more surety thereof as hereafter shall be expressed First it is very well known to all degrées of this Realm that the late King of most famous memory K. Henry 8. as well by all the Clergy then of this Realm in their several Convocations as also by all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in divers of his Parliaments was justly and rightfully recognized and knowledged to have the supream Power Iurisdiction Order Rule and Authority over all the State Ecclesiastical of the same and the same power jurisdiction and authority did use accordingly And that also the said late King in the Five and twentieth year of his Reign did by authority of Parliament amongst other things set forth a certain Order of the manner and form how Archbishops and Bishops should be elected and made as by the same more plainly appears And that also the late King of worthy memory King Edward the Sixth did lawfully succeed his Father in the Imperial Crown of this Realm and did justly possess and enjoy all the same power jurisdiction and authority before mentioned as a thing to him descended with the said Imperial Crown and so used the same during his life And that also the said King Edw. 6. in his time by authority of Parliament caused a godly Book intituled The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies in the Church of England to be made and set forth not onely for one Vniform Order of Service Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments to be used within this Realm and other his Dominions but also did adde and put to the same Book a very good and godly Order of the manner and form how Archbishops Bishops Priests Deacons and Ministers should from time to time be Consecrated made and Ordered within this Realm and other his Dominions as by the same Book more plainly may and will appear And although in the time of the said late Queen Mary as well the said Act and Statute made in the five and twentieth year of the Reign of the said late King Hen. 8. as also the several Acts and Statutes made in the 2 3 4 5 and 6. years of the Reign of the said late King Edward for the authorizing and allowing the said Book of Common Prayer and other the premises amongst divers other Acts and Statutes touching the said supream authority were repealed yet nevertheless at the Parliament holden at Westminster in the first year of the Reigne of our Sovereign Lady the Queens Majesty that now is by one other Act and Statute there made all such Iurisdictions Priviledges Superiorities and Preeminences Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been or may lawfully be used over the Ecclesiastical State of this Realme and the Order Reformaxion and Correction of the same is fully and absolutely by the authority of the same Parliament united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm and by the same Act and Statute there is also given to the Queens Highness her heirs and successors Kings and Queens of this Realm full power and authority by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England from time to time to assigne name and authorize such person or persons as she or they shall think meet and convenient to exercise use occupy and execute under her Highness all manner of Iurisdictions Priviledges Preeminences and Authorities in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power or Iurisdiction within this Realm or any other her Dominions or Countries And also by the same Act and Statute the said Act made in the Five and twentieth year of the said late King Hen. 8. for the order and form of the electing and making of the said Archbishops and Bishops together with divers other Statutes touching the Iurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical is revived and made in full force and effect as by the same Act and Statute plainly appeareth And that also by another Act and Statute made in the said Parliament in the first year of the Reign of our said Sovereign Queen intituled An Act for the Uniformity of Common Prayer and Service in the Church the said Book of Common Prayer and the Administration of Sacraments and other the said Orders Rites and Ceremonies before mentioned and all things therein contained with certain Additions therein newly added and appointed by the said Statute is fully stablished and authorized to be used in all places within this Realm and all other the Quéens Majesties Dominions and Countries as by the same Act among other things more plainly appeareth Whereupon our said Sovereign Lady the Quéens most excellent Majesty being most justly and lawfully invested and having in her Majesties order and disposition all the said Iurisdictions Power and Authorities over the State Ecclesiastical and Temporal as well in cases Ecclesiastical as Temporal within this Realm and other her Majesties Dominions and Countreys hath by her Supream Authority at divers times sithence the beginning of her Majesties Reign caused divers grave and well learned men to be duly Elected Made and Consecrated Archbishops and Bishops of divers Archbishopricks and Bishopricks within this Realm and other her Majesties Dominions and Countreys according to such Order and Form and with such Ceremonies in and about their Consecration as were allowed and set forth by the said Acts Statutes and Orders annexed to the said Book of Common-Prayer before mentioned And further for the avoiding of all ambiguities and questions that might be objected against the lawful Confirmations Investing and Consecrating of the said Archbishops and Bishops her Highness in her Letters Patents under the great Seal of England directed to any Archbishop Bishop or others for the Confirming Investing and Consecrating of any person elected to the Office or Dignity of any Archbishop or Bishop hath not onely used such words and sentences as were accustomed to be used by the said late King Henry and K. Edw. her Majesties Father and Brother in their like Letters Patents made for such causes but also hath used and put in her Majesties said Letters Patents divers other general words and sentences whereby her Highness by her Supream Power and Authority hath dispensed with all causes or doubts of any imperfection or disability that can or may in any wise be obiected against the same as by her Majesties said Letters Patents remaining of Record more plainly will appear So that to all those that will well consider of the effect and true intent of the said Laws and Statutes and of the Supream and absolute authority of the Queens Highness and which she by her Majesties said Letters Patents hath used and put in ure in and about the making and Consecrating of the said Archbishops and Bishops it is and may be very evident that no cause of scruple ambiguity or doubt can or may justly be objected against the said Elections Confirmations or Consecrations or any other material thing meet to
Chap. 19. Vrging the second inference for the opinion of the Parliament 67 Chap. 20. Refuting the shifts devised to evade this inference 72 Chap. 21. Proving the second part of the reason that it was not revived then 76 The first Chapter Proving the first part of the Conclusion the Protestant Bishops are no Bishops ORDINE and urging the first Reason the invalidity of the form whereby they were Ordained THere is a Bishop Ordine and there is a Bishop Officio Jurisdictione or simpliciter A Bishop Ordine I call him whose Ordination was essentially valid and so imprinted the Episcopall Character As ex gr if one should be Ordained in due matter and form by one or more Bishops having no Jurisdiction or should be Ordained without a Title or should be Consecrated Bishop of some See and afterward resign it or be deprived of it or degraded And Bishops in this sense are necessary to the Ordaining of Bishops Priests and Deacons and consequently to the interior essentiall form of the Church as it consists in a Hierarchy of Order A Bishop Officio I call him who was validly Confirmed and Consecrated Bishop or Archbishop and Pastour of that See or flock of Clergy and people whereof he is stiled as ex gr Canterbury London c. and continues actuall Bishop of it or of some other And Bishops in this sense are necessary to the Consecrating of Archishops and Bishops of Cathedrall or Metropoliticall Sees and to the Instituting of Pastors to Parochiall Churches and consequently to the exterior essential form of the Church as it consists in a Hierarchy of Jurisdiction The first part then of my Conclusion is that Protestant Bishops are no Bishops Ordine My reasons are two The first is because the Protestant form for Ordaining Bishops is essentially invalid For the essential form of Ordination is some fit words that is words fignifying the Order given Mr. Mason l. 2. c. 16. n. 6. So Protestants themselves Non verba quaelibet huic instituto for making a Priest and there is the same reason of a Bishop inservire poterunt sed quae ad Ordinis conferendi potestatem exprimendam sunt accomodata Dum per Apostolum Tit. 1.5 mandavit Christus ut crearentur Ministri mandavit implicitè ut inter Ordinandum verba adhiberentur idonea id est quae dati tum Ordinis potestatem complecterentur Istiusmodi autem verba quatenus datam potestatem denotant sunt illius ordinis forma essentialis And the reason is evident because Ordination being a Sacrament as Protestants themselves do * Id. l. ◠n. 8. D. Bramb p. 96. and must confess for else it is no argument of the parties having any authority from God more then another hath who is not Ordain'd that is a visible sign of an invisible grace or power given by it there must be some visible sign in it to signifie the power given for it cannot be a sign of what it signifies not and else the same Rite as ordains a man a Deacon would ordain him Priest and Bishop The essential matter then of Episcopal Ordination which is imposition of hands being a dumb sign and common to divers Orders as Bishops Priests Deacons and to divers other graces as Confirming curing the sick c. of necessity there must be some words joyn'd with it as its form to interpret it and determine it to the grace of Episcopal Order which no words can possibly do but such as signifie that Order either in the natural sense of the words as ex gr Be thou a Bishop or I ordain thee a Bishop c. or by the Institution of Christ as these words I baptize thee c. signifie the grace of regeneration because instituted by Christ to that end Now in the Protestant form there is no word signifying Episcopal Order in the natural sense of the words For this is their whole form Take the Holy Ghost and remember that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by Imposition of hands for God hath not given us the Spirit of fear but of power and love and soberness In which is nothing but what may be said to any Priest or Deacon at his Ordaining nay or to any childe at Confirming Nor is there any colour of ground to say that these words signifie it ex instituto Christi being there is no testimony in Scripture of such his institution nor did he ever use these words but once to his Apostles when he gave them power of remitting sins which is a power of Priestly Order onely nor do we finde that any of the Apostles ever used them De ordinat Sacr. par 2. and it appears by all the Rituals now extant set forth by Morinus that no Church Greek or Latine ever used these words for so much as any part of the Ceremony for ordaining a Bishop for 1200. years nor any of the Greek Churches yet to this day nor therefore doth the Roman Church which introduced them within these 400. years use them as essential form as shall be seen more anon The second Chapter Replying to Dr Bramhall's Answer TO the foregoing Objection he makes this Answer Pag. 222 Ans If these words be considered singly in a divided sense from the rest of the Office there is nothing in our form which doth distinctly and reciprocally express Episcopal power But if these words be considered conjoyntly in a compounded sense there is enough to express it distinctly 1. The party is presented to be made a Bishop 2. The Kings Letters Pattents are read requiring them to Consecrate him Bishop 3. He takes his Oath of Canonicall Obedience as Bishop elect 4. The Assembly is exhorted to pray for him before he be admitted to that Office that is of a Bishop 5. In the Letany he is prayed for as Bishop elect that he may have grace to discharge that Office of a Bishop 6. After the Letany he is prayed for as called to the Office of a Bishop 7. The Archbishop tells him he must examine him before he admit him to that administration whereunto he is called and after examination prayes for grace for him to use the authority committed to him as a prudent and faithfull Steward this Authority can be no other then Episcopal Authority nor this Stewardship any other thing then Episcopacy 8. Lastly after imposition of hands with those words Receive the Holy Ghost c. follows the tradition of the Bible into his hands with an exhortation to behave himself toward the flock as a Pastor All which implies Episcopall Authority Repl. This answer is either false or impertinent or a granting of the Argument For if his meaning be that there are no words in their essential form that express it this is a granting of the argument which proceeded onely upon their essential form the other expressions of it in the rest of the office signifying nothing to the purpose because not sacramentall For the conjunction of these
words with those other being not formal which is impossible betwixt words sacramentall as these are and not sacramentall as all the other are but onely materiall or locall because contained within the same Office their signifying of it can contribute or cooperate nothing to make these signifie it one whit the more then they would do taken singly by themselves And so if these taken singly by themselves do not signifie it as he confesses they do not then taken singly by themselves they give it not because they give no more then they signifie and if taken singly by themselves they give it not then none is given because none of the other can give any To make this more plain Suppose all the other expressions had been as they are and the words of their essential form had been onely these Be thou an Officer in the Church or take authority to some administration or God make thee an honest man or some such like mentioning no power of Order in certain will he say they would be valid to make a Bishop by reason of their conjunction with the other expressions I suppose he will not because these signifie no power given of a Bishop And if those would not no more will these for the same reason If his meaning be that there are other words in the Office which express it as intended desired prayed for or supposed to be given by imposition of hands and those words Receive the Holy Ghost c. this is impertinent because the argument proceeded onely upon the not expressing it as given If his meaning be that though these words do not yet they are joyn'd with other words which express it as given this is false because none of those other expressions by him named do express it as given or intended to be given by any of themselves but onely by the imposition of hands and the words joyn'd with it For in the seventh which immediately precedes Imposition of hands the Archbishop tells the party he must examine him before he admit him to that administration and after that onely prayer is made for grace that he may discharge the Office meaning after it should be committed to him as he ought And in the eighth which immediately follows the words of Ordination he is onely exhorted to behave him self as a good Pastor If his meaning be that these words do in some part express it as given and the other in some other part so as betwixt them they make up an expression of it as given this is also false because these express it not at all and none of the other express it as given So take his answer in what sense you will it is no answer to the Objection The third Chapter Answering Dr. Bramhalls Allegations for their Form and in this Chapter his first Allegation from Christs example TO prop up his Answer which he saw needed it he addes to it three Arguments for the validity of their Form but very weak ones all as will appear by the Answers 1. Arg. You may except against Christs own form of Ordaining his Apostles if you will but if that be a sufficient form ours is Ans This supposes that he ordained them Bishops by these words Receive the Holy Ghost which is a false supposition For he ordained them not Bishops by these or any other Sacramental words nay 't is most probable he made not one of them a Bishop but Saint Peter and him he made by those words Pasce oves meas The fourth Chapter Answering his second Argument from the Romane Forme 2. Arg. THe Form used at the same time when hands are imposed is the same both in our Form and yours Receive the Holy Ghost And so as much in our Form to express Episcopal power as in yours and if yours be valid ours is Ans If by the same time he mean the same time Physical or Physicè loquendo I deny his Consequence therefore as much in our Form as yours because their entire essential Form is used at the same time when hands are imposed which ours is not as we shall see anon If by the same time he mean the same time Moral or Moraliter loquendo that is continued without any moral interruption his Antecedent is a mistake For our Form is not those words alone Accipe Spiritum Sanctum nay perhaps they are no part of our essential Form for the reason given supra Cap. 1. but those that are immediately joyned with them to wit the Prayer Propitiare Domine c anciently called the Benediction Conc. Car. 4. Ordo Roman which hath been our Form ever since Saint Peters time and for the substance of it is the same with that which is used over all the Easterne Churches and which anciently until within these four hundred years our Church used at the same Physical time when hands were imposed onely in latter ages for the greater solemnity of the Ceremony and fuller signification of the grace of this Sacrament the giving of the Holy Ghost she hath interposed those words Accipe Spiritum Sanctum and perhaps by way of Prayer onely and appointed them and them alone to be pronounced at the same time when hands are imposed and to be pronounced by all the Bishops assisting and then one of the Bishops onely as the ancient Law and Custom was to pronounce the words of Ordination viz. Propitiare Domine supplicationibus nostris Vno super cum fundente Benedictionem Conc. Carth. 4. inclinato super hunc famulum tuum cornu gratiae Sacerdotalis bene ✚ dictionis tuae in eum infunde virtutem Per c. Anon after which follows the other Prayer anciently called Consecratio Episcopi to wit Deus honorum omnium c. tribuas ei Cathedram Episcopalem ad regendam Ecclesiam c. and after that the anointing his head with holy Chrisme with these words Vngatur Consecretur Caput tuum Benedictione coelesti in Ordine Pontificali In nomine Patris c. After which he is called Episcopus and Consecratus till then not but Electus or Consecrandus onely So all these pertain to the integrity of our Form and are morally which is sufficient to the unity of a moral compositum as a Sacrament is joyn'd with the Imposition of hands and in these you see is expressed Sacerdotal Episcopal and Pontifical grace or Order And so there is more in our Form to express Episcopal power then in theirs The fifth Chapter Answering his third Argument from Cardinal Pool's Dispensation 3. Arg. KIng Edward the sixth his Form of Ordination was judged valid in Queen Maries dayes by all the Catholique Bishops in Parliament 1. and 2. Phil. and Mar. 8. by Cardinal Pool then Apostolique Legat in England and by the Pope himself Paul the fourth This he proves by three Mediums The first Medium The Parliament proposed to the Cardinal this Article that all Institutions to Benefices might be confirmed And the Cardinal did
his Superiour must be one nor the Metropolitane of a Province but the Primate of the Nation or some person authorized by him or his Superiour must be one And consequently by parity of reason nor the Primate of any Nation but the Patriarch of that part of the world or some person having faculty from him must be one This was long ago defined or declared by the first Council of Nice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mos antiquus obtitineat in Egypto Lybia Pentapoli ut Episcopus Alexandrinus horum omnium habeat potestatem c. Vniversim autem illud manifestum est quod si quis absque consensu Metropolitani fiat Episcopus hunc magna Synodus definivit non debere esse Episcopum Can. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is particularly and principally the Consecrating of their Primates c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ecclesiastical Superior to that See 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And afore that by the Canons called the Apostles (a) Can. 35. and since that hath been confirmed by the great Council of Chalcedon (b) Can. 27. and divers other Councils and received by the practise and consent of the Universal Church from that time to this day Consequently the Patriark of the West the Bishop of Rome being the unquestionable rightful Metropolitane to the Primate of this Nation the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Founder of that See no number of Bishops in this land can validly Confirm or Consecrate him but the Bishop of Rome or by Faculty or Commission from him or at least not without his consent implicite or reasonably presumed And so there having been no rightful Primate of this Nation since the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign for want of the Popes consent to his Consecration there hath been no Bishop validly Confirmed or Consecrated in it since that time not can be till the Popes consent can be had The ninth Chapter Vrging the second reason their having no Jurisdiction but from the King and bringing the first proof of it from their own acts and confessions MY second Medium shall be because they have no Jurisdiction to these acts but what they have originally from the King who can give them none And First that he can give them none to these acts I suppose will be granted because to Institute or create a Pastour to a flock of Clergy and people is plainly a power of the Keyes which themselves acknowledge no temporal Prince as such hath And they give a good reason for it Dr. Bram. pag. 63. because the power of the Keyes was evidently given by Christ in Scripture to his Apostles and their Successours not to Sovereign Princes Hence Queen Elizabeth in her Commission to them as were to Confirm and Consecrate Matthew Parker to the See of Canterbury would not use the words assign constitute or authorize as is used in all other Commissions but onely required them to Confirm and Consecrate him and do all other things which in this behalf belonged to their Pastoral Office thereby acknowledging that these were acts of the Pastoral Office which she could not authorize but onely command them to perform Secondly that they have no Jurisdion to these acts but what they have originally from the King may be shewed many wayes I shall make use of three The first shall be from their own acts and confessions As 1. Eccl. Rest in pref That Doctor Heylin notes of Q. Elizabeth as commendable in Her that she looked upon Her self as the sole fountain of both Jurisdictions temporal and spiritual For if she the sole fountain of both then they that Confirmed and Consecrated Matthew Parker and Her other first Bishops had no Jurisdiction for it but what they derived from Her 2. That afore their Consecration they take 1. the Oath of Supremacy whereby they acknowledge the King to be the onely Supream Governour as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as Temporal For if so they cannot exercise any Spiritual Jurisdiction in foro exteriori as this is to Confirm and Consecrate a Pastour but what must be derived from him Nor can they say that by the Supream Governour in that Oath is meant onely the Supream political Governour 1. Eliz. 1. for the Act that established that Oath declares it to belong to the Kings Supremacy to use and exercise all such Jurisdictions Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as by any Spiritual and Ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been or may lawfully be used over the Ecclesiastical State of this Realm and consequently to authorize any Bishops in the land as the Pope afore did to Confirm and Consecrate Archbishops and Bishops and so that none might Confirm or Consecrate any but by authority from the King as afore they might not but by authority from the Pope nay it gives to the King more authority and in this very kinde then the Pope can exercise or ever pretended to viz. to assign and authorize any persons as he shall think meet Bishops or not Bishops Clerks or Laymen so they be his natural born Subjects to exercise under him all manner of Jurisdictions and Authorities in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual Jurisdiction within this Realm and consequently to Confirm or Consecrate Archbishops or Bishops of any Sees for this is a spiritual Jurisdiction 2. Besides this they take a particular Oath of Homage whereby they acknowledge to hold thir Archbishoprick or Bishoprick with all authority jurisdiction priviledges revenues and all else thereunto belonging solely and onely from his Majesty If all their Jurisdiction from him solely they can have no authority to constitute a Pastour of a Cathedral or Metropolitical Church but what they must have from him The tenth Chapter Bringing the second Proof from other publick Acts. THe second way of proof shall be from other publick Acts and proceedings approved by them by which it appears that the King can and sometimes does at his pleasure limit controul suspend or utterly deprive the Bishops of their Jurisdiction which he could not do if they had it from any other then himself Of this I shall name two Instances One shall be the sequestring of Doctor Abbot by the late King from his Office of Archbishop of Canterbury upon a displeasure taken against him for refusing to license a Sermon as the King desired and committing that Office he living unto other Bishops of his own appointing See the Commission at large in Mr. Rush Hist Collect p. 435. authorizing them to do all or any acts pertaining to the power or authority of the Arch-bishop of Canterbury in causes or matters Ecclesiastical as amply fully and effectually to all intents and purposes as the said Archbishop might have done And so by vertue of this Commission those persons had authority to Consecrate or Confirm the Archbishop of York if it should happen or any Bishop within the Province of Canterbury which without it they had not Another shall be the
added to the Book of Common-Prayer and administration of the Sacraments as a member of it or at least an appendant to it and therefore by 1. Eliz. was restored again together with the said Book of Common-Prayer intentionally at the least if not in terminis But being the words in the said Statute were not clear enough to remove all doubts they did therefore revive it now and did accordingly enact c. when there is not any one of these sentences in the Act I do not say in words but not so much as in sense nay when the Act supposed the contrary as is shown supra The seventeenth Chapter Confirming the Argument by the proceedings in Bonners Case and urging the first inference for the opinion of the Judges THis that I have urged that that part of the Act of Edw. 6. for the Book of Ordination was not revived afore 8. Eliz. and consequently they no legal Bishops afore that Act is so true as that it was the opinion of even the Protestant Judges at that time and of the Parliament that made that Act as may be manifestly inferred from the proceedings of the Judges and Parliament in the Case of Bonner and Horn which was this By the first Session of that Parliament 5. Eliz. 1. power was given to any Bishop in the Realm to tender the Oath of Supremacy enacted 1. Eliz. to any Ecclesiastical person within his Diocess and the refuser was to incur a Premunire Mr. Horn the new Bishop of Winchester tenders by vertue of this Statute the Oath unto Doctor Bonner Bishop of London but deprived by Q. Eliz. and then a Prisoner in the Marshalsea which was within the Diocess of Winchester Bonner refuses to take it Horn certifies his refusal into the Kings Bench whereupon Bonner was indicted upon the Statute He prayes judgement Dyar fol. 234. whether he might not give in evidence upon this Issue Quod ipse non est inde culpabilis eo quod dictus Episcopus de Winchester non fuit Episcopus tempore oblationis Sacramenti And it was resolved by all the Judges at Serjeants Inne that if the verity and matter be so indeed he should well be received to give in evidence upon this Issue and the Jury should try it After which we hear no more of the Indictment And at the next Session of that Parliament which was 8. Eliz was revived the Act of Edw. 6. for the Book of Ordination and enacted That all that have been or shall be made Ordered or Consecrated Archbishops Bishops c. after that Form of Edw. 6. be in very deed and by authority hereof declared and enacted to be and shall be Archbishops Bishops c. and rightly made Ordered and Consecrated any Statute Law Canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding But with this Proviso that no person shall be impeached by occasion or mean of any Certificate by any Archbishop or Bishop heretofore made or before the last day of this Session to be made by vertue of any Act made in the first Session of this Parliament touching the refusal of the Oath enacted 1. Eliz. And that all tenders of the said Oath and all refusals of it so tendered or before the last day of this Session to be tendered by any Archbishop or Bishop shall be void Now from this Story I make two inferences to my purpose The first that in the opinion of the Judges at that time the Act of Edw. 6. for the Book of Ordination was not revived by 1. Eliz. and so Horn was no Legal Bishop For otherwise there is no reason imaginable why Horn would not joyn issue with Bonner upon that point non fuit Episcopus tempore oblationis Sacramenti and so come to a trial of it The eighteenth Chapter Refusing the shifts used by Mr. Mason and Doctor Heylin to evade this inference MAster Mason puts this for our Question l. 3. c. 11. n. 6. Quae ratio dilatae Sententiae whereas that is not our question but this Why did not Horn joyn issue c. and to avoid the true one gives other reasons for it but very frivolous ones as will appear by the Answers 1. Reas Bonner's Counsel though they pleaded Horn was no Bishop yet for ought appears by Dyar they gave no reason for it It seems therefore that the Judges allowed them longer time to produce their reasons that so the dignity of the Bishops might shine more clear Ans Doctor Heylin saith Bonners Councel did give their reason p. 2. f. 173. viz. that the Form of Edw. 6. had been repealed by Q. Mary and so remained at Horn 's pretended Consecration But I suppose it a mistake of his for it is not the use in the entring of a Plea to give a reason of it for that is to be shewn and pleaded at the hearing which this cause never came to And therefore that could be no reason of the delay of sentence 2. Reas Other Jurors were to be warned out of Surrey afore sentence could be given Ans It was not time to warn Jurors afore Issue joyned which this never was And when they were to be warn'd it was but out of Southwark which might have been against the next term and so could be no reason why sentence was delayed two years or near upon as it was betwixt this pleading at Serjeants Inne and the Session of 8. Eliz. 3. Reas Whilst the Suit was depending which began 7. Eliz. a Parliament was held 8. Eliz. in which all suits depending for refusal of the Oath of Supremacy were dissolved Ans He is out in his reckoning For Horn thirsting after Bonners ruine who it is thought was the man chiefly aimed at in that Act began the Suit soon after that Act of 5. Eliz. and procured him to be Indicted and Bonner demurr'd to it which as Doctor Heylin saith being put off from Term to Term came at last to be debated among the Judges at Serjeants Inne which was in Michaelmas Term which began in 6. Eliz. betwixt which and the Parliament was two years or near upon So that Act could be no reason why it was delayed all that time after the Judges had made that Rule for the Issue and trial of it Doctor Heylin therefore gives another reason for it and I believe the true one p. 2. f. 173. viz. that it was advised which he must mean by the Judges to Horn for it was not in the power of Bonner being Defendant to refer it that the decision of the point should rather be referred to the following Parliament And of this advice he gives this reason for fear such a weighty matter might miscarry by a contrary Jury Ans But this could be no reason because the Decision of the point in Law upon which rested the whole difficulty and which alone could be referred to the decision of the Parliament viz. whether the Form of Edw. 6. were Legal or whether one Consecrated by that Form were a Bishop
was not to be put to the Jury but to be determined by the Judges and the Jury to try onely the matter of fact whether he were so Consecrated If therefore the Judges had delivered it for Law that Horn if so Consecrated was a Bishop and he could have proved he was so Consecrated as was easie for him to do if the Records be true the Jury must have found him a Bishop or incurred an attaint which there was no reason to fear they would do in such a cause as that where the Queen was Plaintiff a Protestant Bishop and their neighbour and Landlord to most of them being Southwark men the Prosecutour all the Bishops and Clergy in the land made by the new Form extreamly interested in the verdict and onely a Papist generally hated and deprived of all Office and power in the State and then a prisoner the Defendant And that which he addes to colour his reason That there had been some proof made before of the partiallity or insufficiency of a Jury touching grants made by King Edwards Bishops if meant of Juries in Queen Maries time was no reason in Queen Elizabeths and if meant in Her time helps to confirm what I say that afore 8. Eliz. neither Judges nor Juries could finde King Edwards Bishops were legal Bishops The true reason therefore why the Judges advised Horn to refer his Cause to the Parliament can be no other then this as I say that they found an Act of Parliament was necessary to make him a Bishop The nineteenth Chapter Vrging the second inference for the opinion of the Parliament MY second inference is that the Parliament 8. Eliz. were not of opinion that Horn was a legal Bishop For if they had 1. They would not have revived the Act of Edw. 6. for the Form of Ordination for that implied it was not revived afore and if not they could be no legal Bishops 2. They would have made no Law in the Case but left it to a judgement of the Court or onely given a Sentence in it themselves 3. If they would make a Law for it yet 1. They would not have enacted them to be Bishops but onely declared that they were so 2. Nor would they have said as they do Be it declared and enacted that all things heretofore done in or about the Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops be and shall be by Authority of this Parliament at and from every of the several times of doing thereof good and perfect any matter or thing that can or may be objected to the contrary notwithstanding which except meant of the making them so to be by vertue of that Act would be meer non-sense and contradiction but thus All things heretofore done c. were in very deed at and from every of the several times of doing thereof good without authority of this Act and any matter or thing to be objected to the contrary 3. Nor would they have said as they do All that have been Consecrated Archbishops c. since her Majesties Reign be in very deed and also by authority hereof declared and enacted to be and shall be Archbishops and Bishops and rightly Consecrated any Law Canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding which except as afore would be another strange medley of non-sense and contradictions which ambiguous language they were driven to out of a desire to use some words for the honour of the Bishops as if Bishops afore and of a necessity to use other for the creating them such then but they would have said in plain and good English which would have put the matter out of question All that have been Consecrated were in very deed at and from every of the several times of their Consecrations Archbishops and Bishops and rightly Consecrated according to Law 4. Nor would they have recited as they do at large the Supream Authority given to the Queen by 1. Eliz. To assign and authorize such persons as she should think meet to exercise under Her all manner of Spiritual Jurisdiction and thereupon inferred So that to all that will well consider of the effect and true intent of the said Statutes and of the Supream and absolute authority of the Queen to make Bishops by Her Commission onely with or without any Legal Form of Consecration or with or without any Bishops for the Consecraters and which she by her said Letters Pattents hath used in and about their Consecration by supplying to them all defects either in the Form they should use or in the faculty state or condition of the Consecraters whether Bishops or not Bishops it is and may be evident that no cause of scruple can or may be objected against their Consecrations for this grounds the Legality both of the Form and of the Consecraters not upon the things in their own nature but upon the authority of the Queens Commission which supplied to them all defects in Law but they would have said plainly and without praying any such aid from the Queens Supremacy They were Consecrated by Legal Bishops and by a Legal Form or the Form of Edw. 6. was a Legal Form or was revived by 1. Eliz. c. seeing that was the onely exception against the Form of their Consecrations 5. Nor least of all after Bonner had put in a plea so insolent and reproachful to the Queen Her Bishops and their whole Clergy and Church and if Horn had been a Bishop had incurr'd a Premunire for refusing the Oath of Supremacy and when the acquittal of him and of all other refractory refusers of the Oath afore the last day of that Session when there was no other exception to the Certificates but this that they that made them were no Bishops and this without and afore any petition exhibited or submission promised on the Delinquents part would in the interpretation of all indifferent men redound notably to the justifying of Bonner's plea and consequently to the infamy of their whole Clergy and Church I say all this considered they would never have made such Proviso's for the indemnity of Bonner and the other Delinquents if they could have found Horn a Legal Bishop The twentieth Chapter Refuting the shifts devised to evade this inference l. 3. c. 11. n. 7. MAster Mason saith This annulling of Horn 's Certificate doth not argue Bonner 's innocence or any Defect in Horn 's being a Bishop but onely the great favour and indulgence of the Parliament For saith he first they cleared our Bishops from the calumny of their adversaries and then graciously pardoned Bonner and his fellows that had so impudently flown upon the Bishops for offering the Oath to them For they hoped it would come to pass that they who out of ignorance or malice had alwayes before that been snarling at their Consecrations would at length be wise Refut 1. They did not first clear their Bishops as is shewed afore 2. Nor did they pardon Bonner and his fellows but annul the process 3. That Act was