Parliament and doctrine of the church of England Concerning addition and alteration specified in the act there be divers and sundry other alterations and some additions also in the parish booke differing from the booke of King Edward in wel-nigh l. materiall poyntes And for the vse of which pointes if the Kings Iudges and Iustices should as strictly and rigorously proceed as the Bb. have done and yet doe for the not vse of the Suâ—plice Crosse they might bring all the ministers of the church within danger of sixe monethes imprisonment and of the losse of one yeares profite of all their spirituall promotions to the King For these words of the statute that all and singular ministers in any Cathedrall or Parish church c. be bound to say and vse the Mattens Evensong celebration of the Lords Supper and administration of each of the Sacramentes and all their common and open prayer in such order and forme as is mentioned in the said booke so authorized by Parliament in the fifth sixth yeeres of the Raigne of King Edward the sixth with one alteration c. and none other or otherwise These wordes I say doe as exactly and precisely bind all Ministers to vse the book of King Edw. and none other or otherwise in all poyntes excepting the excepted as they binde anie Ministers to vse the rites ceremonies mencioned in the said booke But how can any Minister vse that order of service and none other or otherwise which is appointed in the booke of fift and sixt Edw. 6. excepting the excepted when as some other order of service exceptinge the excepted is concluded within the booke provided by the Parishioners And for the vse of which booke rather then for refusall of the vsâ— of which booke a minister is punishable by the statute And to make the thing which we have in hand to be vndeniable without cavil namely that the booke provided by the Parishioners is not that booke which is authorised by act of Parliament it is to be noted besides the alterations and additions specified in the statute that there is one great and mayne alteration betweene the two bookes of sundrie chapters appointed to be read for the first lessons at Mattens Evensong vpon divers festivall dayes Which alteration also it is evident that the same was made generally and for the most part from the better to the worse namely from the canonicall scriptures to the Apocriphall writings from whole chapters to peeces of chapters and that as it seemeth not without fraud and collusioÌ„ to the Queene Realm The proofe of which alteration is apparantly scene by the severall kalenders of both bookes Vnto which kalenders for the first second lessons except the same be proper lessons at morning and evening prayer the minister is referred For in a Rubrick before Te Deum at morning prayer it is said There shal be read two lessons distinctly with a loude voyce the first of the old testament the second of the new like as they be appointed by the kalender except there be proper lessons assigned for that day And in the order for evening prayer it is thus said Then a lesson of the old Testament as is appointed likewise in the kalender except there be proper lessons appointed for that day And after Magnificat then a lesson of the new Testament Now these first and second lessons whether they be proper or not proper lessons assigned by the parish booke that many of them doe vary from thâ— first and second lessons appointed by the booke of 5. and 6. Edw. 6. is plainly to be seene not only by the kalenders of both bookes but also by the order appointed for proper lessons A paterne whereof at certeyne feast dayes followeth  Kalender of King Edwards originall printed booke Kalender of the Parishes printed booke Stevens day Morning prayer 1. lesson Esa 56 Morning prayer 1. lesson Pro. 28 Evening prayer 1 lesson Esa 57 Evening prayer 1. lesson Eccle. 4. Saint Iohn Morning prayer 1 lesson Esa 58 Morning prayer 1 lesson Eccle. 5. Evening prayer 1 lesson Esa 59 Evening prayer 1 lesson Eccle. 6. Innocents Evening prayer 1. lesson Esa 60 Evening prayer 1 lesson Wisd 1â— Vpon the circumcision day both bookes agree saving that King Edwa. readeth the whole 10. chapter of Deuter. at evening prayer and the Parish booke but part vpon the Epiphanie the chapters at morning and evening prayer for first and second lesson by both bookes are the same But the Genealogie of our Savior Christ mencioned in the third of Luke by the Kings booke is appointed to be read whereas by the Kalender and one rubricke in the parish booke the same is appointed not to be read  King Edw. Kalender The parish bookes Kalender Convers of Paule Morning prayer 1 lesson Ge. 46 Morning prayer 1 lesson Wisd 5 Evening prayer 1 lesson Gen. 47 Evening prayer 1 lesson Wisd 6 Purification of Mary Morning prayer 1 lesson Ex. 12 Morning prayer 1 lesson Wisd 9 Evening prayer 1 lesson Exo. 13 Evening prayer 1 lesson Wisd 12 Mathias Morn prayer 1 lesson Num. 33 Morning prayer 1 lesson Wis 19 Even prayer 1 lesson Num 34 Evening prayer 1 lesson Ecclus. 1 Annunciat of Mary Morning prayer 1 lesson Jos 21 Morning prayer 1 lesson Ecclus. 2 Evening prayer 1 lesson Jos 22 Evening prayer 1 lesson Ecclus. 3 Vpon Monday and Tewsday in Easter weeke vpon the ascension day and Whitsunday King Edwa. booke appointeth no proper Chapters for the first Lessons but only proper chapters for the second lessons and so referreth the Minister for the first lessons on those dayes to the chapters which by the common Kalender are appointed to bee read vpon those dayes Whereas the parish Booke appointed proper chapters aswell for the first as second lessons vpon all those dayes Vpon Monday and Tewsday in Whitsunday weeke by the K. book there be no proper chap. appointed for the first or secoÌ„d lesson at morning or evening prayer whereas the parish book appointed vpon Monday part of Gene. 11. at morning prayer for the first lesson and for the second lesson 1 Corint 12. And for the first lesson at evening prayer of the same day parte of the 11. of Numbers Vpon Tewsday in the same weeke for the 1. lesson at morning prayer part of the 19. 1. kings and for the first lesson at evening prayer Deut. 30.  King Edwa. Kalender The parish bookes Kalender Marke Morn prayer 1 lesson 2. K. 3 Morn prayer 1 lesson Ecclus. 4 Evening prayer 1 lesson 2. K. 4 Evening prayer 1 lesson Ecclus. 5 Philip and Iacob Morn prayer 1 lesson 2. K. 15 Morn prayer 1 lesson ecclus 7 Evening prayer 1 lesson 2. K. 16 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclus 9 Barnabe Morn prayer 1 lesson Hest 3 Morn prayer 1 lesson ecclus 10 Evening prayer 1 lesson Hest 4 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclus 12  King Edw. Kalender The parish bookes Kalender Peter Morn
in the Scriptures because they only agree in name and not in nature Wherfore seeing there be other orders and degrees of Bishops then Provincial Diocesan Bishops found in the holy Scriptures seeing also Kings and Princes being Vicarij Dei be commanded to authorise all things for the trueth and nothing against the trueth it seemeth necessarie that his Maiestie should not only restrayne the Provinciall and Diocesan Bishops from vrging subscription to this booke of ordination being so derogatory in their sence and construction to his supremacie as nothing can be more but also to keepe the Bishops them selves within the tether and compasse of the word of God For if the word of God doe approve amongst the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments a primacie of order only denyeth vnto them any primacie of iurisdiction and power in ecclesiasticall governement as the learned Protestants have proved against the Papists touching Peters supremacie then will it follow that ours also ought to bee reduced to the same compasse both for the Kings Maiesties safetie and the Churches good Least Princes giving them more then God alloweth them they shoud them selves loose that right and authoritie which they ought to reteyne in their owne Royall persons Now that it may not be obiected that we begge the question of Scripturely Bishops not having any primacie of iurisdiction power in ecclesiasticall government to let passe all particuler reasons of the Protestants against the Papists in this point it shall suffice in this place to produce for witnesses six forty Iurors against whoÌ„ no chalendge or exception can be taken Namely the said Thomas Crammer Archbishop of Canterburie Edward Archbishop of Yorke Iohn Bishop of London Cuthhert Dunèlmem Steven Winton Robert Cariolen Iohn Exon Iohn Lincoln Rowl and Coven Lichfield Thomas Elien Nicholas Sarum Iohn Banger Edward Herefordien Hugh Wigornen Iohn Roffen Richard Cicestren William Norwicen William Meneven Robert Assaven Robert Landaven Richard Wolman Archdeacon of Sudbur William Knight Archdeacon of Richmond Iohn Bell Archdeacon of Gloster Edmond Boner Archdeacon of Lecester William Skipp Archdeacon of Dorset Nicholas Heeth Archdeacon of Stafford Cuthbert Marshall Archdeacon of Notingham and Richard Curren Archdeacon of Oxford Together with William Cliff Galfrid Downes Robert Oking Radulf Bradford Richard Smith Simon Mathew John Fryn William Lukemaster William May Nicholas Wotton Richard Cox Iohn Edmonds Thomas Robertson Iohn Baker Thomas Baret Iohn Hase and Iohn Tyson Sacrae Theologiae iuris ecclesiastici civilis Professores All which Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons and Prelates having with one voyce and accord shewed vnto King Henry the eight that divers good Fathers Bishops of Rome did greatly reprove and abhorre as a thing cleane coÌ„trarie to the Gospell the Decrees of the church that any Bishop of Rome or elswhere should presume vsurpe or take vpon him the tytle and name of the vniversall Bishop or of the head of all Priestes or of the highest Priest or any such like tytle proceede further and in the end conclude and give vp their verdict thus For confirmation whereof it is out of all doubt that there is no mencion made neither in scripture neither in the writings of any authenticall Doctour or Authour of the Church being within the tyme of the Apostles That Christ did ever make or institute any distinction or difference to be in the preeminence of power order or iurisdiction betweene the Aposties them selves or betweene the Bishops them selves but that they were all aequall in power order authoritie and iurisdiction And that there is now and sith the tyme of the Apostles any such diverâ—â—tie or difference among the Bishops it was devised by the ancient Fathers c. For the said Fathers considering the great and infinite multitude of Christian men and taking examples of the ould Testament thought it expedient to make an order of degrees to be among Bishops and spirituall governours of the Church and so ordeyned some to be Paâ—riarkes some to be Primates some to be Metropolitanes some to be Archpishops some to be Bishops c. Which differences the said holy Fathers thought necessarie to enact and establish by their Decrees and constitutions not for that any such differences were prescribed and established in the Gospell or mencioned in any Canonicall writings of the Apostles or testified by any ecclesiasticall Writer within the Apostles tyme. And thus farre their verdict But let vs graunt that orders of Bishops Priestes and Deacons bee conteyned in the holy scriptures yet if those orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons which are established in the booke be not the same orders of Bishops Priestes Deacons which are authorised by the scriptures then through the aequivocation of these wordes Orders of Bishops Priestes and Deacons there being afalacie how should this forme and maner of subscription be lawfull viz. that the booke coÌ„teyneth nothing contrarie to the word of God that it lawfully may be vsed For only such orders of Bishops Priestes and Deacons ought to be acknowledged subscribed vnto vsed as by the holy scriptures are warranted And therefore such as are conteyned in the booke if so be they be divers froÌ„ those which are approved in the holy scriptures how should they without sinne be subscribed vnto and vsed Vnlesse we shall affirme that Ministers of the Gospell of God may rightfully approove of such orders of Ministers as the Lord and Law giver of the Gospell never allowed ne approoved And thus much have we spoken touching not subscription touching the not exact vse of the order and forme of the booke of common prayer and touchinge the not precise practise and wearing of the rites ceremonies and ornaments of the church Wherein if we have spoken otherwise then as for our speaking wee have warrant from the Kings lawes our earnest desire is that it may be shewed vnto vs wherein we haue erred For if there be any thing whereof we be ignorant we shal be willing to be taught the same and having learned it to yeald to the practise thereof In the meane time seing not to weare a Surplice in the ministration of Divine service not to make a crosse in Baptisme not to subscribe c. in it selfe is not a sinne against any commandement of God nor a thing scandalous vnto the people And seeing also the Parsons who refuse to weare and vse the same be in every respect men of good note condition fame qualitie and behaviour yea such as against whom no misdemeanor for doctrine or life which might aggravate their offence can iustly be obiected we may lawfully as we thinke conclude in their behalf that de aequitate misericordia iuris they ought to be respected and tolerated rather then for their refusall meerely standing vpon their consciences whether erroneous or not erroneous it skilleth not de rigore iuris if there be any such rigour to be suspended excommunicated or deprived yea and in so generall and doubtfull a case
prayer 1 lesson Iob. 31 Morning prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 15 Evening prayer 1 lesson Job 32 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 19 Iames. Morn prayer 1 lesson eccl 10 Morning prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 21 Evening prayer 1 lesson eccle 11 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 23 Bartholomew Morn prayer 1 lesson ezek 3 Morn prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 25 Evening prayer 1 lesson ezek 6 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 29 Matthew Morn prayer 1 lesson micha 7 Morning prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 35 Evening prayer 1 lesson Nahu 1 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 38 Michael Morn prayer 1 lesson Zecha 7 Morning prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 39 Evening prayer 1 lesson Zecha 8 Evening prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 44 Luke Morn prayer 1 lesson Iudu 13 Morning prayer 1 lesson ecclu. 51 Evening prayer 1 lesson Jud. 14 Evening prayer 1 lesson Iob. 1 Simon and Iude. Morn prayer 1 lesson Sapi. 17 Morn prayer 1 lesson Iob. 24. 25 Evening prayer 1 lesson Sapi. 18 Evening prayer 1 lesson Job 42 All Saints Morni prayer 1 lesson Wisd 3 Morn prayer 1 lesson part of Wis 3 Evening prayer 1 lesson Wisd 5 Even prayer 1 lesson part of Wis 5 Andrew Morni prayer 1 lesson Esai 5 Morning prayer 1 lesson Pro. 20 Evening prayer 1 lesson Esai 6 Evening prayer 1 lesson Pro. 21 Thomas Morn prayer 1 lesson Esa 48 Morning prayer 1 lesson Pro. 23 Evening prayer 1 lesson Esa 49 Evening prayer 1 lesson Pro. 24 Vnto these alterations there is one maine difference to be added and fitt in this place to be observed coÌ„cerning certaine dayes wherein proper lessons are to bee read For by the booke of King Edw. it is said proper Psalmes lessons for divers feasts and dayes but by the parish booke the title is after an other maner viz. Lessons proper for holy dayes From whence it followeth that all those dayes wherein proper lessons are to be read are by that title accompted to be holy dayes which is repugnant to a Rubricke of the same booke entituled These to bee observed for holy dayes and none other Out of which Rubrick amongst a number of holy dayes there specified six dayes be secluded from being holy dayes for the which six dayes notwithstaÌ„ding proper lessons are appointed to be read as vpon holy dayes and these six dayes be the dayes following viz. the day of the coÌ„version of Paule Barnabes day Wensday and Thursday before Easter Goodfriday and Easter even It seemeth therefore not to be so safe a matter as men are borne in hand it is for ministers absolutely to subscribe that there is nothing in the whole booke of common prayer repugnant to the holy worde of God seeing there is so grosse and palpable a repugnancie in the booke it selfe Consentiet nullâ— qui secum dissidet ipse Vnto which repugnancie also may be added an other repugnancy more absurd For besides the alterations and additions before specified and not comprised in the statute there is a Rubrick added which not only repugneth the booke of K. Edward but also crosseth the kalender aswell of the parish booke it selfe as of the booke of K. Edward By which Rubrick also there is a detraction from the booke of K. Edward worse then the former of the Letany Because this Rubrick appointeth onely part of the first chapter of Saint Matthew and part of the third chapter of Saint Luke to be read whensoever by the kalender or booke those chapters come to be read Whereas the kalender of both bookes appointeth the whole first chapter of Saint Matthew the whole third chapter of Saint Luke to be read vpon divers dayes in the yeare As for example both bookes on the first Sunday after the nativitie appoint the whole first chapter of Saint Matthew to be read for the Gospell Which whole chapter also is appointed by the kalenders of both bookes to be read for the second lesson of morning prayer on the second day of lanuary the third of May and the 31. of August The like is to be observed by the kalenders for the reading of the whole third chapter of Saint Luke for the second lesson at morning prayer vpon the 21. of February the 19. of Iune and the 17. of October But these chapters are no part of the Booke of coÌ„mon prayer and by the Preface before the second part of the Homilies a Minister may for some chapters of the old Testament read some chapters of the New as to him shall seeme to tend more to edification By your leave this your exception seemeth to be but an homelie frivoulous exception For though the chapters bee no part of the booke of common prayer yet be the chapters part of the matter of the common service of the church prescribed by the booke yea and the formall and orderly reading of such and such chapters at such such times is part also of the order and forme of saying the same service Insomuch as neither Mattens nor Evensong in matter forme can be song or said without the chapters be read And as for the preface to the Homilies that by the same the minister is at libertie to leaue some chapters of the old for some chapters of the new Testament for first or second lesson what doeth that helpe the falsification of the parish booke when the same in place of six and twentie or thereabouts of Canonical hath appointed so many of Apocriphall chapters vpon feast dayes to bee read Or how can the Preface exempt a Minister from being punishable before the Kinges Iustices if he shall follow some private preface and breake the Kings publike edict But both bookes agree in many pointes and namely that the Minister in Baptisme shall make a crosse vpon the childes forehead shall say We signe thee with the signe of the crosse c. And therefore how soever the bookes may differ in some moe pointes then are mentioned in the Statute yet cleane to disavow the book of common prayer provided by the Parishioners not to bee the booke of common prayer which the Ministers in their dayly ministâ—atioÌ„ are bound to vse is but a cavill and reproveth the whole state of Prelacie and of the Realme who have received and vsed the same booke ever since the first yeare of our late Queenes Raigne King Henrie the eight writing to the Emperour against the Pope telleth him that a free man ignorant of his freedome doth not therefore become a bondman because ignorantly he submitteth him selfe to servitude No more say we is the State of the Realme lyable to reproofe when having committed the ordering of these affayres to the fidelitie and circumspection of the Clergie it hath bene abused by the Clergie Howsoever the State then of the Realme have received and vsed the booke attayned and gotten by the Parishioners it mattereth not to the point in question For if the Clergie vnwitting to the State have caused or suffered a booke to bee printed and
had without cause devided them selves from the vnitie of the true church of Christ. Whereas in trueth the Church of Rome by hir Apostasie having cut hir selfe from the vnitie and vniversalitie of the doctrine and discipline of the true and mother church of Ierusalem is hir selfe become the most notable and prime sectarist and scismatick of all the world And of whose schismes our Diocesans so farre as they partake with hir can not be but guiltie Vnles then the Diocesans can approve them selves touching their vse of ceremonies and Diocesan governement to stand in vnitie with the true new Ierusalem in these dayes repaired departed from the old scismes and sectes of Rome we assure our selves that they shall never bee able to prove those ministers which stand not in vnitie either of iudgement or practise with them but be conscionably and so lawfully divided in these things from them for such division to be sectaries or scismatickes For it must be an vnlawful discession by inobedience from the vnitie of the first and mother church of Ierusalem and not a lawfull departure vpon conscienc efroÌ„ the vnitie of the daughterâ—church of England that maketh a sect or scisme For otherwise ought not all other Churches stande in vnitie of ceremonies and governement with the church of England or vnlawfully dividing them selves from the church of England must they not become scismatickes sectaries And how then are not almost all the christian and reformed churches in the world not onely almost but altogether scismatickes and heretickes For have they not divided them selves from all those rites ceremonies and ornaments yea from that maner of Diocesan governement which are yet reteyned in the Church of England My Lords I confesse that brevitie and perspicuitie are two commendable graces of the toung and of the penn such as in all mens speeches and writings are much to be affected But yet how long or tedious soever already I have bene I most humbly beseech your Honorable Lordshippes to licence me to passe on one steppe further especially the matter being of such importance as the same may not well bee passed over with silence It hath pleased Sir Edward Cooke Knight his Maixsesties Attornie Generall with all candor and charitie to confirme and satisfie by demoÌ„strative profes all such as were not instructed in these points following First that an ecclesiastical Iudge may punish such Parsons Vicars c. as shall deprave or not observe the booke of common prayer by admonition excommunication sequestration or deprivation other censures and processe in like forme as heretofore hath beene vsed in like cases by the Queenes Ecclesiasticall lawes though the act of primo Eliza had never insflicted any punishment for depraving or not observing the same Secondly seeing the Authoritie of an Ecclesiasticall Iudge is to proceed and to give sentence in ecclesiasticall causes according to the ecclesiasticall law that the Iudges of the common law ought to give faith credit to their sentence and to allow it to be done according to the ecclesiasticall law when the iudge ecclesiasticall hath given sentence in a case ecclesiasticall vpon his proceedings by force of that law For saith he cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum Now then as these two pointes bee plainly taught and demonstrated vnto vs so also even by the same demonstrative reasons it is cleere that there must be first a depraving or not observing of the booke secondly that every sentence given by an Ecclesiasticall Iudge in a case of depraving or not observing of that booke must be given according to the ecclesiasticall law and vpon his proceedings by force of that lawe in like forme c. From whence it followeth that all sentences touching depravation or not observatioÌ„ of the booke be either voyd sentences by reason of nullitie or no good sentences by reason of iniquitie and iniustice if by the Iudges Ecclesiasticall vpon their proceedings the same sentences have not bene given by force and according to the same lawes in like forme as heretofore hath bene vsed in like cases by the Kings Ecclesiasticall Lawes or if the factes charged vpon the Ministers by the iudges ecclesiasticall by the letter intendement of the law be no depravations or not observations of the same booke And therefore to the end all questions touching these two poyntes might hereafter vtterly cease and bee quite buried your Lordshipps could not performe a more acceptable service to the King the Church and Realme then by an humble importuning his Maiestie to have it explaned by parliament both who by the letter and true meaning of the Statute bee depravers or not observers of the booke and also what lawes Ecclesiasticall may and of right ought to be called indeed and trueth the Kings Ecclesiastical Lawes For vnlesse aswell touching these pointes as touching the former pointes of Sir Edward Cooks it be throughly decided what is the binding and assured law how should the Ministers or others content and satisfie themselves with an vndoubted trueth And that this maner of controversie about the invaliditie of sentences of deprivation given by ecclesiasticall Iudges is not a controversie now first moved but that the same hath bene long since handled and discussed is a matter yet remayning I doubt not vpon publike record For whereas sentences were given in the tyme of King Edward the sixt for the depriving of Steven Gardener from the Bishoprick of Wincester Bonner from the Bishopricke of London Heath from the Bishoprick of Worcester Day from the Bishopricke of Chester Tunstall from the Bishopricke of Durham Vessay from the Bishopricke of Exeter wherein many grave and learned commissioners were imployed as the Archbishop Cranmer Ridlie Bishop of London Goodrick Bishop of Elie Sir William Peeter and Sir Thomas Smith the Kings Secretaries Sir Iames Hales one of the Iudges of the Law Maister Gosnell Maister Goodrick Maister Lisley Maister Stamford men notably learned in the common lawes of this Realme Mai. Leveson and Mai. Oliver Doctors of the Civill Law nevertheles the same sentences were in the tyme of Queene Mary revoked and disannulled without Perliament within the space as myne Authour sayth of three dayes by vertue of other Commissioners for faultes found in the processes viz. that the former Commissioners had proceeded ex officio without authoritie contrary to the Kings Ecclesiastical Law sometimes quod iuris ordo non fuerit servatus c. sometimes that the Interrogatories were ministred to divers persons without knowledge of the defendants c. sometimes that some of the witnesses were examined privately without oath sometimes that their exceptions and appellations were not admitted but their persons committed to prison pendente appellatione c. And therefore most honorable Lords it is to be considered if the like or greater and more notorious defaultes and enormities bee to bee found in any sentence of deprivation given ex officio by a Diocesan governour at this day whether the same sentence
the same offence suffer imprisonment for the space of sixe monethes without bayle or mainprise Now by the letter of this branch it can not be denied but that foure severall kindes of offences mencioned in the same by what soever minister they shal be committed are every of them punishable alike by one and the self same maner of peyne notwithstanding the offences seeme to be of divers natures One consisting in the refusall of the vse of common prayer an other in the refusall of the administration of the Sacramentes in such order and forme as they be mencioned and set foorth in the said booke A third vpon a wilfull and obstinate standing in the same in vsing some other rite or ceremonie then is mencioned and set foorth in the said booke And a fourth in speaking against or depraving the booke or any part thereof As for the which speaking against or depraving the booke the letter of the Statute seemeth to bee so playne as that no maner scruple can be moved what the minde intendement of the Parliament was about the speakers against or depravers thereof But touching the offence of a Ministers refusing to vse the said cōmon prayers and of his refusing to minister the Sacramentes in such order and forme as they be mencioned set forth in the said booke and wilfully obstinately standing in the same of his vsing any other rite or ceremonie then is mencioned c. these Queres following reallie and properly arise from the letter of the foresaide two former branches For seeing there is no mention at all made of rites and ceremonies in the former branch and seeing also there is no punishment by the second branch mencioned to be inflicted vpon a Minister for the refusall of the vse of rites and ceremonies but onely vpon a wilfull and obstinate standing in the same for the vse of other rites and ceremonies then are mentioned and set foorth in the saide booke it seemeth doubtfull and questionable First Quaere Whether a Minister conscionably refusing to vse some of the rites and ceremonies mencioned and set forth in the saide booke be punishable before the Kings Iustices in maner and forme before expressed vnles wilfully obstinately standing in the same hee shall vse any other rite or ceremonie then is mencioned c. Second Quaere If a Minister that is bound to minister the Sacrament of Batisme doe not refuse to minister the same Sacrament in such order and forme as is mencioned set forth in the said booke but shall in very deed and trueth minister the same Sacrament in such order and forme as is mencioned and set foorth in the said booke whether the same Minister bee punishable before the Kings Iustices in maner and forme before expressed for not making a crosse or not signing the childe in the forehead with a crosse after the sacrament of Baptisme is fully and perfectly ministred For so this sacrament bee ministred in such order and forme and with such rites and ceremonies preceeding baptisme as be mencioned in the said booke and none other rite or ceremony with wilful obstinacie be vsed in the ministration of Baptisme it seemeth cleere by the letter and sense of the Statute that the Minister is not punishable before the Kings Iustices by the peyne of imprisonment c. for omission of the crosse after baptisme For this fact of not crossing after baptisme not being within the letter of the Statute it is absurd to say that the same fact should be punishable by the law when as the same fact is not within but without the compasse scope and letter of the law That this omission of crossing is an omission after the ministration of Baptisme and not an omission of the order forme mencioned to bee in the ministration of Baptisme is made cleere vnto vs by the decree of all the Lordes spirituall and Clergie by the Kings confirmation vnder the great seale of England by the opinion of some great Lawyers Iudges published in open seates of Iustice For this hath ben decreed confirmed and published that the making of a crosse and signing the childe in the forehead with a crosse is no parte of the sacrament of Baptisme and that baptisme is fully and perfectlie ministred without these rites and ceremonies This case then of the omission of the crosse after baptisme being most cleere by such a cloud of witnesses that the same is not an omission of that order and forme appointed to be in the ministration of Baptisme it seemeth to be a thing most cleere that a minister by the letter of the Statute is no more punishable before the Kings Iustices for omission of the Crosse after Baptisme then is any person by the letter of the Statute of Queene Mary punishable by the Kings Iustices for maliciouslie or contemptuously molesting letting vexing or troubling or by any other vnlawful wayes or meanes disquieting or misvsing any Preacher not in but after his sermon preaching or collation Third Quaere Whether a Minister that ought or should say common prayer in any parish Church bee punishable before the Kings Iustices in maner and forme before expressed if he shall not refuse to vse all but shall vse some of the said common prayers in such order and forme as they be mencioned and set forth in the said booke For it is not said in this clause if he refuse to vse all or any of the said prayers but it is saide if the Minister that ought to singe or say common prayer mencioned in the same booke refuse to vse the said common prayers c. If then he observe the order and forme of the booke by saying some of the prayers in that order and forme as they bee mencioned in the booke though hee say not all and singuler the prayers it seemeth by the letter of the statute that he is not punishable before the Kings Iustices Indeed if the booke had appointed but two prayers onely as it hath appointed but two Sacraments only and the Minister in this case should haue refused to say one prayer and only have said the other prayer in this case it seemeth to be without all controversie that hee should have violated the law because the letter of the law sayth if he shall refuse to vse the said common prayers which word prayers being of the plurall nomber must conteyne two prayers at the least Fourth Quaere Whether a Minister that ought or should vse the rites and ceremonies mencioned in the said booke of common prayer be punishable before the Kings Iustices in maner forme before expressed if he shall not refuse to vse all but shall vse some of the said rites and ceremonies in such order forme as they be mencioned and set forth in the said booke For it is not enacted that the Minister shall vse all and every the said rites ceremonies or if he shall refuse to vse any of the saide rites and ceremonies but it is said
soever they should have grounds and causes so to doe Mary since when as the Discipline and governement provinciall diocesan ministred and exercised by the late Archbishop deceased and his Suffraganes was diversly handled disputed and controverted not to be agreeable but repugnant to the holy Scriptures necessarie also for the repressing of vice the increase of faith and Christian religion to be changed they herevpon iustly fearing that the most vertuous Christian Queene deceased vpon sundry cōplaints made in open Parliament against their many vniust greevances would have reformed the same their maner of governement they then presently vpon new advise and consulation taken boldly and constantly avouched the same their governement to have bene from the Apostles times and agreeable to the holy scriptures and therefore also perpetuall and still to be vsed in no case to be altered by any king or Potentate whatsoever By meanes of which this their enclyning to the popish opinion and holding their Iurisdictiō to bee de iure divino professedly mainteyning in the Homilie wherevnto also subscription is vrged that the King and all the Nobilitie ought to be subiect to excommunication there is now at length growne such a mayne position of having a perpetuall Diocesan and Provinciall governement in the church that rather then their Hierarchie should stoope they would cause the Kings Supremacie which he hath over their said Iurisdiction to fall downe to the ground In so much as by their supposition the King hath no authoritie no not by his supreame power to alter their sayd governement at all And to this end and purpose as it seemeth in their late canons have they devised and decreed this booke of ordination to be subscribed vnto Which subscription can not but quite and cleane overthrow the Kings supremacie and auncient iurisdiction in the most dangerous degree For if their Provinciall and Diocesan orders and degrees of Ministerie together with their iurisdiction be to bee vsed as established and derived vnto them by the holy scriptures how then can it be in the power and iurisdiction of the King to graunt or not to graunt the vse of Provinciall and Diocesan Bishopisme and iurisdiction Or how may the provinciall Bishops with their Diocesan Suffraganes be called the kings ecclesiasticall officers if their iurisdictions be not derived vnto them from the king For if they be called Gods Bishops or Bishops of Gods making how then may they anie more be called the kings Bishops or Bishops of the kings presenting nominating and confirming Nay besides who then can alter them who can restreyne them who can revoke or recall their power and iurisdiction who can resist them or what king of England may pluck his neck from vnder their yoke Nay how should the kings Supremacie as by the ancient Lawes of the Realme it ought remayne inviolable when his Royall person whole Nobilitie and Realme is subiect and lyable to the censure of the canon Law excommunication Which law the Provinciall and Diocesan Bishops to this day in right and by vertue of their Provinciall and Diocesan iurisdiction and none otherwise do stil vse practise and put in execution Besides if Bishops Provinciall and Diocesan as they be described in that book be commanded in the Scriptures and were in vse ever since the Apostles times then ought they to be in the Church of England though the King and his law never allowed nor approved of them But to hold this opinion as it will vphold the Popes supremacie because the generall reasons which vphold a Provinciall Bishop will vphold a Pope so will it once againe not only impeach the Kings supremacie but also be repugnant to the lawes and customes of the Realm By which supremacie lawes and customes only the provinciall diocesan Bishops have bene hitherto vpheld For seing the lawes and customes of the Realme doe make the Kings nomination presentation and confirmation the very essence and being of a Provinciall Diocesan Bishop with vs So that these offices ought to be held only from the authoritie gift and graunt of the King how ought not the kings nomination presentation authoritie and gift yea and the law it self in this case wholy cease if the order degree ministerie and iurisdiction of a provinciall and diocesan Bishop be founded in holy Scripture Vnlesse we shall affirme that that was in the Apostles times which was not or that that is to be found in holy Scripture which is not Namely that there were in the Apostles times and that there be in the holy Scriptures no Bishops but provinciall and dioceasan Bishops to bee found And that by the law of God and the Gospell every King and Potentate hath supreme power to suffer none but Provinciall Diosan Bishops to be in the Churches So that by subscription to allow that provinciall and Diocesan Bishops be Scripturely Bishops and that their iurisdiction and power is a Scripturely iurisdiction and power is to deny that their iurisdiction and power dependeth vpon the kings iurisdiction and power or that by the kings gift and authoritie they be made Bishops But how doeth subscription you will say to the booke of ordination approve the orders and degrees of provinciall diocesan Bishops to be by Divine right rather then by humane ordinance How Why thus it is evident saith the preface of that booke to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles times there have bene these orders of Ministers in Christes Church Bishops Priests and Deacons Yea and by the whole order of prayer and of Scripture read vsed in the forme of consecrating of an Archbishop or Bishop it is apparant that the order of an Archbishop or Bishop consecrated by that booke is reputed taken to be of Divine institution And therfore seing the names of those orders of Ministers must necessarily be taken and vnderstood of such orders of Ministers as be sett forth and described in the body of that booke it must needes be intended that the Ministers by their subscription should approve the orders of Ministers mencioned in that booke to be of Divine institution and consequently that provinciall and diocesan Ministers or Bishops have not their essence and being from the nomination gift authoritie of the King Besides if we should vnderstand by the word Bishop him that hath the Ministrie of the word and Sacraments as the Pastor teacher and by the word Priest the Presbiter that is the Governing elder and by the word Deacon the provider for the poore then for the Ministers to subscribe to the booke of ordination would no way iustifie those officers or degrees of Ministers which are described in that booke but would indeed vtterly subvert and overthrow them Because the orders and degrees of a provincial diocesan Bishop of a Priest and Deacon mentioned in that booke be of a farr differing nature from those orders and degrees of Ministers which are mencioned