videtur c. It seemeth we may say seeing an Abbot gouerneth his Monastery by ordinary Iurisdiction and an Abbatesse is equall vnto him in freedome of administration that she hath ordinarie Iurisdiction as well as the Abbot Yea the same Stephen striueth to attibute vnto her the power of excommunication which is more then the Church of England ascribeth to Princes For it attributeth vnto them onelie that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwayes to godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed vnto their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuil sword the stubborne euill doers When the B hath vsed his spirituall censures he can proceed no further but as Iosias compelled all that were found in Israel to serue the Lord So may euery Prince by his royall authority compell all his subiects to do their duty and those which refuse to be reformed by the Church he may restraine with the ciuil sword inflicting tēporal punishments as the qualitity of the offence requireth When Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed in the Councell of Antioch he did notwithstanding hold his Church and chaire by violence whereupon the Councell knowing that of themselues they could proceed no further were forced to seeke the aide of Aurelian the Emperour by whose commandement he was expelled PHIL. IF the Iurisdiction of the Prince and the Prelate be so different how then is the Prelates deriued from the Prince ORTHOD. Heere wee must consider the matters handled in the consistories of Bishops and the manner The matters originally and naturally belonging to those Courts are onely such as are originally and naturally Ecclesiasticall the manner to ratifie their iudgements is not properly vnder any corporall mulct but onely by spirituall censures as suspension excommunication and such like In both which respects the Iurisdiction of Bishops hath beene much inlarged by the fauour and indulgence of Christian Princes Concerning the matter Constantine the Great gaue libertie to Clerkes to decline the iudgement of ciuill Iudges and to bee iudged by their owne Bishops By occasion whereof many Ciuill Causes were brought to the cognisance of Ecclesiasticall Courts Hee made also a law to ratifie those iudgements As though they had beene pronounced by the Emperour himselfe Now all the Iurisdiction which Bishops haue in Ciuill Causes is meerely from the Prince Concerning the manner it seemeth sometimes expedient to annex coactiue power to the Episcopall office both for the honour of Prelacie and also to make their spirituall censures the more regarded which also without controuersie must bee acknowledged to proceede from the Prince For as the Lord hath compacted the light into the body of the Sunne that thence it might be communicated to Moone and Starres So hee hath put all ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction into the person of the Prince from whom as from a glorious Sunne or fountaine all other inferiour lampes doe borrow their light But if wee speake of that Episcopall Iurisdiction which both in respect of matter and manner is meerely spirituall the immediate fountaine of it is God himselfe as our most learned and religious King with his royall Penne hath thus witnessed to the world That Bishops ought to bee in the Church I euer maintained it as an Apostolicke institution and so the ordinance of God contrary to the Puritanes and likewise to Bellarmine who denyeth that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction immediately from God If his Maiesties iudgement bee contrary to Bellarmines who holdeth the negatiue then his Princely wisedome embraceth the affirmatiue to wit that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction meerely spirituall immediately from God Notwithstanding for so much as they exercise the same in a Christian Common wealth at the holy direction and command and vnder the gracious protection of a religious King within the kings dominions vpon the Kings subiects according to the Canons and statutes established by the Kings authoritie wee may iustly call those Courts the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts and the Archbishops and Bishops the kings Ecclesiasticall iudges Wherefore though this spirituall power in regard of it selfe be immediately from God yet in these respects it may rightly be said to be deriued from the king So it is a Christo tanquam ab authore conferente a Rege tanquam a iubente dirigente promouente protegente PHIL. If your Bishops haue their spirituall Iurisdiction immediately from God when doe they receiue it ORTHO When they are made Bishops that is in their Consecration For the partie to be Consecrated is presented to the Archbishop in these words Most reuerend Father in God wee present vnto you this godly and well learned man to be Consecrated Bishop Where the word Bishop is taken in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sense for a Timothy or a Titus an Angel or gouernour of the Church And the Archbishop with other Bishops present imposeth hands saying f Take the holy Ghost that is such ghostly and spirituall power as is requisite to aduance a Presbyter to the office of a Bishop so here is giuen him whatsoeuer belongeth to the Episcopall office as the prayers going before the pronouncing of these words and following after doe declare wherein humble petition is made for Gods blessing and grace that hee may dulie execute the office of a Bishoppe faithfullie serue therein and minister Episcopall discipline PHIL. If it be giuen in Episcopall Consecration how then is it giuen immediatly from God ORTHOD. I will answere you if you will answere me a few questions And first I demaund whence is the power of Order PHIL. It is immediatly from God because it requireth a Character and grace which onely God can effect For though it be said to be giuen with Imposition of hands yet the meaning is not that either the Imposer or the Imposition of hands doeth giue it but God himselfe while hands are Imposed To which purpose it is excellently said of S. Ambrose O brother who giueth the Episcopall grace God or man Thou answerest without doubt God but yet God giueth it by man Man imposeth hands God giueth the grace The Priest imposeth an humble hand and God blesseth with a mightie hand ORTHOD. And whence commeth the grace of Baptisme PHIL. This also without question is immediatly from God ORTHOD. And whence commeth faith in the hearing of the Gospel PHIL. It is likewise immediatly from God ORTHOD. And doeth not God in all these vse the ministerie of man PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTHOD. Then you see a thing may be giuen immediatly from God though in giuing it he vse the meanes and ministery of man for in such like speeches the word Immediatly is not so taken as excluding meanes but as distinguishing the action of God from the meanes When the children of Israel were stung of the fierie serpents God in healing them vsed the
Of the Election of the Bishops of Rome vnder Christian Emperours before the diuision of the Empire PHIL. THe authoritie of Emperours began to bee interposed in the election of Damasus and first of all verely onely in Schisme to pacifie vproares and so the matter was composed by Valentintan betweene Damasus and Vrsicinus By Honorius betweene Boniface and Eulalius And by King Theodoricke betweene Symmachus and Laurentius Afterward Emperours intermedled euen when there was no Schisme to preuent least peraduenture there should be vprores Yea and the matter came by little and little to that passe that Bishops elected durst not receiue Consecration without their assent ORTHOD. The first Christian Emperour was Constantine the Great conuerted according to the calculation of Baronius in the yeere of Christ 312. the second yeere of Pope Melchtades and the 7. yeere of his sitting in the Imperiall Throne In his time succeeded three Bishops of Rome Siluester Marcus and Iulius whose elections Constantine dwelling farre of permitted to be performed as in ancient maner by the Suffrages of the Clergie and people Yet what authoritie he thought himselfe to haue in such matters may appeare by these his words to Athanasius If I shall vnderstand that any man which is desirous to be partaker of the Church shal be hindered or excluded by thee I will presently send one who by my commandement shall cast thee out and giue thy place to another After Iulius succeeded Liberius Anno 352 Constantius being sole Emperour who though he intermeddled not with this Election in the West yet he interposed himselfe before that time in the East For when the people had slaine Hermogenes the Captaine in defence of Proclus he came himselfe in person to Constantinople and cast Proclus out of the Church yet he deferred saith Socrates to pronounce Macedonius Bishop because he was wonderfully incensed against him as for other reasons so because he was chosen without his aduice and counsell notwithstanding hee gaue him licence to execute his function in that Church onely wherein hee was chosen but afterward vnderstanding that Paulus was placed againe he sent one Philip to cast out Paulus and to place Macedonius Thus you see how both Constantine and Constantius interposed their authoritie before the time of Damasus And had not Valentinian done the like Damasus could hardly haue obtained the Popedome because the contrary faction was so strong AFter Damasus who continued vnder fiue Emperours Valentinian Valens Gratian Valentinian the yonger and Theodosius succeeded Siricius in the yeere of Christ 385. being the tenth yeere of Valentinian and the seuenth of Theodosius whose election was confirmed by the Emperour Valentinian as may appeare by his Epistle to Pinianus extant in the Vatican and published by Baronius PHIL. This was extraordinary by reason of Schisme but it was no ordinary matter till the dayes of Iustinian For then as Onuphrius saith After the Gothes were driuen out of Italy which happened in the yeere 553. there grew a custome by the authoritie of Pope Vigilius to wit That so soone as the Pope was dead a new election should presently be made after the ancient maner by the Clergie the Senate and people of Rome but the elected might not bee Consecrated before the Emperour of Constantinople confirmed the election and gaue licence to the Pope elected that he might be ordained and Consecrated Now if this grew by the authoritie of the Pope it doeth not argue any right originally in the Emperour but onely deriued from the Pope ORTHO A constitution was made at that time That the new elected Pope should not onely craue licence of the Emperour to be ordained but also pay him a certaine summe of money which was done to this end as Onuphrius witnesseth That the Emperour might be assured of the behauiour and conditions of the new Popes least any turbulent spirit or enemy to the Emperour beeing ordained the City of Rome and the country of Italy might reuolt from the Easterne Empire for now the authority of the Pope began to bee great by reason that the Emperour liued farre off at Constantinople But though this paying of money begun in the time of Vigilius yet the authority of the Emperor in elections was before his time as witnesseth Platina in the life of Siluerius the Predecessor of Vigilius Siluerius saith he borne in Campania hauing for his father Hormisda a Bishop was created Pope by the commandement of Theodohatus cum antea non regum sed imperatorum authoritas interueniret whereas before that time the authority not of Kings but of Emperours was interposed So hee speaketh of it as a knowne ordinary and vsuall matter Yea and Iustinian tooke it so hainously to be robbed of this right that as Platina declareth this was one of the causes why hee sent Belisarius with an army into Italy Moreouer as it was the custome of the Emperor before Vigilius so it remained long after PHIL. Indeed this Tyranny continued til the daies of Benedict the second at which time Constantine moued with the holinesse of the man sent a Sanction that from thenceforth whomsoeuer the Clergie people and Roman army should choose him they should all presently beleeue to be the true Vicar of Christ not expecting the authority either of the Emperour or of the Exarch of Italy ORTHOD. This is your fashion If the Emperor doe any thing against the Pope it is mere tyranny if the Pope doe any thing against the Emperor it is cleere libertie But you confesse that this custome preuailed from Vigilius to Benedict the second in which space were 21. Popes of thereabout all created by Imperiall authority except Pelagius the second of whoÌ„ Platina reporteth it as a strange accident that he was made Pope iniussu Principis without the Emperours commaund whereof he rendreth this reason That they could not send any man because the City was besieged and withall he affirmeth That whatsoeuer the Clergie then had done were nothing if the Emperor should not approue it wherefore Gregory the Deacon was sent to Constantinople to pacifie the Emperour Afterward when Gregory himselfe was chosen Pope Hee sent letters to the Emperor Mauritius earnestly intreating him to make voide the election of the Clergie and people but his letters being intercepted by the Gouernor of the City were torne in peeces other written to intreate the Emperour to confirme him Moreouer Platina hauing said that Seâ—erinus was confirmed in the Popedome by Isaatius the Exarch giueth this reason For then the election of the Clergie and people was counted vaine vnlesse the Emperours or their Exarehes had confirmed them And this you grant continued till Benedict the 2. but did it then cease Constantine did not absolutely refer it to the Clergy people but ioyned with them the Roman army which being for the gard of the Empire was at the Emperours command And his sonne Iustinian the yonger who presently
onely two Bishops would not suffer those two to consecrate a third but willed them to proceede to an election and send the party elected to Rome to be consecrated by three ORTHO The presence of three when they may conueniently be had we greatly commend yet not as a commandement of God but as a constitution of the Church to be imbraced of congruity and not of necessitie PHIL. YEs of necessity and that both necessitate precepti by the necessity of a command which we are bound to obey because as Anicetus saith instituente domino sieri iubetur it is commanded to be done the Lord so appointing and also necessitate medij as a necessary meanes necessary I say not only ad bene esse to the well performance of the consecration but also ad esse to the very being of it so that without it there is a nullity For first of all this is the generall iugdement of the Iurists as appeareth by those words of Cardinall Turrecremata Iuristae quasi omnes sunt huius opinionis quod requiratur ternarius numerus Episcoporum ita vt si quis a paucioribus consecretur dicatur nihil agi that is almost all the Iurists are of this opinion that the number of three Bishops is so required that if one be consecrated by fewer it may be said that nothing is done Which iudgement of the Iurists preuaileth with most eminent Canonists as appeareth by the words following in the Cardinall Vnde Hugo Archidiaconus dicunt vt Papa solus cum vno Episcopo non posset consecrare hac forma durante that is whereupon Hugo and the Archdeacon say that the Pope alone with one Bishop cannot consecrate so long as this forme endureth The words of the Archdeacon are these est ergo de forma substantia sacramenti quod ibi sint tres Episcopi si ordinetur a minus non est Episcopus quia deest substantia siue forma quâ— exigitur in collatione illius ordinis that is therefore it is of the forme and substance of the Sacrament that there be three Bishops and if one be ordained of lesse he is no Bishop because the substance or forme required in the Collation of that Order is wanting Moreouer whereas in the second Counsell at Arles it is saide that a Metropolitan should not presume to ordaine a Bishop without three of his prouinciall Bishops which the Canon Law aleadgeth three or two that is three with the Metropolitan or two besides him the glosse vpon the word three saith thus quod dicit tribus est de substantia consecrationis alias non esset consecratê° â—iessent pauciores that is Whereas the Councell saith three it is of the substance of the consecration otherwise he should not be consecrated if there were fewer ORTHO IS this the Iudgement of your Iesuites PHIL. Father Turrian speaking of the Metropolitan and two Bishops assistant saith Hi sunt tres prorsus necessarij these are three altogether necessary and elsewhere he produceth this saying of Damasus Quod Episcopi non sint qui minus quam a tribus ordinati sunt Episcopis omnibus patet quoniam prohibitum est a sanctis patribus vt qui ab vno vela duobus ordinati sunt Episcopis neque nominentur Episcopi si nomen non habent qualiter officium habebunt that is it is manifest to all men that they are no Bishops which are ordeined of lesse then three Bishops Because the holy Fathers forbid that such as are ordained of one or two Bishops should not so much as be called Bishops if they haue not the name how should they haue the office and he inferreth this conclusion in the words of Damasus Quare quicquid inter Episcopos aut de rebus solummodo adeos pertinentibus egerint necesse est vt irritum fiat quia quod non habent dare non possunt that is Wherefore whatsoeuer they shall doe among Bishops or concerning things belonging onely to Bishops it must needs be void because they cannot giue that to another which they haue not themselues Whereupon he accounteth your Bishops no Bishops your Ministers no Ministers your ordinations no ordinations Nec enim schismaticae ordinationes sunt sed nullae penitus ac potius meré laicae For the ordinations of the Protestants are not Schismaticall ordinations but no ordinations at all and mere laick ORTHO What saith Bellarmine to this matter for he was the noble and renowned Iesuite though now he hath changed his habit for a red hat PHIL. He saith Nostri temporis haeretici neutrum habent id est nec ordinationem nec successionem propterea longé inuerecundiús quam vlli vnquam haeretici sibi nomen munus Episcopi vsurpant i. the Heretickes of our time haue neither that is neither ordination nor succession and therefore they vsurpe vnto themselues the name and office of a Bishop farre more immodestly then euer did any other Heretickes the ground of which assertion as may appeare both by the antecedents and consequents is because they are not consecrated by three ORTHO Doth hee not allow a consecration by fewer in case of necessitie PHIL. It cannot be doubted saith he but ordinarily three Bishops are required to the ordination of a new Bishop vnlesse peraduenture by dispensation with one Bishop ordaining there be present two mitred Abbots which may supply the place of Bishops as it vseth sometimes to be done ob Episcoporum raritatem for the scarcitie of Bishops Hetherto Bellarmine to which Binius addeth aliamue iustam causam or for any other iust cause ORTHO By whose dispensation must this be PHIL Binius saith per summi Pontificis dispensationem by the Popes dispensation ORTHO If there bee neither three nor two nor any Abbots assisting nor yet the Popes dispensation what is then the iudgement of Bellarmine PHIL. You shal heare himselfe speake from which an insoluble argument is taken in this manner A Church cannot be without Bishops as we haue declared among the Lutherans there are no Bishops for they haue no ordination nor succession from the Apostles therefore among them there is no Church And verely that neither Luther who was accounted Bishop of Wittenberge nor Zuinglius who was reputed Bishop of Tigur nor Oecolampadius who in the very Epitaph vpon his graue is called the first Bishop of Basill nor Caluin who was called the first Bishop of Geneua nor any other of them were ordeined of three Bishops nor of one by dispensation with the assistance of Abbots is a thing notoriously knowen neither do they deny it Therefore these are no Bishops at least in the iudgement of the Fathers of the Nicen and Carthaginian Councell yea in the iudgement of the Apostles themselues who haue decreed that a Bishop ought to be ordained by three Bishops Thus Bellarmine is clearely of opinion that a Bishop must either be ordained of three or haue assistance
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
ordinare Episcopum in nostris Prouincijs c. If two presume to ordaine a Bishop in our Prouinces it pleaseth vs to decree concerning those presumptuous persons that if it shall any where happen that two Bishops shall make a Bishop against his will the authors being condemned he which suffred violence shal be substituted in the Church of one of them if his life be answerable and that another neuerthelesse be ordeined in the place of the other being cast out If two shall make a Bishop with his consent then he also shall be condemned to the end that those things which were instituted by antiquitie may be obserued more warily Here are two Cases for the ordained was either vnwilling or willing If vnwilling he enioyed the Bishopprick because he was not consenting to the breach of the Canon If he were willing then he also was condemned put from the Bishopprick which was not for want of receiuing the Episcopall power for if two Bishops could confer it to one against his wil vndoubtedly they could giue it to one that was willing But the first is confessed by the Councell in that they allow him and giue him a Bishoppricke where he may exercise his Episcopall function therefore the latter was not then doubted of But though both had receiued alike power in their ordination yet the innocent was allowed the offender reiected for discipline sake PHIL. This Canon is chaffe ORTH. If Gratian meane this then hee hath fouly mangled it but that you may know that this is no chaffe you shall heare your owne famour Baronius Nobilus quidem c. Truely this is to be called a most noble Synod being adorned with a garland of most famous Prelates And againe Florebant quidem c. Truely the said Prouinces of France if any other coasts of the Christian world did flourish at this time with Bishops both most holy and most learned by whose painfull vigilancie the Ecclesiasticall Lawes remained in their strength And againe Tot igitur c. Therefore so many most famous Prelates made the Councel of Orenge famous and glorious in all things although it consisted of a small assemblie of Bishops And least a man should wonder at this rare commendation he rendreth his reason Porro vt tot insignes c. Moreouer that there should be found in the same Prouinces so many men notable for learning and godlinesse the cause may seeme to be the most famous Monasterie of Iusula Lerinensis the land next adioyning being a Seminary of most holy Bishops Which he further extolleth by the verses of Sydonius Apollinarius To Baronius we will adioyne Binius who vseth to gather stickes vnder Baronius his hedge Haec Synodus Clarissimorum c. This was a most noble Synod beautified with a crowne of most noble Prelates In it fifteene Bishops of the Prouince of Lyons Marbona meeting after their maner made 29 Canons concerning the lawes and discipline of the Church Wherefore by the iudgement of this most noble Synod it is apparant that he may be a Bishop which is Consecrated onely by two and therefore three are not required of absolute necessity Hitherto of the Councels Now let vs consider examples of antiquitie DIoscorus Patriarch of Alexandria was consecrated onely by two and yet was acknowledged to haue sufficient Episcopall power The former point is testified by the Bishops of Pontus in a Synodall Epistle Ordinationem suam adamnatis Episcopis hoc duobus accepit i. He receiued his ordination of Bishops condemned and that onely of two The latter may appeare by the Councell of Chalcedon in the Acts whereof he is vsually styled The most Reuerend Bishop of Alexandria yea that title is giuen him by Eusebius Bishop of Doryleum his accuser by the Emperour Theodosius and by the Councell it selfe in a Synodall Epistle And as they acknowledge him for a Bishop so they allow of Anatolius whom he did consecrate as may appeare by the words of Tharasius vttered in the seuenth generall Councell Tharasius the most blessed Patriarch said what say you of Anatolius was he not a Prince of the fourth Synod Yet he was created Bishop by Dioscorus and that Eutyches being present therefore let vs also receiue the ordained of Hereticks in like maner as Anatolius was receiued Yea he was approued and receiued into Communion by Pope Leo the first approued in these words Leo Episcopus Anatolio Episcopo receiued into Communion in these words in qua Communionis integritate societatem tuae dilectionis amplectimur i. in which soundnesse of Communion we embrace the fellowship of your loue Now seeing Anatolius was acknowledged for a Bishop by a Pope and two generall Councels you must needes confesse that Dioscorus who ordained him was likewise a Bishop although hee were not consecrated by three NOw let vs crosse the Mediterranean Sea and passe from Alexandria to Rome And here what thinke you of Pelagius the first was not hee a true and lawfull Bishop PHIL. He is commended by Pope Adrian and generally put into the Catalogue ORTHO But Pope Pelagius was not consecrated by three as appeareth by Anastasius whose wordes are registred both by Baronius and Binius Et dum non essent Episcopi qui cum ordinarent inuenti sunt duo Episcopi Iohannes de perusio Bonus de ferentino Andreas presbyter de Ostia eum ordinauerunt Episcopum Vpon which place Binius saith When Pelagius had approued the fift Synod he so greatly offended all the Westerne Bishops that he could not find sufficient Prelates of which he might be ordained according to the Apostolicall constitution and so it was necessary that at the Command of Pelagius a Priest of Ostia which had neuer happened before should performe the office in stead of a Bishop Heere is a cleare confession that a Bishop of Rome in case of necessitie was consecrated only by two Bishops and a Priest And yet it appeareth by the same place of Anastasius that he ordained in his time 26. Priests and 49. Bishops Now if three Bishops be required of absolute necessitie then there was a nullity in his Consecration and consequently in all the Consecrations deriued from him and so there will follow a world of nullities in the Church of Rome or if there be no nullitie in his Consecration then you cannot conclude a nullitie for the want of three HItherto of three Now I will proue that two are not required of absolute necessitie For Euagrius Patriarch of Antioch was ordained by Paulinus alone and yet was allowed for a lawfull Bishop PHIL. I doubt of both branches how proue you the first ORTHOD. Paulinus alone saith Theodoret transgressing many Lawes had created him For the Canons doe not permit one to chuse his successour they command that all the Bishops of the Prouince should be assembled they forbid any man to be created vnlesse three
strangers a common courtesie is a token of arrogancie And a proud looke doeth argue a proud heart according to the saying A man may be knowen by his looke PHIL. It is the iudgement of S. Iohn the Apostle That we must vouchsafe such men as are diuided from the Catholicke Church no honour or office of courtesie in these words If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine receiue him not into house neither say vnto him God saue you ORTHO How can you apply this to the British-Bishops who confessed as Bede relateth That they vnderstood that to be the true way of righteousnes which Austin had preached Yea Parsons the Iesuite affirmeth That the faith which S. Austin brought and that which the Britaines had before must needs bee one and the selfe same in all materiall and substantiall points PHIL. They were all Schismaticks and guiltie of departing from the Church of Rome ORTHOD. How could they depart from it seeing they were neuer lincked to it by any bond of obedience For when should Rome haue any such iurisdiction ouer Britaine At the first planting of Religion You cannot proue it In the dayes of Eleutherius it doeth not appeare that euer he chalenged any such thing And euen their maner of Baptizing obseruing Easter and other Ecclesiasticall institutions contrary to the customes of the Church of Rome make more then probable proofe that Britaine was not vnder the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome Wherefore though we cannot excuse the Britaines for refusing to ioyne with him in the conuersion of the Saxons yet wee must needs say they had iust reason to refuse to put their necks vnder his yoke And surely if Austin had not had a proud spirit hee would onely haue requested their helping hand for the Lords worke and not haue sought dominion ouer them for himselfe and for his lord the Pope Yet the pride of his spirit and his aspiring cogitations may further appeare in that he demaunded of Gregorie i How he should deale with the Bishops of Britaine and France thereby affecting not only to haue iurisdiction ouer the Britaines but ouer the French also Which Gregory well ynough perceiuing answered We gaue thee no authoritie ouer the Bishops of France for that of ancient time of my predecessours the Bishop of Arles receiued his Pall whom we must not bereaue of his authoritie Thus much of his pride NOw whether he were the cause of the massacre following I will not define You shall heare the opinion of Amandus Xierixensis a Frier Minorite When the Brittans saith hee were Catholiks the Saxons were Gentiles for the conuersion of whom blessed Gregory sent Austin and Mellitus which conuerted the Saxons but when Austin would haue brought the Bishops and Abbots of the Brittans by Apostolicke authority that they should receiue him as Legate and preach with him to the English discord was mooued for their disobedience to Saint Austin and so warre was raised betweene the Kings of the Brittans and of the Saxons which now beeing conuerted would haue subdued the Brittans to Austin Bede himselfe testifieth how Austin threatfully prophesied that if they would not take peace and bee at concord with their brethren they should receiue warre from their enemies and if they would not preach to the Englishmen the way of life they should suffer at their hand and by their power the vengcance of death Now because the euent did answere to the speech it is called a prophesie For what followed Edilbert King of Kent moued Edelfride King of Northumberland to ioyne with him against the Brittans and there was made a bloudy massacre the narration whereof is thus set downe by Galfridus Monemutensis In a part of the Brittans Christianity yet flourished the which beginning in the daies of Eleutherius neuer failed among them When Austin came hee found seuen Bishopricks and an Archbishopricke supplied with very godly Gouerners and Abbies a great number in which the flocke of Christ was kept in good order Besides other Cities in the Citie of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 21. hundred monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinooch a man marueilously well learned who by diuerse arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to bee subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edilbert therefore the King of Kent as soone as hee saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching stirred vp Edelfride and other Princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and goe to Bangor to destroy Dinooch and his Clergie Who taking the City commaunded the swords of his men to bee turned first vpon the monkes so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with martyrdome entred the kingdome of Heauen If they were martyrs what were they that made them Martyrs If the Saxons were persecutors and did persecute them to that end that they might make them subiect to Austn what then is to bee thought of Austin It had beene the dutie of Austin saith Lelandus to haue admonished the Saxons that perfidious nation that if they would admit Christianity sincerely they should restore to the iust Lords and possessours the Empire of Brittaine which contrarie to the oath of warfare they had occupied by tyranny If Austin sought by any sinister meanes to enlarge his owne iurisdiction hee was farre vnlike to Palladius Bishop of Scotland who as Polydor witnesseth besought Constantine their king with many prayers that hee would not assist with armes the idolatrous nation of the Saxons against the Christian Brittans PHIL. Saint Bede saith that Saint Austin long before that time was taken out of this life to the kingdome of Heauen ORT. That is not Saint Bedes but some false finger hath foysted it in For a learned antiquary skilfull in the Saxon language affirmeth that it is not found in the Saxon copie Hitherto of circumstances incident to his person Now at last let vs come to his ordination and I hope you will confesse him to be a canonicall Bishop PHIL. HEe was most canonicall For as Doctor Stapleton declareth out of Saint Bede hee was sent from the Bishop of Rome the successor of Peter and consecrated by the Bishops of France ORTHOD. Pope Gregory saith hee was consecrated by the Bishops of Germany PHIL. That is the fault of the copie for it should not bee Germaniarum but Galliarum as Baronius thinketh ORT. When did the French Bishops ordaine him PHIL. After he had bin a while in Brittaine and had conuerted diuers ORTHO Baronius is perswaded by a place of Gregory that it was before the conuersion of the English but by whom was hee ordained PHIL. Saint Bede saith that it was performed by Aetherius Archbishop of Arles ORTHOD. Baronius saith that Aetherius was Bishop of Lyons not of Arles and that Virgilius was then Bishop
once of minde to haue proceeded no further But after the funerall of his father some of his Councell alleadging reasons and producing the Popes dispensation so preuailed with him that the marriage proceeded and they had issue besides those that died in their infancie the Lady Marie This was misliked of many insomuch that when a motion was made of a marriage betweene the Duke of Orleance and the Lady Mary one of the Counsellours to the French King made a doubt whether shee were the king of Englands lawfull daughter because shee was begotten of his brothers wife which scruple was first mooued in the Court of Spaine and thence was spread to France and Flanders Moreouer Cardinall Woolsie aduised Longland Bishop of Lincolne the Kings Confessor to admonish him of it Which the Bishop modestlie refused as fitter to bee performed by himselfe So the Cardinall vndertooke the businesse to whom the King answered Take heed that you call not againe into question a thing which is alreadie iudged About three daies after Longland beeing brought by Wolsey vnto the King entreated his Maiestie That hee would permit the matter to bee considered and examined In the meane time the Cardinall did cast abroad rumors among the people concerning the blemish of the former marriage and how both the Germanes and French men misliked the same which hee is supposed to haue done not of conscience but of malice and subtilty because hauing missed the Popedome by the Emperours meanes hee would bee reuenged of the Queene which was the Emperours Aunt and withall hee is said to haue commended vnto King Henry The beautifull Ladie Margaret Sister to the French King hoping by the assistance of two such mightie Princes in time to aspire to the Popedome WHich proiect though God which scattereth the imaginatiōs of the proud disapointed him of his purpose was such that nothing could haue bin inuented either more profitable for the kingdome or more pernicious to himselfe the Pope and the Court of Rome For this scruple did kindle such a fire in the kings bosome that it vexed his very soule and conscience Whereupon the king being desirous to haue the matter decided to the vttermost so farre preuailed with Pope Clement the seuenth that hee appointed two Cardinals to heare the matter Wolsey Archbishop of Yorke Campeius who arriued the seuenth of October 1528. At this time there was great war between Charles the Emperor and Francis the French king about the kingdome of Naples wherein the Pope wished that the French might preuaile least the Emperour obtaining it should sit too close vpon his skirts Wherefore to weaken the Emperour he moued a league betweene the English and the French for procuring whereof hee did not onelie referre this matrimoniall cause to his said Legats but also of his owne meere motion no man requesting him gaue Campeius a secret Bull in his bosome dated the sixth of the kal of Ian. anno 1527. Wherein hee infringeth the former dispensation affirming that the king could not continue in such a matrimonie without sinne Whereupon he decreed that after the declaration of the nullitie of the former marriage and the kings absolution it should be lawfull for him to marry another This Bull hee forbad him to shew to any saue onely to the King and Cardinall Woolsey And though openly he commaunded him to handle the cause with all expedition yet secretlie hee willed him to protract the time promising that hee himselfe would watch a fit oportunitie to publish the Decree So the King and Queene were cited to appeare before them in May following at which time after some debating of the cause they protracted the sentence till the beginning of August notwithstanding the Kings earnest entreatie to haue a finall determination one way or other for the better quieting of his troubled conscience When August came the King expected an end but the crafty Cardinals considering that if they should iudge according to Gods law it would bee a great derogation from the Church of Rome deuised delayes so Campeius alleadged that hee was a member of the Court of Rome whose custome was to keepe a solemne vacation in the dogge daies and thereupon deferred iudgement till October following In the meane time the Pope seeing that King Henry could not bee drawne by hope of diuorce to take part with the French sent to Campeius Commanding him to burne the former Bull. And before the beginning of October Campeius was called home by the Popes letters The King beeing thus deluded sent to the Pope at Bononie requesting some end but hee would needs pause vpon the matter till he came to Rome ABout this time it pleased the diuine prouidence so to dispose that the King for his recreation went to Waltam twelue miles from London in the way imparted his griefe to Stephen Gardiner his Secretary and Doct. Fox his Almoner intreating them to bee carefull in so weighty a cause It fell out that they lodged in the house of one Master Cressy whither Cranmer also beeing tutor to two of Master Cressyes sonnes was come at that time with his pupils by reason of the plague then in Cambridge At supper they asked his iudgement concerning the Kings cause hee answered that nothing did more prolong the cause nor more torment the Kings conscience then the dilatory protractions and winding inuolutions in the Romane Court with which snares whosoeuer are once intangled doe hardly euer recouer themselues Wherefore hee thought good that leauing those Courtly trials and delayes wherewith the King was so tossed with such griefes of minde The opinions of Diuines both in our owne Vniuersities and in others should bee enquired concerning this cause which is determinable by the Lawe of God and not by the Law of man And if the Diuines shall agree and pronounce that the marriage is lawfull or vnlawfull by the Law of God let not the king seeke any more to the Court of Rome but cause sentence to bee giuen in his owne dominions according to the iudgement of the Diuines so being cheerefull in minde and free in conscience hee may liue a Princely life and worthy this common-wealth in lawfull matrimonie which is to be wished of all vs Christian subiects This answere pleased them exceedingly and they presently related it vnto the King to whom Doctor Fox made mention of Cranmer but Gardiner would haue challenged all the glory to themselues Then said the King Where is that Cranmer hee hath the sowe by the right eare If I had knowne this deuice but two yeeres before I might haue saued much charges and trouble so the King conferred with Cranmer and commanded him to set downe his minde in writing at the deliuery whereof the King asked him if hee would stand to iustifie that which hee had written before the Bishop of Rome Cranmer answered yea that I will doe by Gods grace if your Maiestie doe
which hath not the right order of Priesthood but the Priesthood conferred in King Edwards time was no Priesthood because they wanted the authority to offer the blessed sacrifice of the Masse therefore those Priests were not capable of the Episcopall order ORTHO I answere first that seeing that King Edward rained but sixe yeeres and fiue moneths it is likely that most of them which were aduanced in his time to bee Bishops were before his time in the order of Priesthood Secondly if any be produced which were not yet it shal be iustified God willing when we come to the point that the order of Priesthood conferred in the dayes of King Edward Queene Elizabeth and King Iames is the true ministery of the Gospel and that your sacrificing Priesthood is sacrilegious and abominable In the meane time you must giue vs leaue to holde that the ministery of the Church of England is holy in the sight of God and iustifiable in the sight of man CHAP. XII Of the Bishops Consecrated in the dayes of Queene Marie THe lineall descent hath led vs to the Bishops in Queen Maries time concerning which shal I craue your iudgement PHIL. You know it already they were all Canonical ORTHOD. For the more distinct proceeding let vs diuide them into two ranckes the old Bishops and the new the old I cal such as being cōsecrated before her time were continued in her time the new which were Consecrated in her time PHIL. All which were allowed for Bishops in Queene Maries time whether old or new were Canonicall ORTHO The old Bishops were all made in the dayes of K. Henry the eighth and almost all in those very times which you brand with imputation of schisme and heresie when none could bee Consecrated vnlesse hee did sweare to the king against the Pope Wherefore seeing you iudged both Consecrators and Consecrated schismaticall and hereticall and yet esteeme them Canonicall your obiections of schisme and heresie must eternally bee silenced in the question of Canonicall Bishops For if these crimes can frustrate a Consecration then their Consecration was frustrate and they were no Bishops or if they were Bishops and Canonicall then all the Bishops in King Henries time were likewise Canonicall Moreouer some of them whom you so commend were Bishops in King Edwards time as for example Thomas Thurlby whom King Henrie promoted to be Bishop of Westminster was aduanced by King Edward to the Bishopricke of Norwich and afterward preferred by Queene Mary to the Bishopricke of Ely and moreouer to be one of her priuie Councell Yea some of them had the place of a Bishop in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth Namely Anthony Kitchin who in King Henries time was made Bishop of Landaff kept his dignities and place in the dayes of K. Edward continued the same all the reigne of Queene Mary and so till the day of his death which was in the fift yeere of Queene Elizabeth Wherefore in iustifying the old Bishops you iustifie al generally which were Consecrated in King Henries daies and some which continued in King Edwards and Queene Elizabeths But now from the old let vs come to the new PHIL. QVeene Mary aduanced Holiman bishop of Bristow Coates bishop of Chester Watson bishop of Lincolne Morris bishop of Rochester Morgan bishop of S. Dauis Brooke bishop of Glocester Glin bishop of Bangor Christophorson bishop of Chichester Dauid Poole bishop of Peterborow Cardinall Poole bishop of Canterbury and others ORTHOD. And these reuerend Prelats Bush bishop of Bristow Tailor bishop of Lincolne Scory bishop of Chichester Barlow bishop of Bathe and Wells Couerdale bishop of Exeter and Harly bishop of Hereford with sundry others were at that time forced to leaue their bishopricks For what cause partly for not yeelding to the Pope and Popish Religion partly because they were married which Greg. Martin calleth a polluting of holy Orders though S. Paul saith it is honourable among all men and the bed vndefiled But let vs see the Consecration of your new bishops PHIL. I will begin with that renowned Prelate Cardinall Poole whose Consecration followeth Anno 1555. Reginald Poole cons. Archb. Cant. 22. Mart. by Nichol Arch. Ebor. Thom. Eltens Edmund Lond. Rich. Wigorn. Ioh. Lincoln Mauric Roff. Thom. Asaph Anno 1557. Thom Watson Dauid Pole Cons. B. 15. Aug. by Nich. Ebor. Thom. Eli. Wil. Bangor Anno 1557. Ioh. Christophorson cons. B. 21. No. by Edmund Lond. Tho. Elien Mauric Roff. ORTHOD. All these deriue their Consecration from bishops which were made in the time of the pretended Schisme and some of them from Cranmer himselfe therefore you must either acknowledge all them and namely Cranmer for Canonicall or neither Cardinall Poole nor any of the rest made in Queene Maries time can be Canonicall THE THIRD BOOKE OF THE BISHOPS CONSEcrated in the Raigne of Q. Elizabeth and of our gracious Soueraigne King IAMES CHAP. I. Of the Bishops deposed in the beginning of the raigne of Queene Elizabeth with an answere to certaine odious imputations concerning some Antecedents and Consequents of their Depositions PHIL. THe reuolution of times hath brought vs to the raigne of Queene Elizabeth euen to that blacke and dolefull day wherein all the Bishops of England all I say one onely excepted were deposed from their degrees and dignities For a great penaltie was inflicted vpon such as should after the Feast of S. Iohn Baptis◠1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesiasticall Office whatsoeuer after the old rite or administer any Sacrament after the Romane maner to wit That hee which offended against that Law for the first time should pay 200 Nobles or be in bonds sixe Moneths for the second 400. Nobles or a yeere in bonds for the third he should be in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods By which meanes it came to passe That at the day prescribed the holy and diuine Offices ceased to be performed publikely through the whole Kingdome And because the Bishops would not consent to those impieties nor affirme vpon their Oathes that they beleeued in their consciences That the Queene onely was the Supreame gouernesse of the Church of England vnder Christ they were all saue one shortly after deposed from their Degree and dignitte and committed to certaine prisons and custodies whereupon they are all at this day dead with the long tediousnesse of their miseries The names of which most glorious Confessours I will set downe that the thing may be had in euerlasting remembrance First of all Nicholas Archbishop of Yorke and a little before that time Lord Chancellour of England then Edmund Bonner Bishop of London and Tunstall of Durham Iohn of Winton Thomas of Lincolne Thurlby of Ely Turberuill of Exeter Borne of Bath Pole of Peterborow Baine of Lichfield Cuthbert of Chester Oglethorp of Carlile and Thomas Goldwell of S. Asaph c. ORTH. Here are two things to be discussed The deposing of the old Bishops and aduancing of the new Concerning the first
you make a grieuous complaint that they were not onely deposed but also vsed with great indignitie both before their deposing and after Wherfore let vs first consider the circumstances and then come to the deposition it selfe PHIL. I say that a Grieuous penalty was inflicted vpon such as should after the feast of Saint Iohn Baptist 1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesisticall office whatsoeuer after the old rite ORTHOD. You maske your noueltie vnder the vizard of antiquity and call that the old rite which was but yesterday but proceed PHIL. This penalty extended to such as should administer any Sacrament after the Roman manner ORT. Saint Paul saith That which I receiued of the Lord that deliuer I vnto you teaching vs that Sacraments must bee ministred in such manner as wee haue receiued of the Lord wee are not tied to the rite of Rome or any other City or Country but onely to the institution of Iesus Christ If Rome follow this wee will follow it with Rome if Rome forsake this then farewell Rome But what was the penalty PHIL. To wit That hee which offended against the law for the first time should pay two hundred crownes or be in bonds six monthes for the second foure hundred crownes or a yeere in bondes for the third hee should bee in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods ORTHOD. What hath that good Lady done which doth not become a most vertuous and gratious Prince hath shee made lawes to establish religion So did Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius Hath shee inflicted a penalty vpon the infringers So did Constantine vpon the Donatists That their goods should bee confiscate so did Theodosius vpon the Donatists likewise Ten pound of gold to bee paide to the Emperours Exchequer And these lawes are highly commended by Saint Austin Indeed he was some times of opinion that they were to bee dealt withall onely by perswasions not by penalties but when his fellow Bishops laide before him so plaine examples of so many cities infected with Donatisme and all reclaimed by helpe of imperiall lawes hee changed his minde and yeelded vnto them Then hee perceiued that the Circumcellions which were like vnto mad men were brought into their right wittes againe and made good Catholikes by being bound as it were with the chaines of imperiall lawes then he perceiued that others beeing in a spirituall lethargie were awakened with the seuerity of Imperiall lawes then hee perceiued that the Kings of the earth serue Christ euen by making lawes for Christ. So did that gratious Lady Queene Elizabeth wherein how mildely and mercifully shee proceeded you may learne by looking backe to her sister Queene Mary who was not content to inflict a pecuniary mulct or a little imprisonment vpon those of the contrary religion but tied thē to stakes burned thē to ashes in flaming fire PHIL. As though a life lingting in disgrace were not worse then a present death For Foureteene noble and most worthy Bishops inferiour in vertue and learning to none in Europe were all deposed from their honours and high calling and most of them imprisoned and spitefully vsed in all respectes ORTHOD. FIrst let vs consider what they deserued and secondly how they were serued How well they deserued at the Queenes hands may appeare by their behauiour in three points concerning the Coronation Disputation and Excommunication First when the Queen was to bee crowned they all conspired together refusing to performe such solemnitie as by them of dutie was to bee performed at her Coronation Owen Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill onely excepted PHIL. Had they not cause to refuse So soone as shee came to the crowne shee presently reuealed her minde in religion both by many other meanes and especially in that shee straightway silenced the Catholike Preachers and suffered the heretikes to returne into the kingdome from diuers places where they were in banishment Moreouer shee gaue charge to a certaine Bishop about to performe the holy rite before her and now standing at the Altar attyred in holy vestments that hee should not eleuate the Consecrated hoaste whereupon it came to passe that the Archbishoppe of Yorke whose office it was Cardinall Poole Archbishop of Canterbury beeing departed this transitory life to annoynt and Consecrate her to bee Queene denied his helpe and the rest of the Bishops likewise al sauing one and he almost the last among them ORTHO Your eleuation is referred to adoration which is Idolatrie therefore if shee forbad it as also the Preaching of errour and commanded the Preaching of truth shee did but her duty For as Saint Austin saith Princes may commaund that which is good and forbid that which is euill within their owne kingdomes not in ciuill affaires onely but in matters pertayning to diuine religion also But if it were so that the Queene therein had committed an errour if it were so that Popery were true religion yet shee was the lawfull Queene the Kingdome descended to her by right of inheritance the Nobles and commons according to their dutie acknowledged her for Queene she was proclaimed by order taken by the Lords and the Archb. of Yorke himselfe then Lord Chancelour of England what reason then had the Bishops to deny her that solemnity which was neuer denied to any of her noble progenitours If she had pulled the Miters from their heades for refusing to set the Diademe vpon her head had not this beene a iust reward for a due desert Hitherto of the first point that is the Coronation SEcondly it was the Queenes pleasure that there should be a solemne disputation betweene the Popish Bishops or some other Champions appointed by them on the one part and other learned diuines of our religion on the other part but the Bishops with one accord most obstinately refused the incounter PHIL. They had reason for as they then answered for themselues It was not fit that those things which for many ages had beene defined by so famous iudgements of Popes Councels and Fathers should now come againe into question and disputation ORTH. You tell vs of Popes Councels and Fathers but I heare no mention at all of the Scripture truly Philodox wee builde not our faith vpon Popes nor Councels nor Fathers but onely vpon the blessed and sacred word of God registred in the writings of the Apostles and Prophets but for the better vnderstanding of this word wee make honourable account of ancient Councels and Fathers yet so that wee put an infinite difference betweene them and the word of the liuing God For the word of God is infallible it can neither deceiue nor bee deceiued but the word of man is subiect to errour therefore wee must trie all things and holde that which is good and the touchstone of all is the word of God Neither are wee afraid of the Councels and Fathers you beare the world in hand that all make for you but vpon manifold and
iust experience it prooueth otherwise As for the Popes if you meane the ancient Bishops of Rome wee regard them with reuerence and if their true writings were extant wee would willingly embrace them but as for your late Popes wee litle respect them Moreouer if your Bishops had for them the former definitions of Fathers and Councels they might more easily haue conuinced their aduersaries in disputation this should haue beene a spurre vnto them and not a bridle PHIL. As it was not fit to call the former definitions in question againe so much lesse was it fit that those things which ought to haue beene discussed in the Vniuersities by certaine order before the learned and iudicious should bee handled before the people which was vnskilfull and desirous of noueltie which vseth to define euery thing rather by outcryes then by arguments ORTHOD. As though this disputation had beene intended before the rude and barbarous multitude and not rather before the most honourable graue wise and iudicious in the whole Kingdome The trueth is that the Bishops doubted the cause they feared that they were not able to defend it by the Scriptures PHIL. They saide that against the contentious and such as would not rest in the iudgement of the Church little good could bee done by disputation And verily no maruell if they were loth to haue triall by disputation when the Iudge was Nicholas Bacon a layman an Hereticke altogether ignorant of Diuinitie the most reuerend Archbishop of Yorke assisting for fashion sake onely The day came which was the third of April there was infinite concourse vnequall lawes of disputation were prescribed of the Heretickes onely nothing was done with order and reason the time slipped away with declamations on both sides the prophane iudge moderateth all things as it pleaseth him all comes to nothing and so the Heretickes proceede in their madnesse ORTH. These are figures of rehetoricke wherewith you vse to embellish your speeches as it were with precious stones Whosoeuer will hold with the Pope is presently with you a good Catholicke and a very learned man but let him bee neuer so wise learned and iudicious if hee loue God his Prince and countrey better then the Pope hee shall bee reproached with ignorance and heresie as appeareth in that honourable personage Sir Nicholas Bacon Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England a man famous for wisdome pietie and the zeale of Gods glory But why doe you blemish him because hee had the fauour of a gracious Prince you might haue learned of Salomon Hee that loueth purenesse of heart for the grace of his lippes the King shall bee his friend can you blame him for that hee was designed by his Soueraigne to bee a moderatour at the disputation you should rather haue considered the Queenes great mildenesse and gracious proceeding in that shee vouchsafed to ioyne with him an assistant as Sanders confesseth one of your owne Religion a man of eminent note in Church and common wealth who stoode not for a cipher or for fashion sake but was armed with authoritie and had power to prouide that the Papistes should haue full libertie to speake their mindes before that great and honourable assembly How was it possible that the businesse should bee contriued with greater equalitie and indifferencie PHIL. Should a lay man iudge of Bishops and profound Diuines ORTH. Did not Basil Bishop of Ancyra and other Bishops dispute with Photinus before certaine noble men which the Emperour had appointed to bee Iudges did not Saint Austine dispute with the Donatists Marcellinus the tribune being Iudge did hee not dispute with Pascentius the Arrian Laurentius a secular man being Iudge And if it please you to looke into the volumes of Councels you shall finde that in the fourth generall Councell being the first at Chalcedon noble men of the Laity were appointed Iudges whose names are set downe in the beginning of the first action The like is to bee found in the sixt generall Councell being the third at Constantinople And in the third generall Councell being the first at Ephesus Theodosius and Valentintan appointed Candidianus an Earle to bee the Iudge PHIL. These were Iudges after a sort But how that may appeare by the wordes of the Emperour concerning Candidianus Ad Sacram vestram Synodum abire iussimus sed ea lege conditione vt cum quaestionibus controuersijs quae circafidei dogmata incidunt nihil quicquam commune habeat i. wee haue commanded him to goe vnto your sacred Synode but vpon this condition that hee haue nothing at all to doe with questions and controuersies of faith ORTHOD. Very true But first to remoue all such persons as might be troublesome to the sacred Synode Secondly not to suffer those which were of the Synode to depart before the consultation were ended Thirdly not to let them dispute any by-matters before the principall were fully discussed and concluded Fourthly to prouide that the disputation might be peaceable without tumult Fiftly to see that euery man might haue libertie without offence to propose what he thought good and to confute the contrary In like manner Sir Nicholas Bacon was appointed to these and the like offices and not to decide or determine any controuersie of faith PHIL. Hee was a capitall enemie of the Catholickes ORTHOD. All that was done or said at those meetings is extant to bee seene whereby it may appeare that all his proceedings about that businesse were most milde moderate honourable and Christian though the Bishops did shew themselues very obstinate PHIL. The Protestants would haue had them to dispute vpon such Articles proposed for questions as seemed to haue a greater shewe of proofe in the Scriptures for the Heretickes as of the Communion vnder both kindes of publique prayers to bee had in the vulgar tongue and such like ORTHOD. In the publique reformation of a Church the first thing to be considered is the due ordering of diuine seruice and Sacraments therefore the questions were chosen with singular discretion one concerning the prayers whether they should bee in the vulgar tongue another concerning the Lords Supper whether it should bee ministred in both kindes In both which points you had done great iniurie to the people of God But you say that the Protestants made choise of such questions as seemed to haue a greater shew of proofe in the Scripture and haue we thinke you but a seeming shew of proofe no sound substantial proofe indeed If the Bishops had bin of this opinion it should rather haue incouraged them to the incounter then haue caused them to flie the field Is the holy Scripture for vs in these questions onely if the disputation had beene about the worshipping of images inuocations of Saints iustification by faith and such like could not wee haue produced as pregnant proofes out of the Scriptures for these as for the former but now one may
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
Salomon may rightly be called Prophets PHIL. I say that Salomon deposed Abiathar not as a king but as a Prophet and executer of diuine iustice ORTHOD. As though the King as a King were not an executer of diuine iustice yes Philodox it is the King as King which beareth not the sword in vaine it is the king as king which is The minister of God and a râ—uenger of wrath to him that doth euill therefore the King as King is the executer of diuine iustice And so when you say not as a king but as an executer of diuine iustice you put those things asunder which the Lord hath put together againe when you say that hee did it As a Prophet and an executer of diuine iustice you put those things together which the Lord hath put a sunder for a Prophet as a Prophet is the mouth of the Lord the executer of diuine iustice is not the mouth but the hand of the Lord the hand and the mouth must be distinguished PHIL. I will proue that Salomon did it as a Prophet For in the same place it is sayd that Salomon put out Abiathar that hee might fulfill the words of the Lord which he spake against the house of Eli in Shilo ORTHOD. Doe you thinke that such like speeches import the finall cause and the intents of the Agents The souldiours seeing the coate of Christ to be without seame wouen from the top throughout said one to another Let vs not diuide it but cast lots for it whose it shal be that the Scripture might bee fulfilled which saith they parted my garments among them and on my coate did they cast lots doe you imagine that the soldiours had any intent hereby to fulfill the Scripture Euen iust as much as Iudas had when hee sold his master for thirty peeces of siluer or Herod when hee slue the infants or the Iewes when they gaue him vineger to drinke They had no purpose in so doing to fulfill the Scripture yet God so disposed that by their action the Scripture was fulfilled Likewise your owne Bishop Tostatus may teach you that in this place the particle vt doth not signifie the finall cause but the consecution But what if Salomon had done it to that very end and purpose that the word of the Lord concerning the house of Eli might be fulfilled would this prooue that he did it as a Prophet Iehu when he had slaine Iehoram said to Bidkar a Captaine Take him and cast him in some place of the field of Naboth the Iezrelite for I remember that when â— and thou rode together after Ahab his father the Lord laide this burthen vpon him surely I haue seene yesterday the bloud of Naboth and the bloud of his sonnes sayd the Lord and I will render it thee in this field saith the Lord now therefore take and cast him into the field according to the word of the Lord The casting of him into the field was not onely a fulfilling of the prophesie but it was also commaunded to bee done euen directly to that end that the prophesie might bee fulfilled yet I thinke you will not say that Iehu was a Prophet so farre are you from prouing that Salomon did it as a Prophet PHIL. Either as a King or as a Prophet not as a King and therefore as a Prophet ORTHOD. NOt as a King why so the Lord had promised that Salomon should sit vpon the Throne of Dauid his father so Salomon was heire apparant to the crowne by Gods owne appointment yet for all this Adonias exalted himselfe and sayd I wil be king and Ioab and Abiathar helped him forward they said God saue King Adonias Whereupon all three were guilty of high treason against the king and all three were punished by the king PHIL. True by the king but not by kingly power ORTHO Yes by kingly power the king did it as a king And to beginne with Adonias the king granted him a conditionall pardon that If hee shewed himselfe a worthy man there should not a haire of him fall to the earth but if wickednesse were found in him hee should die and therefore when hee desired Abisha to wife the wisdome of the King reaching into the profoundnesse of the policie did interpret it as a meanes of aspiring to the kingdome So King Salomon sent by the hand of Benaiah the sonne of Iehoiada and hee smote him that hee died Who did this the spirit of God saith that King Salomon did it so it is ascribed to the King yea it is cleare that the King did it as a King for who could pardon treason but a King as a King Or who should draw the sword of iustice against malefactors but he that beareth not the sword in vaine that is the King by the power and authoritie of a King Concerning Ioab it was tolde Salomon that he was fled to the Tabernacle of the Lord and Benaiah sayd thus saith the King come out and hee sayd nay but I will die here and Benaiah brought the King word againe and the King said doe as hee hath said and smite him in all which there was nothing but the execution of iustice which belongeth to a King as a King Now to come to Abiathar his offence against the King was the same and the Scripture ascribeth the punishment in the same tenour of wordes vnto the king Then the King said vnto Abiathar the Priest euen the king who in the former verse commaunded Adonias to bee slaine that is the King as a King which may appeare further by that which hee said Goe to Anathoth to thy owne fields in which words hee confineth him which is the action of a King And againe thou art worthy of death but I will not this day kill thee because thou barest the Arke of the Lord God before Dauid my Father and because thou hast suffered in all things wherein my Father hath beene afflicted In which wordes hee granteth life to one that had deserued death and who could doe this but a King So Salomon cast out Abiathar from being high Priest vnto the Lord Where wee see death changed into depriuation All which doe argue the power of a King yea it is said that the King put Benaiah the sonne of Iehoiada in the roume of Ioab ouer the hoast which vndoubtedly belonged vnto the King as hee was King and it followeth immediately in the same verse and the King set Sadok the Priest in the roume of Abiathar Thus you see that the whole course of Scripture ascribeth it to the King as a King and why should you thinke otherwise PHIL. BEcause in the old Testament the Leuites were free by the law of God from the power of secular Princes For in the third of Numbers God doth not once but often repeate that the Leuites are properly his owne and that he hath chosen them
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
confessed that this Councell of Antioch was a wicked Arrian Councell Secondly Socrates declareth that this very Canon was vrged against S. Chrysostome who reiected it as being made by the Arrians of set purpose against Athanasius Thirdly if wee should admit this Canon yet it maketh nothing against the Consecratours of Archbishop Parker for they were not deposed by any Councell and therefore needed no Councell to restore them but as Athanasius and other Bishops being forced to flee in the time of Iulian returned againe in the dayes of Iouian Qui cum omnes alios Episcopos tum eum nempe Athanasium ante omnes qui omnibus virtute antecellebat citra dubitationem vllam pietatis causa bello vexatus fuerat ab exilio reuocat i. Who recalled from exile as all other Bishops so especially Athanasius who in vertue excelled all men and without doubt was vexed and troubled onely for his pietie and Religion So these reuerend Bishops being forced to flee in the time of Q. Mary onely for their pietie and Religion returned againe in the dayes of Q. Elizabeth who as she recalled all godly Christians and Preachers from exile so especially those that excelled in learning and vertue Hitherto of the Consecratours NOw for the Consecrated he was a man against whom you can take no exception for you must needs acknowledge that he was capable of the Episcopall Office because Bristow confesseth that he was a Priest secundum Catholicum ritum i. according to the Catholick rite Which is most true He was Chaplaine to the Lady Anne Bullein and afterward to K. Henry the 8. who greatly preferred him and he was thought by Q. Elizabeth the fittest man to be aduanced to the See of Canterburie He was very learned as may appeare by his writings famously knowen to the world and a great louer of learning and Religion For he founded a Grammer Schoole at Rochdale in Lancashire Vnto Corpus Christi Colledge in Cambridge where hee was brought vp he procured 13. Schollerships built the inward Library and two faire chambers in the same He gaue to the Library of that Colledge a great number of Bookes some printed other written very rare and much to be esteemed for their value and Antiquitie He gaue also to the Vniuersitie 50 written books of great value and 50 printed He gaue to the same Colledge land for the maintenance of two Fellowes aboue the ordinary number He tooke order for the preaching of 6. Sermons yerely in 5. seuerall Churches in Norfolke To Trinitie Hall he gaue a Schollers place and bookes likewise And otherwise bestowed much money vnto charitable vses Lastly hee is commended by a great Antiquary for being singularly studious of Antiquities by whose care and industrie many excellent Monuments both in the Latin and Saxon tongue were preserued which otherwise had perished in the darknesse of Obliuion But from the persons we will proceed to the matter and forme of the Consecration PHIL. I Haue heard credibly reported That your new Superintendents were made Bishops with no other ceremony then with the laying of the English Bible vpon their heads ORTHOD. Yes they were all made with imposition of hands which is the only ceremony of Ordination which the Scripture mentioneth And Bellarmine thinketh it to be the matter essentiall And for the other Ceremonies which are but the inuention of man you cannot inforce them vpon vs further then the wisdome of our Church doeth hold it conuenient But concerning Archb. Parker this was his singular felicitie That being the 70. Archbishop after Austin yet of all that number he was the onely man and the first of all which receiued Consecration without the Popes Bulls and superfluous Aaronicall Ornaments as gloues rings Sandals slippers Miter Pall and such like trifles making a happy beginning more rightly and more agreeable to the simplicitie and puritie of the Gospel with Prayer inuocation of the holy Ghost imposition of hands and Religious promises in Attire correspondent to the grauitie and authoritie of an Archbishop with a Sermon made by a learned and godly Diuine concerning the Office charge and faithfulnesse of a Pastour to his flocke and the loue obedience and reuerence of the flocke to the Pastour And after Sermon with receiuing the holy Communion in a great assembly of most graue men And last of all with the common and feruent prayers of them all that the Office imposed vpon him might redound to the glory of God the saluation of his flocke and the ioyfull testimonie of his owne conscience PHIL. WHat forme of wordes did they vse to giue the Episcopall power with the imposition of hands ORTHOD. The very same which was vsed in King Edwards daies and is vsed still in the Church of England yea the very same words which by the great prouidence of God are still retained in your owne Church And this may appeare by the act of his Consecration remayning in record Cicestrensis Heref Suffraganeus Bedford Milo Couerdale manibus Archiepiscopo imposit is dixerunt anglice viz. Take the holie Ghost c. Thus haue wee examined the place the persons the matter the forme of his Consecration and finde nothing but agreeable to the lawes of the Land the Canons of the Church and the practise of reuerend antiquitie wherein how circumspectly the Queene proceeded may further appeare by this that her letters patents were sent to diuerse learned professours of the law that they might freelie giue their iudgment and all of them ioynthe confessed that both the Queenes Maiesty might lawfully authorize the persons to the effect specified and the said persons also might lawfully exercise the act of confirming and Consecrating in the same to them committed whose names subscribed with their owne hands remaine in record as followeth William May. Robert Weston Edward Leedes Henry Haruie Thomas Yale Nicolas Bullingham Hitherto of Archbishop Parker now let vs heare your exceptions against the rest CHAP. V. Of the rest of the Bishops Consecrated in the second and third yeere of Queene Elizabeth PHIL. IF his or their Consecrations were sound why did the Queene in her letters patents directed for the consecrating of them vse diuerse generall words and sentences whereby she dispensed with all causes or doubts of any imperfection or disability that could or might bee obiected in any wise against the same as may appeare by an act of Parliament referring vs to the said letters patents remayning of record ORT. She might entertaine some reason in her royall brest which you and I and such shallow heads are not able to conceiue But if I might presume to giue my coniecture I suppose shee did it ad maiorem cautelam For there wanted not malicious Papists which would prie into the state of the Clergy and obserue the least imperfection that could be Whereupon to preuent their slanders and to stoppe the mouthes of malice that gracious Queene was not
vide 18 Edmund Grindall vide 3. Edwin Sands vide 11. 13 Rob. Horne cons. 16. Feb. 1560. by Mathew Parker vide 4. Edmund Grindall v. 3. 14 Tho. Young Cons. 21. Ian. 1559. by Math. Parker vide 4. Edmund Grindall v. 3. Ioh. Hodgskins in the time of H. 8. 15 Rich. Cox with Edm. Grindall v. 3. 16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cons. 24. Mar. 1559. by Mathew Parker vide 4 17 N. Bullinghā cons. 21 Ian. 1559 by Mathew Parker v. 4 Edm. Grindall v. 3 Richard Cox vide 15 Iohn Hodgskins 18 Ioh. Iewell cons. 21 Ian. 1559 by Mat. Parker v. 4 Edm. Grindal v. 3 Richard Cox v. 15 Io. Hodgskins 21 Iohn Young Consecrated 16. Mar. 1577. by Edmund Grindall vide 3 Iohn Elmer vide 10 Iohn Iewell vide 18 22 Ant Rud Consecrated 9. Iun. 1594. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Iohn Young vide 21 23 Richard Fletcher Cons 14. Dec 1589. by Iohn VVhitgift vide 2 Iohn Elmer vide 10 Iohn Young vide 21 24 Iohn Bullingham Cons 5. Sep 1581. by Edmund Grindall vide 3 Iohn Elmer vide 10 Iohn Young vide 21 25 Richard Vaughan Cons 25. Ianuary 1595. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Richard Fletcher vide 23 Iohn Young vide 21 26 Anthony Watson Cons 15. August 1596. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Iohn Young vide 21. Richard Vaughan vide 25 27 Thomas Bilson conse 13. Iune 1596. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Richard Fletcher vide 3 28 William Day consecrated 25. Ianuary 1595. by Iohn Whitgift vide 2 Richard Fletcher vide 23 Iohn Young vide 21 PHIL. These are domesticall testimonies of your owne neither doe I know whether they be true ORTH. The records alleadged are of such high credit and reputation that they cannot possibly be infringed As for the maine point whereupon all the rest dependeth that is the Consecration of Archbishop Parker as it was solemnly performed in a great assembly so it was published in print in his owne time when all things were in fresh memorie And though some of his spitefull and bitter enemies did then scornefully coment vpon his life yet the trueth of this fact they neuer called in question PHIL. Surely Orthodox I cannot but maruell if your extracts be true how the contrary opinion was so commonly receiued in the English Colledges at Rome and Rhemes ORTH. Truely Philodox that which a man wisheth hee is willing to beleeue the mind sophisticate with malice is ready vpon euery light occasion to imagine the worst yea and somtimes to blaze that for certaine which hath neither shew nor shadow of truth Yet these vaine surmises you receiue for oracles and deliuer one to another by the holy hand of tradition wherein you glory as in an vnanswerable argument So did your fellowes at Framlingham so did Hart in the conference with Doctour Rainolds but when hee had heard his answere iustifying our Bishops by authentical records he would needes haue that whole point left out of the conference saying he would not presse him with it and confessed hee thought that no such thing could haue beene shewed and that himselfe had beene borne in hand otherwise Now Philodox as he was deluded so are you but as he receiued satisfaction so I hope will you THE FOVRTH BOOKE VVHERIN IS INTREATED of Episcopall Iurisdiction CHAP. I. Whence the Bishops of England receiue their iurisdiction PHIL. THough it were graunted that the Bishops of England haue Canonicall Consecration yet it will not follow that they are perfect and complete Bishops For whence haue they their Iurisdiction ORTH. Partly from Christ and partly from the Prince PHIL. From the Prince how can this bee Is Episcopall Iurisdiction of the same nature with the Princely ORTHOD. Betweene the Regall and Episcopall there are many differences but it shall bee sufficient for our present purpose to obserue these two first the Episcopall Iurisdiction is onely spirituall or Ecclesiasticall but the Regall is both Ecclesiasticall and temporall Secondly the King doth gouerne Ecclesiasticall affaires not Ecclesiastically but regally that is with a soueraigne authoritie outwardly coercitiue with temporall punishments The Bishop handleth Ecclesiasticall matters in Ecclesiasticall manner For hee is enabled by himselfe and ex officio ordinario not onely to minister the word and Sacraments but also to performe other holy and eminent actions as for example to ordaine Ministers and to inflict spirituall censures vpon the offendours namely the sentence of excommunication and againe to absolue and restore them to the Communion of Saints Which sacred offices our Church ascribeth not vnto the person of the Prince neither did our Kings or Queenes euer practise them For regall Iurisdiction consisteth not in a ministeriall power nor personall performance of such things but in an outward supreame commanding authoritie as was before declared out of the admonition annexed to the Queenes iniunctions an acte of Parliament and the Articles of Religion Wherefore as it was not lawfull for the Kings of Iudah to take vpon them the Priestly office to burne incense or offer sacrifice and yet they might command the Priestes euen in these things to doe their dutie as it was prooued before by many examples so it belongeth not to the Prince to minister the word and Sacraments to ordaine or excommunicate yet being supreame gouernour ouer all persons and in all causes within his owne dominions hee may make lawes and command that these things bee done by such persons and in such manner as is agreeable to the blessed will of God Iustinian made a lawe that no Bishops nor Priestes should separate any man from the holy Communion before the cause were declared for which the holy Canons command him so to doe inacting there-withall that if any were otherwise excommunicated he should be absolued by a greater Priest and restored to the Communion of Saints When Maximus Bishop of Salonae had incurred Ecclesiasticall censures Pope Gregory the Great did release them secundum iussiones serenissimi Domini imperatoris i. according to the Commandements of his most gracious lord the emperour Which commanding authoritie as Pope Greg. did acknowledge in the Prince so some of your own men ascribe it euen to an Abbot or an Abbatesse Tabiena Armilla scribunt c. i. Tabiena and Armilla write after Panormitane Astensis and others that an Abbatesse may command such Priests as are subiect vnto her to excommunicate her rebellious obstinate Nuns or absolue the same so that the Priests shall be bound to obey her Which kinde of spirituall iurisdiction you giue to a woman not only delegated but ordinary according to the common opinion of the Canonists Canonistae volunt c. i. The Canonists are of this mind that the dignitie of Prelacie and excellencie of office may giue to Ecclesiasticall women spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which they may inioy not onely by right delegated and committed vnto them but also by ordinary Stephanus de Aluin inclineth to the same opinion Dicendum
at Rome that the Romane Bishop might absolutely succeed him ORT. This is your owne coniecture and not Law diuine PHIL. Pope Marcellus saith that Peter came to Rome iubente Domino the Lord so commaunding ORTH. This is your owne tradition and not Law diuine And as your succession so your monarchicall iurisdiction cannot be proued to be by Law diuine This was well knowne to the Fathers of the first generall councell who confined the Bishop of Rome as well as the Bishop of Alexandria ascribing his patriarchical power vnto custome not to Law diuine This was likewise knowne to the Fathers of the second and fourth generall councels who ascribe the preheminence of the Bishop of Rome to the honour of the Imperiall City for so the Fathers of the fourth councell interpret the second and affirme it themselues Antiquae Romae throno quòd vrbs illa imperaret iure patres priuilegia tribuere eadem consideratione moti 150. Dei amantissimi Episcopi sanctissimo nouae Romae throno aequalia priuilegia tribuêre rectè iudicantes vrbem quae imperio senatu honorata sit aequalibus cum antiquissima regina Roma priuilegijs fruatur etiam in Rebus Ecclesiasticis non secus ac illam extolli ac magnifieri secundam post illam existentem The Fathers did rightly giue priuiledges to the throne of old Rome because the City then raigned and the 150. Bishops most earnest louers of God assembled in the second generall councell which was the first at Constantinople mouedâ—y the same consideration gaue equall priuileges to the most holy throne of new Rome rightly iudging that the City which was honoured both by the Empire and the Senate and enioyeth equall priuileges with Rome the most ancient Queene of Cities should bee extolled and magnified euen in things Ecclesiasticall no otherwise then Rome being the second in order after it Thus they hold the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome to bee not Monarchicall because they giue equall priuileges to Constantinople but Patriarchicall which they referre not to the Institution of Christ nor to Peters fact nor to the succession in Peters chaire but to the honour of the Imperiall City in that it was Imperiall therefore as Binius confesseth they hold it to be by Law humane and not diuine PHIL. Baronius Bellarmine and Binius doe tell you that this Canon was not confirmed by Pope Leo. ORTHO Eusebius Bishop of Doryleum did testifie the contrarie openly in the councell in these words Sponte subscripsi quoniam hanc regulam sanctissimo Papae in vrbe Româ relegi praesentibus clericis Constantinopolitanis eamque suscepit i. I haue subscribed willingly because I read ouer euen this Canon to the most holy Pope in the City of Rome in the presence of the Clerkes of Constantinople and hee embraced it But let vs imagine that hee did not embrace it yet I referre this point to any indifferent iudge whether wee should rather beleeue sixe hundred Bishops and vpward speaking vprightly what they thinke and grounding their iudgement vpon the decrees of former generall councels then one man with a few flattering fauorites speaking partially in his owne cause PHIL. This Canon was not made by the councel but Anatolius with the Easterne Bishops made it secretly and by stealth after the Iudges and the Popes Legate were gone out of the Councell ORTHOD. The Church of Constantinople beeing desirous to propose this matter Entreated the Popes Legats to communicate with them in the handling of it who refused because the Pope had giuen charge to the contrary then they made relation of it to the Iudges who commaunded the holy councell then present to looke into it which they did accordingly therefore though it pleased the Iudges to depart yet the councell proceeded by authority from the Iudges And the Popes Legats might haue staied if it had pleased themselues Moreouer The Decrees were read at the next meeting openly in the councell before the iudges who ratified them by their sentence and all the councell cried and redoubled againe and againe that the sentence was iust PHIL. The Popes Legats interposed a contradiction affirming that the Apostolike See ought not to be debased ORTHOD. The Iudges notwithstanding would not relent but concluded the whole businesse thus Tota Synodus approbauit i. The whole Synod hath approuedit wherefore it was the iudgement of the whole Synod that the Popes iurisdiction is not by Law diuine CHAP. IIII. Of the Election of Bishops in the primitiue Church before there were any Christian Princes PHIL. IF wee consider the practise of the Christian world in primitiue antiquitie which was nearest to the fountaine and knew best the meaning of Law Diuine wee shall finde that they were either elected or at least confirmed by the Pope or by authoritie from the Pope either expresly or by his permission or conniuencie and so receiued their iurisdiction ORTHOD. To examine these points in order let vs begin with the election of Ministers concerning which we find three varieties in the new Testament The first by lots the second by voyces the third by the spirit of prophesie Matthias was chosen by lots the Deacons by voyces Timothy and others by the spirit of prophesie For as Chrysostome saith In those dayes the pastours were made by prophesie what is by prophecie by the holy Ghost as Saul was shewed by prophecie when hee lay hid among the stuffe as the holy Ghost said separate vnto me Paul and Barnabas so was Timothie chosen Theodoret thou hast not thy calling from men but thou receiuedst that order by diuine reuelation Oecumenius by reuelation of the spirit Timothy was chosen of Paul to bee a Disciple and ordained a Bishop This kind of election seemeth to bee vsuall in the Apostles times and to haue continued so long as the gift of prophecie and discerning of spirits remained Now of these three the first and third were by God himselfe the second by all the faithfull This is all wee finde in Scripture yet here is no precept but onely example Wherefore it seemeth that the Lord hath left this point as a thing indifferent to bee ordered by the discretion of the Church so all things be done honestly and in order From the Scripture if wee come to the ages following they referred it to the Clergie and people PHIL. To the Clergy I grant by the conniuencie of the Pope but in the Councell of Laodicea elections of B. are forbidden to be made by the people ORTH. The Councell in that place nameth Priestes not Bishops and if vnder the name of Priestes you comprehend Bishops yet you must consider that it being onely prouinciall could not impose lawes to the whole Christian world That Bishops were chosen by popular elections after this Councell may appeare by the great Nicen Councell assembled as Baronius thinketh six yeeres after the Councell of
Symonists These things said Aegidius Hispanus the Cardinall and others whose conscience did touch them gaue councell to the Pope that he should wincke and dissemble the matter lest some tumult should be raised vpon this occasion especially because it is wel knowne that once there shal a departure come The same Robert lying vpon his death-bed sighing said thus Christ came into the world to gaine soules therefore if any man be not afraid to destroy soules is not he worthily called Antichrist The Lord in 6. dayes made the whole world but he laboured more then 30 yeeres to repaire man Is not therefore this destroyer of soules worthy to be iudged an enemy of God and an Antichrist The Pope blusheth not impudently to disanull the priuiledges of former Popes his predecessors by this barre Non obstante which is not done without their preiudice and manifest iniurie for so he pulls downe that which so great and so many Saints haue builded Behold the contempt of Saints therefore the contemner shall iustly be contemned according to that of Esay Woe to thee which despisest shalt thou not be despised who will obserue his priuiledges The Pope answering doth thus defend his errour An equall hath no authority ouer an equall therefore a Pope cannot binde me being a Pope c. And againe Although many other Apostolicke men haue afflicted the Church yet hee hath compeld it to be in bondage more grieuously then others and hath multiplied inconueniences For the Caursini being manifest Vsurers which the holy Fathers and our doctors haue driuen out of France this Pope hath raised vp and protected in England and if any speake against them he is tired out with losses and labours Witnes Roger B. of London The world knoweth that Vsury is accounted detestable in both Testaments and is forbidden of God but now the Merchants of my L. the Pope do practise Vsury openly at London they contriue diuers grieuances against Ecclesiasticall and Religious persons forcing poore men to lye and to set their Seales to lying writings As for example I receiue so many marks by yeere for an 100. pound and am forced to make a writing and sealè it in which I confesse my selfe to haue receiued an 100. pound to be payed at the yeeres end And if peraduenture thou wouldest pay the Popes Vsurer the principall againe within a moneth or fewer dayes he will not receiue it vnlesse thou wilt pay the whole hundred pound Which condition is heauier then any which is required of the Iewes for whensoeuer thou shalt bring a Iew his principall he will take it kindly with so much gaine as is answerable to the time c. And againe We haue seene one of the Popes Letters wherein this clause was inserted That such as made their Testaments or caried the Crosse or yeelded ayde to the Holy-land should receiue so much pardon for their sinnes as they gaue money And wee know our lord the Pope wrote vnto the Abbot of S. Albans that he should prouide for a certaine man called Iohn de Camezana in a competent benefice and shortly prouision was made in a Church worth fortie marks by the yeere but he not content therewithall complained vnto the Pope who wrote to the same Abbot to prouide more bountifully for him and yet the Pope reserued the donation of the former benefice vnto him selfe And to passe ouer other things the Pope graunted for secular fauour that one may obtaine a Bishoprick and not bee a Bishop but an euerlasting elect which is as much to say as that he should receiue the milk and the wooll of the sheepe and yet not driue away the wolues Mathew Paris telleth how this Bishop Robert Grosthead hated all kind of Enormities to wit all kind of Couetousnesse al Vsury Symony and Rapine all kinde of Riot Lust Gluttony and Pride which so raigned in that Court that this iudgement was iustly giuen of it Eius auaritiae totus non sufficit orbis Eius Luxuriae meretrix non sufficit omnis And being at the point of death hee indeauored to prosecute how the Court of Rome hoping That mony would flow like the riuer Iordane into their mouth gaped wide that they might get vnto themselues the goods both of those that died intestate and also those that died testate how that they might do it the more licentiously they made the King their consort in the rapines neither shall the Church saith he be deliuered from this Egyptian bondage but in the edge of the bloudy sword but verily these things are light but shortly that is within three yeeres there shall come more grieuous In the end of this propheticall speech which hee could scarcely vtter for sighs teares and groanes bursting out his tongue faultred his breath failed and the organes of speech decaying imposed silence Mathew Paris concluding the yeere 1255. saith This yeere passed away to the Church of Rome and the papall Court if one doe respect the deuotion of the people most venemous for the deuotion which Prelates and people vsed to haue towards our mother the Church of Rome and to our Father and Pastour to wit our Lord the Pope gaue vp the ghost for although that Court had many times drawne bloud of Christs faithfull people yet it neuer wounded them all and euery one so deadly as this yeere and the yeere following Anno 1256. Rustandus the Popes Nuntio the kings proctor woud haue the Bishops to set their hands to a bill and confesse that they had receiued no smal sum of money of the Italian Merchants conuerted to the good of their Churches which all men knew to be manifestly false Whereupon they affirmed and not without reason that To die in this cause were a more manifest way of Martyrdome then it was in the case of Saint Thomas the Martyr The same yeere Certaine Abbeyes in England were bound ouer for the payment of two thousand ounces of gold to the Papes Merchants Anno 1259 Sewalus Archbishop of Yorke lying vpon his death bed lifting his hands and countenance to heauen with teares said thus Lord Iesus Christ of Iudges most iust thy infallible iudgement knoweth how manifouldly the Pope whom thou hast suffered to be set ouer thy Church to gouerne it hath wearied mine Innocency for this cause as God knoweth and the world is not ignorant that I would not admit to the gouernment of Churches which thou hast committed to mee though vnworthy such as were altogether vnmeete vnknowne Notwithstanding least the Popes sentence although in it selfe vniust should be made iust by my contempt I being intangled with such bands that is papall censures doe humbly desire to bee absolued But I appeale to the Pope himselfe before the high and incorruptible Iudge and heauen and earth shal be my witnesses how vniustly hee hath assaulted mee and how oft he did scandalize and prouoke me Thus in the bitternesse of his soule hee wrote vnto the Pope prouoked by