find St. Ambrose in his Funeral Oration upon Satyrus his Brother approving and commending him for that he avoided the Luciferian Bishops their Churches and their Assemblies for though desirous of the Holy Sacrament non it a avidus fuit ut esset incautus he was not saith he so desirous of it as not to be Orat. in Fun. Frat. Tom. 3. p. 19. Edit Basil 1567. careful from whose hands he took it and therefore advocavit ad se Episcopum he calleth first the Bishop that was to administer it and asked him utrumnam cum Episcopis Catholicis conveniret whether he was one of those that were in Communion with the Catholick Bishops non enim putavit fidem esse in Schismate for he did not believe that a right Faith could be had in a wrong and Schismatical Profession No less a Zeal may be observed in those more Honourable Ladies and Worthy Matrons of Rome when Liberius their Bishop was banished and Felix put into his room they saith the Historian perceiving the lukewarmness or rather cowardice Theod. lib. 2. cap. 17. Edit Col. Allob. of their Husbands in the case dressed themselves as became their Quality went to the Emperor and besought him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he would take pity upon the City and restore to them their Bishop again or at least give them and others leave to follow him adding that though he had placed another over them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that neither they nor any other of the Citizens would ever enter the Church whilst he was in it And thus it was when Arsacius was thrust into the See of Constantinople in the place of St. Chrysostom nay so averse were the Citizens to receive him that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tho' they met him in the Streets they would not so much as vouchsafe to salute Theod. lib. 5. cap 35. him Neither were they more complying when Atticus was put upon them in the room of Arsacius none of them would communicate with him Nay though an Edict was procured for the Expulsion and Confiscation of the Goods of all such Bishops for the Deprivation of all such publick Officers and for the Banishment of all such Artificers and Tradesmen that would not communicate with him yet none saith Palladius but the In vit Chrys c. 10. p. 95 96. Edit Lut. Par. 1680. poorer Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and those that were weaker in the Faith went in unto them whereas the others despising the World and willing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keep themselves upright and their Consciences undefiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some of them fled to Rome some of them to the Mountains and some to foreign Monasteries the People all the while that staid behind keeping up their Meetings in the open fields And thus it happened again at Rome in the time of the contention between Damasus and Vrsinus the tumult Lib. 4. c. 24. saith Socrates was great occasioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not about Faith or Heresie but whether of the two by right should be Bishop And here I pretend not to determine the Priority of Ordination to either and Praef. ad lib. precum Edit Oxon. 1678. yet I know that Marcellinus and Faustinus gives it to Vrsinus as well as Socrates and others to Damasus and perhaps if things were rightly weighed and duly examined Vrsinus that lost it might bid as fair for the Chair as Damasus that got and possessed it However the Vrsinians Loco citat buoyed up themselves with the precedency of a seven days Ordination would have nothing to do with the other Nay when Damasus had prevailed so far with the Emperor as to have Vrsinus banished and his Clergy imprisoned or sent after him so that none were left to officiate among them yet rather than go in to Damasus Populus timens Deum per coemiteria Martyrum stationes sine Clericis celebrabat the People that feared God more than the Emperor his Judges or the new made Bishop met at the Tombs of the Martyrs and held on their stations without them 19. Neither let the Apostatizing Clergy or the complying Laity who run along with those disorderly Bishops think that they for their so doing are under no Crime or deserve no Censure Abstinuimus communicatione Felicissimum Augendum item Repostum de extorribus Irenen Rutilorum Paulam Sarcinatricem Sophronium ipsum de extorribus Soliassum Budinarium We have saith Caldoâ—ius in a Letter to St. Cyprian Ep. 42. p. 81. according to your Order separated from our Communion Felicissimus and Augendus Repostus the Exile Irene the Radler Paula the Pedler as also Sophronius and with him Soliassus the Mulettor As for Felicissimus saith St. Cyprian he endeavours cum Episcopo portionem plebis dividere Ep. 41. Cyp. Cal. to share the People with his Bishop that is to divide the Sheep from the Shepherd and the Children from the Father and therefore decree him excommunicated As for Augendus nec Episcopum nec Ecclesiam cogitat he neither hath regard to his Bishop nor the Church but confederates and combines with the other and therefore let the same sentence pass upon him quisquis se conspirationi ejus adjuxerit and as for the rest that go on in the Faction with them let them also know that they are not to communicate with us in the same Church Now of these some were Clericks as Felicissimus and Angendus others Confessors as Repostus and Soliassus others common Christians as Irene Paula and perhaps Sophronius from whence we may justly infer that it is not the high Calling of the Clergy the meritorious sufferings of the Confessors the Simplicity and Plainness of the well-meaning Christian no nor the Trimming between both Parties flattering the one and holding Communion with the other whilst they herd with the Out-liers and be found in their Quarters that will excuse them from the foul guilt of Schism or the due Demerits of it The Confessors at Rome were very sensible of this videbamur quandam Communicationem cum Schismaticis haeretico homine habuisse We seemed say they to Cornelius to have held Communion Corn. ad Cyp. Ep. 45. with Novatian and his Schismatical followers for we frequented their Assemblies appeared amongst them in their Holy Offices of Religion sincera tamen mens nostra semper in Ecclesia fuit yet our Hearts and our Souls ever went along with the Church We knew there was but one God one Christ one Holy Spirit unum Episcopum in Catholica Ecclesia esse debere and that there ought to be but one Bishop in a Church However nos imposturam passi sumus we cannot but say we were imposed upon and do heartily pray ut abolerentur de memoria tollerentur that those things may be forgiven and forgotten and we received again into Communion with Cornelius our lawful Bishop Such there were that could run with the Hare and
it being impossible to have two opposite Bishops in a Church without disturbing the Order and destroving the Vnity thereof For if there be two opposite Bishops there must be two opposite Altars and two opposite Communions each Bishop pretending aâ—ainst the other to be the true catholick and lawfull Bishop to which the Flock ought to adhere The first and true Bishop will doe what he can to keep the Flock from straying after the second and false one who usurps upon him and the Vsurper on the other hand will endeavour to the utmost to draw them after him and drain the Congregations of him over whom he usurps 7. Thus when that wicked and turbulent Novatianus the Author and Founder of the Schism was ordained Bp. of Rome over the head of Cornelius canonically placed there before He pretended to be the true and rightfull Bishop and to strengthen his own Interest would admit of none if formerly of Cornelius his Party to communicate with him unless they would first solemnly swear to become ever after his And therefore holding both their hands together with the bread in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist lib. 6. cap. 35. swear says he to me that you will never forsake me nor go back to Cornelius and so delivering the Bread the Communicant instead of answering Amen as the Custome was was forced to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will never return to him And as he was thus forward and active to begin a Schism at Rome so he was no less sedulous to propagate it abroad whereupon St. Cyprian his Contemporary reports it of him That Ep. 55. Antoniano though there were Bishops already regularly ordained and canonically constituted throughout all the Provinces and the several Cities thereof venerable for Age sound in Faith approved in Trials and Perfecutions yet he super eos creare alios Pseudoepiscopos ausus est was so presumptuous and daring as to create over them Bishops False-bishops of his own as if he were able by the discord he endeavoured to foment to over-run the Church of Christ and to tear in pieces its whole ecclesiastical Frame And indeed such footing it took that Socrates speaking of the Sect tells us that in the time of Boniface l. which was full an hundred and fifty Lib. 7. c. 30. Edit Col. Allobr years after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they mightily flourished at Rome enjoyed many Churches and had under them many great Congregations Sozomen speaking of them says That though other Sects were generally Lib. 2. cap. 30. short liv'd and soon decayed yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Novatians or they who had their rise from Novatus because their Bishops were for the most part good Men and they themselves held the Catholick Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were numerous at first and so continued to be 8. Such a Mischief arose by Meletius of Lycus in Egypt from whom the Meletian Faction took both its Name and Rise He quarrelling with Peter his Patriarch the Bp. of Alexandria for that he admitted the Lapsi being then both in Prison together and with them many other Bishops Ecclesiasticks and Confessors the same Quarrel that Novatianus fifty years before had with Cornelius took part against him which Peter perceiving and willing to try how the rest stood affected threw his Mantle cross the Prison crying out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that are for Epiph. ad Haeres lib. 2. T. 2 Haer. 68. me and my opinion let them come hither and they that are for Meletius let them go to him which being done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the company saith Epiphanius was divided and the greatest number of them Loc. cit cap. 3. went to Meletius and from thenceforth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they parted Companies and in acts of divine Worship kept their separate Assemblies Nay as soon as ever released out of Prison he where-ever he went 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordained Bishops Presbyters and Deacons of his own against the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons constituted before by Peter and thereupon erected Churches for his own Faction and so divided the Church that each Party refused to communicate with the other distinguishing their Assemblies as the aforesaid Author has it by an Inscription over their Church doors those who followed Peter taking to themselves the ancient name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Catholick Church and those who went after Meletius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church of Martyrs Nay though many of both sides were afterwards condemned to the Mines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they would not even there so much as communicate or pray together A breach of so ill consequence to the Church that being brought before the Nicene Fathers they disabled the Bishops which Meletius had made till confirmed by a more holy and warrantable Ordination and as for himself they confined him to his own City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 allowing him no power for the future to elect Socr. l. 1. c. 6. or to lay hands on any declaring him to be such an Offender in the Case that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the rigour of Justice he deserved no Favour at all 9. Such another Schism was that in Affrica begun at Carthage by Majorinus his being made Bishop there whilst Caecilian the preordained Bishop Advers Parm. lib. 1. p. 19. Aug contra Parm. lib. 1. cap. 3. Paris 1679. was living The Promoters were few as Optatus observes two baffled Competitors two or three sacrilegious Church-robbers potens factiosa Mulier a rich factious and exasperated Woman The Abetters not many more among whom Donatus who gave name to the Faction all Traditors and so uncapable of ordaining others or continuing in their own Orders But though so despicable Infects at first yet Cyp. Ep. 65. no sooner embodied and winged but like the Locusts in the Revelations they soon overspread and covered the Land filled all the Territories and places thereof insomuch that in their Council at Bagaia you shall Aug. cont Ep. Parm. l. 1. c. 4 Edit Paris 1531. Cont. Parm. lib. 1. p. 22. find no less than three hundred and odd Bishops of their brood Nay so numerous that whereas formerly men were accustomed to blush and be ashamed of their Actions there were none at that time saith Optatus to do it quia praeter paucos Catholicos peccaverunt universi forasmuch as all were become Sinners and all a few Catholicks excepted Apostates from the Vnity of the Church A Schism that lasted near an hundred years Aug. lib. 3. cont Julianum and might have continued much longer in the Church had not the pars Donati upon the death of Parmenian their Bishop put two new ones Primianus and Maximianus together in the Chair at once of whom Saint Augustine makes this Remark that for any Worth or Excellency in them Ep. 162. other than to head a Faction Maximianus might have been Minimianus and Primianus might
Ordinis cum Lib. 5. Ep. 32. judicare debet qui nec manere impar sit nec jure dissimilis they and they only are to be deputed Judges over Ecclesiasticks who are of the same Order and therefore to be presumed the most competent Judges because most knowing in those Affairs Hoc est Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit judicare that is as St. Ambrose comments upon it he would have Bishops to be the onely Judges of Bishops An Authority though partly Temporal yet of that nature that instead of laying waste the Church of supplanting the Bishops or of subverting the Canons it became a real defence and patronage to them all and no sooner experienced but was as frankly and freely consented to in reference to the succeeding Emperors Placuit ut quicunque ab Imperatore it seemeth good say the Bishops in the Milevitan Council that if any shall appeal to the Emperor to have Cen. 19. his Cause tried before Secular Judges he be deprived but if he appeal to have an Hearing thereof before a Synod of Bishops it shall no ways displease Thus did Pope Innocent address himself to Honorius to have the Schism between St. Chrysostome and Arsacius ended First he writes to Theophilus that great Promoter of it to challenge him to a Council We cannot saith he either in Reason or Justice withdraw our selves from Chrysostom 's Pallad de Vit. Chrys c. 3. p. 24. Communion and therefore if you dare abide by the Judgment you have made of his Deposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make your Appearance before the next Synod And after that he with the rest of the Italian Bishops sends to Honorius that he would write to his Brother Arcadius Co Emperour with him that a Council for that end might be convened where both Eastern and Western Bishops might conveniently meet which Honorius accordingly did sending his Letters by five Bishops two Presbyters and one Deacon assuring him That if either he or his Bishops could satisfie them that Chrysostome was duly and justly deposed he for his part would withdraw all Communion from him but if not that he then hoped He would be prevailed with to desert their Communion and their new made Patriarch Whence it is obvious to infer 1. That where two Bishops are placed at one time in a See a Schism must necessarily ensue 2. That Synods onely are the Deposers of Bishops and the onely Judges of a Deposition 3. That neither Emperour Senate Privy Council or Secular Power whatsoever can do it without making a Schism 4 That till a Synod be called and hath determined the Matter the first must be accounted the lawful Bishop and the second with his Adherent the Schismatick 26. And as this was the Usage Practice and Custome of all foreign Churches so it was one of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those antient Customs that the English Church hath observed Ego Constantini vos Petri Gladium habetis in Manibus I saith K. Edgar as cited by Twisden wear the Sword of Vind. Chur. 2. p. 94. Constantine and you of St. Peter Now how far the first exercised his Authority in reference to the case before us is already shewn and if K. Edgar went no farther we are sure there was no seizing upon Bishops or of putting others into their Bishopricks before they were heard and condemned by Bishops Indeed the Author of the Discourse concerning the Illegality of the late Ecclesiastical Commission tells us That P. 11 12. the Saxon Laws are a plain Evidence that Church Matters were in those times determined in the same Assemblies wherein the other Laws of the Kingdom were determined and I am apt to think that in a great measure they were But then as the learned Spelman observes Episcopuâ— jura Gloss Tit. Gemot divina enuntiabat Comes secularia alter alteri auxilio the Bishops declared and vindicated the Ecclesiastical Laws and the Nobles the Secular each supporting and assisting the other the one according to the Canons of the Church and the other according to the Municipal Laws of the Land Nay I cannot see but in some cases their actings might be separate sure I am that in the Synod held at Bacanceld and in that other soon after held at Clovesho for the restoring the Jurisdiction of the Metropolitical See of Canterbury to its Archibishop of which it had been despoiled by K. Offa contra Canones Apostolica Statuta in duas scissa Paroechias and contrary to all Canons and Constitutions Apostolical divided into two and Spel. Conc. in Ep. Kenul ad Leon. 3. in part given to Adulphus his Favourite there was none of the Laity in them no Earls no great Men of the Nation the one being held as we see in Spelman Praesidente Kenulso Rege by the King Archbishop Bishops Conc. Brit. an 709 803. and Abbats multis aliis idoneis personis and many other not great Men or Nobles but fitting persons the other ab Athelardo Archiepiscopo cum duodecim Episcopis potiori Clero by the Archbishop of Canterbury and twelve other Bishops with the chiefest of their Clergy as may appear by their respective Subscriptions and Spelman's Notes upon them adding this severe and terrible Denunciation Hear oh Heavens and give ear oh Earth Siquis quod omnino absit If any one which God forbid shall at any time hereafter presume against the Apostolical Precepts and this our Determination Tunicam Christi scindere Vnitatem ejus Ecclesiae dividere to tear the seamless Coat of Christ and thereby to divide the Vnity of the Church of Canterbury sciat se esse aeternaliter damnandum let him know that if he repents him not of that his fault he shall be eternally damned But be it so or not as the Authour avers yet in this we shall not much dissent that K. William I. having brought England under the power of his Sword separated Judicatures referring as it was in Constantine's days Ecclesiastical Matters to Ecclesiastical Judges Thus in a Council held at Winchester he himself being present with three * Spelm. anno 1070. Legates from Rome totius Cleri populus the whole Synod of the †Antiq. Brit. de Sâ—igand Clergy after they had heard divers things objected against Stigand then Archbishhp of Canterbury eum Episcopatu Ordinibus abdicabant deprived him both of his Archbishoprick and his Office The Crimes were chiefly these quod Archiepiscopatum Roberto vivente neque amoto possidisset because he had possessed himself of the Archbishoprick Robert the Archbishop being alive and not deposed and had worn the Pall which he left behind him being by Force most unjustly driven from thence Crimes every way deserving Deposition and because done by a Synod justly so punished and if Crimes then they are and must be so now let Stigand and his Party think what they will At the same time and by the same Synod was Agelmar Bishop of the East Angles deposed
Spelm. anno 1070. but whether so justly or no I shall not determine And a little after Vlstan the good Bp. of Worcester was by a Synod held at Westminster under Lanfranc in like manner deposed and God wot for Grounds inconsiderable enough quia Linguam gallicam non noverat onely because Mat. Paris Hist Ang. Edit Lond. 1640. he did not understand the Norman Language which methinks to me is much the same as if at this day Depositions were to proceed against our Bishops because they do not understand the Lingua of the Dutch And at this rate for ought I can find all future Affairs were managed to K. Stephen's days onely the Conquerour nonnullos tam Episcopos quam Abbates deposed several both Bishops and Abbats as Conquerors use to Spel. an 1070. do quos nec Concilia nec Leges Seculi damnabant whom neither the Synods of Bishops nor the Laws of the Land had pronounced guilty And thus he did not minding the Irregularity or Injustice of the Proceedings sed ad confirmationem sui quod noviter acquisiverat Regni but that he might settle and confirm himself in the Possession of that Kingdom which by his Arms he had newly acquired In K. Stephan's days if Dr. Brady be not Compl. Hist p. 216. Edit 1685. mistaken the Canon Law and Lawyers were called into England and no one need to doubt whilst that lasted and was esteemed good Law among us that either the Churches Rights their Synods or their Judicatures were invaded We read indeed of some * Ibid. p. 213. that were imprisoned of others †P. 481. that were proscribed of others ‖ P. 479. that had their Bishopricks seized and their Goods confiscated to the King's use but of none as I can find deposed without a Synod There was indeed an Attempt not long after as Matthew Paris and Dr. Brady relate the matter much of a like nature against one Adomar alias Athelmar the King's Brother elect of Winchester He say they was not onely forced by the Nobles to quit Hist Ang. p. 982. Comp. Hist p. 635. the Kingdom but the King himself was so far wrought upon that he not onely seized his Temporalties but judged his Bishoprick void yea and suffered Henry de Wenghan his Chancellour to be chosen in his stead But then Adomar all this while was no more than elect never consecrated Bishop and though no more than so yet the very Election of another seemed so irregular to Henry that was chosen that he refused it because it was litigiosa incerta litigious and uncertain Neither would the King yield unto it but with a Salvo to his Brother 's Right namely Si Frater suus Athelmarus praeelectus that if the praeelect his Brother had or should obtain his Consecration from the Pope to whom he had applied himself as it was customary in those days to do ipsemet prae omnibus aliis fieret in eadem Ecclesia institutus he should be first instituted Nay when the Communitas Angliae the Comites Proceres Magnates the Nobles Mat. Par. Addit p. 217. and the great Men of the Nation supplicated the Pope that he might be put from his Administration they used his Non-consecration for an Argument Et certe clementissime Pater hoc satis credimus sine scandalo faciendum cum non sit in Episcopum consecratus For this most holy Father we are well assured may be granted us seeing he is not as yet consecrated thereby intimating and conceding that if he had not been consecrated it could not by them nor any other without eminent Scandal be desired much less effected And if we may believe the History of the Reformation this lasted for Law amongst us till Henry VIIIth's day neither would Burnet part 1. p. 330. he in any wise suffer an Eversion of it nor so much as a Purgation farther than of those Canons onely that were repugnant to the King's Prerogative Stat. 25. H. 8. c. 19. Royal and the known Laws of the Land as certainly those ancient Canons touching Synods and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction were not as being in use even in England long before the Italian Bishop or his encroaching and usurping Canons were received 27. Neither did the Reformation innovate in this matter for by a Preamble to a Statute cited by Cosins we are told that the People of this Apol. Courts Eccl. part 1. ch 14. Realm have bound themselves by long Use and Custome to the Observance of certain Laws besides those which were ordained in this Realm meaning the Canon Laws as to the accustomed Laws and that such Laws were originally established as Laws of the same by the Sufferance of Kings and by the Consent and Customes of the People And because some of those Laws were onerous to the King and his Subjects Power was granted to the King by another Statute to nominate and assign two and 25 H. 8. c. 19. thirty Persons whereof sixteen of the Clergy to view examine and by the King's Signature to establish all such as they should think meet to be established not being contrariant to the Laws of God to the Laws and Customes of the Realm or to the Damage and Hurt of the Prerogative continuing however the aforesaid Laws and Canons in use and vigour under the aforesaid Proviso and Restraint till either the Review be made or it be otherwise ordered and determined This Cranmer often pressed to have bâ—en done saith the Historian but he could never Hist Ref. vol. 2. l. 3. p. 330. obtain it during that King's Reign insomuch that all things remained as they were In the 5th Year of K. Edw. VI. the Design was set on foot again and the Act renewed and accordingly saith Heylin in his Ecclesia Hist Edw. 6. Ediâ— 1670. restaurata the King directed his Commission to Archbishop Cranmer and others and afterwards appointed a Sub Committee consisting saith the Author of the Preface to the Book called Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum of two Bishops two Divines two Doctors of the Law and two Common Lawyers to prepare the Work and make it ready for the rest that it might be dispatched with the more Expedition By them saith Heylin in the aforequoted place the Work was undertaken and digested fashioned according to the Method of the Roman Decretals and called by the Name of Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum Nec dubium quin Parliamentari etiam Authoritate eaedem Sanctionis istae constabilitae And no doubt saith the same Prefacer the Decrees had been established by Act of Parliament and Praes ad Ref. Leg Eccl. Edit 1640. made the standing Law of the Land if it had pleased God that the Life of the King had been continued but a little longer However it was not so imperfect an Embryo nor altogether so unshapen but we may easily discern what Features it had and of what Complexion it would have been and more particularly as to
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let no Man be Can. 19. ordained Bishop without the presence of the Metropolitan or if any shall be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that his Ordination be null and invalid and that not only as to himself but as to all others that shall be afterwards ordained And this was the plea that Alexius made when they would unjustly have deposed him from his Patriarchship and which in probability prevented his deposition stoutly answering as Doctor Burnet relates the matter That if his Ordination was null then all Regal cap. 3. the Metropolitans whom he had ordained and all the Bishops whom those Metropolitans had ordained during the eleven years of his Administration ought to be likewise degraded From whence it is evident that if the Ordination be at first null it conveys and entails a nullity upon all its descent and what a miserable confusion this will bring in eleven years time upon the Church of England he that hath but half an eye may foresee Nay at this rate Archbishop John totius Schismatis Primas Metropolitanus will neither be Primate nor Bishop nor can it in the least justifie him from the Crime of Schism that the present Power backs him in his Invasion and Vsurpation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if any one saith the Apostolical Canon Can. 30. shall make use of any secular Power to thrust himself irregularly into the Possession of a Bishoprick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be deposed and excommunicated together with all those that take part with him The like iâ— decreed in the Council held at Paris Si quis per ordinationem regiam if any Bishop shall unduly and with two much haste ascend to the height of Episcopal Honour by the strength and interposition of Regal Power let him no ways be recieved or owned by the Bishops of the Provâ—nce or if contrary to the Canon he shall be received by any of the Comprovincials then let such be separated from the rest of his brethren 32. I here foresee that the instance of Abiathar will be produced against me not only to overthrow the position of one Bishop in a Church or of one Primate in a Province but to shew that is in the Power of Kings upon good reason to depose any of them nay the highest of them all that do or can Priest it in their Dominions God say they appâ—inted but one High Priest at a time for the whole Jewish Church nâ—ither do we read of any farther order given for the displacing of him or for the putting of others upon him And yet none can deny but that in King David's days there were two High Priests together Zadock the Son of Ahitub and Abiathar the Son of Ahimelech 2 Sam. 15. 29. and this by the sole order and pleasure of the King neither do we read that he was ever the farther from being the Man after God's own heart for his doing so And it is as evident on the other hand that Solomon his Son deposed and degraded one of them to wit Abiathar 1 Kings 2. 26. after he had continued in the Office full forty years and that by no other Authority than his own Both which actions plainly demonstrate That if reasons of State so require the King may either multiply Bishops upon a Church or depose them especially as to us in England since we give the same Prerogative to our Kings as was given by Art 37. God to all Godly Princes in holy Scriptures And this they think will be a sufficient plea and cause for what they are doing But to this I answer and first as to the being of two High Priests at once 33. I think I may say that it is the only instance to be met with in Scripture from the time that the Priesthood was setled upon Aaron and his Family to the time that the Jews became Captives and were carried out of the Land And if it had been either convenient or necessary it would have been oftner practised and if it had been oftner practised we should have oftner heard of it So that it being a particular case it must have a particular reason and foundation proper and peculiar to it self upon which it stands and without which it falls Howbeit it was at a time when the High Priesthood was got into a wrong Chanel and possessed by a Family which according to the Law of Inheritance had no present right unto it I say no present right a right it had at large as bâ—ing of the Family of Ithamar one of the Sons of Aaron to Lev. 10. 7. whom no less than the other the Priesthood at first was given but however not without a Precedency to Eleazar as being the first born And hence we read that when Aaron was to be taken away by death Numb 20. 28. Moses was commanded to strip him of his Garments the Garments of Holiness which at his Consecration he had put upon him and to put them upon Eleazar signifying thereby the divesting Aaron of his Priesthood Lev. 8. 7. to array and invest Eleazar with it From him it was conveyed to Phineas his Son to whom and to whose Seed it was farther assured and Numb 25. 13. granted to be an everlasting Priesthood but so it happened at present that the Posterity of Eleazar was put by and the Posterity of Ithamar taken into their room and so it had been and continued for four Generations even from the time of Ely to this Abiathar's days who having escaped the Massacre made at the command of Saul upon Ahimelech his 1 Sam. 22. 18. Father and Family fled unto David and bringing the Ephod with him 1 Sam. 23. 6. was constituted High Priest in the room of his deceased Father and indeed in some measure meriting the same for it was upon David's account and for entertaining him in his necessities that his Father was put to death and the whole Family besides himself destroyed But 1 Sam. 22. 13. this appearing irregular to David because against the right of Inheritance and finding that the line of Eleazar was to be restored in his days even before the Temple should be built and Israel be in its full Glory he 1 Sam. 2. 32 35. puts Zadock the principal of the line at that time into the Priesthood and gives him the Precedency to Abiathar as being regularly the Heir and the person to whom by right thereof the Priesthood belonged continuing however Abiathar as a Copartner with him in it during life the whole afterwards to devolve upon Zadock and his Posterity as it was at first ordered So that all this was but a Pious and Righteous design in David to restore the Priesthood to its rightful owner and not unreasonably to divide the Church but reasonably to make up the Breach that had been made in the Inheritance A method commended by the Bishops of Sirmium to the Clergy of Rome upon their having
purg ad Optat. Bishop of Cirta one of the Ordainers of Majorinus thereby to find out which of the two were Traditors that the Controversy between the Caecilianists and the Donatists might be stated and ended unde pulsa atque exter sa infamia cum ingenti laude illo judicio recessit by which Judgment of theirs saith Optatus the infamous aspersions that were cast upon Cont. Par. l. 1. p. 30. Caecilian and Felix by the Donatists were wiped off to the eternal Honour of Caecilian and his adherents And thus also for the better management of the Conference between the Catholick and the Donatists Bishops Honorius the Emperor appointed Macellinus his Tribune for a Judge in the case before whom saith Possidonius the Donatists being convicted of De Vitâ Aug. their faults sententia Cognitoris notati sunt were by his Sentence declared guilty and thereupon condemned And thus might Tonstal of Duresme as well as Bonner of London or as Gardiner of Winchester have had their Cause heard had not Archbishop Gardiner refused to meddle because Burnet Part 2. lib. 1. p. 216. he was found to lye under a misprison of Treason And so properly might Voisy of Exeter been tried but for the same reason for he also was found saith Heylin to have fomented the Rebellion of the Devonshire Edw. 6. p. 100 Men And whether Day of Winchester was not in with them and for that reason also not tried by Cranmer to me it is doubtful for the Historian confesses he cannot tell us whether his Deprivation arose from Reform Par. 2. lib. 1. p. 203. the refusing to submit to the new Book or his falling into other transgressions However I cannot but observe 1. That the aforesaid Bishops enjoyed their Bishopricks notwithstanding an ipso facto Deprivation till a farther process was made aad a declaratory Sentence passed upon them 2. That Bonner who led the way unto the rest was not deprived till four months or more after the Act of Deprivation took Fox 1209. place Gardiner not till two years almost after Bonner Voisy not till Heylin p. 100. some months after the Sentence passed upon Gardiner Day Heath Tonstal Burnet lib. 2. p. 203. 216. not till some months after him so slowly was the Act at that time executed 3. That as they enjoyed their Bishopricks till their Deprivations so in all probability they enjoyed the Profits and Revenues thereof Gardiner's were not sequestered from him till within three Heyl. Edw. 6. p. 99. months of the time yea and then also his House and Servants were maintained out of his Bishoprick to the very instant that the declarary Fox p. 1218. Sentence was judiciously pronounced against him This was the Case of the deprived Bishops then and if this method had been taken in reference to our present Bishops that is had the matter for which they are deprived been debated in a Convocation of the Clergy and there concluded that the Allegiance they had sworn might lawfully be transferred without the Breach of Oath or guilt of Perjury had the Refusers of the said transferring been afterwards by a true and legal Parliament decreed to be deprived and had they upon that been Legally and Canonically evicted of such a refusal though no such time had been allowed them nor no such favour granted as in the interim to enjoy their Bishopricks and the Revenues of them nay though after all the Sanctions of the one and the Determinations of the other had seemed to them unjust there would not have been such cause as there is for a complaint So that I think we may cry out of the Injustice at least of the unprecedented Severity of the present Age and yet neither blemish nor expose the Reformation 44. Neither will they be assisted or screened by any thing that was done in Q. Elizabeth's Reign For though according to Stow there were Ann. 2. Eliz. p. 182. Eliz. p. 36. Ed. Lond. 1615. thirteen or fourteen deprived of their Bishopricks omnes qui tunc â—ederunt praeter unum Antonium Landevensem all says Cambden that were then Bishops which he reckons to be sixteen in number besides him of Landaff yet will their Deprivations be found of a quite different nature to those that have been made in our days And to make this out four things are necessary to be observed 45. First That all matters of Ecclesiastical concern were left at King Edward's death under a full and regular establishment consented and agreed thereunto by the King in his Convocation as well as by the King in his Parliament And so it is asserted to be in the Answer to the Lady Mary's Letter as cited out of Master Fox by the Author of Church-Government viz. that the Reformation as touching the Common-Prayer Book Part 5. p. 130. from the second year of his Reign and as touching other Articles of Religion from the fifth was Regular and Canonical as being the Act of the Clergy Thus was the Supemacy and Service Book established as is before shewn thus also were the Articles of Religion and in them the Tit. Art 1552. Art 31. St. 5. 6 Edw. 6. cap. 12. Marriage of the Clergy agreed upon own'd by the Parliament it self to have been so in the Act for adjudging such Marriages lawfull declaring therein that the Learned Clergy of the Realm had determined the same by the Law of God in their Convocations as well by the common assent as by the subscription of their hands 2. That no less Authority ought to be allowed to null the establishment than what was thought necessary by the standing Laws of the Land at first to make it and therefore since it had its Birth and Rise from the King and Convocation as well as from the King and Parliament and more properly from the first than from the latter the Queen had not power of her self no nor by the Parliament without the Convocation to destroy it And hence her own Clergy in Q. Elizabeth's days foreseeing the ill effect of such Power utterly disclaimed it and in their Convocation declared against it telling the Parliament in hopes to keep their Possessions but in the mean time forgetting the method whereby they came possessed that the Authority to handle and define such things which belong to Heyl. Q. Eliz. p. 113. Faith in the Sacraments and Discipline Ecclesiastical hath hitherto ever belonged and only ought to belong to the Pastor of the Church whom the Holy Spirit hath placed in the Church and not unto Lay-Men no though in Parliament as then they were assembled 3. That the Power whereby Q. Mary acted for dissolving the Reformation and for the laying aside the Bishops that asserted it was a less Authority than that by which at first it was established For no sooner was she come unto the Crown upon the death of K. Edw. VI. but and before ever a Heyl. Hist Q. Mary p. 22. Parliament was called she purely