hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
then to the Church of Rome And what office will she take more kindly then the discrediting of those whom she accounteth Heretickes therefore I doe not wonder that you put it in practise I feare nothing but that shortly it shall grow with you a point meritorious Well the Stripe of the rodde maketh markes in the flesh but the stripe of the tongue breaketh the bones But let them remember That the tongue which lyeth slayeth the soule And that all lyers shall haue their portion except they repent in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone PHIL. WHatsoeuer is to be thought of the place yet I will proue by the Lawes of England That neither he nor any of his associats were lawfull Bishops ORTHOD. By the lawes of England how proue you that PHIL. It was ordained by the Parliament in the daies of Henry the eight that no man should be acknowledged a Bishop vnlesse he were Consecrated by three Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane which law was reuiued by Queene Elizabeth and in full strength at the time of the Consecration of Mathew Parker but Mathew Parker was not so Consecrate and therefore by the lawes of England he was not to bee acknowledged for a Bishop For what Archbishop was either present at his Consecration or consenting vnto it Cardinall Poole then late Archbishop of Canterbury was dead and Parker elected into his place Nicholas Heath then last Archbishop of Yorke was deposed Indeed there was a certaine Irish Archbishop whō they had in bonds prison at London with whom they dealt very earnestly promising him both liberty and rewards if so be he would bee chiefe in the Consecration But hee good man would by no meanes be brought to lay holy hands vpon heretikes neither to be partaker of other mens sinnes Wherefore hauing neither Archbishop of their owne religion nor being able to procure any other the Consecration was performed without a Metropolitane cleane contrary to the lawes of England ORTHO What if both Sanders and you abuse the lawes of England in this point as indeed you doe For the words are these And if the person bee elected to the office dignity of an Archbishop according to the tenour of this act then after such election certifyed to the kings highnesse in forme aforesaid hee shal be reputed and taken Lord elect of the said office and dignity of Archbishop whereunto hee shal be so elected and after he hath made such oth and fealty onely to the kings Maiesty his heires and successours as shal be limited for the same the kings highnesse by his letters patents vnder the great seale shall signifie the said election to one Archbishop and two other Bishops or else to foure Bishops within this Realme or within any other the kings Dominions to be assigned by the kings highnesse his heires or successours requiring and commaunding the said Archbishop and Bishops with all speed and celerity to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrate the said person so elected to the office and dignity that he is elected vnto and to giue and vse to him such pall benedictions ceremonies and other things requisite for the same without suing procuring or obtayning any Bulls Briefes or any other things at the See of Rome or by authority thereof in any behalfe Where it is cleare that the King his heires and successours might by the statute send letters patents for Consecration of an Archbishop either to an Archbishop and two Bishops or else to foure Bishops therefore it might be performed without an Archbishop and yet not contrary to the lawes of England PHIL. ADmit this were true yet it auaileth you nothing for Math. Parker was Consecrated neither by three nor by two much lesse by foure though by your owne confession the law required foure ORTHOD. How know you that were you present at his Consecration or did you learne it of any that were present PHIL. I cannot say so but it is very likely because the Catholike Bishops being required to crowne Queene Elizabeth refused all except one ORTHO That one was Owen Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill but hee was none of the Consecrators of Archbishop Parker For he continued in your Popish religion refused the oth of the supremacy was therefore depriued PHIL. That was the common case of them all but one For one alone I must confesse was made to breake vnity of whom a right good and Catholike Bishop said to a Noble man wee had but one foole amongst vs and him you haue gotten vnto you little worthy of the name of a Bishop and Lord whose learning was small and honour thereby much stained And hee as it seemeth was the onely Bishop which you had therefore Math. Parker could not be Consecrated by three ORTHO Hee whom you meane was Anth. Kitchin Bishop of Landaffe who was in the commission but was none of the Consecratours therefore you shoot at randome and misse the marke PHIL. Whence then had you your Consecrators Surely you did not goe to the Churches of the Caluinistes and Lutherans if peraduenture they had any ORTHOD. We did not PHIL. Then you must bee glad to runne to your vsuall refuge that you had one from Greece Alas my masters you are narrowly driuen when you are forced to flie to such miserable shifts ORTHOD. This tale proceeded not from Eudaemon but from Cacodaemon the father of lies No Sir wee needed no Grecian though it pleaseth you to play the Cretian PHIL. If you had neither Bishops of your owne nor procured any either from the Catholike Church or from the reformed Churches or from the Greekish Church then it is true which Doctor Kellison reporteth out of Sanders That they made one another Bishops ORTHO Though Sanders in that booke hath almost as many lies as lines yet he hath not this loude lie it is the inuention of Kellison himselfe you promise demonstratiue reasons and when your argument comes to the issue where all your strength should lie you bring nothing but slender surmises flying reportes and detestable lies Doe these goe at Rome for demonstrations But I will answere you with euidence of truth which may be iustified by monuments of publike record QVeene Mary died in the yeere 1558 the 17. of Nouember and the selfe same day died Card nall Poole Archb. of Canterbury the very same day was Queene Elizabeth proclaimed The 15. of Ianuary next following was the day of Queene Elizabeths Coronation when Doctor Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill was so happy as to set the Diadem of the kingdome vpon her royal head Now the See of Canterbury continued voide till December following about which time the Deane and Chapter hauing receiued the congedelier elected maister Doctour Parker for their Archbishop Iuxta morem antiquum laudabilem consuetudinem Ecclesiae praedictae ab antiquo vsitatam inconcusse obseruatam i. proceeding in this
Bishops but they are found in the Church of Rome and not in the Church of England PHIL. YOur Bishops are no Bishops because they are not ordained according to the Canons ORT. The ancient Canons are more reuerently regarded in the Church of England then in the Church of Rome For how well you haue obserued them in former ages let your owne Baronius testifie How foule saith hee was then the face of the holy Romane Church when most potent and withall most filthie harlots did beare all the sway at Rome at whose lust Sees were changed Bishops appointed and which is horrible to be heard and not to bee vttered whose louers the false Popes were thrust into the seate of Peter which were not to bee written in the Catalogue of the Romane Bishops but onely for the noting of the times for who may say they were lawfull Popes which were thus without right thrust in by such strumpets No where wee finde any mention of Clergie choosing or giuing consent afterward All Canons were put to silence the pontificall decrees were choked ancient traditions proscribed and the old customes sacredrite and former vse in choosing the high Bishop vtterly extinguished And for later times your owne learned friends also complaine as followeth Budeus The holie Canons and rules of Church discipline made in better times to guide the life of Clergie men are now become leaden rules such as Aristotle saith the rules of Lesbyan buildings were For as leaden and soft rules doe not direct the building with an equall tenour but are bowed to the building at the lust of the builders so are the Popes Canons made flexible as leade and waxe that now this great while the Decrees of our ancestours and the Popes Canons serue not to guide mens manners but that I may so say to make a banke and get mony Franciscus de Victoria Doct of the chaire at Salmantica in Spaine Wee see dailie so large or rather so dissolute dispensations proceede from the Court of Rome that the world cannot indure them Neither is it onely to the offence of the little ones but of the great ones also No man seeketh a dispensation but hee obtaineth it Yea at Rome there are which giue attendance to see if any bee willing to craue dispensation of all things established by law all that craue it haue it If you Philodox would see the particulars reade but Claudius Espencaeus a diuine of Paris vpon the Epistle to Titus and vnlesse your fore-head bee as hard as brasse it will make you blush I will conclude this point with the saying of Ruardus Tapperus Chancelour of Louaine In the Court of Rome all things are set at sale with dispensations contayning many things wherewith Christ himselfe is not able to dispence Behold this is your keeping of Canons in the Church of Rome But because you accuse the Church of England for breaking the Canons in making of Bishops I answere first that the consecration of our Bishops is most canonicall Secondly that if wee failed in this or that Canon yet euery transgression of an Ecclesiasticall Canon doth not make a nullitie in a consecration As for example It was prouided by the great Councell of Sardica that none should bee made Bishop vnlesse hee had passed the inferiour orders and staied a long time in them Notwithstanding Nectarius was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople being not only a lay-man but as yet vnbaptized and was presently made Bishop in the second generall Councell held at Constantinople Likewise Saint Ambrose Tarasius Nicephorus Eusebius of Caesarea Thalasius yea and some Popes also as for example Petrus Moronaeus were of lay men aduanced to the Episcopall office yet I know you dare not pronounce a nullitie in their Consecration Wherfore seeing it is a plaine case that euery breach of a Canon doth not annihilate a consecration you must tell vs what Canon you meane and wherein we breake it PHIL. I meane that Canon which requireth that a Bishop should bee consecrated by three Bishops which Canon the Councel of Trent calleth an Apostolicke tradition ORTHO HEre arise two questions the former whether three Bishops be required of necessitie to an Episcopall consecration the later whether the Bishops of England be consecrated by three Now that the state of the former may be the clearer giue me leaue to aske you a few things And first what say you to Amphilochius who was created Bishop not by men but by Angels vnlesse Nicephorus delude vs with fables PHIL. It seemeth to bee no fable but a true Story For Amphilochius was allowed for a lawfull Bishop but this was done as Cardinall Bellarmine saith by diuine dispensation extraordinary ORTH. What say you then to the blessed Apostles were they Bishops or no And if Bishops whether in that they were Apostles or by distinct consecration and if by distinct consecration by whom were they consecrated PHIL. Cardinall Turrecremata teacheth that Chirst himselfe made Peter a Bishoppe immediatelie and Peter ordained the rest first Iohn next Iames then others And Cardinall Bellarmine maketh it the two and twentith prerogatiue of Peter Quòd solus Petrus a Christo ordinatus Episcopus fuerit caeteri autem a Petro Episcopalem consecrationem acceperint i. That onely Peter was ordained Bishop by Christ and the rest receiued their Episcopall consecration from Peter ORTHOD. These conceites and fancies when they shal be weighed in the ballance wil be found too light In the meane time what say you to the consecration of Iohn and Iames were they sound and Canonical PHIL. They were sound no doubt but why should you aske if they were canonicall seeing the Canon was not then made You must vnderstand that there is one consideration to bee had of the Church when it is in the cradle and another when it is growne to ripe and florishing yeeres In the infancie of the Church when Christ ascending into glorie had consecrated Peter and made him the spring and fountaine of all Episcopall Order it was necessarie that the first should bee consecrated by Peter alone the next by two at the most and these consecrations were sound and sufficient but when Iames the brother of our Lord was ordained Bishoppe of Ierusalem by Peter Iohn and the other Iames they gaue a Forme or Patterne to their successours as Anacletus declareth that a Bishop should by no meanes bee consecrated by fewer then by three all the rest giuing their consent ORTHO Suppose a Church should suffer such desolation which the Lord forbid that a Canonicall number of Catholicke Bishops were not to be found what should then be done in this case of necessitie PHIL. Wee may learne that partly of the Councell of Sardica which permitteth a supply from the next prouince partly of Pope Gregory the seuenth who when the Churches of Africke were brought to so lowe an ebbe that they had
you make a grieuous complaint that they were not onely deposed but also vsed with great indignitie both before their deposing and after Wherfore let vs first consider the circumstances and then come to the deposition it selfe PHIL. I say that a Grieuous penalty was inflicted vpon such as should after the feast of Saint Iohn Baptist 1559. say or heare Masse or procure any other Ecclesisticall office whatsoeuer after the old rite ORTHOD. You maske your noueltie vnder the vizard of antiquity and call that the old rite which was but yesterday but proceed PHIL. This penalty extended to such as should administer any Sacrament after the Roman manner ORT. Saint Paul saith That which I receiued of the Lord that deliuer I vnto you teaching vs that Sacraments must bee ministred in such manner as wee haue receiued of the Lord wee are not tied to the rite of Rome or any other City or Country but onely to the institution of Iesus Christ If Rome follow this wee will follow it with Rome if Rome forsake this then farewell Rome But what was the penalty PHIL. To wit That hee which offended against the law for the first time should pay two hundred crownes or be in bonds six monthes for the second foure hundred crownes or a yeere in bondes for the third hee should bee in perpetuall prison and forfeite all his goods ORTHOD. What hath that good Lady done which doth not become a most vertuous and gratious Prince hath shee made lawes to establish religion So did Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius Hath shee inflicted a penalty vpon the infringers So did Constantine vpon the Donatists That their goods should bee confiscate so did Theodosius vpon the Donatists likewise Ten pound of gold to bee paide to the Emperours Exchequer And these lawes are highly commended by Saint Austin Indeed he was some times of opinion that they were to bee dealt withall onely by perswasions not by penalties but when his fellow Bishops laide before him so plaine examples of so many cities infected with Donatisme and all reclaimed by helpe of imperiall lawes hee changed his minde and yeelded vnto them Then hee perceiued that the Circumcellions which were like vnto mad men were brought into their right wittes againe and made good Catholikes by being bound as it were with the chaines of imperiall lawes then he perceiued that others beeing in a spirituall lethargie were awakened with the seuerity of Imperiall lawes then hee perceiued that the Kings of the earth serue Christ euen by making lawes for Christ. So did that gratious Lady Queene Elizabeth wherein how mildely and mercifully shee proceeded you may learne by looking backe to her sister Queene Mary who was not content to inflict a pecuniary mulct or a little imprisonment vpon those of the contrary religion but tied thē to stakes burned thē to ashes in flaming fire PHIL. As though a life lingting in disgrace were not worse then a present death For Foureteene noble and most worthy Bishops inferiour in vertue and learning to none in Europe were all deposed from their honours and high calling and most of them imprisoned and spitefully vsed in all respectes ORTHOD. FIrst let vs consider what they deserued and secondly how they were serued How well they deserued at the Queenes hands may appeare by their behauiour in three points concerning the Coronation Disputation and Excommunication First when the Queen was to bee crowned they all conspired together refusing to performe such solemnitie as by them of dutie was to bee performed at her Coronation Owen Oglethorp Bishop of Carlill onely excepted PHIL. Had they not cause to refuse So soone as shee came to the crowne shee presently reuealed her minde in religion both by many other meanes and especially in that shee straightway silenced the Catholike Preachers and suffered the heretikes to returne into the kingdome from diuers places where they were in banishment Moreouer shee gaue charge to a certaine Bishop about to performe the holy rite before her and now standing at the Altar attyred in holy vestments that hee should not eleuate the Consecrated hoaste whereupon it came to passe that the Archbishoppe of Yorke whose office it was Cardinall Poole Archbishop of Canterbury beeing departed this transitory life to annoynt and Consecrate her to bee Queene denied his helpe and the rest of the Bishops likewise al sauing one and he almost the last among them ORTHO Your eleuation is referred to adoration which is Idolatrie therefore if shee forbad it as also the Preaching of errour and commanded the Preaching of truth shee did but her duty For as Saint Austin saith Princes may commaund that which is good and forbid that which is euill within their owne kingdomes not in ciuill affaires onely but in matters pertayning to diuine religion also But if it were so that the Queene therein had committed an errour if it were so that Popery were true religion yet shee was the lawfull Queene the Kingdome descended to her by right of inheritance the Nobles and commons according to their dutie acknowledged her for Queene she was proclaimed by order taken by the Lords and the Archb. of Yorke himselfe then Lord Chancelour of England what reason then had the Bishops to deny her that solemnity which was neuer denied to any of her noble progenitours If she had pulled the Miters from their heades for refusing to set the Diademe vpon her head had not this beene a iust reward for a due desert Hitherto of the first point that is the Coronation SEcondly it was the Queenes pleasure that there should be a solemne disputation betweene the Popish Bishops or some other Champions appointed by them on the one part and other learned diuines of our religion on the other part but the Bishops with one accord most obstinately refused the incounter PHIL. They had reason for as they then answered for themselues It was not fit that those things which for many ages had beene defined by so famous iudgements of Popes Councels and Fathers should now come againe into question and disputation ORTH. You tell vs of Popes Councels and Fathers but I heare no mention at all of the Scripture truly Philodox wee builde not our faith vpon Popes nor Councels nor Fathers but onely vpon the blessed and sacred word of God registred in the writings of the Apostles and Prophets but for the better vnderstanding of this word wee make honourable account of ancient Councels and Fathers yet so that wee put an infinite difference betweene them and the word of the liuing God For the word of God is infallible it can neither deceiue nor bee deceiued but the word of man is subiect to errour therefore wee must trie all things and holde that which is good and the touchstone of all is the word of God Neither are wee afraid of the Councels and Fathers you beare the world in hand that all make for you but vpon manifold and
hoc regno Angliae quam alium quemuis externum Episcopum i. At the length we all agreed with one minde and one heart vpon this conclusion to wit That the Bishop of Rome hath not any greater iurisdiction giuen him of God in holy Scripture ouer this kingdome of England then any other forraine Bishop And Bellarmine himselfe telleth vs out of Cheynie the Carthusian Monke that in the yeere 1535. there was a Parliament wherein it was Enacted That all should renounce the Pope and all other forraine powers and acknowledge the King to be head of the Church vpon their oath Thus it is manifest that the Bishops and Clergie did then both approue the Title and take the oath which Bishops were such as your selues commend to bee inferiour to none in Europe for vertue and learning And truely excepting their opinions in Religion wherein they were caried away with the streame of the time it cannot be denied but that generally they were very well learned Erasmus inuited into England by William Warham Archbishop of Canterbury when he had considered what difference there was betweene the Bishops of England and other Nations he published to the world in Print That onely England had learned Bishops Moreouer most of these learned Bishops did openly in the Pulpit at Pauls-Crosse defend the Kings Title and sundry of them by their published writings maintained the same The selfe-same oath was taken againe in the â—aigne of K. Edward PHIL. They changed their minds in the dayes of Q. Mary ORTHOD. Very true But their inconstancie cannot abolish the soliditie of their former confession and though they recalled their opinions yet they neuer answered their owne Arguments which remaine still in Print as a witnesse to the world that their former iudgement was grounded vpon Gods Veritie and that the Princes Title did stand with right and equitie PHIL. THese were Bishops and Synods of our owne nation onely but was there euer any learned man else-where that did approue this Title was there euer any King or Queene Christian or Heathen Catholicke or Hereticke in all the world beside before our age that did practise challenge or accept it ORTHOD. Looke into the godly Kings of Iuda Looke into the proceedings of Christian Emperours Constantine Gratian Theodosius and such like Looke into the Lawes of Charles and Lodowicke and you shall see that they practised as much as euer we ascribed to the Queene in this oath When the Councell of Ephesus by the packing of Dioscorus had allowed the cursed opinion of Eutyches and deposed Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople Pope Leo vpon this occasion wrote thus vnto the Emperour Theodosius Behold most Christian and reuerend Emperour I with the rest of my fellow Bishops make supplication vnto you That all things may stand in the same state in which they were before any of these Iudgements vntill a greater number of Bishops may be gathered out of the whole world Who made this supplication Pope Leo a holy and learned Pope To whom To the Emperour Theodosius For what That the Emperour would command not intreat but command So this is an action of Royall authoritie What should he command That all things might stand in their former state What things meaneth he The highest mysteries of Religion concerning the Natures and person of Christ. But what is it to stand in the former state That it might be lawfull for all men so to iudge and speake of these holy Mysteries as they did before the springing vp of the Eutychian Heresie for then they held the Trueth according to the Apostolicke faith And this he beseecheth the Emperour to command notwithstanding the contrary determination of the Councell of Ephesus The second Councell of Ephesus which apparantly subuerted the faith cannot rightly bee called a Councell which your Highnes for very loue to the Trueth will make voyd by your Decree to the contrary most glorious Emperour I therefore earnestly request and beseech your Maiestie by our Lord Iesus Christ the founder and guider of your Kingdome That in this Councell of Chalcedon which is presently to be kept you will not suffer the Faith to be called in question which our blessed Fathers preached being deliuered vnto them from the Apostles Neither permit such things as haue bene long since condemned by them to be freshly reuiued againe but that you will rather command That the Constitutions of the ancient Nicene Councell may stand in force the interpretation of Hereticks being remooued Here the Pope ascribeth to the Emperour power to ratifie and establish those Councels which are according to the Scripture and to disanull those whose determinations are contrary to the Scripture Yea he acknowledgeth that the Emperour hath authoritie to inhibite and restraine Generall Councels that they call not the Trueth of God in question Which the Emperour Martian practised entring the Councell of Chalcedon in his owne person and forbidding the Bishops to auouch any thing concerning the birth of our Sauiour otherwise then was contained in the Nicene Creed Moreouer when the Councell of Chalcedon was concluded Pope Leo wrote thus againe to the Emperour Because I must by all meanes obey your pietie and most Religious will I haue willingly giuen my consenting sentence to those Synodall Constitutions which concerning the confirmation of the Catholicke faith and condemnation of Hereticks pleased me very well The Emperour required the Pope to subscribe And he cheerefully did so Protesting that for his part he must by all meanes obey the Princes will in those cases Now tell me whether the Pope did not acknowledge the Emperour and the Emperour shew himselfe to be Supreame gouernour ouer all persons euen in causes Ecclesiasticall AS the Emperour Martian did practise this Supremacie so the Emperour Basill did challenge the Title when he said in the Councel of Constantinople That the gouernment of the vniuersall Ecclesiasticall Ship was committed vnto him by the Diuine prouidence PHIL. The words are thus in Surius In exordio Synodi ita locutus est Basilius Cum diuina benignissima prouidentia nobis gubernacula vniuersalis Nauis commisisset c. that is In the beginning of the Synod thus said Basilius the Emperor when the diuine and most benigne prouidence had committed vnto vs the gouernment of the vniuersall ship c. Where by vniuersall ship is meant ciuill administration not Ecclesiasticall as Surius hath well obserued ORTHO Binius relating the acts of the councell telleth how the Emperours Epainagnosticum was read in the councell in these words Diuina clementique prouidentia gubernacula Ecclesiasticae nâ—uis vobis committente that is The diuine and gracius prouidence of God committing vnto you the gouernment of the Ecclesiasticall ship Where you see that he speaketh of the Ecclesiasticall ship PHIL. To whom was the gouernment of the ship committed Vobis to you that is to the Bishops what is this to the Emperour ORTH. Indeed
election according to the ancient manner and the laudable custome of the foresaid Church aunciently vsed and inuiolably obserued After which election orderly performed and signified according to the law it pleased her highnesse to send her letters pattents of Commission for his confirmation and consecration to seuen Bishops six whereof were lately returned from exile whose names with so much of the commission as concerneth this present purpose I will here set downe for your better satisfaction Elizabeth Dei gratia c. Reuerendis in Christo patribus Anth. Landauensi Will. Barlow quondam Bath Episcopo nunc Cicestrensi electo Ioh. Scory quondam Cicestrensi Episcopo nunc Herefordensi electo Miloni Couerdale quondam Exoniensi Episcopo Ioh. Suffraganeo Bedford Ioh. Suffraganeo Theâ—ford Ioh. Bale Ossorensi Episcopo Quatenus vos aut ad minus 4. vestrum eundem Math. Parkerum in Archiepiscopum pastorem Ecclesiae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cantuar praedictae sicut praefertur electum electionemque praedictam confirmare eundem Magistrum Math. Parker in Arch Pastorem Ecclesiae praedictae consecrare caeteraque omnia singula peragere quae vestro in hac parte incumbunt pastorali efficio iuxta formam statutorum in ca parte editorum prouisorum velitis cum effectu c. Daâ— 6 Decem. Anno 2. Elizab that is That you or at the least foure of you would effectually confirme the said Matth Parker elected to bee Archbishop and Pastour of the Cathedrall and Metropoliticall Church of Christ at Canterbury aforesaid as is before mentioned and that you would effectually confirme the saide election and consecrate the saide Matthew Parker Archbishop and Pastour of the said Church and performe all and euery thing which belongs to your Pastorall office in this respect according to the forme of the statutes set out and prouided in this behalfe Behold how both the commission and statute concurre with the Canons PHIL. BVt was the consecration accordingly performed ORTH. You neede not doubt of it For first the Bishops to whom the letters patents were directed had reason to set their handes cheerefully to so good a worke so much tending to the aduancing of the true Religion which they all imbraced and for which all of them except one had beene in exile Secondly how durst they doe otherwise seeing it was enacted by a statute made in the 25. yeare of King Henry 8. and still in force that if any Archbishop or Bishop within the Kings dominions after any such election nomination or presentation signified vnto them by the Kings letters patents should refuse and not confirme inuest and consecrate with all due circumstance within twentie dayes after that the Kings letters patents of such signification or presentation should come to their hands then hee or they so offending should runne in the dangers paines and penalties of the statute of prouision and premunire made in the twentie fiue yeare of the raigne of king Edward the third and in the sixteenth of king Richard the second PHIL. This is some probabilitie but yet for all this seeing maister D. Sanders saith that you had neither three nor two Bishops and maister D. Kellison saith you could finde none I will not beleeue the contrary vnlesse you produce the consecration it selfe ORTHOD. Then to take away all scruple I will faithfully deliuer vnto you out of Authenticall records both the day when he was consecrated and the persons by whom Anno 1559. Matt. Park Cant. Cons. 17. Decem. by William Barlow Iohn Scorie Miles Couerdale Iohn Hodgeskins PHIL. IF all this were granted yet it were nothing vnlesse you could iustifie the consecration of his consecratours therefore you must tell me when they were made Bishops ORTHOD. Two of them in the raigne of king Henry 8. and two in the dayes of king Edward the sixt In the raigne of K. Henry B. Barlow and the Suffragan of Bedford Bishop Barlow was a man of singular note who to vse the wordes of Bale ab erudito ingenio famam accepit that is hee had great fame and renowne for a learned wit In regard whereof he was aduanced to be Prior of Bisham and from thence elected to the Bishoprick of Saint Asaph which election was confirmed 23. Febr 1535. and soone after it pleased the King to preferre him to the Bishopricke of Saint Dauids where hee continued all the dayes of King Henry duely discharging all things belonging to the order of a Bishop euen Episcopall consecration as I haue already declared out of authenticall records He was also translated by King Edward to the Bishoprick of Bath and Wels and by Queene Elizabeth promoted to Chichester And as he was generally acknowledged and obeyed as a Bishop in his owne nation so Bucanan relating how King Henry sent him Embassadour into Scotland doth giue him his iust Episcopall title Now you told vs before out of Sanders that in King Henries time none might bee acknowledged for a Bishop vnlesse hee were consecrated by three with the consent of the Metropolitane Wherefore seeing Barlow was so famously and notoriously acknowledged not onely in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth and King Edward but also in the dayes of King Henry it is a cleare case that hee was so consecrated The same is to be said of the Suffragan of Bedford PHIL. What tell you mee of Suffraganes you know how Damasus speaketh against those titulary Bishops called Chorepiscopi ORTHOD. There are two sorts of Chorepiscopi the first had no Episcopall Consecration who are reproued and that iustly for they were onely Priests and not Bishops and of these Damasus speaketh in the iudgement of Bellarmine The second had Episcopall Consecration and these though they had no citie nor diocesse of their owne but onely some countrey towne for their See yet in regard of their Consecration they were true Bishops as Bellarmine confesseth Respondeo Suffraganeos esse veros Episcopos quia ordinationem habent Iurisdictionem licet careant possessione propriae Ecclesia that is I answere that Suffraganes are true Bishops because they haue both ordination and Iurisdiction although they are not possessed of a Church of their owne And of this latter sort are the Suffraganes of England established by act of Parliament in these wordes Be it therefore enacted by authority of this present Parliament that the townes of Thetford Ipswich Colchester Douer Gilsord Southampton Taunton Shaftesbury Molton Marleborrow Bedford Leicester Glocester Shrewsbury Bristow Penreth Bridgwater Nottingham Grantham Hul Huntingdon Cambridge and the townes of Pereth and Barwicke S. Germans in Cornewall and the I le of Wight shall bee taken and accepted for Sees of Bishops Suffraganes to bee made in this Realme and in Wales And the Bishops of such Sees shall bee called Suffraganes of this Realme And for their consecration prouided alwayes that the Bishop that shall nominate the Suffragane to the kings highnesse or the
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
Hales Archdeacon of Lincolne dying intestate left to secular men many thousand markes with great store of Plate and that Almarick Archdeacon of Bedford died also very rich and that Iohn Archd. of Northamton dyed worth fiue thousand markes besides thirty pieces of plate and infinite Iewels Hereupon he made a strange decree not without note of manifest couetousnesse to be proclaimed in England that if from thenceforth any Clerke should die intestate his goods should be turned to the vse of the lord the Pope the execution of which mandate he committed to the preaching Fryers and Minorites but the king hearing of it detesting the couetousnesse of the Romane Court forbade it as preiudiciall to him and his Realme The same yeere the Pope sent to the Bishops of England for a tallage of sixe thousand marke The Bishop of Norwich the Popes prowler in this behalfe wrote to the Abbot of S. Albans for 80. marke the king forbad him to pay and charged the Bishop of Norwich and other Bishops not to proceed in that exaction as they desired to keepe their Baronies holden of the King Thus the Church of England was miserably torne and ground betweene the King and the Pope as betweene two milstones moouing contrary wayes Yet the same yeere the courage of the king relented and he suffered the Church to be spoiled of the sixe thousand marke Then the Pope more bolde then euer before gaue in charge to all the prelates of England that all beneficed men if they were residents should pay the Pope the third part if non residents halfe of their goods but the king forbad the payment and the Clergie rendred many reasons why it was vnreasonable Anno 1247. There was holden a Parliament at London wherin were lamentable complaints of the Popes extortion and it was concluded that letters should be sent to the Pope in the name of the whole kingdome which was dâ—ne and they obtained only this that when the Pope was to make prouision here for his Nephewes or Cardinalls he should aske the king leaue The same yeere there came two English Friers Minorites with the Popes Bulls and got great summes of money they demaunded of the Diocesse of Lincolne 6000. marke the same yeere there was a Parliament and the Clergie granted to the Pope 11000. markes The same yeere the grieuances were much increased for the Prelates were suspended from Collation of Benefices till the greedines of the Romanes were satisfied Anno 1252. the Bishop of Lincolne caused a true account to be made of the reuenues of strangers in England and it was found to be more then 70000. markes Anno 1253. Robert Bishop of Lincolne sent to the Pope this Epistle following Let your wisdome know that I obey the Apostolicke Mandates with a filiall affection deuoutly and reuerently And being zealous of my Fathers honour I am contrary and opposite to those things which are contrary to the Mandates Apostolicke For I am bound to both by the Mandate of God Apostolicke Mandates neither are or can be other then the doctrines of the Apostles and of our Lord Iesus Christ the Master and Lord of the Apostles For the Lord Iesus Christ saith He that is not with me is against me But the diuine Holinesse of the Apostolicke See neither is or can be against him Therefore the tenour of the aforesaid Letter is not consonant to Apostolicke Holines but a thing much dissonant and disagreeing First because from this Addition Non obstante annexed to this and such like Letters which are dispersed farre and wide and not induced with any necessitie of the Law of Nature which is to be obserued there flowes a whole deluge of inconstancie boldnesse malepertnesse immodestie lying deceiuing distrusting and all vices thereupon insuing where of the number is infinite shaking and disturbing the puritie of Christian Religion and the tranquillitie of humane societie Moreouer after the sin of Lucifer which shall also be the sinne of Antichrist the child of perdition whom the Lord shall destroy with the breath of his mouth There is not nor cannot be any other kinde of sinne so aduerse and contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles and Euangelists and to our Lord Iesus Christ so hatefull so detestable and so abominable as to kill and destroy soules by defrauding them of the Office and Ministerie of the Pastorall charge Which sinnes they are knowne by most euident testimonies of holy Scripture to commit which being placed in the power of Pastorall charge doe get the wages of the Pastorall Office and Ministerie arising of the milke and wooll of the sheepe of Christ which ought to be quickened and saued and do not minister such things as are due vnto them For the very not administration of Pastorall Offices is by the testimony of Scripture the killing and destruction of the sheepe And to passe ouer the rest because it is somewhat long I will onely adde his conclusion And briefly recounting I say the Holinesse of the See Apostolicke can onely doe such things as tend to edification and not to destruction For this is the fulnesse of power to be able to doe all things to edification But these things which they call Prouisions are not for edification but for most manifest destruction Therefore the blessed See Apostolicke cannot accept of them because flesh and blood which shall not possesse the Kingdome of Heauen hath reuealed them and not the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ which is in Heauen When this Letter came to the audience of the Pope he being not able to containe himselfe said Who is this dotish surd absurd oldman that with such rash presumption iudgeth our acts By S. Peter and S. Paul if my goodnature did not stay me I should hurle him into such a coÌ„fusion that he should be the fable of the world an astonishment an example a wonderment Is not the King of England our vassall or to say more our slaue who is able at our becke to imprison him and to make him a slaue to shame and reproch But the Cardinals said vnto him Our good L. it were not expedient that we should decree any hard matter against the Bishop for that we may confesse the trueth those things which he saith are true we cannot condemne him he is a Catholicke yea and a most holy man more Religious then we and more holy then we more excellent and of a more excellent life so that he is supposed among all the Prelates of the world not to haue his better nor his equall The whole Clergie of France and England knoweth so much The trueth of such an Epistle which peraduenture is already knowne to many will be able to moue many against vs for he is counted a great Pilosopher perfitly learned in Greeke and Latin a zealous louer of righteousnes a reader in schooles of Diuinitie a preacher among the people a louer of chastitie a persecuter of
is no remission of sinne properly except onely by grace but to giue grace proceedeth from an infinite power whereof man is not capable and therefore no man can forgiue sins properly And if you be not yet perswaded how generally this is receiued I will let you see it by the words of Suarez the Iesuite Fuit grauium doctorum opinio per â—anc potestatem non posse remitti peccatorum culpas sed solum declarari remissas remitti paenas in hoc vltimo est quaedam diuer sitas Nam quidam dixerunt hanc potestatem solùm esse ad â—â—â—â—ttendam paenam temporalem alij vero ad aeternam i. It was the opinion of graue Doctours that by this power the sinners offences are not remitted but onely declared to be remitted and that the punishments are remitted and in this last point there is some diuersitie for some said that this power is onely for the remission of temporall punishment others for eternall And he saith that the former opinion is maintained by the master Altisiodorensis Alex. de Hales Bonauenture Gabriel Maior Thomas de Argent Occam Abulensis and others MOreouer Bonauenture writing of the miracles which were done by the intercession of Saint Francis after his death telleth of a certaine woman which when she was ready to be put into the graue was by vertue of his prayers restored from death to life to that end shee might reueale in confession a certaine sinne which she neuer had confessed before Which Bellarmine relateth as an argument to prooue that auricular confession is approued by God himselfe If you beleeue this lying Legend that the woman was shriuen after her death then you may like wise beleeue that the Priest absolued her For by what reason could he denie her absolution if God raised her by miracle to make confession Now I would demaund whether this woman dyed in the state of damnation or saluation if in state of damnation then the priest could neither iustifie her nor declare her to be iustified because they which die in their sinnes shall perish in their sinnes but if she dyed in the state of saluation and yet was raised by miracle to confesse some sinne for the clearing of others or for some other reason we know not then the Priest did not properly forgiue her sinnes but onely pronounce that they were forgiuen I will close vp this point with a memorable saying of Ferus vpon these wordes Whose sinnes you forgiue c. Non quod homo propriè remittit peccatum sed quod ostendat ac certificet a deo remissum neque enim aliud est absolutio quam ab homine accipis quam si dicat En fi lt certifico te tibi remissa esse peccata annuncio tibi te habere propitium deum quaecunque Christus in Baptismo Euangelio nobis promisit tibi nunc per me annunciat promittit i. Not that man doth properly forgiue sinne but that he sheweth and certifieth that it is forgiuen of God for the absolution which thou receiuest from man is nothing else then if hee should say Behold my son I certifie thee that thy sins are forgiuen I declare vnto thee that thou hast God fauourable and what thing soeuer Christ hath promised vs in baptisme and in the Gospel he now declareth and promiseth to thee by me WHerefore seing we haue in our ordination these words receiue the holy Ghost and take them in the true sence according to the Scripture the consciences of our aduersaries bearing vs witnesse we conclude that the Church of England hath such an absolution as Christ hath left vnto his spouse consisting in the publike and priuate vse of the word and Sacraments CHAP. X. An answere to the arguments of Bellarmine by which he goeth about to prooue absolution to be iudiciall and not declaratory PHIL. THat Christ gaue vnto his Church a true iudiciall power to absolue with authority and consequently that Priests are not onely as heraulds to proclaime and declare but also as iudges in the Court of conscience truely and really to forgiue sinnes Cardinall Bellarmine hath proued by seuen arguments fiue wherof are collected out of the Scripture the sixt is drawne from the authoritie of the Fathers and the seuenth from reason all which I will prosecute in order The first is collected from the Metaphor of the keyes of which it is said I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen For a key vseth not to be made or giuen to signifie that the doore is open or shut but to open and shut it indeed Now that which was promised by the keyes was performed in that place of Iohn and therefore here he gaue them power not onely to declare vnto men that their sinnes are forgiuen but also to forgiue them indeed ORTHOD. As Adam for his sinne was shut out of Paradise so all his posterity proceeding from him by carnall generation considered in their naturall corruption are shut and locked out of heauen into which no vncleane thing can enter For as the Prophet saith Your iniquities haue made a separation betweene you and your God Neither is there any hope of saluation vnlesse the kingdome of heauen bee vnlocked againe But what is the key to open this locke There is a threefold key the first of authoritie the second of excellency and the third of Ministery The key of authoritie belongeth onely to God For seeing euery sinne is a transgression of Diuine law he only hath soueraigne authoritie to remit it against whom it is committed and when he doth remit it then he setteth open the gates of heauen The key of excellency belongeth onely to Christ God and man who by his most soueraigne sacrifice hath made satis faction to God the Father purchased an eternall redemption for vs and meritoriously opened the kingdome of heauen to all beleeuers The key of Ministery was giuen to the Apostles aud their successours to whom was committed the Ministery of reconciliation Which is well expressed by S. Ambrose saying Homines in remissionem peccatorum ministerium suum exhibent non ius alicuius potestatis exercent neque enim in suo sed in patris filij spiritus sanctinomine peccata dimittunt isti rogant diuinitas donat humanum enim obsequium sed munificentia supernae est potestatis i. Men doe performe a seruice or Ministery for the forgiuenesse of sinnes but they doe not exercise the authoritie of any power for they doe not forgiue sins in their owne name but in the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost They make request the dietie bestoweth the gift An office or seruice is performed by man but the bountiful gift is from supernal power This supernall power is the key of authoritie this humane office is the key of Ministery For as a key is made and giuen to open the doore indeed So God gaue the key
you compasse sea and land to make one proselite and when hee is become one you make him two fould more the childe of Hell then yee your selues are But when he is reconciled what is then to be done PHIL. Though now hee bee a Catholicke when the Diuell is coniured out of him yet before he can be Priest hee must be cast wholy in a newe mould For as I told you we account your Ministers but meerly lay men without orders ORTHOD. The more to blame you and therein you degenerate from your forefathers as may appeare by the articles sent by Queene Mary to Bishop Bonner one whereof was this Item touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to any orders after the new sort and fashion of orders considering they were not ordered in very deede the bishop of the Diocesse finding otherwise sufficiency and abilitie in these men may supply that thing which wanted in them before and then according to his discretion admit them to minister Heere you see that they did not ordaine them a new but onely supply that which they thought to be wanting and therefore they misliked not our orders in whole but in part PHIL. Yes they wholly misliked them as you may see by the words considering they were not ordered in very deed If they were not ordered in very deed then howsoeuer they pretended orders yet they had no orders at all but were meerely lay men and so are you For that which they call the new sort and fashion of orders was according to the booke established by King Edward which is vsed in England to this very day ORTHO Doth not a Bishop ordaine when he imposeth handes and saith Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes you forgiue c. PHIL. I answere that Priests are ordained when it is said vnto them take thou power to offer sacrifice but they are also ordained afterward when it is said vnto them Receiue the holy Ghost For by the former wordes they are ordained to the function of sacrificing by the latter to the function of absoluing by both ioyntly to the full and perfect order of Priesthood ORTHOD. But these words Receiue the holy Ghost were vsed in king Edwards time and are to this day in the Church of England in making of Ministers And therefore those that are promoted to orders after the new sort and fashion as you call it are ordered in very deed neither did the Penners of the article meane otherwise PHIL. Are not their words plaine that they were not ordered in very deed ORTHOD. They meant that they were not ordered fully and perfectly therfore aduised the Bishops to supply that which wanted Which they could not say with reason if they had thought them to be meerely lay men therefore they iudged them to bee Priests in part and yet part of the office to bee wanting which needed supply That which they had was the power receiued by these wordes Receiue the holy Ghost That which they supposed to be wanting was the power of sacrificing Therefore their meaning was not to reiterate that which they had but to supply that which was wanting in their cōceit euen as we on the contrary side cause such as come from Popery to vs to renounce the power of sacrificing which we hold sacrilegious but doe not reiterate those Euangelicall words wherin we agree And this you must needes grant vnlesse you will allow of reordination PHIL. Reordination God forbid No sir we will neuer allow of that For order imprinteth a Character and therefore can neuer be reiterated ORTHOD. But you granted before that a Priest is ordained when the Bishop saith vnto him Receiue the holy Ghost And therefore if the power of remitting sinnes giuen in these words were reiterated either in Queene Maries time or among you at this day in ordaining your proselytes then you cannot possibly defend your Church from Reordination If you abhorre Re-ordination then you must confesse that when any Minister reuolteth from vs to you yet in making him Priest you must not repeat those words Receiue the holy Ghost which proueth inuincibly that vnlesse you will be contrary vnto your selues you cannot esteeme vs to bee meerely lay men Or if you will needs aduance your owne orders and make a nullitie in ours and order our fugitiue Ministers accordingly then you must runne there is no remedy vpon the rocke of Reordination by repeating the words wherein we agree PHIL. Though we agree in the wordes yet we differ in the sense ORTHOD. That is no barre to Reordination for if a child bee Baptised in the true forme of words an Heretick shall Baptise the same child in the same wordes though in another sense yet all good Christians will iudge it to be Rebaptisation and there is the same reason of Reordination Therefore thus I reason When you Metamorphise an English Minister into a Popish Priest either you repeat the words Receiue the holy Ghost or you doe not if you doe repeat them then I haue made it manifest that you vse Reordination If you doe not then you iustifie not onely our practise but also our orders For you hold these words necessary in ordination to the conferring of one of the principall functions of Priesthood and therfore in not repeating them you acknowledge that they had receiued that function before in the Church of England consequently that the ministers of England are not lay men So your owne practise doth either condemne your selues or iustifie vs but our practise condemneth altogether the first part of your Priesthood that is your carnall sacrificing as simply abhominable and the latter part so farre as it is polluted with your popish constructions PHIL. If the first part of our Priesthood bee simply abhominable and the latter as it is vsed by vs bee polluted then Cranmer Ridley Parker Grindall and the rest of your Coronels had no other Priesthood but that which was partly abhominable and partly polluted ORTHO When God opened their eyes they did vtterly renounce your carnall sacrificing as derogating from the all-sufficient sacrifice of Iesus Christ the other part that is the power of forgiuing sinnes which they receiued corruptly in the Church of Rome they practised purely in the Church of England renouncing the Pope and all Popish pollutions PHIL. But when the question is concerning the validity of orders wee must not so much respect the practise as the power receiued in ordination how Cranmer Parker and such like receiued both parts of their Priesthood in the Church of Rome And as the Church gaue them so they receiued them in that very sense which the Church of Rome holdeth at this day Wherefore seeing you condemned both parts as we vse them for nettles I cannot but maruell how you can be Roses ORTHOD. Let me aske you a question If one Baptize a Conuert in the Element of water according to the true forme of the Church yet so that both the Baptizer and the baptized haue