Pool to have been a righteous Arch-Bishop and so confesses Catholick Ordination and Jurisdiction to be lawful valid and good which was necessary by the Laws of England as appears from her Mandate in which she supplies any Defects they might have been under Now all the Authority the Queen had flowed from the Parliament which annexed all Jurisdiction Spiritual or Temporal over the Ecclesiastical State of this Realm to the Crown by which they made her Pope So that by the very words of the Act Matthew Parker had his Jurisdiction from the Queen and she hers from the Parliament Therefore the Protestant Priests and Bishops are only Parliamentary Priests and Bishops and are not from Christ and his Church but from their Kings Queen and Parliaments Here is such a heap of things so unjustly and weakly said that it must needs grieve all honest men to see a company of Priests going up and down the Kingdom studying to abuse weak and unlearned persons with such disingenuous Stories or Writings Which I hope will appear more fully if you consider the following particulars First It is certain that King and Parliament have the Supream Legislative Authority in this Realm and this they have from the Laws of God Nature and Society confirmed by the Gospel which commands us to be subject to the Higher Powers Therefore whatever they Enact that is within the Limits of their Jurisdiction is Law and if it be not sinful is to be obeyed if it be sinful it is to be submitted to For instance if they set up a false Religion by Law it does not make it a true Religion but adds the sanction of Law and is the civil Warrant and Security for the Subject therefore the Civil Power cannot change the nature of things to make Good Evil or Evil Good but only gives Authority and Security and in this they are restrained in things Civil as well as Spiritual for if they make unjust Laws in Civil things the case is the same with their unjust Laws about Spirituals Therefore it is to be concluded as the Fundamental Maxim of Civil Government that whatever may be done lawfully and without Sin ought to be done when the Supream Civil Authority commands it and that the Subjects ought to obey Secondly Whosoever is empowered by the King and Parliament to execute this their Supream Authority has a full Right and Title to apply that Power so given or committed to him having the execution of that Law put in his hands and if any shall without their Warrant or Authority from them usurp or assume any sort of Power or Jurisdiction within this Kingdom they are Intruders and Usurpers and the success they have in it does no more justifie that Force than a Robber's does his Title to Goods unjustly taken And although some weak Princes in hard times did yield it up to the Pope yet both the Clergy themselves and the Parliaments did often assert their own Authority which was most eminently done by King Edward the First and King Edward the Third So that the Popes power here had no just Title but was a violent Invasion for that they neither had it from Christ nor Saint Peter nor by any Decree of General Councils and that for 800 years after Christ it was never allowed them that they never had it in the Eastern Churches and that what they had in the Western Churches was only extorted by force and fraud from the Princes and States of Europe and that they had no Law for it in England are things so certain that for proof of this I shall refer my self to the Writers of their own Church De Marca Launoy and Balusius with many others And at this very day the Pope has neither more nor less power in the other Kingdoms of Europe than the Connivence of Princes or the Laws give him Therefore the Pope had no power in England but what was unjustly usurped from the King and Parliament Thirdly When the Supream Authority the King and Parliament have long endured an Encroachment upon them that gives no just Title to it nor hinders them from asserting their own Rights when they find a fit opportunity for it and neither devests them of their Authority nor the Subjects of their due Rights and Freedoms Therefore the Government of the Kingdom and all the exercise of coercive Jurisdiction being inseparably annexed to the Supream Authority it was incumbent on them to shake off all Forrein Jurisdict they should have done it sooner but could never do it too soon Fourthly The King and Parliament asserting their Authority in this Particular and condemning the Popes Usurpations they might commit the execution of it to whom they would Therefore they putting it into the Queens hands and her Successors she had a good Right to exercise it having a Law for it This then being annexed to the Imperial Crown of the Realm by the Supream Authority of King and Parliament the King hath the power of exercising it fully and only in his hands and is to be obeyed in all his Injunctions that are not sinful by the Laws of the Supream Authority in this Kingdom which comes from God and is confirmed by the Gospel Fifthly Though the power of the Ministers of the Gospel comes only from Christ yet the exercise of that Power and this or that person being put in this or that Living or Preferment and having the right to the Tythes and all the Jurisdiction of the Spiritual and Prerogative Courts being things not appointed in the Gospel the King having the Supremacy over the Ecclesiastical State does not exceed his Limits when he reserves to himself such power that no person shall be vested with the Legal Authority for those things but by his knowledg or upon his Order It is true he cannot make a man a Bishop or a Priest nor can he take away Orders for if Bishops should Ordain or Consecrate without or against his pleasure he may proceed against both the Ordainers and Ordained and can hinder their exercising any Function in his Dominions by Banishing or Imprisoning them but â—…he cannot destroy or annul their Orders So that the power of Ordination comes from Christ and has a Spiritual Effect whatever opposition the King may make but the exercise of that power must be had from him If the King commands an Heretick or a Scandalous person to be Elected or Ordained Churchmen may well demur and offer their reasons why they cannot give Obedience not for the want of Authority in the King but because the matter is Morally evil As they must also do if the King should command them to commit Theft or Murther So that all Consecrations in this Land are made by Bishops by the power that is inherent in them only the King gives orders for the execution of that their power Therefore all that the Queen did in the Case of Matthew Parker and the Kings do since was to command so many Bishops to exercise a power they
Bishop should be delayed then he should be Consecrated by two Bishops appointed by the King and then in the same Statute grants further that all recourse be forbidden to Rome and Archbishops and Bishops be Confirmed and Consecrated by Bishops to be assigned by the King Secondly Out of the Act of 8. Eliz. 1. made purposely to set forth the Authority next under God by which Matthew Parker and the other first Protestant Bishops in the beginning of the Queens Reign were made by reciting how they were made by the Authority of her Majesty and how she was authorized to that end by the aforesaid Statute of Henry VIII and the Statute of 1. Eliz. 1. in these words First It is well known to all the degrees of this Realm that the late King Henry the Eighth was as well by all the Clergy then of this Realm in their several Convocations as also by all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in divers of his Parliaments justly and rightfully recognized and acknowledged to have the Supreme Power Jurisdiction and Authority over the Ecclesiastical State of the same and that the said King did in the twenty fifth year of his Reign set forth a certain order of the Manner and Form how Archbishops and Bishops should be made c. And although in the Reign of the late Queen the said Act was repealed yet nevertheless at the Parliament 1. Eliz. the said Act was revived and by another Act they made all Jurisdiction Priviledges c. Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power or Authority hath hitherto been or lawfully may be used over the Ecclesiastical State of this Realm is fully and absolutely by Authority of the same Parliament mark by what Authority united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm mark here how she is made Pope and by the same Statute there is also given to the Queen mark Given Power and Authority by Letters Patents to Assign and Authorize such Persons as she shall think fit whether Clergy-men Lawyers Merchants Coblers or any other so they be naturally born Subjects of the Realm for the Statute requires no more to exercise under her all manner of Jurisdiction in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual Jurisdiction in this Realm Whereupon the Queen having in her order and disposition all the said Jurisdictions c. hath by her Supreme Authority caused divers to be duly made and consecrated Archbishops and Bishops according to such Order and Form and with such Ceremonies in and about their Consecration as were allowed and set out by the said Acts c. And further her Highness hath in her Letters Patents used divers special words whereby by her Supreme Authority she hath dispensed with all causes and doubts of imperfections or disability c. as is to be seen more aâ—… large in the same Act. In which you see declared by the Queen Matthew Parker himself and the whole Parliament That Matthew Parker the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury was made Archbishop as all the other Protestant Bishops in her time were by Authority of the Queen and that she had her Authority for it from the Statutes 25. Henry 8. 20. and 1. Eliz. 1. from whom all our Protestant Bishops since spring and descend and derive all the Power and Authority that they have From which you see clearly that Protestant Bishops have no Authority to teach Preach or to be Bishops but what originally they have from the Parliament Which is still more evidently confirmed by this Parliament now in being which in the year 1662. by the Act of Uniformity annulled the forementioned Forms of Ordination of Priests and Bishops as being deficient and appointed new ones by their own Authority So from the first to the last all the Protestant Priests and Bishops both heretofore and at this present are only Parliamentary Priests and Bishops and not so from Christ and his Church but only from their Kings Queen and Parliaments I must confess this present Parliament may easily answer the Parliaments of Edward the VI. and Queen Elizabeth why it hath lately altered the Form of Ordination instituted and used by them to wit because their Forms were null and invalid but what Authority either of them had to make alter or use any Form of Ordination or to give Power to Teach Preach Minister Sacraments or the like of themselves without Authority from Christ our Saviour there I must leave them to answer him From the Premisses I infer First That they being no Priests nor Bishops theirs is no Church as Mr. Mason and St. Jerom grant Secondly If no Church no part of the Catholic Church out of which and without whose Faith kept entire and inviolate no man can be saved as their own Common-Prayer-Book affirms Thirdly They can never eat the Flesh of Christ our Lord nor drink his Blood without which they cannot have life in them John 6. 54. Fourthly They commit a most hainous Sacriledge as often as they attempt to Consecrate or Minister the most Holy Sacrament having no such Power Fifthly They commit the like Sacriledge in presuming to hear Confessions or forgive Sins Sixthly All that Communicate with them and follow the same Religion are involved in the same sins so that the blind leading the blind they must necessarily both fall into the ditch of eternal perdition foretold by our Saviour Matth. 15. 14. Lastly It is to be noted that although I conceive I have clearly proved the Ordination and Iurisdiction of their Priests and Bishops to be invalid by every argument I have used to those ends yet to my purpose it is sufficient to have proved it by any one For as to prove a man to be a Thief or Forger it is sufficient to prove he has stoln one Horse or forged one Deed to hang him for the one or set him on the Pillory for the other so to prove by one argument alone that they are no Priests nor Bishops nor have any Iurisdiction is sufficient to prove them guilty of Sacramental Forgery and by that means of deluding and stealing away innumerable souls A VINDICATION OF THE ORDINATIONS OF THE Church of ENGLAND In answer to the former Paper THis Paper which you sent me being only a Repetition of those Objections which were long ago refuted by Master Mason with great learning and judgment and more lately by the most Ingenious Lord Primate of Ireland D. Bramhall there needs nothing else be said to it but only to refer the Reader to those learned and solid Writings on this Subject The same Plea was again taken up by the Writers of two little Books published since his Majesties Restauration entitled Erastus Senior and Erastus Iunior which was thought so unreasonable even to some of that Communion that one of the learnedst Priests they had in England did answer them and though he did not adventure on saying our Ordination was good and valid knowing how ingrateful that would have been to
Divines made those Alterations and Changes in the Ordinal and the King and the Parliament who are vested with the Supream Legislative Power added their Authority to them to make them Obligatory on the Subjects Which is all that is imported by the word Lawful in the Act of Parliament the ordinary use whereof among Lawyers is A thing according to Law The â—…th Argument against the Validity of our Priestly Orders is That we have them from those that are not Bishops which carries him to the next Conclusion that our Bishops are not Bishops But before I follow him to that I must desire you would consider with how much disingenuity this Paper is framed that would impose on the easy Reader the belief of our first Reformers not being true Bishops when the Writer cannot but know that Arch Bishop Cranmer was a Bishop as truly Consecrated and Invested as any of the Roman Church were and was confirmed by the Pope who sent him the Pall and to satisfy you that they knew him to be such they degraded him with the usuall Ceremonies before his Martyrdom So that he being the Fountain of our Clergy that succeeded him and being truly Consecrated himself all those he Ordained are by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Bishops or Priests since Orders according to their Doctrine leave an Indelible Character which can never be taken away So that by their Principles no following sentence could deprive him of the power of Ordaining It is true there were many disorderly practices of some Popes in the latter Ages in annulling Orders and re-ordaining those ordained by others for Pope Urban the second appointed those who were ordained Simoniacally to be re-ordained And Stephen the 4th in a Synod Decreed that all the Ordinations his predecessor Pope Constantine had made were null and void because he from a Layman was chosen a Pope and though he passed through the Intermedial degrees of Priest and Deacon yet he stopt not so long in them as was appointy by the Canons and upon the same account it was also judged that Photius the Learned Patriarch of Constantinople who in six days went through all the Ecclesiastical Decrees from a Layman to a Patriarch had no power of Ordaining lawfully and all the Orders he gave were annulled by Pope Nicolaus And to mention no more the Orders given by Pope Formosus were annulled by his Successor Pope Stephen the 6th upon the pretence of some Crimes and Irregularities with which he was charged these practices as they gave great Scandal so they gave occasion to much disputing about the Legality and Canonicalness of these proceedings for the Canonists and Schoolmen being generally very ignorant and prepossessed with an opinion of the Popes Infallibility studied to flatter the Court of Rome all that was possible Yet on the other hand there was so much to be said against these proceedings that as appears by Petrus Damiani Auxilius and other Writers of that time there was great perplexity and many different Opinions about them But the ignorance and passion of those Ages appears evidently in this particular for there is nothing more manifest than that the Ancient Church was of another opinion and as in the debate between Pope Stephen and Saint Cyprian about the re-baptizing of Heretiques the constant opinion and practice of the following Ages was against re-baptizing such as were baptized by those Heretiques who retained the essentials of Baptism So by the same parity of reason and upon the same Arguments they held the Ordinations of Heretiques valid that retained the essentials of Ordination In the case of Heretiques we have these Instances Faelix was consecrated Bishop of Rome by the Arians in the room of Liberius whose banishment they had procured and yet he was acknowledged a righteous Pope and his Ordinations were accounted valid In the General Council of Ephesus the Priests of the Messalian Heresie were appointed to be received into the Church and continue Priests upon renouncing their Heresie The same was also granted to Nestorians Pelagians Eutychians Monothelites and divers other Heretiques as Morinus proves at length And at this day though the Greek Church is condemned by the Roman as Heretical in the point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost yet they are received according to their Orders into their Communion when they renounce their Heresie And their great Vasques says that all the Schoolmen and Summists agree that an heretical Excommunicate or suspended Bishop has still the power of giving Orders for which he cites many Schoolmen and he likewise proves that a Bishop after degradation retains the same power And the case of Schismaticks is no less clear for to wave the Decision of the Council of Nice which seems somewhat dubious in the case of the Novatian Ordinations we find frequently in St. Austins Treatises and Conferences with the Donatists that they offered to them if they would return to the Unity of the Church to receive them according to their Orders So that they did not think Schism did take away the power of giving Orders And in the case of that long and scandalous Schism of the Papacy for fifty years together when the one sat at Rome and the other at Avignon though beside their Schism Depositions Excommunications and Censures of all sorts passed on both sides by each of those Popes against the other and it must be confessed that one of them was the Schismatick and by consequence the Censures fell justly on him Yet both their Ordinations were held valid and when the matter was setled at the Council of Constance the Ordinations on no side were annulled or renewed And though Petrus de Lunay who was called Benedict the 13th refused to submit to them and lay down his pretensions as the others did yet when they gave sentence against him there is not a word in it of annulling Orders given by him From all which it follows that neither the pretence of Heresie Schism nor Censures will according to the practice either of the Primitive Church or of the Church of Rome even in these latter Ages be of any force to invalidate our Orders Which was well seen by Morinus and though he does not write upon this head with so much ingenuity as he does on other points yet he lays this down as a Maxim That all the Ordinations of a Heretiques and Schismatiques made according the forms of the Church and where the Heretiques that gave them were also rightly Ordained according to the forms of the Church are valid as to their Substance and are not to be repeated though they be unlawful and both he that gave and he that received them sinned grievously nor is it in any case lawful for a Catholick to receive Orders from Heretiques or Schismatiques Therefore in those Ordinations if all other things be done according to the form of the Church and only the Crime of Heresie be charged on the Orders given the substance of
had within the Kings Majesties Dominions it is requisite to have one Uniform fashion and manner for making and Consecrating Bishops Priests c. Be it therefore Enacted by the Kings Highness with the Assents of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons of this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same mark by which Authority they are made that such Form and manner of making and Consecrating of Archbishops Bishops Priests c. as by six Prelates and six other men of this Realm learned in Gods Law by the Kings Majesty who was but a Child to be appointed and assigned or by the most number of them shall be devised for that purpose and set forth under the Great Seal of England before the first day of April next coming and shall by vertue of this present Act see what vertues be lawfully exercised and used and none other any Statute Law or Usage to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding By Authority whereof those Prelates and meâ—… learned in the Law invented and made thâ—… Form before mentioned never heard of before either in Scripture or Church of God From which I thus argue and prove my Minor They that instituted the Form were thâ—… King and Parliament 3. 4. Edward VI. Buâ—… that King and Parliament were neither Authors of Grace not had power over the Body and Blood of Christ therefore they that Instituted this Form were neither Authors oâ—… Grace nor had power over the Body and Blood of Christ nor consequently could make it present Fifthly They are no true Priests because the Bishops that made them were no true Bishops nor so much as Priests and no man can give power to another which he hath not himself That they were no true Bishops nor Priests who pretended to make these Priests which shall be the second part of my Discourse I prove thus PROTESTANT BISHOPS NO BISHOPS NOR SO MUCH AS PRIESTS First They are no Priests because made by the same Form which other English Ministers were which I have clearly proved to be null That they are no true Bishops I prove first out of this very Principle already laid because they are no true Priests for as Master Mason a chief Champion of theirs says Epist. Ded. ad Episcop Paris Seeing he cannot be a Bishop who is not a Priest if it can be proved we are no Priests there 's an end to our English Church And the great Doctor of the Church St. Jerom Dial. cum Lucifero cap. 8. says Ecclesia non est quae non habet Sacerdotem It is no Church that hath no Priests The Protestant Bishops therefore being no Priests can be no true Bishops nor their Church a Church at all Secondly They are no Bishops because their Form of Ordination is essentially invalid and null seeing it cannot be valid no more than that of Priesthood unless it be in fit words which signifies the Order given as Mr. Mason says in his Vindiciae Ecclesiae Anglicanae lib. 1. c. 16. n. 6. in these terms Not any words can serve for this Institution but such as are fit to express the power of the Order given And the reason is evident because Ordination being a Sacrament as the same Author says lib. 1. n. 8. and Doctor Bramhal page 96. of the Consecration of Protestant Bishops that is a visible sign of invisible Grace given by it There must be some visible sign or words in the Form of it to signifie the Power given and to determine the matter which is the Imposition of hands of it self a dumb sign and common to Priests and Deacons Confirming Curing c. to the Grace of Episcopal Order otherwise it were sufficient to say at the Imposition of hands Be thou a Constable or God make thee an honest man But there is no such visible sign or words in the Protestant Form expressing this Episcopal Power given therefore no such power is given That there is no such sign or words in the Protestant Form I prove out of the Form it self which is this made in King Edward the VI. time and continued till the happy Restauration of his Majesty that now is Take the Holy Ghost and remember that thou stir up the Grace of God that is in thee by Imposition of hands for God hath not given us the Spirit of Fear but of Power and of Love and Soberness In which is not any word signifying Episcopal Power or Ordination and therefore for this defect in their Form they are no true Bishops Against what has been said you will object first That I prove them to be no Priests because they are no Bishops that made them and on the other side I prove them no Bishops because they are no Priests which is a vicious Circle But I easily answer this because I first prove à priori that is from the essential which ought to give being to each of them tat they are severally null and each of them being null for that reason it is evident that it is a cause of Invalidity in the other for as he can be no Bishop who is proved to be no Priest so he can make no Priest who is proved to be no Bishop Secondly You will object and salve up all the Defects afore-mentioned in one word to wit That although the Form used in the Church of England were invalid in King Edward ' s Queen Elizabeth's King James ' s and King Charles the First 's time for want of a valid Form of Ordination yet now it is valid in our Sovereign King Charles the Second's with whom the Parliament now sitting hath appointed a true Form Enacting that for the future to wit after St. Bartholomew's Day 1662. the Form of Ordaining a Priest should be Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office of a Priest and of a Bishop Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and work of a Bishop But to this I 'le answer you in another word That the salve is worse than the sore because by this change of the Form before established they acknowledge it to be null for why else need they change it Secondly By it they in effect acknowledge all their Bishops and Priests till that time to be null because Ordained by a Form that was null and could not give Power it had not nor signified Thirdly Because being no Bishops already they cannot Ordain validly by any Form whatsoever for no man can give what he has not as has been said before Lastly Whatsoever Power this Act gives to Ordain is from the Parliament and not from Christ which is what I first undertook to show and destroys their Orders root and branch Now although the Bishops of the Church of England and their Ministers grant this change of their Form of Ordination yet if any one should deny it you need only look upon the Form of making Bishops and Priests made 〈◊〉 and which was only used in the Church of England for an hundred years to be found in every
Concurrence or Licence should not be thought necessary in the creating of a Pope And from Hadrian the First who dyed Anno 795. till Hadrian the Third there were 89 years and from Vigilius his days who dyed Anno 555. there were 330 years So long were the Popes made upon the Emperors Mandates Nor did the Emperors part easily with this Right but after that the Otho's and the Henry's kept up their Pretension and came oft to Rome and made many Popes and though most of the Popes so made were generally reckoned Anti-Popes and Schismaticks yet some of them as Clement the Second are put in the Catalogue of the Popes by Baronius and Binnius and by the late publishers of the Councils Labbee and Cossartius There was indeed great Opposition made to this at Rome but let even their own Historians be appealed to what a Series of Monsters and not Men those Popes were how infamously they were Elected often by the Whores of Rome and how flagitious they were we refer it to Barronius himself who could not deny this for all his partiality in his great Work But in the end Pope Gregory the Seventh got the better of the Emperors in this particular And now let the ingenuity of those Men be considered who endeavour to Invalidate our Orders and call our Priests and Bishops Parliamentary Priests and Bishops because they are made upon the King's Mandate according to the Act of Parliament When it is clear that for near 500 years together their own Popes were Consecrated for the most part upon the Emperors Mandate And it is certain the Kings of England have as much power to do the same here as the Emperors had to do it at Rome The Emperors were wont also to grant the Investitures into all the Bishopricks by giving the Ring and the Staff which were the Ceremonies of the Investiture and so they both named and invested all the Bishops and Abbots This Pope Gregory the Seventh thought was no more to be suffered than their creating the Popes both being done by the same Authority Therefore he resolved to wring them out of the Emperors hands and take them into his own and it was no wonder he had a great mind to bring this about for the Bishopricks and Abbeys were then so richly endowed that it was the Conquest of almost the third part of the Empire to draw the giving of them into his own hands Therefore he first disgraced these Laical Investitures by an ill name to make them sound odiously and called all so Ordained Simoniacks as he also called the Married Clergy Nicolaitans Now every body knows how much any thing suffers by a scurvy Nick-name raised on it But he went more roundly to work and deposed the Emperor and absolved his Subjects from their obedience What bloody Wars and unnatural Rebellions of the Children against the Father followed by the Popes instigation is well enough known In the end his Son that succeeded him was forced to yield up the matter to the Pope In Spain it appears both from the 12th and 16th Councils of Toledo that the Kings there did choose the Bishops which Baronius does freely confess And Gregory of Tours through his whole History gives so many Instances of the Kings of France of the Merovinian Race choosing and naming the Bishops that it cannot be questioned all the Writers of the Gallicane Church do also assert that their Kings gave the Investitures from the days of Charles the Great But the Popes were still making inroads upon their Authority for securing which Charles the Seventh caused the Pragmatic Sanction to be made It is true afterwards Pope Leo the Tenth got Francis the First to set up the Concordate in its place against which the Assembly of the Clergy at Paris did complain and appealed to a General Council and yet by the Concordate the King retains still the power of naming the Bishops In England there are some Instances of the Saxon Kings choosing Bishops and though so little remains of the Records or Histories of that time that it is no wonder if we meet but few Yet it is clear that King William the Conqueror and both his Sons did give the Investitures to the Bishops and though upon a Contest between King Henry the First and Anselm about them the King did yield them to him yet upon Anselm's death he did re-assume that power I need not say more to shew what were the Rights of the Crown in this matter nor how oft they were asserted in Parliament nor how many Laws were made against the Incroachments and tyrannical Exactions of the Court of Rome these are now so commonly known and have been so oft printed of late that I need add nothing about them Only from all I have said I suppose it is indisputably clear That if Ordinations or Consecrations upon the Kings Mandate be invalid which this Paper drives at then all the Ordinations of the Christian Church are also annulled since for many Ages they were all made upon the Mandates of Emperors and Kings By all which you may see the great weakness of this Argument I shall to this add some Remarks on a few particulars of less weight that are insinuated in this Argument First The Writer of it would infer from the Queens calling Cardinal Pool the late and immediate Arch-Bishop and Pastor of Canterbury that we acknowledg Catholick Ordination valid lawful and good If by Valid Lawful and Good be understood that which retained the Essentials of Ordination and was according to the then Law there is no doubt to be made of it but if he mean that all the Forms and Ceremonies of their Ordination are acknowledged to be Good he will never draw that inference from these words Secondly From the Clause of the Patents that is for supplying all defects considering the necessity of the times he would infer there was somwhat wanting in them which was thereby supplyed If by that Want he means an essential Defect there was none such for they were true Bishops If he means only that some things were not according to what the Law required it is of no Force for whoever makes a Law can also dispense with it Therefore the execution of these Laws being put in the Queens hands she might well dispense with some particulars all which the Parliament did afterwards confirm and any defect in the point of Law might make them liable to the Civil powers but it can by no means be pretended that this should annul the Ordinations though illegally gone about Thirdly He would infer from the Act of Parliament that the Queen is made Pope when he knows that both by one of the Articles of the Church and another Act of Parliament it is declared otherwise express words as follows where we attribute to the Queens Majesty the chief Government by which Titles we understand the minds of some slandrous folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the Ministry either