The nullity of the prelatique clergy, and Church of England further discovered in answer to the plaine prevarication, or vaine presumption of D. John Bramhall in his booke, intituled, The consecration and succession of Protestant bishops justified, &c. : and that most true story of the first Protestant bishops ordination at the Nagshead verified their fabulous consecration at Lambeth vvith the forgery of Masons records cleerely detected / by N.N.

CHAP. II. (Book 2)

The fabulous Consecration at Lambeth, and the forgery of its records proved by the Statute 8. Eliz. 1. and by the Queenes letters patents, and Commis∣sion.

1. BVt if your Register be not forged, and all was so legally performed at Lam∣beth, as it relates, vvhy should our Doctors object to your first Bishops, not only nullity, but also illegality of consecration, contrary to the statutes, and lawes of the land? Why did the Queene make good by act of Par∣liament, * 1.1 not only the forme of Ed. 6. ordina∣tion, But also all Actes, and things had, made, or donne by any person, or persons, in or about any consecration, confirmation, or investing of any per∣son, or persons elected to the office, or dignity of

Archbishops, or Bishops by vertue of the Queenes letters patents, or commission, sithence the begin∣ning of her reigne? If Parker and the rest had bin consecrated according to the forme of Ed∣ward 6. as your Records, and Writers pretend, what need had there bin of this Act of Parlia∣ment? This is so cleere against your forged Registers, and feigned solemnity at Lambeth, that you thought fit to omit in your answer to this objection, the words of the statute; * 1.2 and only say, that I repeate, the vvords of apart of the statute, and thence conclude, by which act appea∣res, that not only King Edvvards rite, but any other vsed since the beginning of the Queenes rei∣gne, vpon her commission, vvas enacted for good, and consequently that of the Nagshead might pas∣se. Cujus contrarium verum est. The contrary to vvhat these Fathers inferre, doth follovv necessari∣ly from these vvords, vvhich the Fathers cite. The vvords of the Act are these, By vertue of the Quee∣nes letters patents, or Commission. I pray M^r Do∣ctor, have a better opinion of your Readers, then to thinke they are so mad, as to be per∣swaded by you, that men should, cite only the∣se words of a statute, By vertue of the Queenes letters patents, or Commission, to prove the nul∣••ity, or illegality of your protestant consecra∣••ion. Is it the manner, I do not say of Pole∣nick, but even of honest Writers, to concea∣••e, and mangle the words wherupon the Ad∣••ersary grounds the force of his argument.

2. But yow are as unfortunate in citing these few words By vertue of the Queenes letters

patents, or Comission, as your Reader must be unsatisfied of your ingenuity, for concealing the others to wch they relate. * 1.3 The Queenes letters patents which yow cite, declare expres∣sly, that the reason why by her supreme au∣thority, she dispensed with all invalidities of the persons condition, state, and faculty, and with all illegalities against the Canons of the Church, and statutes of the land, was not her Majesties extraordinary care, least some cir∣cumstance in the politicall part might be defective in some punctitilio of law as yow pretend; * 1.4 but an extreme necessity; that is, the want of as much as one true Bishop, to consecrate the rest; and therfore she dispensed not only with censu∣res, * 1.5 and penalties, as the Pope doth in his Bulls; but also with the condition, and state o•• the Consecraters, who being only simple Priests, and noe Bishops, were by the Quee∣nes commission, and supremacy, exalted, and enobled to conferre episcopal orders. The words of the Queens letters patents are. Sup∣plentes nihilominus supremá nostrâ authoritate re∣giâ, &c. Si quid aut in his quae juxta mandatum nostrum per vos fient, aut in vobis, aut vestrum aliquo, conditione, statu, facultate, vestris, ad prae∣missa perficienda desit, aut deerit eorum, quae pen∣statuta hujus Regni nostri, aut per leges Ecclesia∣sticas in hac parte requiruntur, aut necessariâ sun•••• temporis ratione, & rerum necessitate id postulan∣te. In cujus rei, &c. Teste Regina, &c.

3. This part of the Queens letters patent you translate into English thus, * 1.6 supplying b••

our Souveraigne authority all defects either in the Executors of this Commission, or any of them. Its strange you ever made mention of a Commis∣sion so evidently contrary to your principles, and to the cause you vndertake to maintai∣ne, that you dare not translate it faithfully. But I vvil supply your defect in this particu∣lar, Supplying by our Soveraigne Royal authority, &c. If any thing be, or shall be vvanting in these things vvhich yee are to do by our command, either in your selves, or in any of you, or in your condi∣tion, state, faculty, vvhich by the statute of this our Kingdome, or by the lavves of the Church are re∣quired, or necessary, the time, and necessity of af∣faires exacting this, &c. You make this dispen∣sation à superflous clause, or at most a salue to help a latent impediment; but the Queene, and the commission it selfe declare, that it vvas a necessary remedy to enable the condition, and state of the consecraters, who were no Bis∣hops.

4. Yet you are confident that the only ground of this monstruos dispensation, * 1.7 vvas the same excep∣tion vvhich Bishop Bonner did aftervvards make against the legality of Hornes consecration, vvhich is all (say you) that Stapleton, or any of your ad∣versaires had to pretend, or except against the le∣gality of the ordination of the first protestant Bis∣hops There is as litle reason to doubt of your confidence, as there is for you to be so confi∣dent. Did either B. Bonner, D. Stapleton, or any other of your adversaries, mention that exception vvhich you father vpon them?

They were not so ignorant in the lawes, and statutes of England, as you would make them, and all other Writers besides your selfe. It had bin, not onely confidence, but impudence to object illegality of ordination contrary to the lawes of England, if your first Bishops had bin ordained accordring to the lavves, and forme of Edward VI. and so solemnly at Lambeth, as your forged Registers pretend. Bonners exception vvas, * 1.8 that Horne vvas no Bishop, and Stapletons vvords are. You (Hor∣ne) are vvithout any consecration at all of your Metropolitan, (Parker) himselfe poore man being no Bishop neither. Is it not notarious that yee, and your Collegues vvere not ordained according to the prescript, I vvill not say of the Church, but even of the very statuts? These vvords can have no relation to the doubt you move (but our Au∣thors never toucht) concerning your booke of ordination being, or not being restored by Act of Parliament 1. * 1.9 Elizab. Therfore D. Sta∣pletons vvords, and exceptions were against some other illegality, to wit, your first Bis∣hops merry ordination at the Nagshead, for no other vvas ever pretended by your Authors, but either this, or that formal ceremony at Lambeth; vvhich if ever it had bin, D. Staple∣ton would not have bin so impudent, as to ob∣ject notorious illegality against your first con∣secrations. * 1.10 But you say that his objection, and exception sheweth nothing but this, how apt a drowning cause is to catch hold of every reed; By your leave M. Doctor, it also she∣weth,

how apt a drunken cause is to catch hold of every cup; and that your spiritual Fo∣refathers had a plot to make the old Bishop of Landaf halfe drunke, that at least in a pleasant humor he might lay hands on them; therfore they invited him to a Taverne; * 1.11 this is the rea∣son Q. Maries priests did give, vvhy they met at the Nagshead, as you may see in the answers to M. Watsvvorhts letters cited by your self.

5. Yet you desire your Reader to observe, * 1.12 that this dispensative clause neyther had, nor can be construed to have any reference to any consecration that vvas acted by Scory alone, as that silly conse∣cration at the Nagshead is supposed to have bin: and the same Dispensative clause doth not extend at all to any essential of ordination: nor to the Ca∣nons of the universal Church; and that the Com∣missioners authorised by these letters patents to con∣firme, and consecrate Parker, did make no use of this supplentes, or dispensative povver in the con∣secration, vvhich is a purely spiritual Act, and belongeth meerly to the Key of order. All this you desire the Reader to observe vvith you, vvit∣hout giving him any reason, or ground for your observation. Is it the manner of Pole∣nick Writers to beg the controversy out of meere civility? Readers must be persuaded by reason, and not desired by empty words, to give their assent in controverted matters. You say that the Commissioners, or Consecraters of Parker did make no use of the Queens di∣spensative power in the consecration. But themselves say the contrary, (being conscious

of their owne incapacity to consecrate Bis∣hops, as being only simple Priests, and never consecrated) and declare in their desinitive sentence, that they will make vse in the conse∣cration, of the Queenes dispensative povver. Their words are. * 1.13 Therfore vve the Queens Com∣missioners (Barlovv, Scory, &c) by consent of the Lavviers that vve have consulted, do confirme the foresaid election by the supreme authority of the Queene, communicated vnto vs. Supplying also by the sayd supreme authority vvhatsoever hath him defective in this election: as also is, or shall be vvan∣ting in vs, or any of vs, in our condition, state, fa∣culty, to perfect these things vvhich vve are com∣manded te doe. They were commanded not on∣ly to confirme Parkers election, but also to perfect the worke, and consecrate him; and they say that they vvill do so, and do supply the defects of their owne state, and condition, (which could be no other, but the want of e∣piscopal consecration) by the Queens dispen∣sative, and supreme authority. And yet D. Bramhall doth desire the Reader out of curte∣sy, te observe, and thinke the contrary.

6. You talke much of your key of order, which vvas no other, then the key of a celler, elevated by the Queens scepter, and spiritual authority, to be efficient of your first Bishops consecration in a Taverne, which you most ungratefully, * 1.14 and vnwarily reject, when con∣trary to the statutes you affirme, that neyther she, nor the lavves of England can make an ordination to be valid, or invalid, because

they can not change the institution of Christ, who determined for the essential matter of or∣dination, imposition of hands. This is very true, but no protestant doctrine in those ti∣mes as being contrary to the 25. article of your english Creed, which teacheth, that Christ never apointed any visible signe for Orders, and consequently it is no Sacrament. Therfo∣re if imposition of hands be a visible signe, it can not be (according to the symbol of the English Church) the essential matter of ordi∣nation by Christs institution. If you had vtte∣red in your primitive Church the Doctrine, which now you print, you had not only fallen into a Premunire, but also incurred the penal∣ties of an Heretique for being so obstinat a∣gainst your new Creed, and the articles set downe by your first Apostles.

7. It is not to be wondered, that a man so ignorant of his Creed, should knowe so litle of the law as you do. Read I pray these vvords of the statute 8. Eliz. 1. referring to an other made the first yeare of her reigne. And by the same Act, and statute, there is also given to the Q. Highnesse, her heirs &c. full povver, and au∣thority by letters patents vnder the great seale of England, from time to time, to assigne, name, and authorise such person, or persons, as she, or they shal thinke meete, and convenient, to exercise, use, occupie, and execute vnder her Highnesse, all man∣ner of jurisdictions, privileges, preheminences, and auihorities, in any vvise toucking, or concerning any spiritual, or Ecclesiastical povver, or jurisdi∣ction

vvithin this Realme, or any other her H. Do∣minions or Countries. I beseech you M. Doctor, answer now directly, and without tergiversa∣tion might not the Queene by her letters pa∣tents, without any other ceremony, name and authorize, according to this Act of Parliament, any Carrier, Carter, or Catchpol, to exercise, vse, occupie, and execute all manner of jurisdictions, preheminencies, and authorities, in any vvise tou∣ching, or concerning any spiritual, or ecclesiasticall povver. What is episcopacy, or priesthood, but a spiritual, and ecclesiastical power? And what is ordination, or consecration, but to exercise, vse, or execute this spiritual povver, by con∣ferring it vpon others? Therfore according to the statuts of England, the Queene, and her heires, and successors, may make Priests, and Bishops, vvithout imposition of hands, or any other matter, or forme, but their letters pa∣tents vnder the greate seale of England. Which though it be cleere enough by the very words of the statute to any one that vnderstands En∣glish, yet it is made most vndeniably evident, by the Protestant Tenet of those dayes requi∣ring no more for Order then Election of Prince or people, which Tenet appeares in their writings, in their translations of Scrip∣ture, and in their Creed, so that the Prince in England having assumed full power in point of Election, could accordingly dispose, and dispense, at will in any thing belonging to Or∣der. And when any ceremony of consecration was vsed they cared not what it was, so it

might serve to amuse the vulgar, not yet inv∣red to the new Doctrine of Priests, and Bis∣hops not consecrated.

8. This vvas the power assumed: let vs now see their practise vsed. * 1.15 They vvere enforced (sayth D Kellison) to make superintendents, and ministers of our apostating Priests, such as Par∣ker, Grindal, Sands, Horne &c. vvho vvere thought paste sit to make such Ministers on, vvit∣hout any other moulding, or knedding. And vvhen they vvanted Apostatas, vvho vvere consecrated af∣ther the Catholique manner, they tooke laymen of their ovvne, of vvhich some vvere base artificers; and vvithout any other consecration, or ordination then the Princes, or the Superintendents letters (vvho themselves vvere no Bishops) they made them Ministers, and Bitshops vvith as fevv cere∣monies, and lesse solemnity, then they make their Aldermen, yea Constables, and Cryers of the Market. * 1.16 And from this stock proceedeth all the rable of their Ministers, &c. D. Stapleton, whom you call one of the most rational heads our Church had since the separation, gives you this Catalo∣gue of your first protestant Clergy. * 1.17 And vvhe∣rin I pray you resteth a great part of your nevv Clergy, but in butchers, cookes, catchpols, and coblers, diers, and dawbers, fellons cayrring their marke in their hand instead of a shaven crowne, fis∣hermen, gunners, harpers, inkeepers, merchants. and mariners, netmakers, potters, potycaries, and porters of Belingsgate, pinners, pedlers, ruffling, ruffins, sadlers, sheermen, and sheaperds, tan∣ners, tilers, tinkers, trumpeters, weavers, whery∣men,

&c. If D. Stapleton was so rational a head as you are pleased to acknowledge, you hav•• but litle reason to brag of the first heads, an•• members of your schisme, or separation; an•• much lesse to be angry vvith my lord Brookes for applying his Coachman to the office of a prote¦stant Preacher; * 1.18 who by his trade, (not to spea∣ke of his talent) might challenge an eminen•• place amongst your first Ministers, and wit¦hout disgracing your Church, might head thi•• rable, that D. Stapleton hath so particularly described. But speake to the purpose M. Do∣ctor: Doe you persuade your selfe, that all these fellows were ordained by impofition o•• episcopal hands, and with all that formality you bring out of your Pontifical? no truly, they were only ordained by letters patents, or so me paper of your first Bishopss, who practise•• the same stile with their Ministers, that th•• Queene did with themselves, and if someti¦mes vvith ceremony, it vvas onely for cere¦mony, not necessity, and consequently with no more formality then might suffise to blind the ignorant.

And truly when I consider the Queens su∣preme, and spiritual authority, confirmed by the statuts 1. & 8. Eliz. I do not wonder at this practise of your primitive Church in ordai∣ning any Post, or Carrier they met in the high way, and that legally without any imposition of hands, or Ceremony. The statute doth war∣rant it by these words. * 1.19 And further for th•• avoyding of all ambiguities, and questions tha••

might bee objected against the lawfull confirmations, ••nvesting, and consecrations of the said Archbis∣hops, and Bishops (that is Parker, and his fel∣••ows) her highnes in her letters patents, under the great seale of England, directed to any Archbis∣••op, Bishops, or others, (marke the word, others, which comprehendeth laymen, or simple Priests) for the confirming, investing, and con∣secrating of any person elected to the office, or digni∣••y of any Archbishop, or Bishop, hath not only used such words, and sentences as were acustomed to be ••sed by the late K. Henry, and K. Edward, her Majesties father, and brother, in their like letters ••atents, made for such causes: but also hath vsed, ••nd put in her Majesties said letters patents, divers ••••her general vvords, and sentences, wherby her H. ••y her supreme power, and authority, hath dispen∣••ed vvith all causes, or doubts of any imperfection, ••r disability, that can, or may in any vvise be obje∣••ted against the same as by her Majesties said letters ••atents remaining of record, more plainly vvill ap∣care, So that to all those, that vvill vvell consider of the effect, and true intent of the said lavves, and ••••atutes, and of the supreme, and absolute authori∣•••• of the Queens Highnes, and vvhich shee by her Majesties said letters patents hath vsed, and put in ••••e, in, and about the making, and consecrating, of the sayd Archbishops, and Bishops, it is, and ••ay be very evident, (D. * 1.20 Bramhall cites these last words vvithout mentioning the former, of which their sense depends) and apparent that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cause of scruple, ambiguity, or doubt, can, or ••ay justly be objected against the said elections, con∣firmations,

or consecrations, or any other materia•• thing meete to be vsed, or had, in, or about the sa∣me but that every thing requisite, and material for that purpose (that is the Queens letters patents, and ample dispensation vnder the great seale of England) hath bin made, and donne as precise∣ly, and vvith as greate a care, and diligence, or rather more, as ever the like vvas done before her Majesties tyme, as the Records of her Majesties sayd Father, and brothers tyme, and also of her ovvne time, vvill more plainly testify, and declare. This is a clause indeed that taketh a vvay all ocasion of Protestant scruples, and doubts, not only of the invalidity, but also of the illegali∣ty of your ordination at the Nagshead.

10. Yet because you vvould needs have the ordination performed at Lambeth, you main∣taine that these last words, the Records of her Majesties sayd Fathers, and Brothers time, and also of her owne time, will more plainely testify, and de∣clare, relate to your forged Registers. And to make good your assertion, you falsify the text egregiously; for, you say, the statute speaketh expressely of the Records of elections, and confir∣mations, * 1.21 and consecrations, and this you put in a distinct caracter, as if they had bin words of the very statute. Its strange, that where you lay to my charge, falsifying of the text, your selfe should commit the crime so notoriously. In all the statute you can not find any such words, Records of elections, and confirmations, and Consecrations: but you will find expressely these words, as by her Majesties sayd letters pa∣tents

remaining of record. more plainly will appea∣re. If that Glosse is accursed, which corrup∣teth, and cōtradicteth the text, vvhat shall wee say of yours? Read with attention the text, and you will be convinced, that the Records of her Majesties said Father, and Brothers time, and also of her owne time, relate not to any Records, or Registers of the Archbishop of Canterbury, nor to the Records of elections, confirma∣tions, and consecrations; but to the Records of the Kings, and Queenes letters patents; for, the statute sayth: that every thing requisi∣te, and material for the taking away all causes of scruples, doubts, and ambiguities, that might be objected against the sayd elections, and consecrations, and confirmations, or any other material thing meete to be vsed, or had in, or about the same, had bin made, and do∣ne, as precisely, or rather more, then ever be∣fore her Majesties time, as by the Records of her Majesties said Father, and Brothers time, and al∣so of her ovvne, vvill more plainely appeare. The words, or rather more precisely, and with mo∣re care, and diligence, can not relate to Par∣ker, and his Camerades consecration though we should grant, it was performed at Lam∣beth with a read cloth on the floore, and tape∣stry on the east side; for, I hope, in Catholique times they were as precise, diligent, and de∣cent in consecrations, as in Q Elizabeths, (though they vsed not a read cloth vpon à Sunday of Advent, as your Register sayes yee did vpon the 17. of December 1559.) especia∣ly

〈2 pages missing〉〈2 pages missing〉

Notes

• * 1.1

  8. Eliz. 1.
• * 1.2

  Pag. 146. & 147.
• * 1.3

  Pag. 88.
• * 1.4

  Pag. 109.
• * 1.5

  Pag. 92.
• * 1.6

  Pag. 92.
• * 1.7

  Pag. 94. & 95.
• * 1.8

  Counter. bl. fol. 7. & 9. & fol. 301.
• * 1.9

  Pag. 97.
• * 1.10

  Pag. 98.
• * 1.11

  Pag. 129. in ep. ad ami.
• * 1.12

  Pag. 99. & 100.
• * 1.13

  See this definitive sentence in D. Bram∣hall pag. 101.
• * 1.14

  Pag. 60. 121. 171. & 148.
• * 1.15

  Kellison survey pag. 373. & 374. edit, 1603.
• * 1.16

  Pag. 149.
• * 1.17

  Counter∣blast lib. 4. num. 481. prin∣ted an. 1567.
• * 1.18

  Bram Pag. 12.
• * 1.19

  8. Eliz. 1.
• * 1.20

  Pag. 122.
• * 1.21

  Pag. 115.