him to dispose of Church liuings hee was censured for it in the time of Edw. the 3 euen in the high Court of Parliament as an vsurper These points might bee much inlarged but this little touch is sufficient to shew that whatsoeuer iurisdiction hee had in England was by the courtesie of the King whatsoeuer hee tooke vpon him otherwise was by vsurpation Now his challenge by custome is repelled by custome For these sixe hundred yeeres last past hee affecting to bee that which he was not disdained to bee that which he was and aspyring to a Popedome neglected his Patriarchdome so that which he had gotten by vse he hath lost by disusing and by his owne fact hath extinguished his former title Secondly whereas Pope Pelagius required onely a profession of the faith according to the Scriptures and the holy ancient generall councels Pius the fourth hath framed vs a new forme of faith without which no man can bee saued consisting of traditions transubstantiations merits Images reliques and such rotten Romish ragges-which he hath clapt to the Nicen creed as it were a beggers patch to a golden garment And
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
Councels and other authorities Pag. 161. CHAP. 6. Of the election of the Bishops of Rome vnder Christian Emperours before the diuision of the Empire Pag. 163. CHAP. 7. Of the Election of Popes from the Emperour Charles to Otho Pag. 175. CHAP. 8. Of the election of Popes from the time of the Emperour Otho to Henry the fourth Pag. 173. CHAP. 9. Of the election of the Bishops of Constantinople Pag. 178. CHAP. 10. Of the election of the Bishops of Spaine Pag. 179. CHAP. 11. Of the election of the Bishops of France Pag. 180. CHAP. 12. Of the election of the Bishops of England Pag. 182. CHAP. 13. How lamentable the state of England was when Bishopricks and benefices were giuen by the Popes prouisions Pag. 188. CHAP. 14. Whether it belongeth to the Pope to confirme all the Metropolitanes of the world and namely the Metropolitanes of England Pag. 199. ¶ The contents of the fifth Booke CHAP. 1. WHerein the second controuersie is proposed diuided into two questions the former about sacrifising the latter about absolution the state of the former is set downe and the Methode of proceeding Pag. 207. CHAP. 2. Of their argument drawne from Melchisedec Pag. 208. CHAP. 3. Of their argument drawn frō the Paschal Lambe Pag. 216. CHAP. 4. Of their argument drawne from certaine places of the Prophets Pag. 218. CHAP. 5. Of their argumēt drawne frō the words of institutiō Pa. 222. CHAP. 6. Of their arguments drawne frō the actiōs of Christ. Pa. 234. CHAP. 7. Of their argument drawne from the practise of the Church in the Apostles time Pag. 239. CHAP. 8. Of their arguments drawne from the authority of the Fathers Pag. 241. CHAP. 9. Of the second question which concerneth the power of absolution Pag. 244. CHAP. 10. An answere to the arguments of Bellar. by which he goeth about to proue absolution to be iudicial not declaratory Pag. 249. CHAP. 11. Of the third controuersie concerning Deacons Pag. 259. CHAP. 12. Wherein is declared that though wee deriue our calling from such Bishops as were Popish Priests yet our calling is lawfull and theirs as it is vsed vnlawfull Pag. 260. THE FIRST BOOKE CONTEINING THE ENTRANCE AND DIVISION of the whole worke into three Controuersies with their seuerall Questions As also the handling of the first Question whether three Canonicall Bishops be absolutely necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop Framed in forme of a conference betweene PHILODOX a Seminary Priest And ORTHODOX a Minister of the Church of England CHAP. I. The entrance wherein is described the Proceeding of Popish Priests in winning of Proselytes by praising Rome the Romane Religion the Popes loue the English Seminaries As also by dispraising the Vniuersities Church Religion and Ministerie of England PHILODOX WHat My old friend Orthodox I salute you in the kindest maner and congratulate your comming into France the rather because I hope you are passing this way to Rome as sundry of your fellowes and friends haue done before you ORTHODOX To Rome Philodox Alas Quid Romaefaciam mentiri nescio What shall I doe at Rome I cannot lye I cannot aequiuocate PHILO It seemeth si◠that you are pleasantly disposed but in good earnest there are many inducements which in all reason should draw you to Rome For he that hath seene Rome hath seene all things and he that hath not seene Rome hath seene nothing It is the Queene and Lady of Cities the Store-house of Nature the admiration of Art the Epitome of the world wherein all Excellencies shine in their Orient colours and exquisite beautie In old time men did wonder at the Temple of Diana the Tombe of Mausolus the Colossus of the Sunne the Image of Iupiter Olympicus the Palace of Cyrus the walls of Babylon and the Pyramides of Egypt because these things in their seuerall ages were rare and singular and iustly had in precious account But who would now so esteeme them when he may see in one City so many spectacles which are able not onely to rauish the beholders with admiration but also to strike them with astonishment The Emperour Constantius when hee beheld the Rostra the Capitoll the Bathes the Amphitheatrum the Pantheon the Theater of Pompey his eyes were dazeled with miracle vpon miracle but when he came to the Market place of Traiane he stood cleane amazed at those huge and admirable Fabricks neither imitable by the hand nor vtterable by the tongue of man And though time which weareth all things hath now defaced them yet if new Rome be compared with old Rome wee may say with a learned man Non maior sed melioriam Roma non cultior sed sanctior That is Rome at this present is not bigger but better not more sumptuous but more sacred And we may adde that still it ouershineth all other Cities so farre as the golden Moone doeth the twinkling starres ORTHO Suppose that the buildings of Rome were as glorious at this day as they were in the dayes of Constantius yet what of all this Hormisd◠the Persian being then asked what he thought of Rome made answere That this onely pleased him that he had learned that men doe die euen at Rome also as in other places And surely though the walles of our Cities were of gold and the windowes of Saphire yet while we liue in this vale of vanitie we dwell but in houses of clay whose foundation is in the dust God giue vs grace to seeke a City which hath a foundation whose maker and builder is God God graunt that when our earthly Tabernacle shal be dissolued we may haue an house not made with hands but eternall in the heauens PHIL. You say well sir and the right way to attaine thereunto is to be reconciled to the holy Church of Rome Without it there is no hope of saluation within it is a very Paradise of God and a sanctuary for all distressed soules wherefore if you take this course you shal be a thrice happy man and enioy the precious blessing of a quiet conscience ORTHO In deede a quiet conscience is a iewell of iewels the price of it is farre aboue the Pearle neither can it be valued with the wedge of fine gold But this is a flower which groweth not in the gardens of Rome no not in Beluidêre the Popes Paradise For there is no Religion in the world which can pacific the troubled conscience but that onely which teacheth the penitent spirit the remission of his sinnes and an infallible certaintie of his saluation by the merits of Iesus Christ apprehended by a true and liuely faith and sealed to the sanctified soule by the Spirit of grace But the present religion of the Church of Rome teacheth onely a morall coniecturall and fallible That is an vncertaine certaintie which must needs plunge the poore soule into a thousand perplexities Wherefore the present Romish religion is not a doctrine of comfort but of doubt and distrust so farre from quieting the troubled
such a forme as is holy and acceptable in the sight of God But whereas you grant that the persons were capable and the consecrators Canonicall it behooueth you to discouer some essentiall defect in our forme or else you must of necessitie approoue our consecration PHIL. DOctour Kellison saith that in King Edwards time neither matter nor forme of ordination was vsed and so none were truely ordained much lesse had they commission to Preach Heresie and so could not send others to Preach whence it followeth that all the superintendents and Ministers are without calling and vocation ORTHOD. What meaneth Kellison by the matter of ordination PHIL. According to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church holy order is a Sacrament and euery Sacrament of the newe Law consisteth of things and wordes as the matter and the forme which are so certaine and determined of God that it is not lawfull to change them Now in ordination the matter is a sensible signe as for example imposition of hands which Bellarmine calleth the matter essentiall ORTHOD. Others of your owne men are of another opinion for Salmeron the Iesuite hauing proposed the question bringeth reasons for both sides but seemeth to incline to the contrary Fabius Incarnatus asketh this question how many things are of the substance of order and answereth that six But imposition of handes is none of the six Nauarrus speaking of imposition of handes saith Illa non est de substantia Sacramenti that is it is not of the substance of the Sacrament For which opinion hee alleadgeth Scotus But if imposition of handes bee the matter of ordination then Kellison is guiltie of lying and slandering when hee saith that in King Edwards dayes the matter of ordination was not vsed For Sanders himselfe though a shamelesse fellow yet confesseth that in the dayes of King Edward the former lawe concerning the number of Bishops which should impose handes vpon the ordained was alwayes obserued A point so cleare that it might bee iustified by many records but what neede wee goe to records seeing it is a plaine case that the very booke of ordination which was made and established in the dayes of King Edward commandeth imposition of hands wherefore if the essentiall matter bee imposition of hands then I must conclude out of your owne principles that in King Edwards dayes the essentiall matter was vsed PHIL. In the ordering of a Deacon there is not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the Gospels so in ordering of a Priest not onely imposition of handes but also the reaching of the instruments that is of the Patten and Challice and both these Ceremonies are essentiall as Bellarmine proueth Therefore why may we not say that in Episcopall Consecration not only imposition of hands but other ceremonies also belong to the essentiall matter ORTHOD. What other ceremonies I beseech you doe you meane the holy oyle wherewith the head of the consecrated is annointed with these wordes Let thy head bee annointed and consecrated with celestiall benediction or the ring which is blessed with prayer and holy water and put vpon his finger with these wordes Accipe annulum fidei signaculum Receiue the Ring the seale of faith or the Crosier deliuered in these wordes receiue the staffe of the Pastorall office If you meane these or the like and vrge them as essentiall you must giue vs leaue to reiect them because they are only human inuentions You told vs before out of Bellarmine that the matter of ordination is certaine and determined of God now where shall wee finde the determinations of God but in the booke of God we finde in holy Scripture imposition of hands and we imbrace it as Apostolicall as for your rings and Crosiers when you can demonstrate them out of the booke of God we will then accept them as the determinations of God in the meane time we cannot acknowledge them for the essentiall matter of ordination But now from the matter let vs come to the forme 4. PHI. IT is agreed vpon that the forme consisteth in the words which are vttered while the sensible signe is vsed and they are the very same whereby the spirituall power is giuen ORTHOD. I hope you will not say that these words receiue the ring or receiue the staffe concerne the essentiall forme tell vs therfore in what words the true forme coÌ„sisteth that so we may the better examine the speech of Kellison PHIL. The words may be diuers yet the sense the same and this diuersitie of words may seuerally signifie the substance of the Sacrament as for example the Easterne Church baptizeth in these words Let this seruant of Christ be baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost The Latin Church in these words I baptize thee c. Here are two formes of words but each of them containeth the true and substantiall forme of baptisme So in ordination the Easterne Bishops instructed of their ancestours conferre the orders of a Bishop Priest and Deacon Per orationem deprecatoriam By the way of prayer whereas we after the manner of the Romane Church doe conferre them Per modum imperandi in the imperatiue moode by way of command and yet the spirituall power may be conueyed by both For Pope Innocent teacheth that the Scripture mentioneth onely imposition of hands and prayer as for other things vsed in ordination he saith they were inuented by the Church otherwise it had beene sufficient if the ordainer had said onely be thou a Priest or be thou a Deacon but seeing the Church hath inuented other formes they are to be obserued ORTHOD. By what words is the Episcopall power giuen in the Church of Rome PHIL. By these words receiue the holy Ghost because they are vsed when the Bishop imposeth hands And therfore as Priests in their ordination receiue the holy Ghost that is as Bellarmin expounds it out of Chrysostome and Cyrillâ—a ghostly power consisting in forgiuing and retaining of sinnes so a Bishop in his Consecration receiueth the holy Ghost that is A ghostly power consisting in the performance of those things which are reserued properly to Bishops amongst which the power of ordination is most eminent ORTHOD. If you call these words the forme of Consecration then you must acknowledge that not only the matter but also the right forme of Consecration was vsed in the dayes of King Edward for these words were then vsed while the Bishops imposed hands as appeareth by the booke and consequently you must confesse that Ridley Hooper and Ferrar were rightly ordained Bishops and moreouer that Kellison is a notorious slanderer 5. THus much of the second rancke Now come we to the third wherein we may place such if any such be found as were made both Priests and Bishops in the dayes of king Edward PHIL. We thinke that no man can possibly haue the order of a Bishop