Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	bishop_n	title_n	universal_a	1,836	5	10.0429	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07192	Of the consecration of the bishops in the Church of England with their succession, iurisdiction, and other things incident to their calling: as also of the ordination of priests and deacons. Fiue bookes: wherein they are cleared from the slanders and odious imputations of Bellarmine, Sanders, Bristow, Harding, Allen, Stapleton, Parsons, Kellison, Eudemon, Becanus, and other romanists: and iustified to containe nothing contrary to the Scriptures, councels, Fathers, or approued examples of primitiue antiquitie. By Francis Mason, Batchelour of Diuinitie, and sometimes fellow of Merton Colledge in Oxeford.	Mason, Francis, 1566?-1621.	1613 (1613)	STC 17597; ESTC S114294	344,300	282

some eminent Priesthood should declare their faith to them which had obtained the like degree of eminent Priesthood long time before them Therefore it seemeth good to me both to submit myselfe vnto you and to declare manifestly before you the confession of my faith Wherefore this practise doth not mount one Patriarch aboue the rest but rather leuell all of them in an equalitie and consequenly the Bishop of Rome had no more power ouer the Metropolitanes of other Patriarches then other Patriarches ouer his PHIL. The contrary is euident by the decree of Pope Pelagius Placuit vt quisque Metropolitanus c. It is my pleasure that euery Metropolitan which shall not send within three moneths of his Consecration to shew his faith and receiue the Pall shall be depriued of his place and dignitte Wherefore all Metropolitans are bound to performe this office to the Bishop of Rome euen all in the whole world For he that saith euery one excepteth none ORTHO Pelagius meaneth euery one within his owne Iurisdiction PHIL. But all the world was his Iurisdiction ORTHOD. Then belike the Pope was acknowledged Vniuersall Patriarch in the dayes of Pelagius PHIL. Yea and before Pelagius that title was offered to Pope Leo by the Councell of Chalcedon as S. Gregory witnesseth ORTHOD. The whole Councell is extant and we find no such matter PHIL. In the third action there are three Epistles of three sundry Grecians all which begin thus To the most holy and blessed Leo the vniuersall Archbishop and Patriarch of Rome ORTHOD. You might haue said foure But what if a few poore suiters hungry Grecians put a flattering title in their supplications doth this prooue that it was offered by a Councell one of them was a Pr●est two were Deacons and one a lay man not one of them was a Bishop nor yet in your owne iudgement had a voyce in the Councell PHIL. Paschasinus the Popes legate in his subscription calleth Leo the Pope of the vniuersall Church ORTHOD. If that title were aequiualent to this which may be doubted yet it was onely giuen by the Popes parasite and not by the Councell PHIL. It was giuen audiente probante vniuersali Synodo i. The generall Councell hearing and approuing it ORTHOD. This I heare you say but I would heare you proue it PHIL. Although the Councell decreed nothing concerning that matter yet it is euident enough that the giuing of the title to the Bishop of Rome was not displeasing to the Councell seeing no man reprehended it ORTHO They did not reprehend it but did they therefore commend it In the Councell of Lateran in the presence of the Pope an Archbishop in a Sermon speaking of a Pope said He had power aboue all power in heauen and in earth What say you Did the Pope and Councell approue this blasphemie for they did not reproue it If their silence was no argument of approbation then neither was the silence of the Councell of Chalcedon Yea it is most certaine that they neither did vse it nor approue it In the sixteenth Action they write a Synodall Epistle to Pope Leo at which time if euer it was fit that they should adorne him with this title which notwithstanding they vsed not but stiled him the most holy and most blessed Archbishop of the Romanes Neither could they approoue it in that sence which you giue it vnlesse they should crosse and contradict themselues For you intend by that title to aduance him aboue other Patriarches whereas the Councel of Chalcedon giueth no greater priuiledges to the Church of Rome then to the Church of Constantinople And as the Councell did neuer giue the title so Pope Leo did neuer vse it PHIL. Yes in his Epistle to the Emperour Martian against Anatolius in the very inscription of the Epistle he vseth the title of Vniuersall ORTH. He vseth it thus Leo episc Romanae vniuersalis ecclesiae i. Leo B. of the Romane vniuersal Church so he applieth it not to himselfe but to the church PHIL. If he be Bishop of the vniuersal church then he is an vniuersal Bishop ORTHOD. That doeth not follow for the Councell of Sardica in their Synodall Epistle to all Bishops calleth them Bishops and Colleagues of the Catholicke and Apostolicke Church Is not Catholicke the same with Vniuersall and yet their meaning was not to call them vniuersall Bishops neither was it the meaning of Pope Leo to call himselfe so if we beleeue Pope Gregorie affirming that neuer any of his predecessours did vse so prophane a title PHIL. It is to be vnderstood that not any of the Romane Bishops did vse the title of oecumenicall of a solemne custome and continually in all their subscriptions yet some of them sometimes vsed it ORTHOD. Then some of them sometimes vsed a prophane title PHIL. Vniuersall Bishop may be taken two wayes First for him which is the onely Bishop of the whole world excluding all other in which sence S. Gregorie saith If one be an Vniuersall Bishop it remaineth that you are no Bishops Secondly for him that hath a generall care of he whole Church yet so that other Bishops retaine their place and dignitie In the first sence S. Gregory calleth it prophane In the second it belongeth to the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. Concerning the first Gregorie hauing said that the name of Vniuersalitie was offered by the Councell addeth immediatly That neuer any of his predecessours did vse so prophane a title So it is cleare that he calleth that very title prophane which as he saith was offered by the Councell Which iustifieth my former answere For vnlesse you will accuse the Councell of prophanenesse you must needs say that Gregory speaketh improperly ascribing that to the Councell which was onely done by the Popes Legate and a few supplicants in the Councell Moreouer if this prophane title exclude all other from being Bishops then the Councel consisting of 630. Bishops in giuing this title should exclude themselues from being Bishops which is absurd seeing in their subscriptions they intitled themselues Bishops Concerning the second If he be an vniuersall Bishop which hath care of the whole Church then S. Paul was Vniuersall Bishop as well as S. Peter for he had care of all the Churches Then Athanasius was an Vniuersall Bishop for S. Basill saith He caried the care of all Churches PHIL. Peraduenture he meaneth that he caried the care of all within the Patriarchdome of Alexandria ORTHOD. Nor of them onely but of others also For S. Basill saith The whole state of the Church of Antioch dependeth vpon thee So though his iurisdiction was confined within the Patriarchdome of Alexandria yet he caried a tender care ouer the whole Church of Christ. Wherefore in this sence the title of Vniuersall Bishop belongeth as well to the Patriarch of Alexandria as to the Patriarch of Rome Moreouer the very title of Vniuersall Patriarch was giuen and that by a Councell to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople In what sence trow

prosecute an vnanswerable Argument Euery true Bishop must of necessitie be Consecrated by 3. Bishops at the least But the Bishops of England are not so therefore the Bishops of England are no true Bishops ORTHOD. The Bishops of England are so as in due place shall appeare And if in case of necessity they were not so What then The presence of 3. is required onely to the well-being not simply to the being It is no essentiall part of Episcopall Consecration but an accidentall ornament a comely complement of singular conueniencie no substantiall point of absolute necessitie CHAP. IIII. Wherein the Popish Arguments drawen from the Canons of the Apostles and the Decretall Epistles are proposed vrged and answered PHIL. I Will prooue the contrary by sundry arguments and first by the Canons of the Apostles which were collected and set out by Clemens Saint Peters scholar ORTH. If those Canons were made by the Apostles then the Church of Rome is much to blame for the 84. Canon alloweth the 3. Booke of Maccabecs as also 2. Epistles of Clemens and his eight bookes of constitutions for Canonicall Scripture which the Church of Rome reiecteth againe it omitteth the Sonne of Sidrach Wisdome and diuers others which your Church imbraceth for Canonicall PHIL. It seemeth probable saith Bellarmine that this Canon was not set out by Clemens yea it is Apocryphus and Surreptitius as is affirmed by Binius ORTH. What say you then to the 65. Canon which forbiddeth to fast vpon the Saturday excepting one onely that is as Binius declareth the Paschall Saturday PHIL. I say with Baronius it is counterfeite ORTH. But what say you to Pope Gelasius who in a councell at Rome of 70. Bishops saith Liber Canonum Apostolorum Apocryphus the booke of the Canon of the Apostles is Apocryphall And in what sence he called it Apocryphall is expounded by Bellarmine Eos libros vocat Apocryphos qui sunt aediti ab auctoribus haereticis vel certè suspectis Gelasius calleth those bookes Apocryphall which were set out by such authors as were either hereticall or at least suspected PHIL. Gelasius did not call the booke Apocryphall as though all the Canons therein conteined were Apocryphall but as Bellarmine thinketh Propter aliquos vel corruptos vel additos ab haeret●cis that is in respect of some which were either corrupted or added by heretikes of which stampe were those two which you alleadged But the first 50. conteining nothing but Apostolike and Orthodoxe doctrine approued of auncient Popes Councels and Fathers Velut authentici recipiuntur are receiued as authenticall saith Binius ORTH. Pope Zephirine allowed 70. or at least 60. for there are diuerse readings how doth this agree PHIL. Well ynough for Pope Zephirine speaketh not of Canons but of Sentences and you must know that those 60 or 70. sentences are all conteined in the 50. Canons as Binius affirmeth out of Father Turrian ORTHOD. Bellarmine expoundeth these sentences to bee so many Canons in these words Zephirine the fifteenth from Peter deliuereth in his first Epistle that there were onely 70. Canons of the Apostles PHIL. Pope Leo alloweth onely fifty Apostolorum Canones numerant patres inter Apochrypha exceptis 50. Capitulis The fathers doe recken the Canons of the Apostles amongst Apocryphall writings excepting fifty Chapters by which he meaneth fifty Canons ORTHO Then to passe ouer the fifth Canon forbidding a Bishop or Priest to cast off his wife vnder pretence of religion as also the one and thirtith inhibiting all other Bishops to restore a Priest or Deacon excommunicated by his owne Bishop What can you possibly say to the ninth which excommunicateth all those which beeing present at the communion doe not communicate concerning which Binius is forced to confesse Totum hoc decretum non diuine sed humano iure constitutum iam contraria consuetudine est abrogatum that is This whole Decree beeing made not by law Diuine but humane is now abrogated by a contrary custome and alleadgeth for him Bellarmine Zuarez and Turrian which is a notable acknowledgement that such a Canon as you account Apostolicall and Authenticall may not withstanding bee abrogated But not to stand vpon these and the like exceptions let vs heare what the Canons say concerning the consecration of Bishops PHIL. THe words are these Let a Bishop bee ordained of two or three Bishops ORTHO Doth the Canon require two or three Then ordination by two is canonicall as well as by three PHIL. Not so for the Canon meaneth that there should be two or three assistants besides the Metropolitane as is declared by Cardinall Bellarmine and father Turrian ORTHOD. The Canon saith not two or three assistants but two or three Bishops Neither hath it this clause besides the Metropolitane but pronounceth simply let a Bishop bee ordained by two or three Bishops Wherfore the Canon is satisfied with the presence of two or three Bishops This is the iudgement of your owne Pamelius who saith that conseration or imposition of hands was per Episcopos qui conuenerant quos vt minimum duos esse oportebat i. By the Bishops which were assembled which should bee two at the least Where note that hee doth not say the Bishops assistant but the Bishops assembled should bee two at the least This also was the iudgement of Cardinall de Turrecremata who vrgeth this very Canon against your position and prooueth by it that three are not necessary Neither is the presence of two required of absolute necessity if you will beleeue the Apostolike constitutions of Clemens a booke which for my owne part I would not once name but onely that your chiefe champions doe so commonly alleage it Wherefore as Saint Paul cited a Poet against the Athenians so let mee cite this booke against you which so highly esteeme it I Simon of Chanany appoint by how many Bishops a Bishop ought to be ordained to wit by two or three Bishops but if any shall be ordained by one Bishop let both the ordained and the Ordainer bee deposed but if necessity shall compell to be ordained by one because many cannot bee present for persecution or some other cause let the Decree of the commission of many Bishops be produced If this authority bee of credit then you are confuted for it alloweth consecration by one in case of necessity PHIL. But that one must haue the commission of many ORTHOD. The commission is onely for concord sake and to auoide Schisme for the absent cannot impose hands nor giue the power therefore they doe not ordaine though they consent to the ordination which is performed by him onely that is present Now if in any case a Bishop may bee ordained by one and yet bee a true Bishop then the presence of moe is a matter of conueniency and not of absolute necessity And if you thinke that these

constitutions proceeded from the Apostles then you must confesse that they are the fittest interpreters of the Canons of the Apostles PHIL. THe Canon will be cleerer if wee compare it with the Decretall Epistles ORTH. Those Decretals are out of date They haue long shrowded themselues vnder the vizard of reuerent antiquity but now they are vnmasked and appeere to bee counterfeit as is confessed by your owne men Yet I will not take you at this aduantage and therefore let vs heare them PHIL. Anacletus saith that Iames who was named the Iust and the brother of the Lord according to the flesh was ordained the first Archbishop of Ierusalem by the Apostles Peter the other Iames and Iohn giuing a forme to their successours that a Bishop should by no meanes bee consecrated by fewer then three Bishoppes all the rest giuing their consents Likewise Anicetus Wee know that the most blessed Iames called the Iust which also according to the flesh is called the brother of our LORD was ordained Bishoppe of Ierusalem by Peter Iames and Iohn the Apostles Now if so great a man was ordained of no lesse then three verilie it is apparant that they deliuered a forme or pattern● the Lord so appointing that a Bishop ought to bee ordained of no fewer then three Bishops ORTHODOX Heere are two things to bee considered the ordination of Iames and the collection thereupon Concerning the ordination your Anacletus and Anicetus affirme that hee was ordained Bishop of Ierusalem by three Apostles and the same is auouched by Eusebius Hierome and others But what is meant when it is said that the Apostles ordained him PHIL. What else but that they conferred vpon him the Episcopall power as our Bishops doe when they consecrate a Bishop ORTHOD. Then belike before this ordination Saint Iames had not the Episcopall power PHIL. Very true ORTHOD. Was not he an Apostle of Iesus Christ PHIL. Yes for they speake distinctly of Iames the brother of our Lord of whom Saint Paul saith None other of the Apostles saw I saue Iames the brother of our Lord so it is euident that hee was an Apostle ORTHOD. And was he not called to the office of an Apostle immediatly by Iesus Christ consequētly had he not from him al Apostolick authority PHIL. All Apostolick I grant but we speake of Episcopal ORTHOD. As though all Episcopall authority were not comprehended in the Apostolick For what commission can be more ample then this which Christ gaue ioyntly to all his Apostles As my Father sent mee so send I you and Saint Paul proclaimeth that hee was in nothing inferiour to the chiefe Apostles If in nothing then not in Episcopall power and authority This is agreeable to the iudgement of the best learned among you Bellarmine saith Obseruandum est in Apostolica authoritate contineri omnem Ecclesiasticam potestatem i. It is to be obserued that in the Apostolicke authoritie is contained all Ecclesiasticall power If all Ecclesiasticall then surely all Episcopall In another place he proueth the same by the authoritie of S. Cyrill grounding vpon the words of Christ before alleadged Likewise Franciscus de Victoria Omnem potestatem quam Apostoli habuerunt receperunt immediatè a Christo i. The Apostles receiued immediatly from Christ all the power which they had Wherefore to say That Christ made Peter Bishop with his owne hands and that the rest deriued Episcopall power from Peter is a mere fancie Likewise to say that Peter Iohn and Iames did ordeine Iames Bishop that is conferre vpon him any Episcopall power is a mere dreame PHIL. Doe not the fathers commonly say That he was a Bishop ORTHO They say so And in so saying they say truely if they be rightly vnderstood For 1. The Scripture saith of Iudas His Bishopricke let an other man take That is his Apostleship If the Apostleship may be called a Bishoprick then an Apostle may be called a Bishop 2. The word Bishop signifieth an Ouerseer and may most aptly be applied to the Apostles which were the chiefe ouerseers of the Church of Christ. PHIL. Euery Apostle in that he is an Apostle may be called a Bishop in this generall sence But Iames being an Apostle was properly made a Bishop in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sence ORTHOD. A Bishop in the Ecclesiasticall sence hath two properties For 1. hereceiueth his Episcopall power by imposition of hands 2. For the execution thereof hee is confined to a certaine place Neither of which can properly be applied to an Apostle For though the Apostles made their chiefe abode in great Cities and populous places as namely Iames at Ierusalem yet because their Commission extended to all Nations they could not be so tied to any one place as the Bishop was Which is well expressed by Epiphanius saying The Apostles went often to other countreis to preach the Gospel and the Citte of Rome might not be without a Bishop As though he should say The Apostles were to preach to all Nations but the Bishops duetie did confine him to his owne charge This is correspondent to the Scripture which calleth the Apostles The light of the world whereas the 7. Bishops of Asia are stiled The 7. Starres and Angels of the 7. Churches And though the Apostles while they stayed in those Cities did preach ordeine Ministers execute Censures and all other things which are now performed by the Bishops who succeed them in the gouernement of the Church in regard whereof the fathers call them the Bishops of those places yet their Episcopall power was not distinct from their Apostolicke but included in it as a branch thereof not deriued from any Ordination by the hands of man but giuen them immediatly by Iesus Christ. PHIL. If Iames receiued no Episcopall power by Ordination in what sence is it said That they ordained him ORTHOD. Your glosse of the Canon Law giueth 4. senses of that speach Either say that these 3. did Consecrate him onely with visible Vnction but he was before Annointed of the Lord after an innisible maner Or say they did not ordeine him but onely shewed a forme of ordaining vnto others Or say that they ordained him not to be a Bishop but an Archbishop Or say that they ordained that is Inthronised him to the administration of a certaine place for before he was a Bishop without a title Hitherto the Glosse And verily as the Prophets and teachers at Antioch imposed hands with fasting and prayer vpon Paul and Barnabas not to giue them any new Ecclesiasticall power for that is more then wee finde in the Scripture but as the Text saith To set them apart for the worke whereunto the Lord had called them So the Apostles might impose hands vpon Iames not to giue him any Episcopall power that fancie hath bene before confuted but by common consent to designe him to the gouernement of the Church of Ierusalem and to commend him and his

within his own Prouince according to the custome of Rome which custome they commend and propose for a patterne But the Bishop of Rome careth neither for Canons nor Customes which make against him He is not content to bee Bishop in his owne Diocesse and Metropolitan ouer Bishops in his owne Prouince and Patriarch ouer his owne Metropolitans but he would stretch out the pawes of his Supremacie ouer the Christian world Fiftly the Nicen Canons would haue no Priest made without examination and such as are rashly ordained they doe not allow But the Bishop of Rome maketh boy Priests and boy Bishops and boy Cardinals Ferdinandus Medices a Florentine was made a Cardinall by Sixtus Quintus when he was not ful thirteene yeres old and Iohannes Medices which was afterwards Pope Leo the tenth was Cardinall before he was fourteene yeeres complet yet he was an Archbishop fiue yeeres before he was Cardinall And least you should imagine that this fauour was afforded only to Florentines Odettus Castilioneus was Cardinall at eleuen yeere old yet he was elected Bishop before he was Cardinall Alphonsus sonne to Immanuel King of Portugall was Cardinall at seuen yeeres old and yet he was Bishop before he was Cardinall These are the men whose office is to chuse the Pope to assist him with their Counsell and to sit with him as Iudges of the whole world And that which is more wonderfull if we may beleeue Glaber Rodulphus a Monke of your owne which liued at the same time Benedict the ninth was made Pope at twelue yeeres olde Was not this a fitte man to be Father of the Church Moderator of generall Councels Decider of all Controuersies Expounder of all Scriptures the onely Oracle vpon the face of the earth and Iudge Paramount of the Christian World Sixtly the Nicen Canons doe not suffer a Deacon so much as to sit amongst Priests but as the Priest was in place inferiour to the Bishop so the Deacon to the Priest Now though it were granted to be true which Bellarmine affirmeth that vnder Syluester there was seuen Cardinal Deacons in Rome yet the Nicen Councel maketh no exception at all of Cardinals But be he Cardinal or not Cardinall the Deacon is inferior to the Priest and the Priest to the Bishop but the Bishop of Rome hath aduanced his Cardinals euen such as are neither Bishops nor Priests First aboue Bishops then aboue Archbishops last of all aboue Patriarches Seuenthly the Nicen Canons forbid any Bishop to ordaine in his Church a Clerke belonging to another Bishop without the consent of the Bishop to whom he belongeth But the Bishop of Rome ordaineth whomsoeuer wheresoeuer whensoeuer not expecting the consent of any man Last of all the Nicen Canons forbid all Clerkes to follow filthy lucre Wherein how his holines excelleth is plainely platted out by Claudius Espencaeus a Diuine of your owne out of a shamelesse booke openly sold in Rome called the Taxe of the Chamber or Chauncery Apostolicke wherein a man may learne before hand at what price to be dispensed withall for any villany he shall commit be it adultery symony periurie incest or worse then incest Wherefore Philodox if paper could blush I am perswaded the leaues of that booke would be as red as scarlet So at Rome nothing is forbidden but to come without money if a man bring money it will procure a dispensation for any thing A wedge of gold findeth g●ace wheresoeuer it goeth and a Key of gold can open Saint Peters locke For all things are weighed at Rome in a ballance of golde as though pouerty were the onely irregularitie and no sinne in the world were greater then to want money so well doth the Church of Rome obserue the Nicen Canons But let vs heare the words of the Canon PHIL. A Bishop must be ordained if it be possible of all the Bishops in his prouince if this be hard to performe either by occasion of vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet surely three ought to bee congregated into one place so that they haue the consent of the absent solet thē make an ordination Likewise the fourth Councell of Carthage when a Bishop is ordained let two Bishops lay the Booke of the Gospels and hold it ouer his head and necke and one Bishop powring the blessing vpon him let all other Bishops that are present touch his head with their handes Likewise the second Councell of Arles Let no Bishop presume to ordaine a Bishop without permission of the Metropolitane nor any Bishop being a Metropolitance without three Bishops of the same Prouince so that others of the same Prouince be admonished by Epistles that they may signifie by their answere that they haue consented So the sixt Councell of Carthage A Bishop must be ordained of all the Bishops which are within the Prouince but if this bee hard either for vrgent necessitie or for the length of the iourney yet by all meanes three meeting together there may bee imposition of handes the absent Bishoppes consenting thereto by writing So the second Councell at Brachar It is meete that Bishops should bee appointed especially by the whole Councell but if this shal be hard in respect of necessitie or for the length of the iourney let three of them bee gathered together and let the subscriptions of all both present and absent bee taken and so afterward let the ordination be performed Thus you see the Councels and namely the Nicen requireth the presence of three For first it should bee performed by all the Bishops of the Prouince but if that cannot be by reason of vrgent necessitie yet surely three must bee congregated so they make it not a thing indifferent but a matter of necessitie and in any case require three ORTHOD. WHat if three present proceede to a consecration not expecting at all the consent of the absent PHIL. Their consent seemeth to bee onely of congruitie and not of necessitie ORTH. But the Nicen Canon not content with three present requireth also the consent of the absent in the same strictnesse of wordes Yet surely let three be congregated into one place so that they haue also the consent of the absent and so let them make an ordination Wherefore if you expound the one branch as a point of cōgru●ty why do you vrge the other as of absolute necessitie Againe these Councels were holden Florente Ecclesia when the world was furnished with plentie of godly Bishops but you vrge them against a Church lately eclipsed and newly recouered from darkenesse the world round about being drowned in superstition and Idolatry These answeres might bee sufficient but for your better satisfaction let vs search the sence of your authorities by comparing them one with another The first was a Canon ascribed to the Apostles which being made when Bishops were scant requireth two or three The second drawne from the decrees of Popes supposed to

Catholicke and the followers hereticall We acquit the Masters and condemne the Schollers they are heires of heauen which haue written those bookes the defendours whereof are troden downe to the pit of hell But now the Church hath long agoe with one voice condemned this Heresie When Praetextatus and Felicianus hauing baptised sundry in schisme returned to vnitie the Church did not rebaptise them whom they had baptised but kept them in that baptisme which they had in Schisme For according to Saint Austin some doe minister baptismum legitimum and that legitimè some neither legitimè nor yet legitimum some legitimum but not legitimè Such as performe it in the true element and forme of wordes being themselues in the bosome and vnitie of the Church doe minister both legitimum and legitimè such as faile in the institution and are themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe neither minister legitimè nor yet legitimum such as doe obserue the substance of institution being themselues in Schisme or Heresie doe minister legitimum but not legitimè And those which receiue it from them haue a lawfull baptisme but not lawfully For it is one thing to haue a lawfull thing vnlawfully and another thing not to haue it at all The Sacraments of the Church may be found without the Church as the riuers of Paradise are found without Paradise Heretickes and Schismatickes may haue rem columbae though they themselues be extra columbam PHIL. The trueth of this Doctrine is so plaine that no common Catholick is ignorant of it ORTH. Then to proceede what if the Priest wee speake of were interdicted suspended excommunicated degraded PHIL. Yet if hee obserue in all points of substance the institution of Christ it is effectuall and neuer to bee repeated This is vndoubtedly the iudgement of our Church And therefore in Queene Maries time though the land had beene interdicted and vnder the Popes curse for Schisme and Heresie by the space of twentie yeeres wee did not rebaptise them who were then baptised but haue kept them with vs in their former baptisme ORTH. COncerning baptisme we agree Now to come to the eucharist shall the vngodly life or wicked opinion of the Minister make his ministration of it vneffectuall to the people of God PHIL. In no case so he obserue the ordinance of Christ. ORTHOD. You answere rightly For the sonnes of Eli were wicked men and procured Gods heauie wrath against themselues yet there is no doubt but the God of all Grace did accept of those Sacrifices which his faithfull children with an honest heart presented according to the Law of the Lord to be offered euen by their hands so long as they inioyed the Office of Priesthood Our Sauiour in the Gospel reproued the Scribes and Pharisees for their false and superstitious doctrine which was so commonly receiued and so anciently continued that there can be no question but many of the Priests were infected with it Yet Christ commanded the Leper to shew himselfe to the Priest Yea he himselfe frequented the Feasts wherein Sacrifices were offered by those Priests But to goe forward Can the Eucharist be ministred by a Priest whom the Pope hath excommunicated and degraded PHIL. Though all Priests haue the power of Order vnder the Pope yet for as much as they haue it not immediatly from the Pope but from God therefore the Pope cannot so take it away but that if they will they may vse it For a Priest though the Pope should Excōmunicate suspend interdict degrade him yet if he will himselfe he shall truely Consecrate For euery Priest hath an indeleble Character which is a certaine spirituall and supernaturall power imprinted in the soule of man in Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders whereby the Baptized Confirmed and Ordered are inabled to giue or receiue the Offices of certaine Sacraments The Character of Confirmation being not greatly to our present purpose may bee passed ouer The Character of Baptisme is a passiue power whereby the Baptized is made ●it to receiue other Sacraments whereof without Baptisme he were vncapable The Character of Order is an actiue power to minister the Sacraments vnto other Now in holy Orders it must be obserued That the Priestly Character doeth differ from the Episcopall For the Episcopall is either an other or the same extended so that it conteineth the Priestly and somewhat else A Priest in respect of his Priestly Character is first of all the publicke and ordinary Minister of Baptisme For a Lay-man may not Baptise publickely but onely priuately Neither priuately in the presence of the Priest or Deacon but onely in their absence Neither alwayes in their absence but onely in case of necessitie for then a Lay-man be he Iew or infidel may Baptize so hee intend to doe that which the Catholicke Church doeth in that kinde of Administration A Deacon may Baptise not onely priuately but publickely so it be at the appointment of the Bishop or Priest But a Priest may suo iure Baptize ex Officio euen in the presence of a Bishop as is declared by Pius Quintus and the Councell of Trent who qualifie the contrary opinion and reduce it to a tollerable sence Secondly a Priest by vertue of his Priestly Character may consecrate the Hoaste which no Lay-man King nor Emperour no Angel nor Archangel can performe because they want this Character Indeed a Deacon may helpe to minister the Eucharist but he cannot Consecrate no not by dispensation If he should take it vpon him he should effect nothing But euery Priest receiueth in his Ordination a Character not from man but from the Eternall God which in respect of the Eucharist is absolute perfect and independent Wheresoeuer it is there God is present ex pacto and cōcurreth to the producing of supernaturall effects which he doeth not where this Character is wanting Now the holy Councels of Florence and Trent do teach vs That this Character is indeleble death onely if death can dissolue it otherwise it is euerlasting ORTHOD. If by indeleble Character bee meant onely a gracious gift neuer to be reirerated then we may safely confesse that in Baptisme and holy Orders there is imprinted an indeleble Character For a man rightly Baptized becomming a Turke or a Iew and afterward returning to the faith and Church of Christ is in no case to be rebaptized the vertue of his former Baptisme is not spunged out but still remaineth auaileable Likewise when a Priest lawfully ordained becoming a schismaticke or hereticke is iustly censured for his crimes and afterward is reclaimed if the Church shall need his labours and hold it conuenient that he execute the Ministeriall function hee may in no case be reordained but may performe it by vertue of his Orders formerly receiued Hitherto of a Priest NOw to transferre our speech to a Bishop Shall his iniquitie hinder him from giuing Orders PHIL. No verily for there is the

videtur c. It seemeth we may say seeing an Abbot gouerneth his Monastery by ordinary Iurisdiction and an Abbatesse is equall vnto him in freedome of administration that she hath ordinarie Iurisdiction as well as the Abbot Yea the same Stephen striueth to attibute vnto her the power of excommunication which is more then the Church of England ascribeth to Princes For it attributeth vnto them onelie that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwayes to godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed vnto their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuil sword the stubborne euill doers When the B hath vsed his spirituall censures he can proceed no further but as Iosias compelled all that were found in Israel to serue the Lord So may euery Prince by his royall authority compell all his subiects to do their duty and those which refuse to be reformed by the Church he may restraine with the ciuil sword inflicting tēporal punishments as the qualitity of the offence requireth When Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed in the Councell of Antioch he did notwithstanding hold his Church and chaire by violence whereupon the Councell knowing that of themselues they could proceed no further were forced to seeke the aide of Aurelian the Emperour by whose commandement he was expelled PHIL. IF the Iurisdiction of the Prince and the Prelate be so different how then is the Prelates deriued from the Prince ORTHOD. Heere wee must consider the matters handled in the consistories of Bishops and the manner The matters originally and naturally belonging to those Courts are onely such as are originally and naturally Ecclesiasticall the manner to ratifie their iudgements is not properly vnder any corporall mulct but onely by spirituall censures as suspension excommunication and such like In both which respects the Iurisdiction of Bishops hath beene much inlarged by the fauour and indulgence of Christian Princes Concerning the matter Constantine the Great gaue libertie to Clerkes to decline the iudgement of ciuill Iudges and to bee iudged by their owne Bishops By occasion whereof many Ciuill Causes were brought to the cognisance of Ecclesiasticall Courts Hee made also a law to ratifie those iudgements As though they had beene pronounced by the Emperour himselfe Now all the Iurisdiction which Bishops haue in Ciuill Causes is meerely from the Prince Concerning the manner it seemeth sometimes expedient to annex coactiue power to the Episcopall office both for the honour of Prelacie and also to make their spirituall censures the more regarded which also without controuersie must bee acknowledged to proceede from the Prince For as the Lord hath compacted the light into the body of the Sunne that thence it might be communicated to Moone and Starres So hee hath put all ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction into the person of the Prince from whom as from a glorious Sunne or fountaine all other inferiour lampes doe borrow their light But if wee speake of that Episcopall Iurisdiction which both in respect of matter and manner is meerely spirituall the immediate fountaine of it is God himselfe as our most learned and religious King with his royall Penne hath thus witnessed to the world That Bishops ought to bee in the Church I euer maintained it as an Apostolicke institution and so the ordinance of God contrary to the Puritanes and likewise to Bellarmine who denyeth that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction immediately from God If his Maiesties iudgement bee contrary to Bellarmines who holdeth the negatiue then his Princely wisedome embraceth the affirmatiue to wit that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction meerely spirituall immediately from God Notwithstanding for so much as they exercise the same in a Christian Common wealth at the holy direction and command and vnder the gracious protection of a religious King within the kings dominions vpon the Kings subiects according to the Canons and statutes established by the Kings authoritie wee may iustly call those Courts the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts and the Archbishops and Bishops the kings Ecclesiasticall iudges Wherefore though this spirituall power in regard of it selfe be immediately from God yet in these respects it may rightly be said to be deriued from the king So it is a Christo tanquam ab authore conferente a Rege tanquam a iubente dirigente promouente protegente PHIL. If your Bishops haue their spirituall Iurisdiction immediately from God when doe they receiue it ORTHO When they are made Bishops that is in their Consecration For the partie to be Consecrated is presented to the Archbishop in these words Most reuerend Father in God wee present vnto you this godly and well learned man to be Consecrated Bishop Where the word Bishop is taken in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sense for a Timothy or a Titus an Angel or gouernour of the Church And the Archbishop with other Bishops present imposeth hands saying f Take the holy Ghost that is such ghostly and spirituall power as is requisite to aduance a Presbyter to the office of a Bishop so here is giuen him whatsoeuer belongeth to the Episcopall office as the prayers going before the pronouncing of these words and following after doe declare wherein humble petition is made for Gods blessing and grace that hee may dulie execute the office of a Bishoppe faithfullie serue therein and minister Episcopall discipline PHIL. If it be giuen in Episcopall Consecration how then is it giuen immediatly from God ORTHOD. I will answere you if you will answere me a few questions And first I demaund whence is the power of Order PHIL. It is immediatly from God because it requireth a Character and grace which onely God can effect For though it be said to be giuen with Imposition of hands yet the meaning is not that either the Imposer or the Imposition of hands doeth giue it but God himselfe while hands are Imposed To which purpose it is excellently said of S. Ambrose O brother who giueth the Episcopall grace God or man Thou answerest without doubt God but yet God giueth it by man Man imposeth hands God giueth the grace The Priest imposeth an humble hand and God blesseth with a mightie hand ORTHOD. And whence commeth the grace of Baptisme PHIL. This also without question is immediatly from God ORTHOD. And whence commeth faith in the hearing of the Gospel PHIL. It is likewise immediatly from God ORTHOD. And doeth not God in all these vse the ministerie of man PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTHOD. Then you see a thing may be giuen immediatly from God though in giuing it he vse the meanes and ministery of man for in such like speeches the word Immediatly is not so taken as excluding meanes but as distinguishing the action of God from the meanes When the children of Israel were stung of the fierie serpents God in healing them vsed the

matter of the Sacrament in all respects as wee doe and he being a part of the Nicen councell and one that helped to make the Canons and subscribed vnto them must needs be holden for a sufficient and faithfull interpreter of his owne and their meaning So in him wee haue 318. Bishops the most reuerent sages and Senate of the Christian world after the Apostles daies al denying your sacrifice maintayning a remembrance in stead of a sacrifice Wherefore when they describe a Priest by offering of sacrifice they doe not meane a sacrifice in substance but in signification and representation Neither can it bee proued that euer any of the ancient Fathers thought otherwise nor that any one of them was a Masse Priest as may further appeare by our learned diuines which haue handled this point to whom I referre you Wherefore seeing your sacrifising neither can be proued by the scriptures nor by the Fathers rightly vnderstood but is contrary to both we detest it to the bottome of hell as a most blasphemous abhomination derogating from the soueraigne and all sufficient sacrifice offered once for all by that one Priest which with one oblation entred the holy place and hath purchased an eternall redemption for vs. Hitherto of the first function of Popish Priesthood Now let vs come to the second CHAP. IX Of the second question which concerneth the power of absolution PHIL. THe second function of Priest-hood is the power of absolution which God hath giuen neither to King nor Emperour to Angell nor Archangell but onely to the Priest and in this also you are defectiue in the Church of England ORT. What absolution doe you meane and in what manner is it giuen PHIL. There is an absolution in the Consistory and an absolution in the Court of Conscience the former is from excommunication and other spirituall censures the latter which we meane is from sinne and is giuen in Priestly ordination euen by the words of Christ himselfe For the Bishop imposeth hands saying whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen and whose sinnes you retaine they are retained c. ORTHOD. The very same words are vsed in the Church of England as may appeare by the booke The Bishop with the Priests present shall lay there hands seuerally vpon the head of euery one that receiueth Orders The receiuers humbly kneeling vpon their knees and the Bishop saying Receiue the holy ghost whose sinnes thou dost forgiue they are forgiuen and whose sinnes thou dost retaine they are retained and therefore if the power of absolution bee giuen by these words then it is giuen and receiued in the Church of England PHIL. Not so for though you haue the words yet you haue not the true sence of the words and therefore neither doe your Bishops giue it nor you receiue it ORTHOD. Then let vs without all partiallity examine the true sence meaning of them For as much therefore as our Sauiour did represent a reall donation both by breathing and saying receiue without all controuersie somewhat was really giuen actually received but what was that vndoubtedly the holy Ghost for he said receiue the holy Ghost But what is meant by the holy Ghost It cannot be denied that they receiued the presence of the spirit for their direction support and assistance and the Lord hath promised the same spirit to all faithfull ministers when he said Behold I am with you that is with you and your successors vntill the end of the world To this purpose it is well spoken of Leo Qui mihioneris est author ipse fiet administrationis adiutor that is He that is author of my burthen will be the helper in my administration and againe Dabit virtutem qui contulit dignitatem i. Hee that gaue me the dignity will giue me strength to performe it But seeing it is euident that in the booke of God the holy Ghost doth many times signifie the gifts of the holy Ghost to point out the fountaine and welspring of those heauenly graces the interpretation of Saint Ierome may seeme most consonant to reason who by the holy Ghost vnderstandeth in this place a grace of the holy Ghost in these words acceperunt spiritus sancti gratiam that is they receiued a grace of the holy Ghost It remaineth therefore that we consider what grace that was It was not the grace of adoption or regeneration because they had receiued that already as appeared by the fruits thereof We beleeue know that thou art the Christ the son of the liuing God nor the grace of miracles because they receiued not that till afterward Behold I wil send the promise of my Father vpon you but tarry in the city of Ierusalem vntil you be induced with power from aboue which promise was fulfilled in the fiery tongues it seemeth therefore to be some ordinary grace which should continue with them their successors in the Church for euer as is confessed on both sides what can this be but that which Christ himself doth mētion in the words following as it were of set purpose to take away al ambiguous construction whose sins you remit they are remitted c. And this is expressed likewise by S. Ierome who calleth it gratiam qua peccata remitterent i. a grace whereby they might forgiue sins This is also the iudgement of S. Chrysostome saying a man should not erre if hee should say that they then receiued a certaine power and spirituall grace not that they should raise againe the dead or worke miracles but that they might forgiue sinnes To these we may ioyne Saint Ambrose who saith Hee that hath receiued the holy Ghost hath receiued power both to loose sinne and to bind it and a little after Munus spiritus sancti est officium Sacerdotis that is the guift of the holy Ghost is the Priests office Wherefore by holy Ghost is meant a ghostly ministeriall grace or power to forgiue sinnes PHIL. Thus far we agree as may appeare by our learned writers Cardinal Bellarmine Palacius and others but all the question is in what manner the Minister forgiueth sinnes ORTHOD. Saint Paul saith All things are of God which hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe by Iesus Christ and hath giuen vnto vs the Ministery of reconciliation For God was in Christ and reconciled the world vnto himselfe not imputing their sinnes vnto them and hath committed vnto vs the word of reconciliation Whereby it appeareth that God reconcileth the world properlie by not imputing their sinnes the Apostles and other Ministers of the Gospell ministerially as Embassadours of Christ to whom is committed the word and ministery of reconciliation For what other thing is our forgiuenesse of sinnes then a reconciling of men to God but we reconcile men to God by preaching and declaring the word of the Gospell therefore by preaching and declaring the word of the Gospell we forgiue sinnes PHIL. There is