Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	bishop_n	presbyter_n	presbytery_n	3,704	5	11.1309	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88083	Erastus Junior. Or, A fatal blovv to the clergies pretensions to divine right. In a solid demonstration, by principles, forms of ordination, canon-laws, acts and ordinances of Parliament, and other publique acts, instruments, records, and proceedings, owned by themselves, that no bishop, nor minister, (prelatical, or Presbyterian) nor presbytery (classical, or national) hath any right or authority to preach, ... in this nation, from Christ, but onely from the Parliament. In two parts: the one demonstrating it to an episcopal, the other to a Presbyterian minister. By Josiah Web, Gent. a serious detester of the dregs of the Antichristian hierarchy yet remaining among us.	Lewgar, John, 1602-1665.	1660 (1660)	Wing L1831; Thomason E1010_11; ESTC R202720	19,588	24

was made Confirmed and Consecrated Archbishop by Authority of the Queen and that she had her Authority for it from the Statutes of 25. H. 8. 20. 1. Eliz. 1. 3. From that Clause in the Commission it self for the Confirming and Consecrating of Matthew Parker wherein she expresly refers to the Statutes made in that behalf meaning those two aforenamed Juxta formam saith she Statutorum in ea parte provisorum editorum According to the form of the Statutes in this case made and set forth As much as to say that the Patent was grounded upon those Statutes And so I have abundantly demonstrated my Thesis as to you That you have no Authority to preach but what you have originally from the Parliament The second Part. Demonstrating to a Presbyterian Minister that he hath no Authority to preach from Christ but onely from the Parliament SIr I shall suppose your Case the best that can be supposed of any Presbyterian Minister in England viz. That William Juxon late Bishop of London being a true Presbyter together with all the Presbyters then of London assisting him Ordained twelve Presbyters whom afterward he placed as Pastors or preaching Ministers in so many Parish Churches in London lying next to one another These twelve preaching Ministers were the first Classical Presbytery that after the abolishing of Bishops was erected in the Nation And the Church of N. within the Precinct of that Classis falling void they Ordained you a Presbyter and afterward gave you Mission to that Congregation of N. that is placed you to be the Pastor or preaching Minister of it And I say that in this Case you have no authority to preach to that Congregation from Christ but onely from the Parliament And I make it good by this Argument You have no Authority from Christ to preach to that Congregation but what you have either by your Ordination or your Mission But you have no Authority to preach to that Congregation by your Ordination and none from him but from the Parliament onely by your Mission Therefore you have none from him but onely from the Parliament The Major is supposed in the Case nor is there any third ordinary way imaginable and you pretend not to extraordinary The first part of the Minor That you have no Authority to preach to that Congregation by your Ordination I prove from the form of it which supposing it the same as is prescribed in your Directory was this The Presbytery of that Classis laid their hands upon you accompanying it with a short Prayer or Blessing by the Preacher who carried on the Work of that day to this effect Thankefully acknowledging c. for fitting and inclining this man to this great work we beseech him to fill him with his holy Spirit whom in his name here they laid their hands upon you we set apart to this holy Service to fulfill the work of his Ministery in all things that he may save both himself and his people committed to his charge In which words added to the Imposition of hands to interpret the meaning of it that it might not be a dumb Ceremony you see there is not one syllable of authorizing you to preach to that Congregation of N. but onely that they who laid their hands on you set you apart to this great and holy work and office of the Ministery that is that by in or with that Imposition of hands there was given to you from and by Christ himself immediately a divine power lawfully to execute the Office of preaching and ministring Sacraments in Christs name and with his authority to that Congregation unto which you were then designed or to any other in the Nation or in the world whereunto you should be duly admitted And that this power I speak of was all that these words or the Imposition of bands gave you and not any Authority as to that Congregation of N. is manifest because if they gave you Authority to that Congregation it was either to that Congregation alone or to more then that If to that alone you could not be admitted as Minister to any other Congregation without being anew Ordained which you count neither necessary nor lawful (a) If a Minister be designed to a Congregation who hath been formerly Ordained Presbyter let him be admitted after examination without any new Ordination And if to more then that it must be to any or every one in the Nation and in the world because the words name none nor mean no one more then another and authorized you as much to every one as to any one or else when you should be admitted to Officiate in any Congregation neither you nor the people could be certain whether that were one of the Congregations or no to which your Ordination authorized you which uncertainty would render it useless as to any one And if you say your Ordination authorized you to every one you would be a Pastor Apostolique or such a one as the Apostles were that is universal created by Christ immediately and consequently supream subject to no Classis Synod Parliament or other mortal superiour which would utterly overthrow all your form of Church Government and Discipline For then you might preach and minister Sacraments in any Church where you should please against the Pastors will then all Admissions of Presbyters to be preaching Ministers to such or such a Church would be vain absurd and arrogant acts Then no Classis Synod or Parliament could for any crime whatsoever convent or silence you and much less depose or eject you In fine then there would be no distinction betwixt Pastors and flocks Of necessity therefore to avoid such horrid absurdities the first part of my minor must be granted me That you have no authority by your Ordination to preach in that Congregation The second part of the Minor That you have no authority from Christ but onely from the Parliament by your Mission I thus make good They who gave you your Mission had no Authority from Christ but onely from the Parliament to give it you Therefore you have no Authority from Christ but onely from the Parliament by your Mission The Consequence is evident in the terms The Antecedent is firm for two reasons First because those Presbyters who gave you Mission were no Ministers of those Churches by any Divine Right or Authority from Christ but onely of the Parliament because placed in those Churches by the Bishop of London as he was Bishop of London which I am sure you will not cannot dare not say he was by authority from Christ for then it had been a wicked and sacrilegious act in the Parliament to deprive him of his Bishoprick and in you to advise and encourage them to it nor by any other Authority but that of the Parliament for then it had exceeded the power of the Parliament to deprive him of it Nor can you say those Ministers were placed in those Churches by him in any

other quality or capacity but as he was Bishop of London because as he was a Presbyter he could not Institute Pastors by himself alone as he did those nor Institute them in any wise as a Bishop Ordine Secondly because supposing they had been Ministers of those Churches by Authority from Christ yet as they were single Presbyters they had no authority so much as to Ordain and much less to give Mission but onely as they were Associated into a Classis or Presbytery (a) Preaching Ministers orderly Associated are those to whom Imposition of hands doth appertain Humb. Adv. of Div. at Westm in the Doctr. part of Ordin §. 10. Now this Association was not made formed or authorized by any authority from Christ but onely of the Parliament and so those Ministers who gave you your Mission did not give it you as Presbyters or Officers of the Church instituted by Christ but meerly as Officers or Commissioners of the Parliament which it was by accident that any of them were Presbyters This appears First because for Associating the first Presbytery there was no other imaginable ordinary Authority then in the Land but that of the Parliament And if you will say the first was Associated by Christ immediately any of those whom you call Sectaries say as much for their authority and with as much reason Secondly because it appears by the Ordinances Acts and publick Proceedings of the Parliament by you owned and abetted in abolishing the form of Church Government and Discipline then established and introducing another in place thereof in settling Classes and authorizing them to Ordain Ministers in ejecting Ministers and placing others in their Cures in Collating and Instituting to vacant Benefices and executing these powers not by Presbyters onely but by Lay-Committees nay by single Lords and Officers of the Army c. that the supream visible Authority in matters Ecclesiastical in this Land was in the Parliament and so no Classis was Associated but by authority of the Parliament and after its Association had no authority to give Mission or exercise any other act of Jurisdiction but what it had from the Parliament For Instance I name these Ordinances 1. That of 12. June 1643. Whereas it hath been declared and resolved by the Lords and Commons in Parliament that the present Church Government by Archbishops Bishops c. is evil c. and that therefore they are resolved that the same shall be taken away and that such a Government shall be settled in the Church of England as may be most agreeable to Gods Word c. the right Honourable Algernon Percy Earl of Northumberland c. naming other Earls and Lords John Selden Dr. Gouge c. naming divers others Lawyers Gentlemen and Divines are hereby authorized and enjoyned to sit confer and treat of such things as concern the Discipline and Government of the Church of England as shall be proposed to them by both or either House of Parliament c Provided that they assume not to exercise any Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical whatsoever or any other power then is particularly expressed 2. That of 22. January following The Earl of Manchester shall have authority in the associated Counties to eject all such Ministers as he shall judge unfit for their places and to place in their rooms such as shall be approved of by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster 3. That of 22. Feb. following The Lord Fairfax shall nominate and appoint such able and godly Divines as he shall think fit into all such Churches in the County of York as are or shall be destitute of Ministers 4. That of 23. April 1645. Philip Goodwin shall be henceforth Vicar of Watford and Officiate the Cure as Vicar thereof during his life without any further Admission or Induction 5. That of 26. April following None may preach but Ordained Ministers except such as intending the Ministery shall for trial of their Gifts be allowed by such as shall be appointed by the Parliament 6. That of 29. August 1648. Be it Ordained by the Authority of this Parliament that all Parishes in this Nation shall be brought under the Government of Congregational Provincial and National Assemblies c. And all Classes and Parochial Congregations are respectively hereby authorized and required to proceed accordingly c. The Province of London shall be divided into twelve Classical Elderships The first Classis to contain Alhallows c. The several Classes where no Congregational Presbyteries are already settled shall have power to nominate such Ministers and others as are qualified according to this Ordinance to joyn with them in the same to be approved by the Committee of Lords and Commons for Scandal until such time as Congregational Presbyteries shall be settled in the said respective Precincts c. When seven Congregational Elderships or more shall be constituted into any Classical Precinct the same shall be signified to the several Congregational Elders so established who shall depute fit Elders who together with their Ministers shall meet as a Classis c. That which shall be done by the major part of the Classis shall be esteemed as the act of the whole And none shall be esteemed a valid act unless done by four Ministers and eight Ruling Elders c. The power of Classicall Assemblies shall be 1. To Ordain and admit Ministers for the Congregations 2. To censure Ministers c. It is Ordained by the Authority of this Parliament that the Classical Presbyters within their Bounds may and shall Ordain Presbyters according to the Directory for Ordination hereafter expressed c. The Presbytery or five Ministers at least sent from them shall solemnly set him who is to be Ordained apart to the Office and work of the Ministery c. Laying their hands on him with a short Prayer or Blessing to this effect c. Let every one which is or shall be chosen for any Congregation or place not being at that time within the Bounds of any Classical Presbytery be Ordained by that Classis which he shall address himself unto c. And it is further Ordained by the Authority Aforesaid That all persons who shall be Ordained Presbyters according to this Directory shall be forever reputed to all intents for lawfull and sufficiently authorized Ministers c. Thirdly It appears from the humble Advice of your Divines assembled at Westminster unto the Parliament afore any Classes were formed to authorize Ministers to Associate themselves into Classes for the Ordaining of Ministers for the Army Navy City of London c. In these present exigencies while we cannot have any Presbyteries form'd up to their whole power and work c. And yet it is requisite that Ministers be Ordained for the service of places and Congregations destitute of Ministers by some who being set apart themselves for the work of the Ministery have power to joyn in the setting apart of others Let some Ministers in or about London be designed BY PUBLIQUE AUTHORITY meaning of the Parliament to which they addressed that Advice who being ASSOCIATED may Ordain Ministers for the City and vicinity c. And let the like ASSOCIATION be made BY THE SAME AUTHORITY in other Counties c. And so I have abundantly demonstrated my Thesis That you have no Authority to preach in that Church of N. where you are Minister from Christ but from the Parliament onely FINIS

Erastus Junior OR A FATAL BLOW TO THE CLERGIE'S Pretensions to DIVINE RIGHT In a solid Demonstration By Principles Forms of Ordination Canon-Laws Acts and Ordinances of Parliament and other publique Acts Instruments Records and Proceedings owned by themselves THAT No Bishop nor Minister Prelatical or Presbyterian nor Presbytery Classical or National hath any Right or Authority to Preach and consequently much less to Officiate in the publique Worship minister Sacraments demand Tythes ordain Pastors inflict Censures or exercise any other act of Simple and much less of Governing Jurisdiction in this Nation from Christ but onely from the Parliament In two parts the one demonstrating it to an Episcopal the other to a Presbyterian Minister By Josiah Web Gent. a serious detester of the Dregs of the Antichristian Hierarchy yet remaining among us LONDON Printed and are to be sold by Livewell Chapman at the Signe of the Crown in Popeshead Alley 1660. The Preface THere hath been much debate a long time betwixt the Prelatical and Presbyterian Clergy which of them hath Divine Right or Authority from Christ to preach minister Sacraments ordain Pastors inflict Censures and exercise other Acts of Spiritual Jurisdiction in this Nation whereas the plain truth is neither of them hath any from Christ but onely from the Parliament This truth I shall demonstrate in the ensuing Discourse by their own Principles forms of Ordination Acts or Ordinances of Parliament and other publique Acts Instruments and Records owned by themselves And in regard one of my means of proof is to be from their own Principles I shall alledge divers things as truths which are not so in my opinion but onely in theirs against whom I urge them and therefore also I shall in urging of them use their own terms And because the Demonstration will be more expedite and clear in one of these Acts singly then in so many together and the confuting their Divine Right as to any one of them will in consequence confute it in all the rest because they all hang by one string and Preaching is the first and least act of Jurisdiction and so the proof against that will prove more strongly against all the rest therefore I shall insist onely upon that of preaching and demonstrate that no Minister ordained by Imposition of hands and constituted a Pastor whether it hath been by any of the late Bishops or a Classical Presbytery hath any authority by which I mean power to exercise the Office lawfully so much as to preach by which I mean teaching Gods word by way of Office to any creature in this Nation from Christ that is by any bene placitum or will of his by him revealed or any means or ordinance by him instituted to that end but onely from the Parliament originally under God as author of Nature onely And my end in it is First to unbeguile the common people in their believing their Ministers as men of God and Ministers of Christ and their teaching as Gods word because of their being Ordained by Bishops or a Presbytery and villifying all others not so Ordained by the nick name of Tub-preachers by making it appear that there is not the meanest Teacher in the Land allowed by the State or deputed by a Congregation but is a Teacher sent and a man of God and Minister of Christ as much as the Reverendst Bishop or Minister of them all and his teaching is as truly the word of God as the best of theirs is that is when he holds forth a Text of Scripture or other revealed truth and the the best of theirs is no more or otherwise Secondly to vindicate the Authority of the Parliament in what they have done in abolishing Episcopacy and several branches of it or shall hereafter think fit to do in abolishing the yet remaining branches of it Imposition of hands Tythes Presentations Classes Synods National Ministery Directory c. and impowering every Congregation to depute their own Pastor by making it appear there is no Minister Priest Bishop Classis or Synod in this Land hath or since the Reformation of Religion by Henry the Eighth ever had any authority to Ordain Pastors demand Tythes license Preachers or so much as to preach but what he or they have or had originally under God from the Parliament which therefore by the same Authority whereby it established them may when it pleases dissolve them without any ones just complaint at the Authority And now then to go in hand with what I have undertaken and to proceed against them severally beginning first with the elder of the two the Prelatical Minister or Priest as he loves to be called The first Part. Demonstrating to an Episcopal Priest that he hath no authority to Preach from Christ but onely from the Parliament SIr I shall suppose your Case the best can be supposed of any Prelaticall Minister in England viz. That William Lawd late commonly called Archbishop of Canterbury being a true Bishop Ordine or in power of Episcopal Order and as much as the King and all the Bishops in England could make him lawful Archbishop of Canterbury Ordained you a true Priest and afterward gave you Mission to the Church of N. within his Diocess that is Instituted you Rector or Pastor of it and Licensed you to preach in that Congregation And I say that in this Case you have no authority to preach to that Congregation from Christ but onely from the Parliament And I make it good by this Argument You have no authority from Christ to preach to that Congregation but what you have either by your Ordination or by your Mission But you have no authority to preach to that Congregation by your Ordination and none from him but from the Parliament onely by your Mission Therefore you have none from him but onely from the Parliament The major is supposed in the Case nor is there any other ordinary way imaginable and you pretend not to extraordinary The first part of the minor That you have no authority to preach to that Congregation by your Ordination I prove from the form of your Ordination which was this The Bishop with the other Priests present laying their hands upon you the Bishop said these words to you Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins thou forgivest they are forgiven whose sins thou retainest they are retained and be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and of his holy Sacraments In the Name of the Father c. After which the Bishop delivering the Bible to you said these words Take thou authority to preach the Word and to minister the holy Sacraments in this Congregation where thou shalt be so appointed So what authority you have by your Ordination must be given you by the one of these words Now First that the former words at the Imposition of hands Receive the holy Ghost c. gave you none is manifest because those words being Sacramental (a) We deny not Ordination to be a Sacrament

authority to give you Mission as he was a Bishop Ordine is manifest because the giving Mission is an act of compleat Jurisdiction which he had not as he was a Bishop Ordine no more in Canterbury then he had in Rome or Constantinople or no more then the Bishop of Rome or Constantinople had in Canterbury And the Stile in his Instrument whereby he Instituted and Licensed you William by Divine Providence Archbishop of Canterbury shewes he Instituted and Licensed you not as he was a Bishop Ordine but as Archbishop of Canterbury which he might have been sufficiently to the Instituting and Licensing you in that Church although he had not been so much as a Deacon Ordine The second part of it That he had no authority from Christ but onely from the Parliament as he was Archbishop of Canterbury is thus proved He was no Archbishop of Canterbury by authority from Christ but onely of the Parliament Therefore he had no authority from Christ but onely from the Parliament as he was Archbishop of Canterbury The Consequence is evident The Antecedent I prove thus Matthew Parker the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury was no Archbishop of Canterbury by authority from Christ but onely of the Parliament Therefore Will. Lawd was no Archbishop of Canterbury by authority from Christ but onely of the Parliament The Consequence I suppose will be granted me because Matth. Parker was Confirmed and Consecrated in all the same form and by all the same authority as Will. Lawd was and he being the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury and consequently one and the chief in the Confirming and Consecrating of those by whose Successors William Lawd was Confirmed and Consecrated was the necessary pipe or channel for conveying Divine Authority from Christ to William Lawd and so must have his authority from Christ first afore William Lawd could have any by him The Antecedent which is indeed the onely difficult part of my Argument I prove from the form of creating him Archbishop which was this The See being void by the death of Cardinal Pool the Dean and Chapter petitioned the Queen for her Licence to chuse their Archbishop which she granting sent with it a Letter nominating to them Matthew Parker for the man and him they were bound to chuse under a Premunire The Election being made and certified into the Chancery there issued out a Commission under the great Seal to seven Bishops assigned by the Queen commanding and authorizing them or any four of them to Confirm the election and to Consecrate him This four of them did And his Consecration being certified by them into the Chancery there issued out a Writ to the Dean and Chapter commanding and authorizing them to Install or as they called it to Inthronize him that is to put him into the actual possession of his Office and Dignity After which he enjoyed his Spiritualties that is all Spiritual Jurisdiction pertaining to that See And then issued a Writ out of the Exchequer to the Sheriff to restore to him the Temporalties which at the death of any Bishop were used to be seized into the Prince's hands This was the whole form from first to last of creating him Archbishop which as you see consisted of four parts 1. His Election which presented him to the Queen to be created 2. His Confirmation which created him Archbishop elect Immediately after which by the ancient Canon-Law he should have had all ordinary Jurisdiction to which was not requisite powers of that Order which he wanted if he wanted any for any Lay-man might have been elected to it as Ambrose was to Milan and his Election confirmed pertaining to that See namely to Collate Benefices in his gift to Institute Pastors to License Preachers to visit the Province and Diocess to call and hold Courts and Synods inflict or release Censures appoint Chancellors Vicars Generall Archdeacons c. (a) Extra C. transmissam C. nostri C. inter corpor de Translat But by the later Canons of the Pope in grossing all Authority into his own hands he could not exercise any though Consecrated until he had his Pall from Rome and the Popes Bull for putting him in possession of his Church (b) Extra Injuctae de Elect. inter extra comm C. Nisi C. Quod sicut c And accordingly the Queen by the Law of the Land succeeding to the Pope in all his priviledges and in that among the rest he could not no not after Consecration exercise any Jurisdiction until by her Writ he was put in possession of his Bishoprick 3. His Consecration which gave him the Stile Name and Dignity of Archbishop absolute 4. His Installation which gave him possession of his Spiritualties The first and last of which Acts were performed by the Dean and Chapter the two middle most by the Bishops and the first mover of all was the Queen or her Chancery If I then make it evident that none of these Agents under the Queen acted in it by any Authority from Christ but meerly as the Queens Commissioners and that she had her Authority for Commissionating them not from Christ but from the Parliament I hope you will grant it a Demonstration that he was no Archbishop of Canterbury by Authority from Christ but onely of the Parliament Now all this is easily made evident For as to the Dean and Chapter I am sure you will grant me that they acted not in it by any Authority from Christ for though you hold Bishops to be de Jure Divino you hold not Deans and Chapters to be so too The rest I shall prove in the ensuing five Propositions The First Proposition Those Bishops who Confirmed and Consecrated Matthew Parker could not validly do either by their own Authority as Bishops without a Faculty or Commission from some Superiour in Jurisdiction to the See of Canterbury For First they could not do either validly as they were Bishops Ordine For first I suppose you will grant me that as Bishops Ordine they could not Confirm his Election because that was an act of compleat Jurisdiction and of giving compleat Jurisdiction speaking of that act per se or of its own original nature afore it was invalidated by the Popes Law Nor secondly for the same reason could they Consecrate him validly as Bishops Ordine For the Consecrating of a Bishop consisted of two parts or acts One was the Sacramental part viz. the Imposition of hands by all of them and pronouncing the words of Ordination by one of them in all their names Receive the Holy Ghost and remember to stir up the Grace of God which is in thee by Imposition of hands c. And of this Act I will make no question but they being as they were true Bishops Ordine might and did as such perform it validly But then this Act did onely Ordain him a Bishop Ordine not Consecrate him Archbishop The other part therefore of the Ceremony which was all the

rest of it and from whence the whole Ceremony had its name of Consecration which may be called the Sacring or the Ritual part was that which Consecrated him Archbishop to wit the Investing of him with his Mitre Ring Crosiar-staff Cross Rochet c. the anointing of his head and hands with Chrisme the pronouncing over him the Prayers and Benedictions proper to an Archbishop and the adhibiting of all these Ceremonies with that intent to create him Archbishop and Pastor of the Cathedrall and Metropolitical Church called Christs-Church in Canterbury For so was their Commission Quatenus eundem in Archiepiscopum Pastorem Ecclesiae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cantuariensis Consecrare c. And so was their demand when three of them at his Consecration presented him to the fourth to be Consecrated Hunc tibi praesentamus ut Archiepiscopus Consecretur Now this therefore being plainly a meer act of compleat Jurisdiction they could not perform it validly as Bishops Ordine onely Secondly they could do neither of these acts validly as they were Bishops Officio or Jurisdictione because 1. Not one of them was an actual Bishop Officio For one of them Hodgskins was onely a Bishop Suffragan of Dover which was no Cathedral Church nor could he exercise any Jurisdiction but by Commission from the Bishop of Canterbury Another of them Coverdale was onely a quondam Bishop of Exeter And the remaining two Barlow and Sco●y were so also that is quondam Bishops onely but onely that they were Elect the one to Chichester the other to Hereford This appears by the stile given them in the Letters Patents Reverendis in Christo Patribus Wilhelmo quondam Bathoniensi Wellensi Episcopo nunc Cicestrensi Electo Joanni quondam Cicestrensi Episcopo nunc Electo Herefordensi Miloni quondam Exoniensi Episcopo Joanni Episcopo Suffraganeo c. That is To the Reverend Fathers in Christ William late Bishop of Bath and Wells now Elect of Chichester John late Bishop of Chichester now Elect of Hereford Miles late Bishop of Exeter John Bishop Suffragan 2. No Bishop could validly exercise any least act of Episcopal Jurisdiction as both these were and of the highest nature out of his own Diocess as London where they Confirmed and Lambeth where they Consecrated him was and as any place possible must have been out of the Diocess of all but one of them 3. No Bishop could validly give a Jurisdiction to be exercised out of his own Diocess as Canterbury was out of all their Diocesses 4. No Bishop nor number of Bishops alwayes meaning by their own authority could validly give a Jurisdiction greater then their own and superior to their own and over themselves and all the Bishops in the Land as that of the See of Canterbury was The second Proposition No Bishops in the Land could validly Confirm or Consecrate an Archbishop of Canterbury without Commission from the Queen I shall give the reason in the words of the Statute 8. Eliz 1. Because all Jurisdiction Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority hath hitherto been or may lawfully be used over the Ecclesiastical State of this Realm was fully and absolutely by the Statute of 1. Eliz. 1. united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Now it is well known I believe to your self that afore the Statute of 25. H. 8. and after the repeal of that Statute by Queen Mary until that Act of 1. Eliz 1. the Pope had this priviledge in this Realm that no Bishops in the Land could validly either Confirm or Consecrate an Archbishop of Canterbury without a Faculty or Bull from him and consequently after that Statute which settled all the Popes priviledges in the Crown that priviledge was in the Queen that none could do either of those acts without a Faculty from her The third Proposition The Queen did give Commission to those Bishops for the Confirming and Consecrating of Matth. Parker This appears by the Letters Patents themselves extant in the Rolls in these words Elizabetha Regina c. Reverendis in Christo Patribus Wilhelmo c. naming seven Bishops Cùm vacante nuper sede Archiepiscopali Cantuariensi per mortem naturalem D. Reginaldi Poli Cardinalis ultimi immediati Archiepiscopi Pastoris ejusdem ad humilem petitionem Decani Capituli Ecclesiae nostrae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cantuariensis eisdem per Literas nostras Patentes Licentiam concesserimus alium sibi eligendi in Archiepiscopum Pastorem sedis praedictae ac iidem Mattheum Parker elegerunt c Nos eidem electioni Regium nostrum assensum adhibuimus pariter favorem Et hoc vobis tenore praesentium significamus Rogantes ac in fide dilectione quibus nobis tenemini firmiter praecipiendo Mandantes quatenus vos aut quatuor vestrûm cundem Matheum Parker in Archiepiscopum Pastorem Ecclesiae praedictae Electum electionemque praedictam Confirmare eundem in Archiepiscopum Pastorem Ecclesiae praedictae Consecrare caeteraque omnia peragere quae vestro in hac parte incumbunt Officio Pastorali juxta formam Statutorum in ea parte editorum provisorum velitis cum effectu That is Elizabeth Queen c. To the Reverend Fathers in Christ William c. Whereas the Archiepiscopal See of Canterbury being lately void by the natural death of my Lord Reginald Pool Cardinal the last and immediate Archbishop and Pastor of it at the humble petition of the Dean and Chapter of our Cathedral and Metropolitical Church in Canterbury called Christs Church we did by our Letters Patents grant Licence to them to chuse themselves another for Archbishop and Pastor of the See aforesaid and they have chosen Matthew Parker c. We have given our royal assent and favour to the said Election And we signifie this to you by the tenor of these presents Requiting and by the fidelity and love wherein you are bound to us firmly enjoyning Commanding you that you or four of you effectually Confirm the said Matthew Parker Archbishop and Pastor Elect of the said Church and Confirm the said Election and Consecrate him Archbishop and Pastor of the said Church and do all other things which in this behalf are incumbent on your Pastoral Office according to the form of the Statutes in this case made and provided And further for the avoiding of all ambiguities and questions that might be objected against the lawful Confirming and Consecrating of the said Matthew Parker partly because the Popes consent without which all was void and null by the Canon Law established in generall Councels (a) But universally this is clear that if any one be made a Bishop without the consent of his Metropolitane the great Synod hath defined that such a●one ought not to be a Bishop meaning by Bishop any Bishop whatsoever and principally the Primate of a Nation and by Metropolitane meaning any Metropolitane whatsoever but principally the Patriarch of that part

of the world which you grant the Pope to be of the West Conc. Nic. 1 Can. 6. which you count the proper Rule for judging even against Acts of Parliament in these matters (b) Councils truly General being the supream Tribunals of the Catholique Church do binde particular Churches as well in point of discipline as of faith Bish of Derr schism gard p. 475. English Statutes cannot change the essentials of ordination the validity or invalidity of it depends not upon humane Law but upon the Institution of Christ id 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 41. Judges at the Common Law have neither grounds nor rules in the Common Law for judging of the validity of an Episcopal Consecration id ib. p. 60. was not to it and partly because none of those who Confirmed or Consecrated him was an actual Bishop it was judged by her Council and by those Lawyers Civil and Canon who were advised with in it needful she should insert into her Patent a clause whereby by her supream royal authority she should enable those Bishops in regard of the present exigencies because neither the Popes consent nor actual Bishops enough to consecrate him could be had to supply to themselves all defects whatsoever in quality faculty or any other things necessary to that performance by the Laws of the Church For so it follows in the Patent Supplentes nihilominus suprema authoritate nostra Regia siquid in vobis aut vestrum aliquo conditione statu aut facultate vestris ad praemissa perficienda desit eorum quae per Statuta hujus Regni nostri aut per Leges Ecclesiasticas in hac parte requiruntur aut necessaria sunt temporis ratione rerum necessitate id postulante That is Supplying nevertheless to your selves by our supream Regal Authority hereby delegated to you to that end if any thing in you or any one of you or in your condition state or faculty to the performing of the Premises is wanting of those things which by the Statutes of this our Realm or by the Ecclesiastical Laws are in this behalf requisite or necessary the condition of the time and necessity of things requiring it So you see how true it was I said they could do neither of those Acts without her Commission when not onely her Commission was judged necessary to give them power to do them but her Dispensation also to make their acts valid non obstante the Laws of the Church The fourth Proposition The Queens Letters Patents was not a meer Mandate commanding them to execute their Office which they might be supposed to have from Christ but a Commission authorizing them to do what they did so as they acted in it not as Bishops or Officers authorized by Christ but meerly as her Commissioners That in that quality onely they Confirmed him themselves expresly acknowledge and declare in the Instrument of his Confirmation as it is to be seen in the Records at Lambeth For thus they say In nomine Domini Amen Nos Wilhelmus Barlow c. Mediantibus Literis Commissionalibus Reginae Commissionarii specialiter legitime deputati c. praedictam electionem Mathei Parker in Archiepiscopum Pastorem Ecclesiae praedictae suprema authoritate Regiâ nobis in hac parte Commissa Confirmamus Supplentes ex suprema authoritate Regiâ nobis delegata quicquid in nobis aut alique c ut supra That is In the name of the Lord Amen We William c. By the Queens Commissional Letters specially and lawfully deputed Commissioners c. do by the supreme authority of the Queen to us in this behalf committed Confirm the aforesaid Election of Mat. Parker c. supplying by the supreme authority of the Queen to us delegated if any thing be wanting in us or any of us c. as above And if as her Commissioners they Confirmed as her Commissioners also they Consecrated him For 1. The Patent Commissionates them to both alike and they needed her Commission to both alike Mandantes quatenus eundem Confirmare Consecrare velitis c. Commanding you that you Confirm and Consecrate him So if Mandantes did authorise them to the one it did so to the other also 2. The Patent did in formal words authorise them to dispense with themselves for any defect of Faculty c. for the performing of both those acts alike Supplentes suprema authoritate nostra Regia si quid ad praemissa perficienda deest c. And this Dispensation was necessary to the validity of both those acts alike 3. To signifie they did Consecrate him in vertue of the Queens Commission to them for it when three of them at the performing of that Ceremony presented him to the fourth to be Consecrated whereas afore the Statute of H. 8. the Popes Bull for authorising the Consecrators was used to be read at that time in place thereof was read the Queens Patent to them Proferebatur saith the Act of it upon Parkers Records Regium Mandatum pro ejus Consecratione The Queens Mandate or Commission to them for Consecrating of him was read as the authority for what they did The fifth and last Proposition The Queen had her Authority for Commissionating them from the Parliament This is manifest First from the Statute of 25. H. 8.20 which recites how that by an Act made that Parliament they had enacted That if any person nominated or presented by the King to the See of Rome to be any Archbishop of this Realm should be delayed denied or otherwise disturbed from the same for lack of Palls Bulls or other things to him requisite by the Law of the Land then in force to be obtained of the See of Rome that then he might and should be Consecrated and Invested by any two Bishops in this Realm appointed by the King Where although in the next words according and after like manner as divers Archbishops and Bishops have been heretofore in ancient time by sundry of the Kings Progenitors made Consecrated and Invested within this Realm they were willing to seem as if they did not then first grant that right or priviledge to the Crown but onely restore it yet it is manifest they did then grant it to him For as they named none so nor could they name any one King of England who made a Bishop within this Realm and much less the Primate of England the Archbishop of Canterbury Indeed William the Conquerour Rufus and Hen. 1. and perhaps some of our Kings afore them did without asking the Popes consent Invest Bishops in vacant Sees that is by the delivery of a Ring and Crosiar did put them in possession of their Bishopricks so as to injoy their Temporalties and to be legal Bishops in the Kings Courts But I know no instance of one Archbishop of Canterbury Invested by any one of them without the Popes consent nor did any of them use that practice of Investing Bishops after the Council of Vienna which was in