The consecration and succession, of Protestant bishops justified, the Bishop of Duresme vindicated, and that infamous fable of the ordination at the Nagges head clearly confuted by John Bramhall ...

CHAP. III. The fourth and fifth reasons against this improbable fiction, from the no necessity of it, and the lesse ad∣vantage of it. (Book 3)

MY fourth plea is, because there was no need to play this counterfeit pageant. We use to say Necessity hath no law. that is, regardeth no law. In time of warre the lawes are silent, but this was a time of peace. First there could be no necessity why they should have a clandestine Consecrati∣on, without a Register or publick Notary, when they might have had an Army of pu∣blick Notaries ready upon their whistle, evē under their elbowes at Bowes Church, out of the Courtes of the Arches, and the Audi∣ence, and Prerogative. Secondly, there was no necessity why they should anticipate the Queenes Letters patents for their consecra∣tion, by whose gracious favour they were elected, and of the accomplishmēt whereof in due time they could not doubt; unlesse they would wilfully destroy their owne hopes, by such a mad pranke as this had been, that is, unlesse they would them∣selves

hew downe the bough where upon they stood. Thirdly, there was no ne∣cessity that they should chuse a common Taverne for the place of their Consecra∣tion, when the Keies of all the Churches in the Kingdome were at their Command, Fourthly, there could be no necessity why they should deserte the forme of Ordina∣tion prescribed by the Law, which was agreeable both to their judgements, and to their desires, and to their duties; and to omitte the essentialls of Ordination, both matter and forme, which they knew well enough, to be consecrated after a new brainsick manner.

Then all the necessity which can be pre∣tended, is want of a competent number of Ordeiners. Suppose there had bene such a necessity 'to be ordeined by two Bishops, or by one Bishop, this very necessity had bene a sufficient Dispensation with the ri∣gour of the Canons, and had instified the Act. as St. Gregory pleadeth to Augustine▪ In the English Church wherein there i•• no other Bishop but thy self,* 1.1 thou can•• not ordeine a Bishop otherwise then alone▪ And after this manner, our First English Bishops were ordeined. And so migh••

these protestant Bishops have bene validely ordeined, if they received the essentialls of Ordination. But what a remedy is this, be∣cause they could not have a competent number of Bishops, according to the ca∣nons of the Church, and the lawes of En∣gland, therefore to reject the essentialls of Ordination, for a defect which was not es∣sentiall, and to cast of obedience to their su∣periours, both civill ād Ecclesiasticall? This had bene just like little children which be∣cause they cā not have some toy which they desire, cast away their garments, and what∣soever their Parēts had provided for them, Wante of three Bishops might in some ca∣ses make a consecration illegall or uncano∣nicall, but it could not have rendered it in∣valide, as this silly pretēded Ordinatiō had.

But now I come up close to the ground worke of the fable,* 1.2 and I denie positively that there was any such want of a compe∣tent number of Bishops, as they pretend. And for proofe hereof, I bring no vaine rumours or uncertein conjectures, but the evident and authentick testimony of the great seale of England, affixed to the Queenes Leuers Patents, for authorising the Confirmation and Consecration of Arch-Bishop Parker, dated the sixth day of December, Anno 1559. dire∣cted

to seven protestant Bishops, namely Anthony Bishop of Landaffe, William Barlow sometimes Bishop of Bath and Wel∣les, and then elect Bishop of Chichester, Iohn Scory sometimes Bishop of Chichester, then Elect Bishop of Hereforde, Miles Coverdale sometimes Bishop of Exceter, Iohn Suffragan Bishop of Bedford, Iohn Suffragan Bishop of The••ford, and Iohn Bale Bishop of Ossory in Ireland. Three are a Canonicall number, if there were choise of seven, then there was no wante of a competent number to ordeine cano∣nically. I adde, that if it had bene need∣full, they might have had seven more out of Ireland, Arch Bishops and Bishops, for such a worke as a consecration. Ireland never wanted store of Ordeiners. Nor ever yet did any man object, want of a Competent number of Consecraters, to an Irish Protestant Bishop. They who con∣curred freely in the Consecration of Pro∣testant Bishops at home, would not have denied their concurrence in England, if they had been commanded. Which ma∣kes me give no credit to that vaine reporte▪ of an Irish Arch Bishop prisoner in the tower, who refused to complie with the desires of the protestant Bishops, for his li∣berty and a large rewarde. But the Arch

Bishop wanteth a name, and the Fabl•• wanteth a ground; the witnesses and per∣suaders are all unkowne. And if there had bene a grane of truth in this relation; yet in this case one man is no man, one mans refusall signifieth nothing.

Against the evident truth of this assertion, two things may be opposed out of the re∣lation of these Fathers. The First is par∣ticular, concerning the Bishop of Landaffe, that he was no Protestant, but a Roman Catholick untill his death. So they say in∣deed, that he was the onely man of all the Ca∣tholick Bishops, that tooke the oath of Supremacy. Observe how prejudice and partiality doth blindfold men of learning and partes; They confess he tooke the oath of supre∣macy, and yet esteeme him a good Roman Catholick. I see censures go by favour, and one may Steale an horse, better then another looke over the hedge. I am well contented, that they reckon him for so good a Catholick.

They adde, that he knew Parker and the rest which were to be ordered Bi∣shops to be hereticks, and averse from the Doctrine of the Roman Catholick Church, which he Constantly adhered unto, (the Supremacy onely excepted)

during his life. And a little after they tell us, that he desired to be numbred among Catho∣licks. Now what if the Bishop of Landaff after all this should prove to be a protestāt? Then all the Fathers story is quite spoiled. And so he was. If he knew Parker and the rest, to be heretickes, he knew himself to be one of their brother hereticks. His daily masse was the English Leiturgy, as well as theirs, He adhered constantly to a Protestant Bishoprick during his life, as well as any of them, And if he did not hold it as long as any of them, it was deaths fault, and none of his fault.

They say they prevailed with him to give them a meeting at the Nagges head in Cheape∣side, where they hoped he would ordeine them Bishops, despairing that ever he would do it in a Church, because that would be too great and notorious a scandall for Catholicks. They were too modest. They might easily have prevailed with him, or have had him com∣manded to joine in their consecration in a Church, after a legall manner. He who did not stick at renouncing the Pope, and swearing an oath of Supremacy to his Prince, would not have stucke at a legall Ordination, upon the just command of

his Prince. But to desire him to do it in a taverne, in a clandestine manner, without the authority of the greate seale, before their election was confirmed, was to desire him out of Curtesy to run into a Premu∣nire, that is to forfeit his Bishoprick of Landaffe, his estate, his liberty. Is it become a more notorious scandall to Catholicks, to ordeine in a Church, then in a taverne, in the judgment of these fathers? There may be scandall taken at the former, but notorious scandall is given by the later.

Here Bishop Bonner steppeth upon the stage, and had well neare prevented the whole pageant, by sending his Chaplein to the Bishop of Landaffe, to forbid him under paine of excommunication to exercise any such power of giving Orders in his diocesse, where with the old man being terrified, and other wise moved in conscience refused to proceed. Bishop Bonner was allwaies very fierce which way soever he went: If Acworth say true,* 1.3 he escaped once very narrowly in Rome, either burning or boiling in scalding leade, for being so violent before the Assembly of Cardinalls, against the Pope, on the behalf of Henry the eight, if he had not secured himself by flight. Afterwards he made such bonefires of protestants,

and rendered himself so odious, that his prison was his onely safeguard from being torne in pieces by the People. But that was, dum stetit Iliam & ingens Gloria Teu∣crorum, whilest he had his Prince to be his second. Now he was deprived, and had no more to doe with the Bishoprick of Lon∣don, then with the Bishoprick of Con∣stantinople, he had the habituall power of the Keies, but he had no flock to exer∣cise it upon. If he had continued Bishop of London still, what hath the Bishop of London to do with the Bishop of Landaffe? Par in parem non habet potestatem. Thirdly, Bowes Church which is neare the Nagges∣head, wherein the Ecclesiasticall parte of this story, so farre as it hath any truth in it, was really acted, (that is the Confirma∣tion of Arch Bishop Parkers election) though it be in the City of London, as many Churches more, is not in the Diocesse of London, but a Peculiar under the Iu∣risdiction of the Arch-Bishop of Canter∣bury.

Lastly, the Fathers say that when Parker and the rest see that he had refused, they re∣viled the poore old man, calling him doating foole, and some of them saying, This old foole thinketh that we can not be Bishops, unlesse we

be greased. The contrary is evident by the Recordes of the confirmation, that Arch Bishop Parker was not present in person: So this whole narration is composed of un∣truthes, and mistakes, and incongruities, and contradictions. But that which disco∣vereth the falsity of it apparently to all the world is this, that the Bishop of Landaff lived and died a protestant Bishop, in the reigne of Queene Elisabeth, as he had bene formerly in the reigne of King Edward, for proofe whereof I produce two of their owne Authours.* 1.4 The one is Sanders, But the Bishops, who had bene created out of the Church in those most wicked times, who had now repented from their hearts of their Schisme, being not contented wiih this common dispensa∣tion and confirmation, did each of them parti∣cularly crave pardon of their former grievous fault from the See Apostolick, and Confirma∣tion in their Bishopricks, excepting the Bishop of Landaffe, who omitting it rather out of ne∣gligence then malice, did onely relapse into Schisme in the reigne of Queene Elisabeth, as we interprete it by the just judgement of god.* 1.5 He acknowledgeth, that he became a Prote∣stant againe, that is in their language, re∣lapsed into Schisme. The other is cited by Doctor Harding, We had onely one foole

among us, (we see whose livery the foole was,) who now I know not by what entisements is become yours, being un∣worthy the name of a Lord and a Bi∣shop, whose learning is very little, and his credit by this action much lost. Thus writeth Doctor Harding of the Bi∣shop of Landaffe, about the fifth yeare of Queene Elisabeth, at which time he was li∣ving, and continued protestant Bishop of Landaff.

A second objection against the truth of that which hath bene said of the competent Number of our Protestant Bishops to make a canonicall Ordination, is an exception against all the seven Bishops named in the letters Patents, that they were no true Bi∣shops, because all of them were ordeined in a time of Schisme, and two of them in King Edwards time, according to a new forme of Ordination, and consequently they could not ordeine. That Ordina∣tion which was instituted by Edward the sixth was judged invalide by the Catho∣licks,* 1.6 and so declared by publick judg∣ment in Queene Maries reigne, in so much as leases made by King Ed∣wards

Bishops, though confir∣med by Deane and Chapiter were not esteemed available, because they were not (saith the sentence) consecra∣ted, nor Bishops.

To the First part of this objection, that our consecraters were ordeined themselves by Schismaticks or in a time of Schisme, I answer three waies. First this argument is a meere begging of the quaestion. The case in briefe is this. If those branches of Papall power which we cast out of England by our Lawes at the Reformation, were ••laine usurpations, then our Reformation 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but a reinfanchisement of our selves, and ••he Schisme lieth at their dore, then they may question the validity of their owne Ordination upon this ground, not ours: But we are ready to mainteine to all the world ••hat all those branches of Papall power, which we cast out by our lawes at the Re∣••ormation, were grosse usurpations, ••irst introduced into England above ele∣••en hundred yeares after Christ. So this ••art of the Objection concerneth them 〈◊〉〈◊〉 us.

••econdly these Fathers know wel enough, ••••d can not but acknowledg, that accor∣ding

to the principles of the Catholick Church and their owne practise, the Ordi∣nation not onely of Schismaticks, but o•• hereticks, if it have no essentiall defect i••••valide, and the persons so Ordeined ough•• not to be reordeined, but onely reconciled▪ Many Orthodox Christians had their holy orders from hereticall Arrians. If Cra••∣mer, and Latimer, and Barlow, and Hodg∣kins, were no true Bishops, because the•• were ordeined in a time of Schisme then Gardinar, and Bonner, and Tu••••stall, and Thurleby, &c. were no true Bi••shops, for they were ordeined in a tim•• of Schisme likewise; then Cardinall Pol•• and Bishop Watson, and Christophers▪ and all rest of their Bishops were no tru•• Bishops who were ordeined by these. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to put out one of our eies (like the envio•• man in the fable) they would put out 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their owne.

Thirdly I answer, that it was not we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 made a Discrimination betweene our ••••••shops and their Bishops, as to the poi•••• of Ordination, but the Marian Bisho•• themselves, who made a mutuall co••••pact, one and all, that none of them shoul•• impose hands upon any new elect•• Bishops; thinking vainely, there could

other Consecraters have bene found out, and that by this meanes they should both preserve their Bishopricks, and bring the Queene to their bent: but they found them selves miserably deceived. Many Bishops who had bene chased out of their Bishop∣ricks in Queene Maries daies, did now re∣turne from exile, and supplie the place of Consecraters. Then conjurationis eos peni∣tuit, The Bishops repented of their Conspi∣racy.* 1.7 Multi ad judices recurrunt, &c. many of them ran to the Iudges, confessed their obsti∣nacy, and desired leave to take the oath of Supre∣macy. Thus writeth Acworth an Author of good account in▪ those daies. If this foolish conspiracy had not bene. we had had no Difference about our Consecra∣tions.

To the second part of this objection, that the forme of Ordeining used in King Ed∣wards daies, was declared invalide in Quee∣ne Maries Daies, I answer, First, that we have no reason to regarde the Iudgment of their Iudges in Queene Maries Dayes, mo∣re then they regard the judgment of our Iudges in Queene Elisabeths daies. They who made no scruple to take away their lifes, would make no scruple to take away their holy Orders.

Secondly I answer that which the Father•• call a sentence, was no sentence. The word is Dicitur, it is said or it is reported, not decre∣tum est, it is decreed. Neither were Queene Maries lawes proper rules, nor Queene Maryes Iudges at common law the proper Iudges, of the validity of an Episcopal consecration, or what are the essentialls of ordination, according to the institution of Christ. They have neither rules, no•• grounds for this in the common law.

Thirdly I answer that the question i•• Queene Maries daies was not about the va∣lidity or invalidity of our Orders, bu•• about the legality or illegality of them, not whether they were conformable to the institution of Christ, but whether they were conformable to the Lawes o•• England.

The Lawes of England can neither make a valide ordination to be invalide▪ nor an invalide ordination to be valide, because they can not change the institutio•• of Christ. In summe King Edwards Bishop•• were both validely ordeined according to the institution of Christ, and legally ordei∣ned according to the lawes of Englād. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Queene Mary changed the Law, that the

forme of ordeining which had beē allowed in King Edwards daies should not be allo∣wed in her daies. Notwithstanding Queene Maries law, they continued still true Bi∣shops, by the institution of Christ, But they were not for that time legall Bishops in the eie of the Law of England, which is the Iudges rule. But when Queene Elisa∣beth restored King Edwards law, then they were not onely true valide Bishops, but legall Bishops againe.

That corollary which the fathers adde, in so much as leases made by King Edwards Bishops though confirmed by the Deane and Chapiter were not esteemed available, because they were not consecrated or Bishops, that is in ••he eie of the English law at that time, signi∣••ieth nothing at all. Leases concerne the be∣••efice of a Bishop, not the Office of a Bishop. A Bishop who is legally ordeined, though ••e be invalidely ordeined, may make a lease ••hich is good in law. And a Bishop ••hich is validely ordeined, if he be ille∣••ally ordeined, may make a lease which is ••oide in law.

Concerning Bishop Bonners Conscience, ••hat he lost his Bishoprick for his con∣••ience, and therefore it is not proba∣••••e that he would make himself guilty of so

much sacrilege, as to declare King Edwards forme of ordination to be invalide for the profit of new Leases, it belongeth not to me to judge of other mens Consciences. But for Bishop Bonners Conscience I referre him to the Testimony of one of his Freinds, Nico∣las Sanders, who speaking of Bishop Gar∣diner, Bishop Bonner, Bishop Tunstall and the Bishops of Worcester and Chiche∣ster, concludeth with these words. T••••mide ergo restiterunt pueri Regis prima•••• spirituali, imo simpliciter subscripseru••, & in omnes caeteras innovationes, quae ne•• videbantur ipsis continere apertam haer••••sim, ne Episcopatus & honores perderent •• vel ul••ro, vel comra conscientiam coa•• consenserunt. Therefore they resisted the sp••••rituall primacy of the King being but a boy fair∣ly, yea they subscribed to it simply, and they con∣sented to all the rest of the innovations,* 1.8 whic•• did not seeme to them to conteine manifest heresy either of their owne accord, or compelled agai•• Conscience, least they should lose their Bishop∣ricks and honours. We see they had no grea•• reason to bragge of Bishop Bonners Con∣science, who sometimes had bene a grea•• favorite of Cranmer and Crumwell. He g•••• his Bishoprick by opposing the Pope, a•••• lost his Bishoprick by opposing his Prince▪

But if reordination be such a sacrilege, many Romanists are guilty of grosse sacri∣lege, who reordeine those Proselites whom they seduce from us, with the same essen∣tialls, matter and forme, imposition of hands, and these words Receive the holy Ghost; wherewith they had been formerly ordei∣ned by us.

Lastly I answer, (and this answer alone is sufficient to determine this controversy,) that King Edwards forme of ordination was judged valide in Queene Maries daies by all Catholicks, and particularly by Cardinall Pole then Apostolicall Legate in England, and by the then Pope Paul the fourth, and by all the clergy and Parlia∣ment of England. The case was this. In the Act for repealing all statutes made against the see of Rome, in the first and second yeares of Philip and Mary, the Lords Spirituall and Temporall in Parlia∣ment assembled, representing the whole body of the Realme of England, presented their common request to the King and Queene, that they would be a meanes to the Legate to obteine some settlements by authority of the Popes Holiness, for peace sake, in some Articles where of this is one. That institutiōs of Benefices and other Promotions

Ecclesiasticall, and Dispensations made accor∣ding to the forme of the Act of Parliament might be confirmed. Institutions could not be con∣firmed, except Ordinations were confirmed. For the greatest part of the English Clergy had received both their benefices and their holy orders, after the casting out of the Popes usurped authority out of England. And both benefices and holy orders are comprehended under the name of Ecclesia∣sticall Promotions. This will appeare much more clearely by the very words of the Cardinalls Dispensation, Ac omnes ecclesiasticas seculares seu quorumvis or∣dinum regulares personas, quae aliquas impetrationes, dispensationes, conces∣siones, gratias & indulta, tam ordines quam beneficia Ecclesiastica, seu alias spirituales materias, pretensa authori∣tate supremitatis Ecclesiae Anglicanae, licet nulliter & de facto obtenuerint, & ad cor reversae Ecclesiae unitati restitutae fuerint, in suis Ordinibus & beneficiis, per nosipsos seu a nobis ad id deputatos misericorditer recipiemus, prout jam multae receptae fuerunt, secumque super his opportune in domino dispensabimus;

And we vvill graciously receive (or in∣terteine) by our selves or by others depu∣ted by us to that purpose,* 1.9 (as many have already been received) in their Orders and in their Benifices, all Ecclesiasticall Persōs as well Secularas Regular of what∣soever Orders, vvhich have obteined any suites, dispensations, grants, graces, and indulgences, as vvell in their Ecclesiasticall Orders, as Benefices and other spirituall matters, by the preten∣ded authority of the Supremacy of the Church of England, though ineffectually and onely de facto, so they be penitent, and be returned to the unity of the Church. And vve vvill in due season dispense vvith them in the Lord for these things.

Here we see evidently, that upon the re∣quest of the Lo••ds Spirituall and Temporall and Commons, being the representative body of the Church and Kingdome of England, by the intercession of the King and Queene, the Popes Legate did receive all persons, which had been Ordeined or Beneficed, either in the time of King Henry or King Edward, in their respective Orders

and Benefices, which they were actually possessed of, at the time of the making of this dispensation or Confirmation, without any exception or Condition, but onely this, that they were returned to the unity of the Catholick Church. Neither was there ever any one of them who were then retur∣ned, either deprived of their Benefices, or compelled to be reordeined. From whence I argue thus, Either King Henry the eighths Bishops and Priests, and likewise the Bi∣shops and Priests Ordeined in King Ed∣ward the sixths time, had all the Essentialls of Episcopall and Priestly Ordination, which were required by the institution of Christ; and then they ought not to be reor∣deined, Then (in the judgement of these Fathers themselves) it is grievous sacrilege to reordeine them: Or they wanted some essentiall of their respective Ordinations, which was required by the institution of Christ; and then it was not in the power of all the Popes and Legates that ever were in the world, to confirme their respective Orders, or dispense with them to exe∣cute their functions in the Church. But the Legate did Dispense with them to hold their Orders, and exercise their severall functions in the Church, and the Pope

did confirme that dispensation. This doth clearely destroy all the pretensions of the Romanists against the validity of our Orders.

It may perhaps be objected, that the dis∣pensative word is recipiemus, we will re∣ceive, not we do receive. I answer, the case is all one; If it were unlawfull to re∣ceive them in the present, it was as unlaw∣full to receive thē in the future. All that was done after, was to take a particular absoluti∣on or confirmation from the Pope or his Le∣gate, which many of the Principall Clergy did, but not all; No not all the Bishops, Not the Bishop of Landaff, as Sanders wit∣nesseth,* 1.10 Yet he injoied his Bishoprick, So did all the rest if the Clergy, who never had any particular confirmation. It is not materiall at all, whether they were confir∣med by a generall or by a speciall dispensa∣tion, so they were confirmed or dispensed with at all, to hold all their Benefices, and to exercise their respective Functions in the Church, which no man can denie.

Secondly it may be objected, that it is said in the Dispensation, licet nulliter & de facto obtenuerint, Although they had obteined their Benefices and Promotions ineffectu∣ally and onely in fact without right: which

doth intimate that their Orders were voide and null, before they had obteined this dispensation. I answer, that he stiled them voide and null, not absolutely but re∣spectively, quoad exercitium, because by the Roman law they might not be lawfully exercised without a Dispensation: but not quoad Characterem, as to the Character. If they had wanted any thing necessary to the imprinting of the Character, or any thing essentiall by the institution of Christ, the Popes Dispensation and Confirmation had been but like a seale put to a blanke piece of paper. And so the Cardinalls dis∣pensation in generall, and particularly for Benefices and Ecclesiasticall Promotions, Dispensations, and Graces given by such Order as the lawes of the Realme allowed and prescribed, in King Henries time and King Edwards time, was then and there ratified by act of Parliament.

Lastly, that this Dispensation was af∣terwards confirmed by the Pope, I pro∣ve by the confession of Sanders himself, though a malicious enemy. He (that is Cardinall Pole, in a publick Instrument set forth in the name and by the autho∣rity of the Pope) Confirmed all Bishop

which had bene made in the former Schisme,* 1.11 so they were Catholick in their judgment of Religion, and the six new Bishopricks which King Henry had erected in the time of the Schisme. And this writing being affixed to the Statute, was published with the rest of the Decrees of that Parliament, and their minds were pacified. All which things were established and confirmed afterwards, by the Letters of Pope Paul the fourth.

We have seene, that there were a com∣petent number of Protestant Bishops be∣yond 'Exception to make a Consecration: And so the necessity, which is their onely Basis or Foundation of the Nagges head Consecration, being quite taken away, this prodigious fable having nothing els to support the incredibilities and inconsi∣stencies of it, doth melt away of it self like winter ice.

The fifth reason is drawen from that well known principle in Rethorick,* 1.12 Cui bono? or what advantage could such a consecration, as the Nagges head Consecra∣tion is pretended to have been, bring to the

Consecraters or the persons consecrated. God and Nature never made any thing in vaine. The haire of the head, the nailes upon the fingers ends, do serve both for ornament and muniment. The leafes de∣fend the blossomes, the blossomes produce the fruite, which is Natures end. In sen∣sitives, the Spider doth not weave her webbes, nor the silly Bee make her celles in vaine. But especially intellectuall crea∣tures have alwaies some end of their Acti∣ons. Now consider, what good such a mock Consecratiō could doe the persons so consecrated? Could it helpe them to the possession of their Bishopricks by the law of England? Nothing lesse. There is such a concatenation of our English Customes and Recordes, that the counterfeiting of of any one can do no good, except they could counterfeite them all, which is im∣possible.

When any Bishops See becommeth voide, there issueth a Writ out of the Ex∣chequer to seise the Temporalties into the Kings hand, as being the ancient and well knowne Patron of the English Church; leaving the Spiritualties to the Arch Bishop or to the Deane and Chapiter, according to the custome of the place. Next the King

granteth his Conge d'Eslire or his License to chuse a Bishop, to the Deane and Chapiter; upon the receite of this License, the Deane and Chapiter, within a certein number of daies, chuse a Bishop, and certifie their Election to the King, under the common seale of the Chapiter.

Upon the returne of this Certificate, the King granteth out a Commission under the great seale of England to the Arch Bishop, or in the vacancy of the Arch Bishoprick to so many Bishops, to examine the Ele∣ction: and if they find it fairely made to confirme it, and after Confirmation to proceed to the Consecration of the person elected, according to the forme prescribed by the Church of England. This Com∣mission or Mandate must passe both through the Signet office and Chancery, and be at∣tested by the Clerkes of both those offices, and signed by the Lord Chanceller and Lord privy seale, and be inrolled. So as it is morally impossible there should be any forgery in it.

Vpon the receite of this Mandate, the Bishops who are authorised by the King, do meete first at Bowes Church in London, where with the assistence of the Chiefe Ec∣clesiasticall Judges of the Realme, the

Deane of the Arches, the Iudges of the Prerogative and Audience, with their Re∣gisters to Actuate what is done, they do solemnely in forme of law confirme the election. Which being done, and it being late before it be done, the Commissioners and Iudges were and are sometimes invited to the Nagges head to a dinner, as being very neare Bowes Church, and in those daies the onely place of note, This mee∣ting led Mr. Neale (a man altogether un∣acquainted with such formes,) into this fooles Paradise; first to suspect, and upon suspicion to conclude, that they were a∣bout an Ordination there, and lastly to broach his brainsick conceites in corners; and finding them to be greedily swallowed by such as wished them true, to assert his owne drowsy suspicion for a reall truth. But the mischief is, that Doctor Parker who was to be consecrated, was not present in person, but by his Proxie.

After the Confirmation is done, com∣monly about three or foure daies, (but as it happened in Arch Bishop Parkers case nine daies,) the Commissioners proceed to the Consecration; for the most part out of their respect to the Archbishop in the Chappell at Lambeth, with Sermon, Sacrament, and all solemnity requisite, according to the forme

prescribed by the Church of England; in the presence of publick Notaries or sworne Officers, who reduce every thing that is done with all the circumstances into Acts, and enter them into the Register of the See of Canterbury. Where they are carefully kept by the principall Officer in a publicke office, as Recordes, where every one who desireth may view them from time to time, and have a copy of them if he please. And it is to be noted, that at any Consecration, especially of an Arch-Bishop, great num∣bers of principall Courtiers and Citisens are present: so as it is no more possible to coun∣••erfeite such a Consecration, then to walke ••nvisible upon the Exchange at noone day.

After the Consecration is done, the per∣••on Consecrated is not presently admitted to his Bishoprick, First the Arch Bishop maketh his certificate of the Consecration with all the circumstances of it, under his Arch-Episcopall seale: Thereupon the King taketh the new Bishops oath of fealty ••nd commands that he be put into the A∣ctuall possessiō of his Bishoprick: Then he is ••nthroned, and at his Inthronisation his Or∣••ination is publickly read: Then he injoieth ••is Spiritualties: Then issueth a Writ out ••f the Exchequer to the Sherif, to restore ••im to the Temporalties of his Bishoprick.

This custome is so ancient, so certein, so generall, that no Englishman can speak•• against it.

Here we see evidently how al things 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pursue one another, and what a necessary and essentiall connexion there is betwee•• them. So as the stealing of an Electio•• or the stealing of a Consecration, can ge•• no man a Bishoprick, as Mr. Neale drea∣med. He that would advantage himsel•• that way, must falsifie all the Record•• both Ecclesiasticall and Civill. He mu•••• falsifie the Recordes of the Chancery, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Signet office, of the Exchequer, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Registries, of the Bishop, of the De••••ne and Chapiter. He must counterfeit th•• hands and seales of the King, of the Arch•• Bishop, of the Lord Chanceller, the Lo•••• Privy seale, of the Clerkes and public•• Notaries, which is not imaginable. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Mr. Neale, who first devised this drow•• dreame (or somebody for him) had 〈◊〉〈◊〉 more experience of our English lawes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Customes, he would have feined a mo•••• probable tale, or have held his peace fo•• ever.

Answer me, They who are calumniate to have had their Consecration at the N••••ges head, did they meane to conceale it 〈◊〉〈◊〉

have it kept secret? Then what good could it do them? De non existentibus & non appa∣rentibus eadem est ratio: If it were concea∣led, it was all one a•• if it had never bene. Or did they meane to have it published? Such an Ordination had bene so farre from helping them to obteine a Bishoprick, that it had rendred them uncapable of a Bishoprick for ever: And moreover sub∣jected both the Consecraters and the Con∣secrated to deprivation, and degradation, and a Premunire or forfeiture of their lands goods and liberties, and all that were present at it to excommunication. Rome is a fitte place wherein to publish such Lu∣dibrious fables as this; where they can per∣swade the people, that the Protestants are stupid creatures, who have lost their Re∣••igion, their reason, and scarcely reteine their humaine shapes. It is too bold an attempt, to obtrude such counterfeit ware•• ••n England.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Resp. Int. 8. August.
• * 1.2

  Rot. 14. Pars 2. Elisab.
• * 1.3

  Ac∣worth cont. monar. Sander. l. 6. p. 195.
• * 1.4

  Sand. de Schism. l. 2. p. 350
• * 1.5

  Confut. Apol. parte 6. c. 2.
• * 1.6

  Brookes Novel, Cafes placit. 493.
• * 1.7

  Ace worth. cont. Sander. l. 2. pag. 197.
• * 1.8

  De Schis∣mate l. 2. p. 282 Edit. Rom.
• * 1.9

  Cardi∣nall Po∣les Dis∣pensati∣on.
• * 1.10

  De Schism. l. 2. p. 305.
• * 1.11

  De Schism. l. 2. p. 350.
• * 1.12

  A fifth reason