The English concord in ansvver to Becane's English iarre: together with a reply to Becan's Examen of the English Concord. By Richard Harris, Dr. in Diuinitie.

❧ Becans Iarre. (Book 9)

IX. Question. Whether the King can create, and depose Bishoppes, or no? (Book 9)

1. MAister Salclebridge saith, that bee can. For thus he writeth pag. 121. Christiani Principes in su∣is Regnis, cum laude, propria authoritate, Epis∣copos crearunt & deposuerunt. Christian Prin∣ces, have in their Kingdomes, by their owne proper authority cre∣ated and deposed Bishops, and that with praise &c. And then againe pag. 144. Rex Angliae Archidiacono Richmundiae E∣piscopalem concessit Iurisdictionem. The King of England granted Episcopall Iurisdiction to the Archdeacon of Rich∣mond &c. And yet further pag. 155. Reges Angliae suprema sua authoritate, deiure, atquecum laude omnium Ordinum Episcopos elegerunt, ac proinde deponere potuerunt. The

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

Kings of England of their owne supreme authority, by right, and with praise of all manner Estates, have elected Bishops, and there∣fore they might depose them also &c. And then lastly: Constat, Christianos Principes cum laude Episcopos elegisse, & de∣posuisse, etiam Romanos. It is manifest, that Christian Prin∣ces, haue elected, and deposed Bishops, yea Popes also, and that with their praise &c.

2. Now M. Tooker, hee denies in the place bifore cited that the King can create or depose Bishoppes. For there hee as∣si••ning 〈◊〉〈◊〉 things necessary for the ordaining or creating of a Bi∣shop, to wit, Consecration of the person, and a Bishopricke, addeth, that the King can performe neither of these two. For nei∣there 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be confer any benefice, and much lesse a Bishopricke or Archbishopricke; neither hath hee any power to consecrate per∣sons. In so much, that in another place he confesseth, that it is so farre off from King Iames to haue power to create or depose Bi∣shops, that he would rather acknowledge himselfe for one of their schollers and Disciples. For thus he writeth pag. 311. Serenis∣simus ac pientissimus Rex noster Iacobus non habet quic∣quam antiquius & honorificentius, quàm vt cum Valentini∣ano filium se Ecclesiae profiteatur, & cum Theodorico Ita∣liae Rege, se alumnum Ecclesiae, & ciscipulum Archiepisco∣porum fuorum, & Episcoporum libenter recognoscat. Our most Gratious and most pious King Iames doth esteeme or ac∣compt nothing more noble and more honorable, then with Valen∣tinian (the Emperour) to professe himselfe a son of the Church; and with Theo••••oricus King of Italy, most willingly to acknow∣ledge himselfe a foster-childe of the Church, and a disciple of his Archbishops and Bishops &c.

3. This Iarre now, as you see, is of great moment. For if the King cannot create or ordaine Bishops, as M. Tooker saith hee cannot; then it followeth euidently that Thomas Cranmer who was made Archbishop of Canterbury by the King (Henry the 8.) was no true, but a false Bishop; no pastour, but a robber; one that entred not into the sheep fold by the doore; but climbed up some other way. Whereof againe ensue three other markeable points. First, that all other Bishops, who were afterward either

created by Cranmer, or by the King, were lake vnto Cranmer himselfe. Secondly, whatsoeuer was done of them, by Episcopall authority or Iuresdiction, was of no validity or force, Thirdly, that they, so ordaixed, are bound to restitution of all reue newes and prosies which they haue reaped by their Bishopricks. What counsell now is there to be taken in this point? Let your Acade∣micks, I pray you, consider.

English Concord.* 1.1

THat Christian Princes haue with commenda∣tion created and deposed Bishops, yea Bi∣shops of Rome; not only Hainric, but also our most drad Soueraigne Lord Iames, the most learned King vpon the face of the earth, hath manifested, in his monitory Preface, out of the Ecclesiasticall Histo∣ries, in these very words, Page 28.

Inperatores arque Reges &c. All these Emperours and Kings which li∣ued religiously and Christianly, were so farre from thinking the Pope to haue any power ouer them, that they themselues haue created Popes, and when they grew irregular, reformed them; and somtimes also deposed them. And Page 291. Sed et per aetates complurimas &c. But for many Ages together, the most assured and inuiolable right of creating the Ro∣mane Bishops, remained with the Emperors. Wher∣in, my principall witnesse shall be the Bishop of Rome; who decreed in a Councela 1.2 of 153. Bishop and Abbats, that right and power of choosing the Pope, and ordaining the Sea Apostolike, should re∣main to the Emperour Charles the great; and more∣ouer, definitiuely ordained that all Archbishops, and

Bishops throughout all Prouinces should take their inuestiture from him:* 1.3 & that no Bishop should be consecrated, vnlesse he were first commended and inuested by the King. And whosoeuer shall offend against this decree, hew rapped him vp in the bands of Anathema.* 1.4 Page. 34. King Henry the first of that name, after the conquest, gaue the Bishopricke of Winchester vnto William Gifford, and presently in∣uested him, into all the possessions appertaining to that Sea, against the decrees of the late Councell. The same King Henry gaue the Archbishopricke of Canterbury, to Raphe Bishop of London, and inuested him by a Ring and a Staffe.* 1.5 Besides, not only Plaina, but other Popish Writers, do witnesse, that the Em∣perours consent, for many Ages, was to be obtained for the choise of the Bishoppe of Rome: which thing Bellarmine wich all his skill,* 1.6 could not handsomely auoid.

Moreouer, also the Romane Bishops were enioy∣ned to pay vnto the Emperours Exchequer, a cer∣taine summe of current money, for the obtaining of their confirmation; which custome endured for the space of seauen hundred yeares,* 1.7 after Christ, as is witnessed by Sigebert Luitprand and other Histo∣rians of the Romane faction. But euery where we shal meet with examples of Emperours, which cut the wings of the Romane Bishops vsurped authority. All these things so substantially manifested, and pithily disputed by our Soueraigne King, in his Apologie for the oath of Alleageance Page 127.128. will D^r. Tooker most willingly subscribe vnto; especially seeing hee demonstrateth the same by sacred text, saying, Sub

veteri Testa:* 1.8 reges haud dubiè, gubernatores erant Ec∣clesiae intra fines suos: exauctor auerunt enim summum Pontificem, aliumque in eius locū subrogauerunt:* 1.9 Vnder the old Testament, there was no question but that Kings were gouernours of the Church, within their dominions: for they deposed the high Priest, and placed another in his roome.

Truely D^r. Tooker affirmeth Regem non Sacra∣re Episcopos. That the King dooth not consecrate Bi∣shops: and as truely that the King is a sonne of the Church, as Valentinian, or with Theodosius a pupill or a foster childe of the Church: yea, a disciple, not onely of Archbishops and Bishoppes; but also of inferiour Priests and Ministers, (whose Sermons he more often heareth) but onely, Quoad officia Ministerialia, re∣specting the proper office of Ministeriall. duties, and not in the Supreme gouernment of the Church. And vnto this purpose writeth D^r. Tooker Page 311. of King Edward the sixt; Titulumet stolam Pontificiam asperna∣batur &c. Although he refused the title and robe of a high Priest: yet notwithstanding he retained the Christia Supre∣macy to himselfe, as the meane wherby he might more safe∣ly aduise the Church, and prouide for it against the time to come. Againe, he verifieth as much of our King Iames and other Christian Princes, Page 312. Sunt quidem reges Christiani &c. Euen now are Christian Kings and other Princes, the highest and Supreme gouernours of all persons whatsoeucr within their Empire and Dominion, and haue euer so beene, from the ancient time, of the purer and Primitiue Church. And Page 312. Non tantum sunt praesules in ordine &c. Yet notwithstanding they are not Prelates in any Priestly order, although they enioy a

Supremacy in the Christian regiment: for vvith great Constantine, they ought to be common Bishops of exterior matters; and with Charles the great, Ludouicus Pius & Lotharius, make lawes, Ecelesiasticall Canons (if neede require) or with King Dauid, Salomon, Ezechia and Ic∣hoshaphat, keepe visitation in the Temple, and giue order to Ecclesiasticall affaires. And why not then, with Sa∣lomon, to depose and disrobe a high Priest, and put an∣other in his place? for which opinion D^r. Tooker wri∣teth, Page 152. Totumhoc quantumcunque est &c. All this how great soeuer, which is as great as may be, is but an or dinary document of pietie, religion and royall iurisdicti∣on. Wherefore this standeth a fir me foundation of our side, that King Salomon out of his ordinary power, might de∣pose the high Priest, and bring him into order. And therefore, vaine is the Challenge of the Romane Bishops, boasting an immunity, as though no secular Prince could remoue them. For it is plaine, that this is practised in sacred Scriptures. Therefore with what face though of brasse, could the Iesuite Becane vtter to the world this low de lye! And from whence doth he in another place con∣fesse, that it is so farre from King Iames, to create and depose Bishops, that hee rather acknowledgeth him∣selfe their foster childe and disciple? As though King Salomon acknowledged not himselfe a foster childe of the Church, and Disciple of the Priests, when hee depo∣sed Abiathar, and subrogated Zadoc in his stead: the Ie∣suite, Sophister like, is alwayes wallowing in a fallacy called Ignoratio Elenchi.

Moreouer, Doctour Tooker, Page. 37. writeth, Rex concedit suam regiam licentiam eligendi. As often as it happeneth to any Cathedrall Church to be destitute of a

Bishoppe, then the King by a vvritte, giueth licence to the Deane and Chapter, to elect another person Canoni∣cally.

But I will btiefely declare vnto thee (gentle Rea∣der) the whole processe and carriage of this election: for it is common and vulgar euery day. Thus there∣fore it proceedeth: When any Cathedrall Church wanteth his Pastor, the King sendeth foorth his roy∣all Writte Conge Destire, directed to the Deane and Chapter; commaunding them with all speed, to as∣semble and to choose an Archbishoppe, or Bishop, for their Sea: but with this prouiso; that they choose no other, than that person which shall be named by the King, vnder the penaltie of a Praemunire, (which is the greatest punishment among vs in England, ex∣cept death.) And the same Archbishop, or Bishoppe so named by the King, and elected as aforesaide, must be consecrated by the Archbishop, or Bishops, vnder the same penalty.

Now consider learned Reader (for I will make thee my iudge) what other thing is this, then to cre∣ate Archbishoppes and Bishoppes? excepting one, lie ceremoniall formalities. But let vs suffer that most blessed Martyr, Archbishop Cranmer, to rest in glory with Christ in heanen. This Iarre and difference is of great momenn, (I meane betwixt the Papists and vs) for if it appeare as cleare as the light, both by the Popes Canon lawes, & also by open Tables of Ecclesi∣astical Histories, as our most drad Soueraine hath most exactly demonstrated, that the Romane Emperor crea∣ted & elected Popes, & set in order the Sea Apostolike:

And if all Archbishoppes and Bishops, through∣out all Prouinces, receiued their Inuestitures from them: (according to the popish VVriters, especially the Iesuits) all those Romane Bishops which haue been so created and elected for many hundred yeares (to omit all inseriour Archbishops and Bishops) Non ex∣titerunt Pastores intrantes per ostium in ouile, sed Praedo∣nes aliunde ascendentes, haue not beene Pastors entring in∣to the sheepefolde by the doore, but thieues and robbers as∣cending another way, that is, false Bishops, Archbishops and Pastors. Out of which I inferre three things.

First, that all the Bishops so created by Emperours and Kings (according to the words of Genebrarde) vvere disorderly and Apostaticall, rather then Apo∣stolicall.

Secondly, whatsoeuer was done of them by Epis∣copallauthoritie, or Iurisdiction, is of no moment, force or validitie.

Thirdly, that the Bishops so ordained, are bound to restitution of all reuene wes and and profits, which they haue reaped by their Bishopricks.

Seest thou not (Iesuit) how thou art beaten with thine owne rodde? Quid hic consilij capiendum? What deuise is now to be taken? Let your Academicks, who, now onely (hauing swallowed vp the Sorbonists) will rule the rost, to weet, the Iesuiticall Fathers (if it so may please their God Layola) see vnto it.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Concord Pag. 58
• a 1.2

  Sigeb. An. 734 Wathr. de Epis. In∣uessat. Mart, Polon. An. 780.
• * 1.3

  Niem, de Pnuil, et Jur. Dist. 63 ca. Adrian.
• * 1.4

  Mat Paris. in H. Act. 1100. sdem An. 1112 et An. 1119
• * 1.5

  Plat. vit. Pela. 2. et Gregory.
• * 1.6

  Declericis.
• * 1.7

  An. 680. in vita Agatho. Anastas. An. 678 Dist. 63. 1. Agatho.
• * 1.8

  2. Chro. 19 v. 4
• * 1.9

  1. Reg. 2. v. 17