hoped for some comfort at the Popes hand but finding none hee was forced so much as in him lay to resigne his kingdoms to Pope Innocent such is the innocency of Popes and to farme theÌ„ again at a 1000. marks by the yere Thus the Pope had caught a pretty morsel but it was too hot for him therefore he was glad presently to disgorge it In the time of the said king came into England one Iohannes Florentinus the Popes Legate hauing but 3. men and 3. horses whereof one was lame who gathered great heapes of money hoysted vp saile and bad England adew Likewise Pandulphus when hee came to make a bargaine with the king for his master the Pope prouided and carried away with him 8000. pounds About the same time the Pope called a generall councell at Rome where the Bishops being weary with doing of nothing desired leaue to depart which they could not obtaine without a great sum of mony that they were forced to borrow of the Romane Merchants and pay to the Pope In the reign of Henry 3. The Pope sent a bul that no English man should be preferred til prouision were made for â— Romans for each of theÌ„ 100. pouÌ„ds by the yere neither did he expresse their names but described them in a confused maner The sonne of Bumphred of such such that if any of them should die he might foist another into the place At this time the Romans were posessed of so many benifices withall were so insolent that the whole body of the nobles coÌ„mons ioyning together did stile theÌ„selues in the subscriptions of their letters The whole coÌ„pany of theÌ„ which had rather die then be confouÌ„ded of the Romans In the reigne of the same King The Roman Helluo sent a Nuntio called Otto into England with letters vnto the king signifying What a great scandall and reproch was brought vpon the Church of Rome because no man could dispatch his affaires in that Court without great summes of money and the cause which constrained them vnto this was their pouertie therefore hee desired that the English men like naturall Children would releeue the pouerty of their Mother and the meanes thereof which hee with the Councell of his Brethren the Cardinalls had deuised was this that euery Cathedrall Church in England should bestow vpon him two Prebendes the one of them to bee giuen by the Bishop the other by the Chapter And likewise that euery Abbey should bestow vpon him so much as belonged to the maintenance of two Monkes one portion whereof to bee giuen by the Abbot and the other by the Couent But the English men deluded him of his purpose for the king went out of the Councell and the Bishops departed to their own home without the leaue of the Legate and the rest that remained said they could doe nothing in the absence of them whom it most concerned The like suite was commensed in France by another of the Popes Legates to whom the Proctour of the Archbishop of Lions answered That it was not possible that this grant should fill the gulfe of the Romane couetousnesse because plenty of riches did alwaies make the Romans madde And the councell of France did thus answere the Legate Let the zeale of the whole Church and of the holy Romane See mooue you because if there should bee a generall oppression of all men it might bee feared least there should houer ouer our heads a generall departure which God forbid In the yeere 1231. there was set out a prohibition that none which farmed any benefice of any Romane should from henceforth pay them any Rent Anno 1232. a sort of armed men with their faces couered set vpon the barnes of a certaine Romane and sold out the corne to the country and gaue much of it to the poore For which the Bishop of London with other tenne Bishops did strike the authours with an anathema Notwithstanding the same yeere the barnes of the Romanes almost through all England were robbed the authour whereof was one Sir Robert Twinge a Yorkeshier Knight who had beene defeated of the bestowing of his Benefiee by the Popes prouision In the yeere 1234. the Pope sent his nuntioes into England with power legatine which by preaching begging commanding threatning and excommunicating got infinite summes of money vnder colour of the holy Land neither was it known in what gulfe that money was drowned In the yeere 1237. base and vnlearned persons came daily armed with the Popes Bulles If any resisted they would procure hee should bee excommunicated so it came to passe that where noble and daintie Clergy men Gardians and Patrons of Churches did vse with their riches to honour the countrey round about them to entertaine passengers to refresh the poore these base persons voide of good manners and full of subtiltie Proctors and Farmers of the Romanes scraping whatsoeuer was precious and profitable in the land sent it into farre countries to their Lords liuing delicately of Christes patrimonie and proud with other mens goods Therefore a man might see sorrow of heart water the eye-lids of holy men complaints breake out and groanes multiplied many saying with bloody sighes It is better for vs to die then to see the miseries of our countrie and of holy men VVoe to England which once was the Prince of Prouinces the ladie of nations the glasse of the Church a patterne of Religion but now is become vnder tribute In the yeere 1239. Sir Robert Twinge the Yorkeshier Knight before mentioned a Romane being thrust by a Popes Bull of prouision into a benefice whereof he was Patron went to Rome and made a grieuous complaint vnto the Pope so that the Pope reuoked his Bull of prouision By the said Sir Robert Twinge the h Nobles and Barons of England wrot vnto the Pope complaining that they were robbed of their presentations of their Ecclesiasticall liuings which their noble progenitours had enioyned from the first planting of Christianitie and were in danger to lose their patronages affirming that though the Pope had taken order by his Apostolicall letters that after the decease of any Italian or Romane promoted by the Popes prouision it should be lawfull for them to present a fit Clerke yet they did daily see the contrary put in practise which they called a common plague Anno 1240. Otho the Popes Legate required a procuration of foure Markes and where one Church did not suffice to the paâ—ment two should ioyne together to one procuration The same yeere the Pope extorted the fift part of the goodes of all strangers beneficed in England and the same was demanded of Archbishops Bishops Abbots and the rest of the Clergie but the Bishops answered they could not vndergoe so vnsupportable a burden which concerned the whole Church without diligent deliberation of a synode But the Archbishop afterward did grant vnto it The same yeere Pope
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
Vniuersall Patriarch was giuen and that by a Councell to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople In what sence trow you You produced but two sences of it out of Bellarmine In the first which prophanely excludeth all other Bishops they did not giue it for then they should deny themselues to be Bishops contrary to their own subscriptions If in the latter then it was common to him with the Bishops of Rome and so cannot proue your Monarchicall iurisdiction PHIL. How proue you that this title was giuen him by a Councell ORTHOD. Binius saith How oft Iohn Bishop of Constantinople is named in the acts of the Councell of Constantinople vnder Hormisda so oft the title of Vniuersall Patriarch is found added vnto him PHIL. Binius in the same place ascribeth this to the imposture of the latter Grecians which he proueth because though two Popes Pelagius and Gregory condemned this title in the Bishop of Constantinople yet no man obiected against them the authoritie of this Councell which had beene very materiall because the greater part of it was approued by the Church of Rome Wherefore it is certaine that this was not originally in the Councell but foisted in afterward ORTHO But Pope Adrian the first in his Epistle to Tharasius recorded in the second Nicen Councell intitleth him a generall Patriarch PHIL. This seemeth also to be added by some Grecian which I rather thinke because the same Epistle translated by Anastasius hath no such title prefixed ORTHOD. As though Anastasius were not as likely to put it out as the Grecians to put it in But Iustinian in the Authentickes giueth Mennas the very selfe same title of Oecumenicall Patriarch PHIL. It must be affirmed that this also crept in vnlesse we say that he is called Vniuersall in respect of the Orientall Bishops and Priests ORTHOD. So Holoander taketh it when hee translateth it Vniuersi eius tractus Patriarchae i. to the Patriarch of all that circuit But are you now aduised Was he called Vniuersal and yet had not the iurisdictiō of the whole world but was onely an Orientall Patriarch then you must confesse that this title might be giuen to the B. of Rome and yet not imply that hee had iurisdiction ouer the whole world but ouer the whole West and so was the Occidentall Patriarch Wherefore the decree of Pope Pelagius requiring all Metropolitanes to send to Rome to professe their faith and receiue the Pall extendeth not to them of the East but onely to them of the West PHIL. Then you grant that hee was Patriarch of the West and that is sufficient to inferre my conclusion for the Westerne Patriarch must needes haue iurisdiction ouer the Metropolitanes of the West in which compasse is Brittany I need not here speake of the ancient diuision of the Prouinces nor of Saint Peter nor of Eleutherius It is famously knowne that Saint Austin was sent hither by the Bishop of Rome receiued a pall from him and apparently submitted himselfe to his iurisdiction so did his successours for almost a thousand yeeres together Wherfore seeing the Bishop of Rome was in lawfull possession you must tell vs vpon what reason you put him from it ORTHOD. By what title doth the Pope challenge his iurisdiction in England By the law of God you cannot iustifie it By reason of the first conuersion of the Island by Saint Peter You cannot make it manifest that euer he was here Will you fetch it from Eleutherius He onely sent at the kings request and challenged no such authority Wil you deriue it from Austin It was then made appeare by many reasons that the Brittans ought him no subiection And it is euident that he and his associates had first their assemblies in Saint Martins Church in Canterbury by the Kings permission afterward when the king himselfe was conuerted they receiued to vse the words of Bede more ample licence both to Preach through all his dominions and also to build and repaire Churches So you see all was receiued from the king It is true that Gregory sent a supply of Preachers and gaue his aduise for the erection of Bishopricks and sent palls hither yet there can bee no question but all this was done by the kings licence Afterward in succeeding ages when the Popes did play the wild boares in the Church in executing Church censures and giuing Church liuings the kings of England made lawes against them euen in the time of Popery For as it was defended by Cyprian and afterward also by the African councell vnder Celestinus that causes should bee ended where they begunne and not bee carried to tribunalls beyond the sea So it was decreed in England in the raigne of Henry the second as witnesseth Mathew Paris De appellationibus si emerserint ab Archidiacono debet procedi ad Episcopum ab Episcopo ad Archiepiscopum si Archiepiscopus defuerit in iustitia exhibenda ad dominum regē perueniendū est postremò vt praecepto ipsius in curia Archiepiscopi controuersia terminetur ita quod non debeat vltra procedi absque assenssu domini regis i. Cōcerning appeals if any shall spring they ought to proceed from the Archdeacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop if the Archb. shal be defectiue in doing iustice they must come at last to our Lord the king that by his cōmandement the controuersie may bee determined in the Archbishops Court so that there ought not to be any further proceedings without the assent of the Lord the king Thus it is cleare that the Pope could not take to himselfe the handling of causes without the kings license It might also be declared how little his cēsures were here respected vnlesse they receiued strength by the kings permission And whereas hee tooke vpon him to dispose of Church liuings hee was censured for it in the time of Edw. the 3 euen in the high Court of Parliament as an vsurper These points might bee much inlarged but this little touch is sufficient to shew that whatsoeuer iurisdiction hee had in England was by the courtesie of the King whatsoeuer hee tooke vpon him otherwise was by vsurpation Now his challenge by custome is repelled by custome For these sixe hundred yeeres last past hee affecting to bee that which he was not disdained to bee that which he was and aspyring to a Popedome neglected his Patriarchdome so that which he had gotten by vse he hath lost by disusing and by his owne fact hath extinguished his former title Secondly whereas Pope Pelagius required onely a profession of the faith according to the Scriptures and the holy ancient generall councels Pius the fourth hath framed vs a new forme of faith without which no man can bee saued consisting of traditions transubstantiations merits Images reliques and such rotten Romish ragges-which he hath clapt to the Nicen creed as it were a beggers patch to a golden garment And
the English there are none both which branches hee presupposeth as granted the French but when doeth any of them come ouer into England as though hee should say their comming is vncertaine so he concludeth that Austin must make Bishops alone without other Bishops Now from Austin we will proceede to his successours PHIL. They may all be presumed to bee Canonicall ORTH. Yet they came from such as were not canonicall Now from the Saxons wee will proceede to the Normans And here what say you to Lanfranck whom William the Conqueror made Archbishop in stead of Stigandus PHIL. There is no reason to doubt of him or any other till wee come to Cranmer CHAP. VI. Of the Consecration of the most Reuerend Father Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterburie ORTH. THen it remaineth that we consider the Consecration of that most reuerend Father and blessed Martyr Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury concerning whom I expect your iudgement PHIL. My iudgement is that he was a principall cause of all those lamentable alterations which happened in the daies of king Henry the eight and Edward the sixt ORTH. Doe you call them lamentable therein you resemble Enuy in the Poet which lamented because she saw nothing worthy of lamentation For those alterations which ye call lamentable were a gracious beginning of a thousand blessings both to the Church and Common wealth of England But speake directly to the point in question whether Cranmer were a Canonicall Bishoppe Why doe you not answere You are like to one which holdeth a Wolfe by the eares who neither knoweth how to hold him nor how to let him goe faine would you infringe the Consecration of Cranmer but alasâ—e you cannot PHIL. Father Becan directing his speach to the Bishops of England saith thus Legitimè consecrati non estis a quo enim an à rege at is consecrandi potestatem non habet An ab Episcopo Cantuariensi vel aliquo simile ne id quidem Nam Thomas Cranmerus qui sub Henrico 8. Cantuariensem Episcopatum obtinuit non fuit consecratus ab vllo Episcopo sed a solo rege intrusus designatus igitur quotquot ab eo postea consecrati sunt non legitimè sed eâ— presumptione consecrati sunt 1. You are not lawfully consecrated for by whom were you whether by the King but he hath not power to consecrate Or by the Bishop of Canterbury or some like Neither that truly For Thomas Cranmer who vnder K. Henry the 8. obtained the Bishopricke of Canterburie was not consecrated by any Bishop but intruded and designed by the King alone therefore as many as were afterward consecrated by him were not consecrated lawfully but by presumption ORTH. Or rather Becan playeth the part of a presumptuous Iesuite against the Lords annointed in saying that King Henry intruded Cranmer as also in glauncing at his most famous and religious successours as though they themselues had consecrated Bishops For what needed he to moue any such question if it were not to raise a mist and cast a cunning surmise to induce men to thinke that it was so But indeede it was not so for our soueraignes in the aduancing of Bishops do nothing but that which they may lawfully by their Princely right agreeable to the patterne of most religious Kings and Emperours and iustifiable both by the lawes of God and the land as in due place shall appeare And as hee wrongeth the Prince so doth hee traduce Archbishop Cranmer as though he were consecrated either by the King or by none at all and consequently the whole Clergie of England at this day deriuing their consecration from that renowned Martyr But if this accusation were true doe you not marke how it would make a cracke in your golden chaine of succession wherein you so reioyce and glory For if Cranmer were no Bishop then some approoued in Queene Maries time would prooue no Bishops as for example Anthony Kitchen Bishop of Landaff and Thomas Thurlby Bishop of Ely both which deriued their Consecration from Cranmer as may be iustified by records the latter whereof was highly commended by the Pope and made one of his Commissioners in the time of Queene Marie and imploied in the proceedings against that most Reuerend Archbishop If this cannot content the Iesuite I will referre him to Parsons his fellow Iesuite a man who neither loued Archbishop Cranmer nor any other of our Religion and yet clearely confesseth that he was a true Bishop BVt what mislike you in Cranmer was hee not in the order of Priesthood let the Pope be Iudge who in his Bull to Cranmer calleth him Magistrum in Theologia in Presbyteratus ordine constitutum i. Master or Doctor in Diuinitie setled in the order of Priesthood Or was he made Archbishop without the Popes authoritie The Pope himselfe affirmeth the contrary both to the King in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus Henrico Anglorum Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis c. De fratrum eorundem consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus ipsumque illi Ecclesiae Cantuariensi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus c. Bonon 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. Pontif. nostri 10. ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the glorious King of the English We haue made Prouision by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of our said brethren of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury and we haue set him ouer the said Church of Canterbury to be their Archbishop And to Cranmer himselfe in these words ¶ Clemens Episcopus dilecto filio Thomae electo Cantuariensi Praefatae Ecclesiae Cantuariensi de eorundem fratrum consilio Apostolica authoritate prouidimus teque illi in Archiepiscopum praefecimus pastorem curam administrationem ipsius Ecclesiae tibi in spiritualibus temporalibus plenariè committendo ¶ Bon. Anno 1532. 9. Kal. Mart. That is Clement Bishop to our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury We haue prouided by our Apostolicke authoritie by the Counsell of the same brethren for the foresaid Church of Canterbury and haue set thee ouer it to be their Archbishop and pastour and fully committing vnto thee the charge and administration of the same Church in things spirituall and temporall Or did the Pope and his Cardinals accept the person of Cranmer vndeseruedly Let your holy Father speake for himselfe ¶ Clemens Episcopus Hâ—n Angl. Regi illustri De persona dilecti filij Thomae electi Cantuariensis nobis fratribus nostris ob suorum exigentiam meritorum acceptâ— c. That is ¶ Clement Bishop to Henry the most glorious King of England We haue made prouision of the person of our welbeloued sonne Thomas elect of Canterbury accepted of vs and our brethren according as his deserts required OR was he Consecrated without the Popes licence Behold the Bull for his Consecration ¶ Clemens Episc. dilecto filio Tho. Electo Cant. Tibi vt a quocunque
send mee thither Marry quoth the King and to him will I send you So hee was sent with the Earle of Wiltshier Embassadour to the Pope who thrust out his glorious foote to bee kissed of them which they refusing the Earles spanniell running somewhat too familiarly did catch and bite him by the great toe Then the cause of their Embassage being declared the Earle deliuered Cranmers booke to the Pope and with all tolde him that hee had brought with him learned men out of England which were ready to defend by Scriptures Fathers and Councels whatsoeuer was contained in that booke against all that should contradict it The Pope promised sundry times a day of disputation but dallied out the matter as his Legates had done before in England so giuing them honourable entertainment hee made Cranmer his penitentiarie and dismissed them Then the rest returning Cranmer was sent by the kings appointment Embassadour into Germany to the Emperour where hee drewe many vnto his side and among the rest Cornelius Agrippa Moreouer the King did not onely consult with the most learned Diuines and Lawyers in the whole kingdome but also caused the question to bee publiquely disputed in the Vniuersities of Oxford and Cambridge both which did vtterly condemne the marriage Neither did hee thus rest but sent Bishop Bonner to the Vniuersities of France and Italie which affirmed vnder their seales that the marriage was vnlawfull and that no man might dispense with it Where it is to be obserued that some of these Vniuersities professe that they tooke an oath euery man to deliuer and to study vpon the foresaide questions as should bee to the pleasure of God and according to conscience After these determinations were reade in open Parliament there were shewed aboue an hundred bookes drawne by Doctours of strange regions which all agreed the kings marriage to bee vnlawfull Now to proceed the King considering the Popes dealing forbad all suites to the Court of Rome by proclamation in September 1530. which Sanders calleth the first beginning of the manifest schisme About the same time Cardinall Wolsey was cast in a premunire and all the Bishops of England for maintaining the power Legatine of the Cardinall But the Bishops beeing called into the Kings Bench before the day of their appearance concluded an humble submission offered the King I 18000. pounds to pardon the premunire and withall gaue him the title of Supreme head of the Church of England Yea Archbishop Warham told him that it was his right to haue it before the Pope and that Gods word would beare it Which proceedings in England did so kindle and enflame the Popes choller that neither the bookes of learned men nor the determinations of Vniuersities nor the offering of disputation nor his owne former Bull and Decree could now hinder him from giuing a contrary publick definitiue sentence dated in his consistorie at Rome the twentie third of March Anno 1532. ABout this time dyed Archbishop Warham while Cranmer was Embassadour in Germany and vpon the vacancie of the Archbishopricke the King sent for him home with purpose to aduance him to that great dignitie but he pretended matters of great importance requiring his abode in Germany by which meanes he deferred his comming for halfe a yeeare And being come home and perceiuing that the place was reserued for him hee imployed his greatest friends to shift it off When the King did personally impart his intent vnto him hee disabled himselfe by all possible meanes vsing all perswasions to alter the Kings determination When he saw the Kings constant resolution he humbly crauing pardon of his grace franckly opened his conscience vnto him declaring that if hee accepted that office then hee must receiue it at the Popes hand which he neither would not could doe for that his highnesse was the onely supreme gouernour of this Church of England as well in causes ecclesiasticall as temporall that the donation of Bishoprickes belonged to the King and not to any forraine authoritie whatsoeuer All which proceedings doe not argue any ambitious or aspiring cogitations but rather an humble and lowly minde preferring the sinceritie of a good conscience before all glorious pompe and worldly dignities The King seeing the tendernesse of his conscience consulted with the learned in the law how hee might bestow the Bishopricke vpon him and yet not enforce him to any thing against his conscience In conclusion hee tooke the oath to the Pope but not after the manner of his predecessours as Sanders slanderously affirmeth For then hee should haue taken it simply and absolutely which hee did not but with a protestation expressing the condition and qualification Neither did hee make his protestation priuately in a corner and then take the oath in publicke as Sanders would make the world beleeue for if this could bee proued then had you reason to condemne him of fraud and periurie but it was not so He did not vse his protestation in any secret and concealed manner like to equiuocating Papists which take oaths in absolute words and yet delude them with mentall reseruations but he made it plainely and publickly first in the Chapter house secondly kneeling before the high Altar in the hearing both of the Bishops and people at his consecration Thirdly in the very same place and in the very same forme and tenour of wordes when by commission from the Pope they deliuered him the Pall. And the summe of the protestation was this that hee intended not to binde himselfe to anything which was contrary to the lawe of God or contrary to the king or common wealth of England or the Lawes and prerogatiues of the same nor to restraine his owne libertie to speake consult or consent in all and euery thing concerning the reformation of Christian religion the gouernment of the Church of England and the prerogatiue of the Crowne or the commodity of the Common wealth and euery where to execute and reforme such things which he should thinke fitte to be reformed in the Church of England and according to this interpretation and this sence and no otherwise he professed and protested that he would take the oath Now if you censure Cranmer because he qualified his oath with such a protestation what censure shal be giuen of your Popish Bishops before Cranmer which took two absolute othes to the King and to the Pope containing manifest contradiction as K. Henry himselfe declared causing thē both to be read in open Parliament And Cranmer hath made the point plaine both in his answere to B. Brookes and in his letters to Queene Marie Or if you censure Cranmer for swearing to the Pope with Qualification what censure will you giue of Heath Bonner Thurlby and the rest that in King Henries daies tooke absolutely the oath of Supremacie which euidently excludeth the Popes authoritie BVt to returne to K. Henry who seeing
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
Binius out of Baronius Thus much for the prophane title As for the thing it selfe The Scripture witnesseth that Salomon was King ouer all Israel if ouer all Israel then ouer the tribe of Leui and consequently euen ouer Abiathar the high Priest if he be their king why are not they his subiects If they be his subiects and he their Soueraigne how can they bee exempted from his Iurisdiction A point so cleare that sundry of your learned writers haue confessed it IOhannes Parisiensis saith that in the old Testament the Priests which annointed kings without all doubt were subiect vnto kings Your owne Iesuite Salmeron affirmeth that potestas spiritualis legis naturae vel Moisisminor erat Regia potestate in veteri testamento ideo etiam summi Sacerdotes regibus subdebantur that is the spirituall power of the Law of nature and of the law of Moses was lesser then the princely power in the old Testament therefore euen the high Priests were subiect vnto kings Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith Non mirum esset si in veteri Testamento summa potestas fuisset temporalis that is It were no maruell if in the olde Testament the chiefe power were the temporall Dominicus a Soto in veteri Testamento dubio procul Sacerdotes a principibus secularibus iudicati that is In the olde Testament without doubt the Priests were iudged by the secular princes Fryer Paule This doctrine that Ecclesiasticall persons vnlesse they be free by priuiledge and fauour should be subiect to secular Magistrates is demonstrated and confirmed by examples of the old Testament whereby it appeareth that all the kings did command iudge and punish Priests and that this was done not onely of bad kings or indifferent but of the most holy and religious Dauid Salomon Ezechias and Iosias Carerius in veteri Testamento Rex super Sacerdotes potestatem habebat eosque pro crimine occidere multo magis officijs dignitatibus spiritualibus eos priuare poterat that is In the old Testament the king had power ouer the Priests and might for their offences kill them much more depriue them of their offices and spirituall dignities Hitherto Carerius out of Tostatus PHIL. IF the kings of Israel had such authoritie doth it follow that Christian Princes must haue the like ORTHOD. What else You must consider that the new Testament doth yeeld vs no examples of Christian kings therefore when the question is concerning the power of kings in the Church of God wee must goe to the fountaine that is the old Testament where there was both a Church and kings in the Church religiously performing the office of kings and what Princely authoritie they exercised for which they are approoued by the spirit of God the same without all question belongeth in like maner to Christian Princes therefore what authoritie Salomon had ouer Abiathar the same haue Christian Princes by the law of God ouer their owne Clergie CHAP. III. Of the Oath of the Princes Supremacy for denying whereof the old Bishops were depriued PHIL. IS not the deposing of a Bishop a spirituall censure how then can it be performed by the secular powers ORTH. The secular powers doe noâ— depose a Bishop by degradation nor by vtterly debarring him from his Episcopall function but onely by excluding him from the exercise of Episcopallactes vpon their subiects and within their dominions And this godly Princes haue performed from time to time in the best and primatiue ages against the Arrians Nestotians and other heretickes as might be declared by many examples PHIL. Shall a Prince take that from them which he cannot giue them ORTH. Hee cannot giue them an intrinsecall power to minister the word and Sacraments which proceedeth from the key of order but he may giue them an extrinsecall power that is a libertie to execute their function within his dominions This he may doe by vertue of the scepter which God hath giuen him though he meddle not with the keyes which God hath giuen to the Church and as he may giue this libertie so he may take it away vpon iust cause as Salomon did when he deposed Abiathar PHIL. If we should admit that Queene Elizabeth had so much authority as king Salomon yet this would not iustifie her proceedings For it belongeth not to Parliaments or secular Princes to make lawes concerning the depositions of Bishops or to inflict any such punishments ORTHOD. Did not the Emperour Martian make a law that such Bishops as went about to infringe any of those things which were enacted by that holy and generall Councell of Chalcedon should be deposed Did not Iustinian make a constitution that if any Patriarch Metropolitane Bishop or Clerke should violate his decrees made for the preseruation of holy order and estate he should be excluded from the Priestly function Did not Theodosius the yonger likewise make a law that the Nestorian Bishops should be expelled and deposed PHIL. The lawes of these Emperours concerning the deposing of Bishops were not put in execution by laymen as Queene Elizabeths were but by Bishops ORTH. Gratian the Emperour made a lawe against the Arrians commanding them like wilde beastes to be driuen from the Churches and the places to be restored to good pastours the execution whereof he committed to Saporas the most famous captaine of that time If this were allowable in the Emperour Gratian then much more in Queene Elizabeth for he did it when there was plentie of good Bishops within his owne dominon Queene Elizabeth did it onely in case of necessitie Neither did she send a captaine to driue them away by violence as Gratian did but appointed honourable commissioners to tender the oath vnto them vpon the obstinate refusall whereof their places were voyd by vertue of the Statute PHIL. GRatian had for him the determination of Synods which had already coÌ„demned the Arrians therefore in this case it was lawfull for him both to make a Law and to commit the execution of it to Lay-men ORTHOD. So had Q. Elizabeth For a Synod of Bishops professing your owne Religion among whom was Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester gaue to K. Henry the title of Supreame head of the Church of England as may appeare by the Acts of the Synod it selfe About two yeeres after the same was renewed in another Synod and about two yeeres after that the two Vniuersities deliuered their iudgement That the Pope had no more to doe in England by the Law of God then any other Bishop The determination of Cambridge is already extant in print The like of Oxeford remaineth in Record wherein after long deliberation and much disputation with all diligence Zeale and conscience they make this profession Tandem in hanc sententiam vnanimiter omnes conuenimus ac concordâ—s fuimus viz. Romanum Episcopum maiorem aliquam iurisdictionem non habere sibi à Dâ—o collatam in sacra Scriptura in
onely carefull that Euery thing requisite and materiall should be made and done as precisely as euer before but also to the end that all men might be satisfied that all doubt scruple and ambiguitie might be taken away and that there should not the least spot of suspition cleaue vnto her Clergie it pleased her Maiestie if peraduenture quicke sighted malice could finde any quirk or quiditie against them by colour of any Canon or Statute graciously to dispense with it Which doth not argue any vnsoundnesse in their consecrations but the godlie care and prouidence of a religious Prince PHIL. You vse to finde fault with the Popes dispensations and will you your selues in an act of Parliament affirme that the Queene dispensed with all causes or doubts of any imperfection or dissabilitie and that in a matter of holie Orders ORTHOD. The Pope taketh vpon him to dispense against the law of God as for example That a brother may marrie his brothers wife So did not Queene Elizabeth but onelie with trespasses against her owne lawes not in essentiall points of ordination but onelie in accidentall not in substance but in circumstance Neither did she giue them leaue to make any voluntarie violatioÌ„ of the law but only dispensed with such omission as necessity it selfe should require as may appeare by the said letters patents And it pleased the Almighty so to dispose that al things were performed in most exquisite manner yet the Papists such was their hatred against the Clergie did blaze abroad the contrarie Whereupon the high Court of Parliament assembled in the eight yeere of that famous Queene hauing deepelie considered and pondered all things pronounced that their speeches were Slanderous not grounded vpon any iust matter or cause For Gods name bee blessed all things were done honestlie and in order euen from her first comming to the crowne ANd verily as Iosua protested I my house wil serue the Lord so Queen Elizabeth resolued with her owne heart I and my kingdomes will serue the Lord. Therefore as Iosias assembled the ancients of Iuda and Ierusalem to make a Couenant with their God so Queene Elizabeth assembled her high Court of Parliament for the same purpose But as when Nehemias went about reformation the Priests and Prophets which should haue bin the principall helpers were principal hinderers so it came to passe in that Parliament that whereas the Prince and Barons and the Commons were great instruments of Gods glorie the Popish Bishops sought by all meanes the glory of their holie father the Pope Notwithstanding God in his mercy gaue a blessing so that the truth preuailed And as Iehoiada required an oth in behalfe of King Ioas so the Parliament did in behalfe of Queene Elizabeth And as Abiathar was iustlie depriued for refusing Salomon and ioyning with Adonia euen so were the Popish Bishops for refusing the oth of the Queenes supremacie which contained nothing else but the Princes lawfull title And as Abiathar beeing displaced Sadok was aduanced so those vndutifull Bishoppes beeing remooued godlie Pastours were preferred THe Bishops depriued were in number fourteene in whose Sees who succeeded may appeare by this table wherein is set downe first the Prouince of Canterbury and then of Yorke   Sees Displaced Placed prouince Cant. London Bonner Grindall Winchester White Horne Ely Thurlby Coxe Lincoln Watson Bullingham Cou. Lichfeild Bane Bentham Bath and Wels. Bourne Barckly Exon. Turberuill Ally Worcester Pates Sandes Peterburrow Poole Scambler Asaph Gouldwell Dauis Yorke Yorke Heath Young Durham Tunstall Pilkinton Carlill Oglethorp Best Chester Scot. Downham ¶ The Consecration of the B. of the Prouince of Cant. Anno 1559. Edm. Grindall Cons. 21. Dec. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Will. Cicester Ioh. Hereford Ioh. Bedford Anno 1560. Robert Horne cons. 16. Feb. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Tho. Meneu Edm. London Tho. Cou. Lich. Anno 1559. Rich. Coxe cons. 21. Decem. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Will. Cicester Ioh. Hereford Ioh. Bedford Anno 1559. Nich. BullinghaÌ„ cons. 21. Ian. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Edm. London Rich. Eliens Ioh. Bedford Anno 1559. Tho. Bentham cons. 24. Mart. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Nich. Lincoln Ioh. Sarum Anno 1559. Gilb. Barckly cons. 24. Mart. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Nich. Lincoln Ioh. Sarum Anno 1560. Will. Ally cons. 14. Iuly by Math. Archbishop Cant. Edm. London Gilbard Bath and Wells Anno 1559. Edwin Sandes cons. 21. Decem. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Will. Cicester Ioh. Hereford Ioh. Bedford Anno 1560. Edm. Scambler cons. 16. Febru by Math. Archbishop Cant. Tho. Meneuens Edm. London Tho. Cou. Lichfield Anno 1559. Rich. Dauis cons. 21. Ianu. by Math. Archbishop Cant. Edm. London Rich. Eliens Ioh. Bedford Of the Cons. of the Bishops of the Prouince of Yorke Thomas Young was translated to Yorke from Saint Dauids whose Consecration was as followeth Anno 1559. Thomas Young cons. 21. Ianuary by Math. Archb. Cant. Edm. London Rich. Eliens Ioh. Bedford The like is to be iudged of the rest which I haue not set downe because as yet I haue not seene the records of Yorke CHAP. VI. A briefe view of all the Bishops of some of the principall Sees during the whole raigne of Queene Elizabeth ORTH. TO the intent that all men may knowe the godly care of the Church of England in obseruing the ancient Canons I will set downe all the Bishops of some of the principall Sees which were consecrated from the first enterance of Queene Elizabeth till the ende of her Raigne Canterbury THe Archbishops of Canterbury in the Queenes time were Math. Parker Edmund Grindal and Iohn Whitgift the consecration of the two former you haue heard already the third remaineth to be declared Anno 1â—77 Ioh. Whitgift cons. 21. April by Edm. Archb. Cant. Ioh. London Rob. Winton Rich. Cicester London THe Bishops of London in the Queenes time were Edmund Grindall Edwin Sandes Iohn Elmer Richard Fletcher and Richard Bancroft The Consecration of the two first were before expressed the rest as followeth Anno 1576. Ioh. Elmer Cons. 24. Mart. by Edm. Archb. Cant. Edw. Archb. Ebor. Ioh. Roff. Anno 1589. Rich. Fletcher Cons. 14. Dec. by Ioh. Archb Cant. Ioh. London Ioh. Roff. Ioh. Glou. Anno 1597. Rich. Bancroft Cons. 8. May by Ioh. Archb. Cant. Ioh Roff. Anton Meneu Rich Bangor Anton. Cicest ¶ Winchester THe Bishops of Winchester in the Queenes time were Robert Horne Iohn Watson Thomas Cooper William Wickham William Day and Thomas Bilson the Consecration of Bishop Horne was before handled the rest were as followeth Anno 1580. Ioh. Watson Cons. 18. Septem by Edm. Archb. Cant. Ioh. London Ioh. Roff. Anno 1570. Thomas Cooper Cons. 24. Febr. by Matth. Archb. Cant. Robert Wint. Nich. Wigorn. Anno 1584. Will. Wickham Cons. 6. Decem. by Iohn Archb Cant. Edm. Wigorn. Ioh. Exon. Mauricius Meneu Anno 1595. William Day Cons.
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
meanes of the brasen serpent yet the vertue of healing proceeded not from the brasen serpent but immediatly from himselfe For â—e that turned towards it was not healed by the thing that he saw but by thee O Sautour of all Euen so though God in giuing this Spirituall power vse the ministerie of man yet the power it selfe is immediatly from God For whereas S. Paul among the gifts of God to the Church nameth gouernments And S. Peter saith If any man minister let him doe it as of the abilitie which God ministreth Your Iesuit Salmeron though striuing to deriue it from the Pope as it is actuall yet considering it in it selfe being conuicted with the euidence of trueth saith thus Ministrationes quoque Domino ascribuntur sicut gubernationes à Paulo quia quicquid est supernaturale in ministerio gubernatione Deus per se fecit id autem ad quod creatura potest concurrere sinit eam agere etsi ipse praecipuè id operetur Gratia igitur gratis data administrandi gubernandi à Deo est immediatè i. Ministrations are ascribed to the Lord by S. Paul as also gouernments because whatsoeuer is supernaturall in ministerâ—â— and gouernment God hath wrought that by himselfe but he suffereth the creature to worke that vnto which it can concurre although himselfe in that bee the 〈…〉 pall agent Therefore the freely giuen grace of administring and gouerning is 〈…〉 tly from God And againe â— Si sâ—matur pro gratia gratis data gubernandi vel administrandi iurisdictionem vt sumunt Petrus Paulus procul dubio donumest quod ab homine procedere non potest i. If Iurisdiction or gouernment be taken for the freely giuen grace of gouerning or administring Iurisdiction as Peter and Paul take it without doubt it is a gift which cannot proceed from man Wherefore when S. Paul willeth Timothie To stirre vp the grace which is giuen him it is to be expounded not onely of the grace of Order but of all Episcopall grace And S. Ambrose when hee saith God giueth the grace doeth vndoubtedly meane all Episcopall grace For who can giue any grace to the Pastours of the Church but onely the God of all grace which giueth Pastours to the Church and appointeth them to be rulers ouer his family To Salmeron we may adde Henr. Gandauensis affirming that Bishops haue their power both of Order and Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ As also Gottifredus de Fontibus and Iohannes de Poliaco all alleadged by Salmeron Whose opinions he controuleth without reason seeing before in effect he affirmed the same I will conclude this point with the Vniuersitie of Paris which ratified this position with a Decree and caused one Iohannes Sarazim a Frier to recant the contrary PHIL. If Iurisdiction be giuen in Consecration then it should be equall in all Bishops ORTHOD. The power it selfe is equall in all though the determination of the power which is from the Church be vnequall When a Bishop is translated to another See hee doeth not lose his former habituall power no more then the Sunne doeth lose his light when hee passeth to the other Hemisphere When a Bishop of a smaller Circuit is aduanced to a greater he getteth not a greater power but a larger subiect whereupon he may exercise his power And when a Bishop is deposed hee is not absolutely depriued of his power but the matter is taken away vpon which his power should worke This is confessed by Vargas to be the opinion of Alphonsus and others If it happen that a Bishop for any crime bee depriued of his Bishopricke then he shall bee depriued of his subiects vpon whom hee ought to exercise his power of Iurisdiction but hee shall not be depriued of the power of Iurisdiction it selfe receiued in his Consecration CHAP. II. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all Spirituall Iurisdiction PHIL. THe giuing of Iurisdiction must onely proceed from him that is the fountaine of all Spirituall Iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane or Bishop vnder him that hath authoritie and commission from him For the Church of God is like vnto a Citie which hath one onely fountaine from whence there issue diuers great floods which are branched out againe into sundry goodly streames whence the water is conueyed by pipes and conduits to serue the whole Citie This fountaine is the Bishop of Rome the great floods are the Patriarches Archbishops and Metropolitanes the streames are the rest of the Bishops the pipes and conduits are all those which deriue their Iurisdiction from the Bishops Now the Church of England was sometimes flourishing like the Paradice of God but since it was cut off from the liuely spring alas for woe it is like to a barren and forsaken wildernesse ORTHOD. The Church of England God be thanked is in such a case that all her friends haue cause to reioyce and all her enemies to gnash their teeth And as for the fountaine you speake of it is not a well of liuing water made by the King of heauen but a puddle or pit of poyson digged by the Prince of darkenesse The Bishop of Rome wee graunt hath of ancient time beene reuerently regarded and had though not a generall iurisdiction yet a large extent yea hee had precedencie of dignity and place before all other Bishops but this was onely by law humane because he was the Bishop of the Imperiall Citie but now hee is like a furious floud which ouerfloweth the bankes he will be no more confined with bounds and limits hee chalengeth a generallity of iurisdiction ouer the Christian world and that by law diuine PHIL. I Will proue That he is the fountaine of al spirituall iurisdiction by law diuine for Saint Peter was so and the Pope succeeded him in this right ORTHOD. There is more required to inferre this conclusion then al the Seminaries Iesuites in the world are able to performe but first how proue you that Peter was inuested in this right by law diuine PHIL. The Scripture is full of testimonies declaring both his lawfull authority and his due execution thereof his authority might appeare by many arguments but I will make choice of two which proue the point in question most directly the promise of the keyes the coÌ„mission of feeding the sheep To begin with the first Christ said to Peter I wil giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen Christ gaue him not one keye only but 2. the key of knowledge the key of power by the key of knowledge he was able to open all Scriptures controuersies of religion The key of power is of order or of iurisdiction by the key of order he was able to ordaine Bishops and Pastours of the Church and againe to lock them out of the ministery by deposing degrading as occasion required by the key of iurisdiction hee might open and shut
to the Emperours by 3. Popes with 3. Roman Councels practised commonly and anciently by all kings through the whole Christian world yeelded to his predecessours in the time of the Saxons vsed by his own father and brother and neuer denied in England before Anselmus began to broach the Hildebrandicall Doctrine PHIL. This cause was handled at Rome where the kings Proctour boldly affirmed that his master the king would not loose inuestitures for the losse of his kingdome to whom Pope Paschall answered if as thou saiest thy king will not indure to lose the donations of Churches for the losse of his kingdome knowe thou precisely I speake it before God that I would not suffer him to obtaine them without punishment for the redemption of my head Thus the cause was determined against the King ORTH. No maruell for the Pope was Iudge in his owne cause such a cause as was not a litle both for his pride and profit such a Pope as within 8. yeeres after periured himselfe in the like matter But notwithstanding the Popes determination the king disdaining to bee so deluded sent to Anselmus forbidding him to enter the land vnlesse he would obserue the customes of William the Conquerour and William Rufus so he was absent three yeeres PHIL. Yet at his returne he got a glorious victory for Edinerus writeth thus rex antecessorum suorum vsu relicto nec personas quae in regimen Ecclesiae sumebantur per se elegit nec eas per dationem virgae pastoralis Ecclesijs quibus praeficiebantur inuestiuit the king leauing the vse of his predecessours did neither himselfe elect such persons as were assumed to the gouernment of the Church nor inuested them to the Churches ouer which they were set by the deliuering of the pastorall staffe ORTHOD. Here is a cleare confession that inuestitures belonged to the king by the vse of his predecessours yet such was the violence and fury both of the Pope and the Archbishop that he thought good to redeeme his quiet by releasing of his ancient right PHIL. If he had any right he did yeeld it vp for Malmsbury saith Venit Rex sublimi trophaeo splendidus triumphali gloria Angliam inuectus inuestiturasque Ecclesiarum Anselmo in perpetuum in manum remisit The king came out of France glistering with a stately trophee entred England with triumphall glory and released the inuestitures of Churches to Anselmus into his hands for euer ORTHOD. True to Anselmus here was a finall and perpetuall end betweene them two neither did the king intermeddle any more in the matter while Anselmus liued but after his death Anno 1113. hee gaue the Archbishopricke to Rodolph Bishop of London and inuested him with a Ring and a Staffe and Anno 1123. he gaue the said Archbishopricke to William Corboll he gaue also the Bishopricke of Lincolne to Alexander the Bishopricke of Bath to Godfrid the Bishopricke of Worcester to Simon the Bishopricke of Cicester to Sifrid After the raigne of Henry the first though the Popes were still busie especially when the state was troubled or the king out of the Realme yet the succeeding Princes would not suffer themselues to bee robbed of this right and royaltie but from time to time put it in practise and maintained their prerogatiue King Edward the third told Pope Clement the fift That his progenitors and other noble and faithfull men had founded and indowed Churches and placed Ministers in them euer since the first planting of religion in the Realme of England and that the kings did of ancient time freely conferre Cathedrall Churches iure suo Regio by their Princely right so oft as they were vacant he doth not say by the Popes permission but by their princely right so the collation of Bishopricks is the ancient right of the kings of England Moreouer he told him that whereas now Deanes and Chapters elect this proceeded from the graunt of the kings at the request and instance of the Pope he doth not say from the graunt of the Pope but from the grant of the kings at the request of the Pope with which concordeth that famous act of Parliament made in the 25. of Edw. the third Our Soueraigne Lord the king and his heires shall haue and inioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which be of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted Sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitors vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund license of the King to chuse and after choice made to haue his royall assent And in the dayes of Richard the second statutum est saith Thomas Walsingam in eodem insuper Parliamento vt de caetero nullus transfreâ—aret ad obtinendum prouisiones in Ecclesijs vel Ecclesiam si quis contrarium faceret si posset apprehendi caperetur vt Regi rebellis incarceraretur A statute was made in the same Parliament that from henceforth none should passe the seas to obtaine prouisions in Churches or to obtaine any Church and if any should do contrary if he could be catched he should be apprehended as a rebell to the king and cast in prison The next yeere the same king set out a Proclamation that all such as were resident in the Court of Rome and had benefices in England should returne by the feast of S. Nicholas vnder paine of forfeiting all their benefices When the Pope heard all this thundering he sent a Nuncio with great complaints for answere wherof the king referred him to the Parliament following which would by no meanes consent that Rome-runners should get their benefices as in former time In the dayes of Henry the fift when the Pope by his bulles translated Richard of Lincolne to Yorke the Deane and Chapter standing vpon the lawes of the land refused to admit him as hereafter shall be declared Shall wee now say that the kings of England conferre spiritual promotions by the Popes indulgence let king Edward the first be witnesse let the Parliament in the raigne of Edward the third be witnesse let the like Parliament in the time of Richard the second be witnesse let the Deane and Chapter of Yorke be witnesse all which were of the Popish religion and yet referred this to the king and not to the Pope Hitherto that the kings of England vsed Inuestitures NOw I will prooue that they vsed them lawfully by a double right as Princes as Patrons As Princes for many reasons First if we looke into the old Testament we find that Salomon set Sadock in the roume of Abiathar by what authoritie Verely by the same by which he cast out Abiathar Which I haue already prooued to be done by the lawful and ordinary power of a Prince If this be a perpetuall patterne for all posteritie then the collation of spirituall dignities is the Princes right Secondly it was prophesied of
conscience are suerties for the freedome of their choice These are the sayings of the learned Bishop among which he interlaced a memorable example of Guntchrannus King of France who when one offered him money for a Bishoprick returned this answere It is not our Princely maner to sell Bishopricks for money neither is it your part to get them with rewards lest wee be infamed for silthy gaine and you compared to Simon Magus A fit Embleame for a Prince and worthy to be written in letters of Gold Most safely for how dangerous a thing it is to commit such matters to popular Elections the Primitiue Church had lamentable experience What vprores also followed the Elections by the Clergie alone let the longest Schisme that euer was in the Church of Rome testifie And for the Popes prouisions whereby hee hath incroached vpon the Princes right they haue bene such as haue giuen both Kings Nobles Clergie and people iust cause of lamentation But since the nomination rested in the Princes hands all tumults and grieuances Gods Name be blessed are vtterly extinguished Now I will adde a word or two of their singular moderation in this behalfe In ancient time our Kings had the collation before free Election was granted as was declared out of the Statute of Edward the 3. whereby it is manifest that they had then in themselues a plenarie power And though this were not without presidents of former ages yet as Charles the Great granted freedome of Elections vnto the Church so haue our Princes established the like by the Lawes of the land according to which they proceed most mildly and graciously doing all things agreeably to the patterne of famous Princes and laudable Canons of ancient Councels With vs the King hath the nomination of Bishops and so had good Theodosius as was plainely to bee seene in the aduancing of Nectarius With vs the Deane and Chapter make the election of their Bishop and so did the Presbyters of Alexandria in Saint Ieroms time which custome had continued there euer since the time of Saint Marke the Euangelist With vs the Deane and Chapter elect him whom the king hath nominated So the Clergie of Constantinople with the whole generall Councell there assembled did thinke it their duetie solemnely to elect Nectarius whom the Emperour had nominated With vs the electours signifie their election to the king humbly crauing his royall assent so the Romane Clergie 1000. yeeres agoe did vse to signifie their election to the Emperour that he might ratifie it by his Imperiall authority And because the ancient Canons giue the power of confirmation to the Metropolitane therefore our King granteth him a commission to confirme the election according to the Canon Finally with vs none can bee consecrated before the king giue commission by his letters pattents neither might the Bishops of Rome in ancient time till the Emperour gaue license and that as Onuphrius saith by his letters pattents Where yet I will confesse there was a difference because the Popes gaue money vnto the Emperour but our Bishops giue none vnto the King Thus much of elections CHAP. XIII How lamentable the State of England was when Bishopricks and Benefices were giuen by the Popes prouisions PHIL. WEE referre all men to the pondering of this one point specially amongst many concerning the nominations and elections of Bishops Abbats and other Prelats whether the world went not as well when such things passed by Canonicall election or the Popes prouision as it hath don since or euer hereafter is like to doe ORTHOD. Concerning the Popes prouisions this is most certaine that howsoeuer the Church of God was prouided for hee prouided for himselfe and licked his owne fingers For the demonstration whereof I will beginne with king Canutus who about the yeere of grace 1031. Returning from Rome wrote thus to the Archbishops Bishops and States of the Realme Conquestus sum iterum coram domino papa mihi valde displicere dixi quod mei Archiepiscopi in tantum angariebantur immensitate pecuniarum quae ab eis expetâ—bantur dum pro pallio accipiâ—ndo secundum morem sedem Apostolicam expeterent decretumque ne id deinceps fiat that is I complained againe before the Lord the Pope and told him that it displeased me much that my Archbishops were so much vexed with huge sums of money which were demaunded of them while for receiuing the palle they went according to custome to the See Apostolike and it was decreed that it should be so no more Here by the way you must vnderstand that a Palle is a little â—yppet three fingers broad made of the wool of two white Lambs which are offered vpoÌ„ the Altar of Saint Agnes while Agnus dei is sung in the solemn Masse and laied all night vpon the bodies of Peter and Paul vnder the great Altar from whence receiuing this vertue to containe the fulnesse of all pontificall power it becommeth the Ensigne of a Patriarch or Archbishop Which glorious ensigne who will weare Must fetch it farre and buy it deare In the daies of Henry the first when Anselmus was at Rome he made supplication to Pope Paschall the second for certaine Bishops and Abbats deposed whereupon saith Mathew Paris The most gentle See which vseth to bee wanting to none so they bring either white or red did mercifullie recall the said Bishops and Abbats and sent them with ioy to their owne Sees In the daies of Richard the first Hugh Bishop of Durham who of an old Bishop was become a young Earle hauing made a voluntary vow to goe to Ierusalem procured a dispensation from the Pope for which hee paied an infinit summe of money In the daies of the same king William Bishop of Ely was made Legat by a gentle Pope vpon the gentle consideration of a thousand pounds In the daies of king Iohn Pope Innocent the third went about to swallow all England and Ireland at a morsell For Hubertus Archbishop of Canterbury being dead the Monkes elected first Reinold their subprior and afterward at the kings request Iohn Gray Bishop of Norwich by means of which double election the Pope tooke occasion to disanull both charging the Canterb. Monkes then at Rome vnder paine of a curse to chuse Steuen Langton a Cardinal which they did and brought him vnto the Altar with a Te deum The king proclamed those Monkes traytors the rest that lurked at Canterb hee prescribed and banished he forbad Steuen Langton to come into England and confiscated the goods and lands both of the Archbishoprik of the Church of Canterb whereupon the Pope authorised certaine Bishops to interdict the kingdome excommunicated the king set out a sentence declaratory to depriue him and committed the execution of it to Philip the French king By which papall meanes bereaft of the loue of his people abandoned of his nobles hated of his Clergie forsaken of his friends behold hee
Christian Princes that they should be nursing fathers of the Church therfore it must bee a part of their Princely care to prouide such nurses as shall feede it with the milke of the Gospel Thirdly in the new Testament Concerning the election of pastours we find neither precept nor any such example as can bee vrged for an euerlasting and vnchangeable rule And if wee look into the practise of the Church it will appeare that it hath bene disposed of in diuers ages in diuers maners according to diuers customes and positiue lawes of Princes growing out of the diuersitie of circumstances and occasions Wherefore it seemeth that the Lord hath left it as a thing indifferent to the discretion of the Church whereof the Christian Prince is not onely a part but Supreame gouernour vnder Christ in which respect though hee were not Patron he hath a transcendent and supereminent power so that the Soueraigne direction and moderation of the matter belongeth vnto him Which was acknowledged to be the kings right euen in the time of Popery as may appeare by the practise for after the death of any incumbent of any Church with cure if the Patron presented not within sixe monethes the Bishop of that Diocesse might bestow it to the end the cure should not bee destitute of a pastour if he neglected the time appointed the Metropolitane of that Diocesse might aduāce one to that Church if he also should leaue the Church destitute by the space limitted vnto him then it belonged to the king and not to the Bishop of Rome to prouide a competent pastour for that Church Thus it is euident that though Churches had Patrons to prouide Pastours for them according to the kings Lawes and Bishops and Archbishops to see it sufficiently done yet in case of neglect the care of it was deuolued to the King as being Supreme gouernour euen in these cases within his own Dominiōs If you say that this was by the grant of the Pope the contrary is manifest because in the 25. of Edward the 3. in the noble statute of prouisours the Bishop of Rome is said to vsurpe the Seignories of such possessions and benefices Wherefore the Lawes of the land and the ancient custome of the Kingdome concurring with the generall practise of Princes receiued with the applause of the whole Christian world doe sufficiently proclaime the right of our Princes in this behalfe especially seeing as K William Rufus truly said The king of England hath all the liberties in his Kingdome which the Emperour challenged in the Empire Hitherto of the right of Princes as they are Princes Now of their right as they are Patrons IN Patronages we may consider two things The causes and the effects The causes originally inducing the Church of God to approoue them were three First because Princes and Lords of the soile out of their deuotion and charitable bounty gaue some of their owne ground for the situation of Churches and the habitation of Ministers resigning their owne right into the hands of the Bishop of the Diocesse and so dedicating it euerlastingly to the Lord. Secondly because vpon that ground they built Churches for holy meetings and dwelling places for the messengers of the Lord. Thirdly because they allowed maintenance both for the Church and the Minister as is expressed in this verse Patronum faciunt dos edificatio fundus The effects of Patronage are three Honos Onus and Vtilitas The first is Honos honour of nominating and presenting a fit Clerke the honour of precedency in sitting in his owne Church and in some places to great personages the honour of Procession For example to the Duke of Venice in the Church of S. Marke The second is Onus a burden for in being a Patron hee vndertaketh the Protection of that Church The third is Vtilitas profit for if he or his children fall into pouerty they must be releeued out of the reuenues of the same Church An example whereof happened in a noble citizen of Perusia These prerogatiues of Patrons were all anciently approoued both by Ciuill and Canon Law But to passe ouer the rest I will onely single out the prerogatiue of presenting In the 9. Councell of Toledo holden in the yeere 655. it was decreed as followeth As long as the founders of Churches remaine aliue they shall bee suffered to haue the chiefe care in those places and they shall offer fit Rectours vnto the Bishop to be ordained in the same Churches And if the Bishop while the Founder liueth shall despise them and presume to ordaine Rectours in the same place Let him know that his Ordination shall be voide and to his shame others shall be ordained whom the Founders shall chuse And before that in the yeere 541. Iustinian made this Constitution That if any man will build an house of prayer and hee or his heires will haue Clerkes to be promoted therein if they allow maintenance for those Clerkes and name such as are worthy let those which are named be ordained Now to apply this to our present purpose It is a cleare case that all the Bishopricks in England were founded by the Kings Ancestours And therefore the Aduousons of them all belong to the King And it is cleare by the Lawes of the land That our Kings haue had and ought to haue the custodie of the same in the Vacancy and the presentments and collations of those Prelacies as Lords and Aduowes of all the lands and possessions that belong either to Cathedrall Churches or Bishops Vpon all these premises this conclusion followeth that this right we speake of belongeth to our Princes as Patrons by Ciuil Canon and the common Lawes of the land To these two former respects we may adde a third drawne from this consideration that our Bishops by the fauour of Princes are Spiritual Lords and Barons in Parliament and therefore it were very hard if men of so great power and place should be obtruded vpon the Prince without his consent Hitherto of the lawfull right of Princes ANd as they haue the collation of Bishopricks most lawfully so they conferre them most fitly most freely and most safely Most fitly because they haue largest scope to choose best meanes to discerne greatest power to procure and assist such as are most eminent for learning and vertue Most freely because they are farther from suspition of corruption then either people or Prelate For to vse the words of a reuerend Bishop Howsoeuer ambitious heads and couetous hands may lincke together vnder colour of commendation to deceiue and abuse Princes eares yet reason and duetie bindeth mee and all others to thinke and say that Princes persons are of all others farthest from taking money for any such respects In meaner persons more iustly may corruption be feared then in Princes who of all others haue least need and so least cause to set Churches to sale Their abundance their magnificence their