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
yet saide is nothing because to the very being of a Bishop the order of Priesthood is essentially required which is not to be found in the Church of England For there are two principall functions of Priesthood the first is the power of Sacrificing the second of Absolution but you haue neither as I will prooue in order to beginne with the first it is giuen in holy Church by these wordes Accipe potestatem offerre sacrificium deo missasque celebrare tam pro viuis quam pro defunctis in nomine domini that is Receiue power to offer Sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masse as well for the quicke as for the dead in the name of the Lord. But you vse neither these wordes nor any aequiualent in your ordination of Priestes as may appeare by the Booke therefore you want the principall function of Priesthood ORTHOD. If you meane no more by Priest then the holy Ghost doeth by Presbyter that is a Minister of the new Testament then we professe and are ready to prooue that we are Priestes as we are called in the booke of common prayers and the forme of ordering because we receiue in our ordination authoritie to Preach the word of God and to minister his holy Sacraments Secondly by Priestes you meane Sacrificing Priestes and would expound your selues of spirituall Sacrifices then as this name belongeth to all Christians so it may bee applied by an excellencie to the Ministers of the Gospell Thirdly although in this name you haue a relation to bodily Sacrifices yet euen so we may bee called Priestes by way of allusion For as Deacons are not of the tribe of Leui yet the ancient fathers doe coÌ„monly call them Leuites alluding to their office because they come in place of Leuites so the ministers of the new Testament may be called Sacrificers because they suceed the sons of Aaron and come in place of Leuites so the Ministers of the new Testament may be called sacrificers because they succeed the sonnes of Aaron and come in place of sacrificers Fourthly for as much as we haue authoritie to minister the Sacraments and consequently the Eucharist which is a representation of the sacrifice of Christ therefore we may be said to offer Christ in a mystery and to sacrifice him by way of commemoration Is not this sufficient if it be not what other sacrificing is required PHIL. THere is required sacrificing properly so called which is an externall oblation made onely to God by a lawfull Minister wherby some sensible and permanent thing is Consecrated and changed with Mysticall rite for the acknowledgement of humane infirmitie and for the profession of the Diuine Maiestie ORTHOD. What is the sensible and permanent thing you offer PHIL. It is the very body and blood of Christ. ORTHOD. The Church of England teacheth thus according to the Scripture The offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption propitiation and satisfaction for all the sinnes of the whole world both originall and actuall and there is no other satisfaction for sinne but that alone and consequently it condemneth your masses for the quicke and the dead as blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits PHIL. But the Councell of Trent teacheth that in the masse there is offered to God a true and proper Sacrifice propitiatory for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead and curseth all those that thinke otherwise ORTHOD. HOw doe you prooue that the Sacrificing Priesthood which offereth as you say the very body and blood of Christ is the true Ministery of the Gospel PHIL. That Ministery which was typed in the old Testament foretold by the Prophets instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles is the true Ministery of the Gospel But our sacrificing Priesthood which offereth the very body and blood of Christ is such therefore it is the true Ministery of the Gospel The proposition of it self is plaine euident the parts of the assumption shall be prooued in order ORTHOD. Then first let vs heare where your Priesthood was typed CHAP. II. Of their argument drawne from Melchisedec PHIL. THe Sacrifice of Melchisedec was a type of that which Christ offered at his last Supper with his owne hands shal offer by the hands of the Priests vntil the end of the world For the vnderstanding wherof we must consider that Melchisedec was a type of Christ in a more excellent maner then Aaron insomuch that Christ is called a Priest after the order of Melchisedec and not after the order of Aaron For betweene these two Priesthoods there are two differences the first consisteth in the externall forme of the Sacrifice For the Sacrifices of Aaron were bloodie and represented the death of Christ vnder the forme of liuing things that were sâ—aine The sacrifice of Melchisedec was vnbloody and did figure the body and blood of Christ vnder the forme of Bread and Wine From which property of the order of Melchisedec we may draw this argument If Melchisedec did offer an vnbloody sacrifice vnder the forme of Bread and Wine then seeing Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedec he also must offer an vnbloody Sacrifice vnder the formes and shapes of Bread and Wine but the Sacrifice of the Crosse was bloody therefore he offered another Sacrifice besides the Sacrifice of the Crosse and what can this be but the Sacrifice of the Supper But he commaded his Apostles and in them vs to doe as hee did saying doe this in remembrance of me therfore Christ commanded that we should sacrifice him in an vnbloody manner in the formes of Bread and Wine consequently the Ministers of the Gospel are Sacrificers by Christs owne institution ORTH. We graunt first that Melchisedec was a type of Christ because the Scripture saith he was likened to the sonne of God Secondly that Christ was a Priest not after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchisedec because God hath not only said it but sworne it The Lord hath sworne and will not repent thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedec but wee deny that Melchisedec did offer any Bread and Wine for a Sacrifice to God wee deny that Christ euer offered any such or euer gaue any such commission to his Apostles Therefore this is so farre from prouing your pretended Priesthood that it will quite ouerthrowe it PHIL. THat Melchisedec Sacrificed Bread and Wine is plaine in Genesis ORTHOD. In Genesis Why there is no such thing the wordes are these And Melchisedec king of Salem brought foorth Bread and Wine and he was a Priest of the most high God Where your owne vulgar translation readeth proferens not offerens hee brought forth Bread and Wine and not hee offered it PHIL. True he brought it forth but the end why he brought it foorth was to Sacrifice vnto God ORTHOD. That is more then you can gather out of the text Iosephus sayth
OF THE CONSECRATION OF THE BISHOPS IN THE CHVRCH OF ENGLAND With their Succession Jurisdiction and other things incident to their calling AS ALSO OF THE ORDINATION of Priests and Deacons FIVE BOOKES Wherein they are cleared from the slanders and odious imputations of BELLARMINE SANDERS BRISTOW HARDING ALLEN STAPLETON PARSONS KELLISON EVDEMON BECANVS And other Romanists And iustified to containe nothing contrary to the Scriptures Councels Fathers or approued examples of Primitiue Antiquitie ¶ By FRANCIS MASON Batchelour of Diuinitie and sometimes Fellow of Merton Colledge in Oxeford Hebr. 5. 4. No man taketh this honour vnto himselfe but he that is called of God as was Aaron ¶ IMPRINTED AT LONDON by ROBERT BARKER Printer to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie Anno 1613. TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD GEORGE LORD ARCHbishop of Canterburie his Grace Primate of all England and Metropolitane And one of his Maiesties most Honourable Priuie Counsell AS in the Romane triumphes the worthy Conquerour gloriously ascending vnto the Capitoll did shew his magnificence by giuing ample gifts vnto the people euen so most reuerend father our victorious Sauiour and noble Redeemer hauing conquered Hell Death Diuell and damnation Triumphantly ascending to the Capitoll of Heauen did shew his vnspeakeable bountie in giuing admirable and incommparable gifts vnto men That is some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastours and Teachers For what hath the Church of God of so precious account as the holy ministery of the Word and Sacraments whereby CHRIST IESVS with all his blessings is reuealed and applied to the soule and conscience It may well be resembled to the Riuers of Paradise which did water and fructifie the Garden of God to the Golden pipes whereby the two Oliue branches replenished the seuen Lampes in the golden Candlesticke to the Crowne which the woman in the Reuelation cloathed with the Sunne and hauing the Moone vnder her feete had vpon her head being richly beset not with stones but with Starres Which holy function flowing from CHRIST as from the fountaine to his blessed Apostles was by thē deriued to posterity But as the water which neere the spring is cleare and chrystalline in further passages may be polluted so in processe of time by the subtiltie of Satan the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments being the ordinance of God was mingled with sacrifising and other humane inuentions Yet such was the goodnesse of God that euen in the darknes of Poperie as Baptisme so the Ministeriall function notwithstanding the abominations cleauing thereunto was wonderfully preserued for the Church of Rome by Gods speciall prouidence in her Ordination of Priests reteined such Euangelicall words as in their true and natiue sense include a ghostly Ministeriall power to forgiue sinnes by the Ministery of Reconciliation consisting in the due administration of the Word and Sacraments So remission of sinnes is ascribed to the Minister as to Gods instrument in effecting it and Ambassadour in pronouncing it Wherefore in that they haue authority to forgiue sinnes they haue also authority to vse the meanes thereof that is the Word and Sacraments Thus the Church of Rome gaue power to her Priests to teach the truth although it did not reueale the truth vnto them Now when it pleased him which causeth the Light to shine out of darkenesse in the riches of his Mercie to remember his distressed Church those blessed instruments which hee first vsed in the Reformation were such as had receiued their Calling corruptly in the Church of Rome But when their eyes were opened they disclaimed the sacrifising abomination and other impurities which by the iniquitie of the time were incorporated into their calling Thus the pollution of Poperie by the Grace of God was drained and drawn away the Ministeriall function restored to the original beautie And here let vs admire and magnifie the Mercy of God who did not forget this remote Iland situate in a corner of the world but did most graciously shine vpon it with his Golden beames from the Sphere of Heauen For whereas in other Countreys the Bishops which should be starres and Angels of the Church did resist the Reformation and persecuted such as sought it It pleased God that in England among other Bishops Archbishop Cranmer the chiefest Prelate of the Kingdome was Gods chiefest instrument to restore the Gospel which afterward he sealed with his blood The euent whereof was That whereas other Reformed Churches were constrained by necessity to admit extraordinary fathers That is to receiue Ordination from Presbyters which are but inferior Ministers rather then to suffer the Fabrick of the Lord IESVS to be dissolued the Church of England had alwayes Bishops to conferre sacred Orders according to the ordinary and most warrantable custome of the Church of CHRIST And although in Queene Maries time fiue blessed Bishops were burned to ashes yet God reserued to himselfe a number which being then forced to take the wings of the Doue and fly beyond the Seas or to hide themselues in the clefts of the rocke when the tempest was ouerblowne the cloudes cleared and the Sunne of Righteousnes began to display himselfe in the happy raigne of Queene Elizabeth returned againe clapped their wings for ioy praised God preached the Gospel and with holy imposition of hands ordained Bishops Presbyters and Deacons in the Church of England These are the Ordinations which reprochfull Papists doe most traduce and slander as though they were no Ordinations at all but onely Nullities thence perswading their Proselytes That our present Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay-men and thereupon inferring that wee haue no Church no saluation In which point some Popish Recusants haue beene so confident that they haue professed That if we could iustifie our Calling they would come to our Churches and bee of our Religion The consideration whereof most Reuerend father gaue me occasion to made into this Controuersie being desirous next the assurance of mine owne saluation as I am a Christian to bee fully and clearely assured of my Calling as I am a Minister In prosecuting whereof I did euidently find That their chiefest Obiections are nothing but slanders confutable by Authenticall monuments of publique Record Whereupon I wished from the bottome of my heart That some learned man would haue vouchsafed for the glory of God and the good of the Church to scatter these Popish mistes and to set the Trueth in the cleare light A worke in my opinion very important First in respect of vs of the Ministerie and secondly in regard of the people committed to our charge For how chearefully and with what ioy of heart may we preach and they heare vs when the lawfulnesse of our Calling is made manifest to all men Thirdly If any haue formerly made scruple to enter our Orders out of ignorance how these odious and scandalous imputations blazed in Popish Bookes might bee truely answered and the point soundly cleared by Record it is verely to bee
hitherto God be thanked he hath missed the Chesnut PHIL. NOw I plainely perceiue That you are deepely ingaged in the schisme and heresie of England O England England thou wast sometimes a most famous and flourishing Church thy faith and Religion shining like a Diamond of true lustre thy zeale and deuotion burning like the flaming fire the sparkling Starres in the firmament were not so glorious but now alas since Caluinisme came in thou hast lost thy lustre thy glory is eclipsed there remaineth no sparkle of thy ancient loue no faith no Religion no Church ORTHOD. You tread in the steps of your foâ—efathers and helpe to fill vp the measure of their iniquitie For it hath bene alwayes their custome to lay odious imputations vpon our Religion that by this stratageme they might win Proselytes vnto their owne Rich. Bristow affirmed that our Religion is proued by experience to be indeed no Religion Cardinall Allen speaking of our Sacraments Seruice and Sermons calleth them things which assuredly procure damnation William Reinolds hath blazed to the world that our Religion is worse then the Turkish The bookes of Sanders and Parsons haue bene as full of slanders as a serpent is of poison To passe ouer Harding Stapleton and others the latter brood is as venemous as the former One example for all may be that lewd Libeller which exclaimeth That the Protestants haue no faith no hope no charitie no repentance no Iustification no Church no Altar no sacrifice no Priest no Religion no Christ. What shall we say to these intemperate spirits If they speake of malice then I say with Michael the Archangel The Lord rebuke them but if they speake of ignorance as I hope they do then I say with the holy Martyr S. Stephen Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Or with our blessed Sauiour Father forgiue them they wote not what they do For that faith and Religion which is agreeable to the Scripture is true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke But the faith and Religion publickly professed at this day in England is in euery Article and branch thereof agreeable to the Scripture therefore it is in euery Article and branch thereof true holy ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke Moreouer where the Gospel is truely preached and the holy Sacraments rightly administred there is a true Christian visible Church but both these dueties are religiously performed in England what reason haue you then to say that we haue no Church PHIL. BEcause you haue no Ministerie for there cannot be a Church without Pastors and bishops as S. Cyprian teacheth who defineth the Church to be a people vnited to a Bishop And S Hierome when he saith That it is no Church which hath not Priests This doeth appeare euidently by S. Paul who declareth that Christ gaue Pastors and teachers for the consummation of the Saints the worke of the Ministerie and the edification of the body of Christ vntill we meet all in the vnitie of faith into a perfect man and the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ. In which place as our learned Cardinall hath obserued the Apostle teacheth That there shall be Pastours in the Church till the day of Iudgement for then we shall meet the Lord in the vnitie of faith Behold saith father Hessius till the number of the Elect bee accomplished in the end of the world the Church shall alwayes haue Pastors and teachers Neither doeth Luther deny this but rather put it among the Notes of the Church And Caluin affirmeth That the Church can neuer want Pastors and teachers From this plaine approued principle thus I dispute Where there is no true Ministerie there is no true Church but among the Protestants in England there is no true Ministerie therefore among them there is no true Church CHAP. II. Wherein is declared in generall how the Papists traduce our Ministers as meerely Lay-men And in particular what they mislike in our Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Whereupon the generall controuersie concerning the Ministerie is diuided into three particular controuersies The first of Bishops the second of Presbyters The third of Deacons ORTHODOX WHat mislike you in our Ministerie PHIL. Not one thing or two but the whole frame of it absolutely and altogether for to deale plainly your Ministers are no Ministers but meerely Lay men Neither is this my priuate opinion but the generall iudgement of our learned diuines which affirme the same As for example Ri. Bristow Consider what Church that is whose Ministers are but very Lay men vnsent vncalled vnconsecrated and therefore executing their pretended Office without benefit or spirituall comfort of any man yea to the certaine and great damnation of themselues and others vnfit and vnworthy by this onely that they bee called to that fond function of any seruice in the Church of God holding therefore amongst vs when they repent and come againe no other place but the place of Lay-men in no case admitted no nor looking to minister in any Office vnlesse they take our Orders which before they had not M Harding In this your new Church Bishops Priests Deacons Subdeacons or any inferior Order you haue none D. Sanders The new Clergie in England is composed partly of our Apostataes partly of meerely Lay-men M. Houlet That either all or the most part of the Ministers of England be meerely Lay men and no Priests and consequently haue no authoritie in these things it is euident Cardinall Allen with our learned diuines at Rhemes All your new Euangelists which haue intruded themselues into Church and Pulpit be euery one from the highest to the lowest false prophets running and vsurping being neuer lawfully called D. Stapleton They being sent of no man nor hauing Ordination haue inuaded the Ecclesiastical Chaires D. Kellison Forasmuch as the inferior Ministers are made by those Bishops and are children of those fathers they also are no true Priests hauing neither Order nor Iurisdiction William Reinolds There is no feeder of sheepe or oxen in all Turkie which doeth not vndertake the gouernment of his flocke or droue vpon better reason and greater right order and authoritie then these your magnificent Apostles and Euangelists can shew for this their Propheticall and Apostolicall and most diuine and most high Office of gouerning soules reforming Churches teaching heauenly Trueth and declaring the minde and will of God to men And finally the Catholicke Priests in their supplication to King Iames Neither is any of your Protestant Ministers comming to our Catholicke fraternity reputed other then meerely Lay-men without Orders Thus you see how we all agree in this point Neither is this the opinion of vs English Exiles onely but other Catholicke doctors are of the same minde The Hereticks of our age saith Bellarmine haue neither Ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and Office of a Bishop more
of Abbots with a dispensation or else he is no Bishop and this argument he calleth insoluble ORTHO HOw this doth crosse and condradict it selfe in due place shall appeare in the meane time I would willingly know what is the receiued opinion of your Seminaries There is a certaine manuscript booke called Controuersiae huius temporis in Epitomen reductae made by Parsons the Iesuite out of the Dictates of Bellarmine and Maldonate and appointed to be written out by euery Student in your Colledge I pray you what saith that booke to this point PHIL. It agreeth with the former the words are these Primus Canon Apostolorum hoc idem declarat scilicet Episcopum non posse ordinari nisi a tribus Episcopis hinc sequitur ineuitabiliter Haereticos non habere vllos pastores seu Episcopos cum primi illorum Episcopi Caluinus Lutherus Zuinglius nunquam fuerunt ordinati ab alijs Episcopis That is The first Canon of the Apostles declareth this same thing to wit that a Bishop cannot be ordeined but of three Bishops hence it followeth vnauoydably that the Hereticks haue not any pastours or Bishops seeing that their first Bishops Caluin Luther Zuinglius had neuer beene ordained of other Bishops ORTHO HItherto we haue seene how you hold the state of the first question but doe your Iesuites and Seminaries vrge this against the Church of England PHIL. Yes for it is a maine point ORTHO Then your maine point is a vaine point but let vs heare them PHIL. Bellarmine speaking of the marriage of English Bishops saith Nullam excusationem habent nisi forte velint liberè confiteri quod verissimum est se veros Episcopos non esse neque aliquid de Episcopatu habere nisi quae sibi iniuste vsurpant nomen opes That is They haue no excuse vnlesse peraduenture they will freely confesse which is most true that they are no true Bishops neither haue any thing of the Episcopall function but what they vniustly vsurpe vnto themselues to wit the name and the riches If nothing else then not the Character not the Iurisdiction not the Order not the Office they haue nothing nothing at all except the name and the riches ORTHOD. The riches alas Is it not strange that a Cardinall swimming in streames of gold to the chinne should enuy the riches of the Bishops of England But be they rich or poore surely if the Pope might haue had his will before this time he would haue made them poore ynough In the daies of King Henry the eight when a view was taken it appeared that he had receiued out of England onely for Inuestitures of Bishops 4000. pounds by the yeere one yeere with another and that for 40. yeeres together But how dare Bellarmine thus accuse our Bishops as though they had nothing belonging to the Episcopall function What no learning none at all It is not long agoe since he put off his Cardinals robes disguising himselfe vnder the ill fauoured habit and vizard of Tortus when one of our Bishops whether learned or no let the world iudge did so vnmaske and display him that all Popish hearts haue cause to bleed to see the weakenesse of their chiefe Champion so plainely discouered And as our Bishops haue learning so let the Cardinall know that they are famous and eminent Preachers very labourious in the Vineyard of Christ and in this respect farre vnlike to his brethren the Cardinals For Iulius the second said that he could not with a good conscience make Frier Giles a Cardinall because then he should leaue his preaching and afterward Leo the tenth made him a Cardinall that he might hold his peace For commonly in the Church of Rome the great Bishops preach seldome the Cardinals seldomer and the Popes neuer But what is the ground of his accusation PHIL. Because they are not Canonically ordeined The same point is likewise vrged against them by Doctor Stapleton Whether went they into France Spaine or Germanie seeing that at home there was no number of such as might and would serue their turne No no as their Religion is contrary their ende is diuers their beginning hath bene vtterly different from the true Christian faith planted among vs so are their proceedings different and repugnant they haue not come in by the doore they haue stolne in like theeues without all Spirituall authoritie or gouernement This difference betweene the Protestants and our true Bishops the first Apostles importeth so much that it may not lightly be passed ouer for their authoritie being proued nought all their doings can be no better I say therefore by the verdict of holy Scripture and practise of the Primitiue Church these men are no Bishops Your pretended Bishops haue no such Ordination no such laying on of the hands of Bishops no authoritie to ordaine Priests and Ministers and therefore neither are you true Ministers neither they any Bishops at all ORTHOD. What reason haue you to say that our Bishops are not consecrated by three the Canon hath alwaies bene obserued in our Church neither can all the Papists in the world giue any one instance to the contrary since the time of Reformation PHIL. Doct. Sanders declareth That there was a time when you had neither three nor two Bishops and yet at the same time your new Superintendents inuaded the Ecclesiasticall Chaires and were glad to seeke their Confirmation from the Prince and Parliament after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration And therefore all the water in the Thames cannot cleare the Clergie of England from being vsurpers ORTHOD. But if this be false then all the water in the Tybur though it were turned into Holy-water cannot purge the Papists from being slanderers And how false it is shall hereafter be declared out of authenticall Records by which it shall appeare That the Queenes Letters patents of Commission concerning the Confirmation and Consecration of the very first Bishop made in her time were directed to 7. Bishops and also that the Consecration was accomplished by 4 Bishops whose names and titles shall be specified In the meane time this onely I say In lying and slandering many Papists haue had an admirable dexteritie but Sanders surmounted them all For as his booke of Schisme is truely called by a learned Bishop Sterquilinium mendactorum A dunghill of lies so it might be iustly termed Sterquilinium calumniarum A very dunghill of slanders Insomuch that for his noble facultie that way he deserueth no more to be called M. Doct. Sanders but M. Doct. Slanders PHIL. It is no slander but a trueth which shal be auouched to your faces for I wil proue al that I haue said in order My masters marke what I say If you can iustifie your Calling we will all come to your Church and be of your Religion ORTHOD. Remember your promise and proceed with your Argument PHIL. I will proceed and
prosecute an vnanswerable Argument Euery true Bishop must of necessitie be Consecrated by 3. Bishops at the least But the Bishops of England are not so therefore the Bishops of England are no true Bishops ORTHOD. The Bishops of England are so as in due place shall appeare And if in case of necessity they were not so What then The presence of 3. is required onely to the well-being not simply to the being It is no essentiall part of Episcopall Consecration but an accidentall ornament a comely complement of singular conueniencie no substantiall point of absolute necessitie CHAP. IIII. Wherein the Popish Arguments drawen from the Canons of the Apostles and the Decretall Epistles are proposed vrged and answered PHIL. I Will prooue the contrary by sundry arguments and first by the Canons of the Apostles which were collected and set out by Clemens Saint Peters scholar ORTH. If those Canons were made by the Apostles then the Church of Rome is much to blame for the 84. Canon alloweth the 3. Booke of Maccabecs as also 2. Epistles of Clemens and his eight bookes of constitutions for Canonicall Scripture which the Church of Rome reiecteth againe it omitteth the Sonne of Sidrach Wisdome and diuers others which your Church imbraceth for Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth probable saith Bellarmine that this Canon was not set out by Clemens yea it is Apocryphus and Surreptitius as is affirmed by Binius ORTH. What say you then to the 65. Canon which forbiddeth to fast vpon the Saturday excepting one onely that is as Binius declareth the Paschall Saturday PHIL. I say with Baronius it is counterfeite ORTH. But what say you to Pope Gelasius who in a councell at Rome of 70. Bishops saith Liber Canonum Apostolorum Apocryphus the booke of the Canon of the Apostles is Apocryphall And in what sence he called it Apocryphall is expounded by Bellarmine Eos libros vocat Apocryphos qui sunt aediti ab auctoribus haereticis vel certè suspectis Gelasius calleth those bookes Apocryphall which were set out by such authors as were either hereticall or at least suspected PHIL. Gelasius did not call the booke Apocryphall as though all the Canons therein conteined were Apocryphall but as Bellarmine thinketh Propter aliquos vel corruptos vel additos ab haeretâ—cis that is in respect of some which were either corrupted or added by heretikes of which stampe were those two which you alleadged But the first 50. conteining nothing but Apostolike and Orthodoxe doctrine approued of auncient Popes Councels and Fathers Velut authentici recipiuntur are receiued as authenticall saith Binius ORTH. Pope Zephirine allowed 70. or at least 60. for there are diuerse readings how doth this agree PHIL. Well ynough for Pope Zephirine speaketh not of Canons but of Sentences and you must know that those 60 or 70. sentences are all conteined in the 50. Canons as Binius affirmeth out of Father Turrian ORTHOD. Bellarmine expoundeth these sentences to bee so many Canons in these words Zephirine the fifteenth from Peter deliuereth in his first Epistle that there were onely 70. Canons of the Apostles PHIL. Pope Leo alloweth onely fifty Apostolorum Canones numerant patres inter Apochrypha exceptis 50. Capitulis The fathers doe recken the Canons of the Apostles amongst Apocryphall writings excepting fifty Chapters by which he meaneth fifty Canons ORTHO Then to passe ouer the fifth Canon forbidding a Bishop or Priest to cast off his wife vnder pretence of religion as also the one and thirtith inhibiting all other Bishops to restore a Priest or Deacon excommunicated by his owne Bishop What can you possibly say to the ninth which excommunicateth all those which beeing present at the communion doe not communicate concerning which Binius is forced to confesse Totum hoc decretum non diuine sed humano iure constitutum iam contraria consuetudine est abrogatum that is This whole Decree beeing made not by law Diuine but humane is now abrogated by a contrary custome and alleadgeth for him Bellarmine Zuarez and Turrian which is a notable acknowledgement that such a Canon as you account Apostolicall and Authenticall may not withstanding bee abrogated But not to stand vpon these and the like exceptions let vs heare what the Canons say concerning the consecration of Bishops PHIL. THe words are these Let a Bishop bee ordained of two or three Bishops ORTHO Doth the Canon require two or three Then ordination by two is canonicall as well as by three PHIL. Not so for the Canon meaneth that there should be two or three assistants besides the Metropolitane as is declared by Cardinall Bellarmine and father Turrian ORTHOD. The Canon saith not two or three assistants but two or three Bishops Neither hath it this clause besides the Metropolitane but pronounceth simply let a Bishop bee ordained by two or three Bishops Wherfore the Canon is satisfied with the presence of two or three Bishops This is the iudgement of your owne Pamelius who saith that conseration or imposition of hands was per Episcopos qui conuenerant quos vt minimum duos esse oportebat i. By the Bishops which were assembled which should bee two at the least Where note that hee doth not say the Bishops assistant but the Bishops assembled should bee two at the least This also was the iudgement of Cardinall de Turrecremata who vrgeth this very Canon against your position and prooueth by it that three are not necessary Neither is the presence of two required of absolute necessity if you will beleeue the Apostolike constitutions of Clemens a booke which for my owne part I would not once name but onely that your chiefe champions doe so commonly alleage it Wherefore as Saint Paul cited a Poet against the Athenians so let mee cite this booke against you which so highly esteeme it I Simon of Chanany appoint by how many Bishops a Bishop ought to be ordained to wit by two or three Bishops but if any shall be ordained by one Bishop let both the ordained and the Ordainer bee deposed but if necessity shall compell to be ordained by one because many cannot bee present for persecution or some other cause let the Decree of the commission of many Bishops be produced If this authority bee of credit then you are confuted for it alloweth consecration by one in case of necessity PHIL. But that one must haue the commission of many ORTHOD. The commission is onely for concord sake and to auoide Schisme for the absent cannot impose hands nor giue the power therefore they doe not ordaine though they consent to the ordination which is performed by him onely that is present Now if in any case a Bishop may bee ordained by one and yet bee a true Bishop then the presence of moe is a matter of conueniency and not of absolute necessity And if you thinke that these
within his own Prouince according to the custome of Rome which custome they commend and propose for a patterne But the Bishop of Rome careth neither for Canons nor Customes which make against him He is not content to bee Bishop in his owne Diocesse and Metropolitan ouer Bishops in his owne Prouince and Patriarch ouer his owne Metropolitans but he would stretch out the pawes of his Supremacie ouer the Christian world Fiftly the Nicen Canons would haue no Priest made without examination and such as are rashly ordained they doe not allow But the Bishop of Rome maketh boy Priests and boy Bishops and boy Cardinals Ferdinandus Medices a Florentine was made a Cardinall by Sixtus Quintus when he was not ful thirteene yeres old and Iohannes Medices which was afterwards Pope Leo the tenth was Cardinall before he was fourteene yeeres complet yet he was an Archbishop fiue yeeres before he was Cardinall And least you should imagine that this fauour was afforded only to Florentines Odettus Castilioneus was Cardinall at eleuen yeere old yet he was elected Bishop before he was Cardinall Alphonsus sonne to Immanuel King of Portugall was Cardinall at seuen yeeres old and yet he was Bishop before he was Cardinall These are the men whose office is to chuse the Pope to assist him with their Counsell and to sit with him as Iudges of the whole world And that which is more wonderfull if we may beleeue Glaber Rodulphus a Monke of your owne which liued at the same time Benedict the ninth was made Pope at twelue yeeres olde Was not this a fitte man to be Father of the Church Moderator of generall Councels Decider of all Controuersies Expounder of all Scriptures the onely Oracle vpon the face of the earth and Iudge Paramount of the Christian World Sixtly the Nicen Canons doe not suffer a Deacon so much as to sit amongst Priests but as the Priest was in place inferiour to the Bishop so the Deacon to the Priest Now though it were granted to be true which Bellarmine affirmeth that vnder Syluester there was seuen Cardinal Deacons in Rome yet the Nicen Councel maketh no exception at all of Cardinals But be he Cardinal or not Cardinall the Deacon is inferior to the Priest and the Priest to the Bishop but the Bishop of Rome hath aduanced his Cardinals euen such as are neither Bishops nor Priests First aboue Bishops then aboue Archbishops last of all aboue Patriarches Seuenthly the Nicen Canons forbid any Bishop to ordaine in his Church a Clerke belonging to another Bishop without the consent of the Bishop to whom he belongeth But the Bishop of Rome ordaineth whomsoeuer wheresoeuer whensoeuer not expecting the consent of any man Last of all the Nicen Canons forbid all Clerkes to follow filthy lucre Wherein how his holines excelleth is plainely platted out by Claudius Espencaeus a Diuine of your owne out of a shamelesse booke openly sold in Rome called the Taxe of the Chamber or Chauncery Apostolicke wherein a man may learne before hand at what price to be dispensed withall for any villany he shall commit be it adultery symony periurie incest or worse then incest Wherefore Philodox if paper could blush I am perswaded the leaues of that booke would be as red as scarlet So at Rome nothing is forbidden but to come without money if a man bring money it will procure a dispensation for any thing A wedge of gold findeth gâ—ace wheresoeuer it goeth and a Key of gold can open Saint Peters locke For all things are weighed at Rome in a ballance of golde as though pouerty were the onely irregularitie and no sinne in the world were greater then to want money so well doth the Church of Rome obserue the Nicen Canons But let vs heare the words of the Canon PHIL. A Bishop must be ordained if it be possible of all the Bishops in his prouince if this be hard to performe either by occasion of vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet surely three ought to bee congregated into one place so that they haue the consent of the absent solet theÌ„ make an ordination Likewise the fourth Councell of Carthage when a Bishop is ordained let two Bishops lay the Booke of the Gospels and hold it ouer his head and necke and one Bishop powring the blessing vpon him let all other Bishops that are present touch his head with their handes Likewise the second Councell of Arles Let no Bishop presume to ordaine a Bishop without permission of the Metropolitane nor any Bishop being a Metropolitance without three Bishops of the same Prouince so that others of the same Prouince be admonished by Epistles that they may signifie by their answere that they haue consented So the sixt Councell of Carthage A Bishop must be ordained of all the Bishops which are within the Prouince but if this bee hard either for vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet by all meanes three meeting together there may bee imposition of handes the absent Bishoppes consenting thereto by writing So the second Councell at Brachar It is meete that Bishops should bee appointed especially by the whole Councell but if this shal be hard in respect of necessitie or for the length of the iourney let three of them bee gathered together and let the subscriptions of all both present and absent bee taken and so afterward let the ordination be performed Thus you see the Councels and namely the Nicen requireth the presence of three For first it should bee performed by all the Bishops of the Prouince but if that cannot be by reason of vrgent necessitie yet surely three must bee congregated so they make it not a thing indifferent but a matter of necessitie and in any case require three ORTHOD. WHat if three present proceede to a consecration not expecting at all the consent of the absent PHIL. Their consent seemeth to bee onely of congruitie and not of necessitie ORTH. But the Nicen Canon not content with three present requireth also the consent of the absent in the same strictnesse of wordes Yet surely let three be congregated into one place so that they haue also the consent of the absent and so let them make an ordination Wherefore if you expound the one branch as a point of coÌ„gruâ—ty why do you vrge the other as of absolute necessitie Againe these Councels were holden Florente Ecclesia when the world was furnished with plentie of godly Bishops but you vrge them against a Church lately eclipsed and newly recouered from darkenesse the world round about being drowned in superstition and Idolatry These answeres might bee sufficient but for your better satisfaction let vs search the sence of your authorities by comparing them one with another The first was a Canon ascribed to the Apostles which being made when Bishops were scant requireth two or three The second drawne from the decrees of Popes supposed to
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
you compasse sea and land to make one proselite and when hee is become one you make him two fould more the childe of Hell then yee your selues are But when he is reconciled what is then to be done PHIL. Though now hee bee a Catholicke when the Diuell is coniured out of him yet before he can be Priest hee must be cast wholy in a newe mould For as I told you we account your Ministers but meerly lay men without orders ORTHOD. The more to blame you and therein you degenerate from your forefathers as may appeare by the articles sent by Queene Mary to Bishop Bonner one whereof was this Item touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to any orders after the new sort and fashion of orders considering they were not ordered in very deede the bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiency and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to minister Heere you see that they did not ordaine them a new but onely supply that which they thought to be wanting and therefore they misliked not our orders in whole but in part PHIL. Yes they wholly misliked them as you may see by the words considering they were not ordered in very deed If they were not ordered in very deed then howsoeuer they pretended orders yet they had no orders at all but were meerely lay men and so are you For that which they call the new sort and fashion of orders was according to the booke established by King Edward which is vsed in England to this very day ORTHO Doth not a Bishop ordaine when he imposeth handes and saith Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes you forgiue c. PHIL. I answere that Priests are ordained when it is said vnto them take thou power to offer sacrifice but they are also ordained afterward when it is said vnto them Receiue the holy Ghost For by the former wordes they are ordained to the function of sacrificing by the latter to the function of absoluing by both ioyntly to the full and perfect order of Priesthood ORTHOD. But these words Receiue the holy Ghost were vsed in king Edwards time and are to this day in the Church of England in making of Ministers And therefore those that are promoted to orders after the new sort and fashion as you call it are ordered in very deed neither did the Penners of the article meane otherwise PHIL. Are not their words plaine that they were not ordered in very deed ORTHOD. They meant that they were not ordered fully and perfectly therfore aduised the Bishops to supply that which wanted Which they could not say with reason if they had thought them to be meerely lay men therefore they iudged them to bee Priests in part and yet part of the office to bee wanting which needed supply That which they had was the power receiued by these wordes Receiue the holy Ghost That which they supposed to be wanting was the power of sacrificing Therefore their meaning was not to reiterate that which they had but to supply that which was wanting in their cōceit euen as we on the contrary side cause such as come from Popery to vs to renounce the power of sacrificing which we hold sacrilegious but doe not reiterate those Euangelicall words wherin we agree And this you must needes grant vnlesse you will allow of reordination PHIL. Reordination God forbid No sir we will neuer allow of that For order imprinteth a Character and therefore can neuer be reiterated ORTHOD. But you granted before that a Priest is ordained when the Bishop saith vnto him Receiue the holy Ghost And therefore if the power of remitting sinnes giuen in these words were reiterated either in Queene Maries time or among you at this day in ordaining your proselytes then you cannot possibly defend your Church from Reordination If you abhorre Re-ordination then you must confesse that when any Minister reuolteth from vs to you yet in making him Priest you must not repeat those words Receiue the holy Ghost which proueth inuincibly that vnlesse you will be contrary vnto your selues you cannot esteeme vs to bee meerely lay men Or if you will needs aduance your owne orders and make a nullitie in ours and order our fugitiue Ministers accordingly then you must runne there is no remedy vpon the rocke of Reordination by repeating the words wherein we agree PHIL. Though we agree in the wordes yet we differ in the sense ORTHOD. That is no barre to Reordination for if a child bee Baptised in the true forme of words an Heretick shall Baptise the same child in the same wordes though in another sense yet all good Christians will iudge it to be Rebaptisation and there is the same reason of Reordination Therefore thus I reason When you Metamorphise an English Minister into a Popish Priest either you repeat the words Receiue the holy Ghost or you doe not if you doe repeat them then I haue made it manifest that you vse Reordination If you doe not then you iustifie not onely our practise but also our orders For you hold these words necessary in ordination to the conferring of one of the principall functions of Priesthood and therfore in not repeating them you acknowledge that they had receiued that function before in the Church of England consequently that the ministers of England are not lay men So your owne practise doth either condemne your selues or iustifie vs but our practise condemneth altogether the first part of your Priesthood that is your carnall sacrificing as simply abhominable and the latter part so farre as it is polluted with your popish constructions PHIL. If the first part of our Priesthood bee simply abhominable and the latter as it is vsed by vs bee polluted then Cranmer Ridley Parker Grindall and the rest of your Coronels had no other Priesthood but that which was partly abhominable and partly polluted ORTHO When God opened their eyes they did vtterly renounce your carnall sacrificing as derogating from the all-sufficient sacrifice of Iesus Christ the other part that is the power of forgiuing sinnes which they receiued corruptly in the Church of Rome they practised purely in the Church of England renouncing the Pope and all Popish pollutions PHIL. But when the question is concerning the validity of orders wee must not so much respect the practise as the power receiued in ordination how Cranmer Parker and such like receiued both parts of their Priesthood in the Church of Rome And as the Church gaue them so they receiued them in that very sense which the Church of Rome holdeth at this day Wherefore seeing you condemned both parts as we vse them for nettles I cannot but maruell how you can be Roses ORTHOD. Let me aske you a question If one Baptize a Conuert in the Element of water according to the true forme of the Church yet so that both the Baptizer and the baptized haue
hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
declaring that euery thing requisite and materiall was done as precisely in her Maiesties time as euer before Thirdly they confirme againe the booke of Common prayer with the forme thereunto annexed enacting that all persons that then had beene or afterwards should be made ordered or Consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priests and Ministers of Gods holy word and Sacraments or Deacons after the forme and order herein prescribed were by authoritie thereof declared and enacted to be Archbishops Bishops Priests Ministers and Deacons rightly made ordered and Consecrated any Statute Law Canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding Whereby it is euident that the Parliament did not make them Bishops but being in very deed true Bishops by lawfull Consecration that honourable court did declare and enact them so to be But what say the Papists to all this When they cannot infringe their Consecration for a poore reuenge they call our Religion Parliament Religion and our Bishops Parliament Bishops PHIL. If you will needs haue your matters seeme to depend of your Parliament let vs not be blamed if we call it Parliament Relgion Parliament Gospel Parliament faith ORTHOD. It is a marueile that you said not a Parliament God and a Parliament Christ. Might not we say as well that in Q. Maries time you had a Parliament Masse and a Parliament Pope Was it lawfull for Q. Mary with her Parliament to subiect the kingdome to the Pope and his Canons and was it not lawfull for Q. Elizabeth with her Parliament to submit themselues to Christ and his Gospel Indeed you haue a spite against the Prince and Parliament because they expelled the Pope aduanced true Religion and defended the Preachers and Ministers thereof neither against the persons onely but against the very place wherein the Banner of Iesus Christ was so gloriously displayed A French Historian speaking of the bloody Massacre saith Wise men which were not addicted to the Protestants part seeking all maner of excuse for that fact did notwithstanding thinke that in all Antiquitie there could not be found an example of like crueltie But the English Powder-plot doeth so farre exceed the French Massacre that there is no degree of comparison this cannot be patternd or paraleld It was of such a transcendencie that all the diuels may seeme to haue holden a blacke conuocation in Hell and there to haue concluded such a sulphurious and Acheronticall deuice as was neuer heard of since the world began But the Lord of Heauen did so strangely reueale it as though the birds of the aire had caried the voyce and that which hath wings had declared the matter As for the chiefe instruments thereof the Rauens of the valleys did plucke out their eyes and the yong Eagles did eate them Wherefore if you will not beleeue vs disputing for Religion yet beleeue God himselfe with his owne right hand and with his holy arme defending our Prince and State our Church and Ministerie and that very House wherein the Standard of the Gospel was aduanced maugre the malice of all the diuels in hell All glory be to thee O Lord for this thy vnspeakeable mercie still protect and defend them that Israel may be glad and thy seruant Iacob reioyce PHIL. IF you can iustifie your Bishops produce their Consecrations make it appeare to the world when by whom and how they were Consecrated beginning with the first which was made in the Queenes time That is with Matthew Parker who did beare the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie ORTHOD. You learned this disdainefull speach of Nicholas Sanders who dedicated his rocke of the Church to that reuerend Archbishop in this vnreuerend maner To the right worshipfull Master Doct. Parker bearing the name of the Archbishop of Canterburie Wherein to let passe that right worshipfull and right scornefull title he doeth not stile him Archbishop but bearing the name of Archbishop As though our Bishops were Bishops onely in name But what can you say against him PHIL. I would faine learne of you the place where he was Consecrated I haue read that Maximus was consecrated in the house of a minstrell and it seemeth that Matthew Parker was Consecrated in a Tauerne For doct Kellison saith That hee heard it credibly reported that some of your new Superintendents were made Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheape A fit Church for such a Consecration and it is most likely that Matthew Parker was one of them because he was the first ORTHOD. This of the Nagge 's head doeth call to my remembrance Pope Iohn the 12. who ordained a Deacon in a stable amongst his horses A fit sanctuary for such a Saint Neither is it a tale or fable as yours is but a story Chronicled by Luitprandus who is and euer will be esteemed a learned Historian notwithstanding that Baronius goeth about to discredit him as hee doeth all other writers that make against him And Luitprandus groundeth himselfe not vpon flying reports as Kellison and you doe but vpon two witnesses the one a Bishop the other a Cardinall Iohn bishop of Narnium in Italy and Iohn Cardinall Deacon who did testifie in a Romane Councell in the presence of Otho the Emperour Se vidisse illum Diaconum ordinasse in equorum stabulo i. That they themselues did see him with their owne eyes ordaine a Deacon in a stable of horses But whereas you say that Kellison heard this credibly reported I must tell you that you are very forward in spreading false reports against the Protestants It is credibly reported at Rome that wee in England haue wrapped some Papists in beares skinnes and baited them with dogges That wee inclose dormise in basons and lay them to the sides of the Catholickes to eate out their bowels That wee binde them to mangers and feed them with hay like horses These are shining lies fit Carbuncles for the Popes Miter Neither doe they report them onely but Print them and paint them and publish them with the Popes priuiledge They need a priuiledge which tell such glorious lies This of the Nagge 's head though it goe currant at Rome and bee blazed for a trueth through the world by men of your rancke is cousine germaine to the former as appeareth by the Records of the Archbishopricke which declare that he was consecrated in Capella infra manerium suum de Lambhith That is in the Chappell within his manor of Lambhith Thus you see the falsehood of this fable which was deuised to no other purpose but onely to make our Ministery and Religion seeme odious to all men Is not this strange dealing for men that make such great ostentation of sinceritie and grauitie But for my owne part I doe not maruaile at it your proceedings are but answerable to your doctrines For you teach That an officious lye is but a veniall sin And againe That the Church of Rome is the holy mother Church Therefore to whom should kinde offices rather be performed