be rightly Ordered and Consecrated The scope of the Parliament and of this Act was to confirme the consecration of Arch Bishop Parker and the rest of the Bishops and to free them from caâ—ills and objections But they confirme no Ordination at the Nagge 's head neither can their words be extended any way to such a ridiculous Consecration Therefore the Ordination of Arch Bishop Parker and the rest was no Nagges head OrdinatioÌ„ My ninth reason to prove that Nagges-head Relation fabulous and counterfeit is taken from the Testimony of that book formerly mentioned of the life 's of the seventy Arâ—h Bishops of Canterbury wherein the Consecrations of Arch Bishop Parker and all the rest are particulary related That which was published to the world in print above thirty yeares before the death of Queene Elisabeth was not lately forged But the legall Ordinations of Arch-Bishop Parker and the rest according to the Register was published to the world in print above thirty yeares before the death of Queene Elisabeth Againe that which was published to the world in print with the allowance of Arch Bishop Parker or rather by Arch Bishops Parker himself was not intended by Arch Bishop Parker to be smothered oâ— concealed Men do not use to publish their forgeries in print especially so soone and of such publick actions whilest there are so many eye witnesses living That the Relation was not confuted That the Authour was never called to an account for it That no man stood up against the Registers nor on the behalf of the Naggâ—â—head Ordination in those daies That 〈◊〉 Neale was so tame to endure the lie in prieâ— and all his party so silent at that timâ— when the truth might so easily have beeâ— discovered as if it had bene written with â— beame of the sun as it was indeed is 〈◊〉 evident proofe that our Relation is undeniable and the Relation which theiâ— Fathers make is but a drowsy dreamâ— which could not indure the light of the sun The tenth and last reason to prove on Relation true and theirs fabulous is taken from all sortes of witnesses ours and theirs indifferently Mr Mason reckoned up seven of our writers who had justiâ—â—ed the legality of our Ordinations and â—ited our Registers as authentick Recorâ—es before himself Bishop Iewell Bishop Hall Bishop Goodwin Doctor â—ollings Mr Camden Mr. Shelden â—nd one who was then living when this â—uestion was so hotely debated in King â—unes his time and had been an eye-witâ—esse of Arch Bishop Parkers Consecraâ—â—ons at Lambeth that was the Earle of â—ottingham One that was well stored â—ith our English writers in Queene Elisabeths time might adde many more â—ut that can not well be expected from me 〈◊〉 this distance We may produce as many of theirs â—ho have confessed or been convinced of 〈◊〉 truth of Arch Bishop Parkers Conseâ—â—ation First Mr. Clerke whose Father â—as Register to Cardinall Pole in his Leâ—â—ntine Courte and he himself an Actuâ—â—y under him when Theophilus Higgins 〈◊〉 out of England to St. Omars or â—â—oway I remember not well whether â—here he met with this Mr. Clerke â—ho falling into discourse with him â—â—ncerning his Reasons why he had forsaken the Church of England Mr Higgins told him that one of them 〈◊〉 that saying of St. Hierome It is no Church which hath no Priests reflecting upon thiâ— Nagges head Consecration Mr. Clerke approved well of his Caution because 〈◊〉 dubiis tutior pars sequenda but withall 〈◊〉 wished that what their Authours had written concerning that point could be maâ— good confessing that he himself was 〈◊〉 England at that time The witnesse doâ—â— not positively remember whether at tâ—â— Consecration or not But Mr Clerâ—â— said that he himself was present when 〈◊〉 Advocate of the Arches whom the Queeâ— sent to peruse the Register after the Consecration and to give her an account whether it was performed Canonically returâ—â— her this answer that he had peruse the Register and that no just exceptiâ—â— could be made against the Consecration But he said something might hâ—â— been better particularly that Bishâ—â— Coverdale was not in his Rochet 〈◊〉 he assured her that could make no â—â—â—fect in the Consecration Here 〈◊〉 have if not an eye witnesse yet at least 〈◊〉 eare witnesse in an undoubted manner ofâ—â— legall Consecration and of the truth of the Register and of the judgement of the Advocate of the Arches concerning the Canonicalnesse of the Consecration Thus much Mr. Higgins was ready to make faith of whilest he was living and Mr. Barwick a person of very good credit from him of at this present The second witnesse is Mr. Higgins himself who comming afterwards into England had a desire to see the Register and did see it and finding those expresse words in it Milo vero Coverdallus non nisi togalanea talari â—â—ebatur and remembring withall what Mr. Clerke had told him whereas the Canonicall garments of the rest of the Bishops are particularly described he was so fully satisfied of the truth of the Consecration and lawfull succession of our English Bishops that he said he never made doubt of it afterwards My third witnesse is Mr. Hart a stiffe Roman Catholick but a very ingenuous person who having seene undoubted copies of Doctor Reynolds his Ordination by Bishop Freake and of Bishop Freakes Consecration by Arch Bishop Parker and lastly of Arch Bishop Parkers owne Consecration he was so fully satisfied with it that he himself did rase out all that part of the conference betweene him and Doctor Reinoldes My fourth witnesse is Father Oldcorne the Iesuit This testimony was urged by me in my treatise of Schisme in these words These authentick evidences being upon occasion produced out of our Ecclesiasticall Courtes and deliberately perused and viewed by Father Oldcorne the Iesuit he both confessed himself clearly convinced of that whereof he had so long doubted that was the legitimate succession of Bishops and Priests in our Church and wished heartily towards the reparation of the breach of Christendome that all the world were so abundantly satisfied as he himself was blaming us as partly guilty of the grosse mistake of many for not having publickly and timely made knowne to the world the notorious falshood of that empty but farre spread aspersion against our succession To this the Bishop of Chalcedon who was better acquainted with the passages of those times in England then any of those persons whom these Fathers stile of undoubted credit makes this confession That father Oldcorne being in hold for the povvder treason and judging others by himself should say those Registers to be authentick is no marvell A fifth witnesse is Mr. Wadsworth who in an Epistle to a freind in England doth testifie that before he left England he read the Consecration of Arch Bishop Parker in our Registers This made him so moderate above his fellowes that whereas some of them tell of five and the most of them of fifteen which were consecrated at
from him and his Successours to the Crown much Land and received back again from the Crown to him and his Successours equivalent Lands If he had been unconsecrated all these Acts had been utterly void In summe whosoever dreameth now that all the world were in a dead sleep then for twenty yeares together whilest all these things were acting is much more asleep himself To these undeniable proofes I might adde as many more out of the Records of the Chancery if there needed any to prove him a Consecrated Bishop As. A grant to the said William Barlow Bishop of St. Davids to hold in Commendam with the said Bishoprick the Rectory of Carewe in the county of Pembrooke Dated Octob. the 29. Anno 38. Hen. 8. A commission for Translation of William Barlow Bishop of St. Davids to the Bishoprick of Bath and VVels Dated 3. Feb. 2. Edv. 6. A Commission for the Consecration of Robert Farrer to be Bishop of St. Davids per translationem VVillelmi Barlow c. Dated 3. Iul. Anno 2. Edv. 6. A Commission for the Restitution of the Temporalties of the said Bishoprick to the said Robert Farrer as being void per translationem Willelmi Barlow Dated 1. Augusti Anno 2. Edv. 6. In all which Records and many more he is alwaies named as a true Consecrated Bishop And lastly in Bishop Goodwins booke de Praesulibus Angliae pa. 663. of the Latin Edition printed at London Anno 1616. in his Catalogue of the Bishops of St. Assaph num 37. he hath these words Gulielmus Barlow Canonicorum Regularium apud Bisham Prior Consecratus est Feb. 22. Anno 1535 Aprili deinde sequente Meneviam translatus est VVilliam Barlow Prior of the Canons Regulars at Bisham was consecrated the two and twentieth Day of February in the yeare 1535 and in Aprill Follovving vvas translated to St. Davids Which confirmeth me in my former conjecture that he was Consecrated in Wales which Bishop Goodwin by reason of his Vicinity had much more reason to know exactly then we have They say Mr. Mason acknowledgeth that Mr Barlow was the man who consecrated Parker because Hodgskins the Suffragan of Bedford was onely an Assistent in that action and the Assistents in the Protestant Church doe not consecrate By the Fathers leave this is altogether untrue Neither was Bishop Barlow the onely man who Consecrated Archbishop Parker Neither was Bishop Hodgskins a meere Assistent in that action Thirdly who soever doe impose hands are joint consecraters with us as wel as them Lastly Mr. Mason saith no such thing as they affirm but directly the Contrary that all the foure Bishops were equally Consecraters all imposed hands all joined in the words and this he proveth out of the Register it self L. 3. c. 9. n. 8. l 3. c. 10. n. 9. They object He might as well be proved to have been a lawfull Husband because he had a woman and diverse Children as to have been a Consecrated Bishop because he ordeined and Discharged all acts belonging to the Order of a Bishop What was Bishop Barlowes Woman pertinent to his cause Are not Governants and Devotesses besides ordinary maidservants women All which Pastours not onely of their own Communion but of their own Society are permitted to have in their houses Let themselves be â—udges whether a Woman a wife or a Woman a Governant or a Devotesse be more properly to be ranged under the name or notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such women as were prohibited to Cohabit with Clerkes by the Councell of Nice But to leave the Hypothesis and come to the Thesis as being more pertinent to the present case If a man have cohabited long with a Woman as man and wife in the Generall estimation of the world and begot children upon her and dies as her husband without any doubt or dispute during his life and long after though all the Witnesses of their Marriage were dead and the Register lost this their Conjugall cohabitation and the common reputation of the world during his Life uncontroverted is in Law a sufficient proofe of the Marriage but all the world nemine contradicente esteemed Bishop Barlow as the undoubted Bishop and Spouse of his Church They adde Ridley Hooper Farrer were acknowledged and obeyed as Bishops in King Edwards time yet were Iudged by both the Spirituall and Temporall Court not to have been consecrated They mistake they were not judged not to have been consecrated for their Consecrations are upon Record but not to have been consecrated ritu Romano after the Roman Form And who gave this Iudgement Their open enemies who made no scruple to take away their Lifes whose unjust judgement we doe not value a rush but Paul the 4. and Cardinall Pole more authentick Iudges of their own party gave a later IudgemeÌ„t to the CoÌ„trary They aske how it is possible that Barlowes CoÌ„secration should not be found recorded if ever it was as well as his preferment to the Priory of Bisham and Election and Confirmation to the Bishoprick of St. Assaph I answer it is very easy to conceive I have shewed him sundry wayes how it might be and one probable way how it was I desire the Reader to observe the extreme partiality of these Fathers they make it impossible for the Acts of one Consecration to be lost or stollen and yet accuse us of forging fifteen Consecrations It is easier to steale fifteen then to Forge one Act. We have often asked a reason of them why the Protestants should decline their own Consecrations They give us one The truth is that Barlow as most of the Clergy in England in those times were Puritans and inclined to Zuinglianisme therefore they contemned and rejected Consecration as a rag of Rome and were contented with the extraordinary calling of God and the Spirit as all other Churches are who pretend Reformation It is well they premised the truth is otherwise there had not been one word of truth in what they say First how do they know this It must be either by Relation but I am confident they can name no author for it or by Revelation but that they may not doe or it is to speake sparingly their own Imagination It is a great boldnesse to take the liberty to cast aspersions upon the Clergy of a whole Nation Secondly how commeth Bishop Barlow to be taxed of Puritanism we meet him a Prior and a Bishop we find him in his Robes in his Rochet in his Cope Officiating Ordaining Confirming He who made no scruple to Ordein and Consecrate others gratis certainly did not forbeare his own Consecration with the apparent hazard of the losse of his Bishoprick out of scruple of Conscience Thirdly this aspersion is not well accommodated to the times For first Zuinglianisme was but short heeled in those Dayes when Bishop Barlow was Consecrated who sate in Parliament as a Consecrated Bishop 31. Henr. 8 and the first Sermon that ever Zuinglius Preached as a Probationer was in Zurick in
doubted of his Ordination They answer first that Mr. Mason did not seek so solicitoâ—sly or diligently for Bishop Gardiners Consecration as for Bishop Barlowes Then why do not they whom it doth concern cause more diligent search to be made without finding the Records of Bishop Gardiners Consecration they cannot accuse Bishop Barlow of want of Consecration upon that onely reason Secondly they answer that if Gardiners Consecration were as doubtfull as Barlowes and Parkers they would take the same advise they give us to repaire with speed to some other Church of undoubted Clergy Yes where will they find a more undoubted Clergy They may goe further and fare worse Rome itself hath not more exact Records nor a more undoubted Succession then the Church of England There is no reason in the world to doubt either of Archbishop Parkers Consecration or Bishop Gardiners or Bishop Barlowes Neither doth his Consecration concern us so much at the Fathers imagine there were three Consecraters which is the Canonicall number besides him It is high time for the Fathers to wind up and draw to a Conclusion of this ArgumeÌ„t That which followeth next is too high and can scarcely be tolerated to accuse the publick Records and Archives of the Kingdome and to insimulate the Primates and Metropolitans of England of Forgery upon no ground but their own ImaginatioÌ„ I doubt whether they durst offer it to a widow Woman As to the impossibility of forging so many Registers in case there be so many it is easily answered that it is no more then that the Consecraters and other persons concerned should have conspired to give in a false Certificate that the Consecration was performed with all due Cerimonies and Rites and thereby deceive the Courts or make them dissemble Should any man accuse the Generall of their order or one of their Provincialls or but the Rector of one of their Colleges of Forgery and counterfeiting the publick Records of the Order how would they storm and thunder and mingle heaven and earth together and cry out No moderate or prudent persons can suspect that such persons should damne their soules that so many pious learned Divines should engage themselves and their posterity in damnable Sacrileges without feare of damnation If a man will not believe every ridiculous Fable which they tell by word of mouth upon hearsay they call persons of more virtue learning and prudence then themselves Fooles and Knaves But they may insimulate the principall Fathers of our Church of certifying most pernicious lyes under their hands and seales not for a piece of bread which is a poore temptatioÌ„ but for nothing that is to make them both Fooles and Knaves Is not this blowing hot and cold with the same breath or to have the Faith of our Lord Iesus Christ with respect of persons Compare the politicall principles of the Church of England with your own and try if you can find any thing so pernicious to mankind and all humane Society in ours more then in yours Compare the Case Theology of the Church of England with your own and try if you can find any thing so destructive to Morality to truth and Iustice and Conscience as might lead us to perpetrate such Crimes more then yourselves We are not affraid of a Paralell You professe great endeavours to make Proselites we do not condemne Zeale yet wish you had more light with it even in prudence which you yourselves extoll this is not your right Course to follow those Birds with noise and clamour which you desire to catch In summe your answer or solution is full of ignorant mistakes It confoundeth Civill Rolles and Ecclesiasticall Registers It supposeth that our Records are but transcriptions one out of another whereas every Court recordeth its own Acts and keeps itself within its own bounds It taketh notice but of one Consecrater where as we have alwaies three at the least many times five or six It quite forgetteth publick Notaries which must be present at every Consecration with us to draw up what is done into Acts with us every one of these Notaries when he is admitted to that charge doth take a solemne Oath upon his knees to discharge his Office faithfully that is not to make false Certificates Secondly it is absurd and unseasonable to enquire how a thing came to passe that never was you ought First to have proved that our Records were forged and then it had been more seasonable to have enquired modestly how it came to passe Thirdly it is incredible that persons of such prudence and eminence should make false Certificates under their hands and seales to the utter ruine of themselves and all that had a hand it and no advantage to any person breathing It is incredible that those Records should be counterfeited in a corner which were avowed publickly for Authentick by the whole Parliament of England in the 8 yeare of Queen Elisabeth which were published to the world in print by the person most concerned as if he dared all the world to except against them and yet no man offered to except against them then Fourthly it is impossible to give in a false Certificate of a Consecration which was never performed in England especially at Lambeth before lesse then thousands of eye witnesses and that at Lambeth in the Face of the Court and Westminster Hall Surely they thinke we consecrate in Closets or holes or hay mowes They may even as well say that the publick Acts of our Parliaments are counterfeited and the publick Acts of our Synods are counterfeited and all our publick monuments counterfeited It is none of the honestest Pleas Negare factum to deny such publick Acts as these Fifthly this answer is pernicious to mankind it is destructive to all Societies of men that Bishops of so great eminence should conspire with publick Notaries to give in false Certificates in a matter of such High Consequence as Holy Orders are without any temptation without any hope of Advantage to them selves or others It affordeth a large Seminary for jealousies and suspicions It exterminateth all credit and confidence out of the world and instructeth all men to trust nothing but what they see with their eyes Lastly it is contradictory to themselves They have told us I know not how often and tell us again in this Paragraph That if the Nagge 's head Consecration had been false they might have convinced it by a thousand witnesses Here they make it an easy thing for the Consecraters and other persons concerned to conspire together to give in a false Certificate that the Consecration was performed with all due Ceremonies and Rites and thereby deceive the Courts or make them dissemble If the world will be deceived so it is but right and reason that it be deceived to be deceived by a false Certificate that may be convinced by a thousand witnesses is selfdeceit But they say this is more possible and more probable then that all the Clergy should conspire not