The reformation of the Church of England justified according to the canons of the Council of Nice, and other general councils, and the tradition of the Catholick Church being an answer to a paper reprinted at Oxford, called (The schism of the Church of England) demonstrated in four arguments, formerly proposed to Dr. Gunning and Dr. Pearson the late bishops of Ely and Chester, by two Catholick disputants, in a celebrated conference upon that point : in which answer the unworthy and false dealings of the papists are shewed, and the charge of schism returned upon them, and the Church of England proved truly Catholick and apostolick in her doctrine and constitution / by Dr. Saywell.

Author: Saywell, William, 1643-1701.1688

THE REFORMATION OF THE Church of England

Justified, according to the Canons of the Council of Nice, and other General Councils, and the Tradition of the Catholick Church.

BEING AN ANSWER to a Paper reprinted at Oxford, called [the SCHISM of the Church of England] Demonstrated in four ARGUMENTS, formerly Proposed to Dr. Gunning and Dr. Pearson the late Bishops of Ely and Chester, by two Catholick Disputants, in a celebrated Conference upon that Point.

In which Answer the unworthy and false dealings of the PAPISTS are shewed, and the Charge of SCHISM returned upon them, and the CHURCH of ENGLAND proved truly Catholick and Apostolick in her Doctrine and Constitution.

By Dr. Saywell.

CAMBRIDGE, Printed by John Hayes, Printer to the University: For Edward Hall Bookseller there. And are to be sold by Luke Meredith at the Angel in Amen-Corner. London. 1688.

[Page]

TO THE READER.

READER,

THOU hadst not now been troubled with the following Papers, if a Relation of part of a pretended Conference with Bishop Gunning, late Lord Bishop of Ely, and Bishop Pearson, late Lord Bishop of Chester, had not been afresh Reprinted at Oxford, and sent abroad into the World as a piece unanswerable by these two Eminent Prelates of our Church. In which, tho' there be nothing new, and which has not been long ago answer'd, yet to satisfie the World about the Truth of that Matter, and to remove any prejudice that some might otherwise conceive concerning these Learned and Pious Bishops, I will give a short account, as near as I can, at this distance of time of the Matter of Fact, and then proceed to a particular Answer to the several Arguments in order as they lie. The Conference was managed in writing about 30 Years ago, and by mutual agreement nothing was to be made Publick without the allowance and consent of both Parties: But such was the disingenuity and unworthiness of one of [Page] the Romish Disputants, that contrary to the Faith and Promise he had made, he sets forth a Book, and pretends it to be an account of the Conference with Bishop Gunning, and Bishop Pearson, when he had left out, changed, and misplaced Matters as he pleased himself; insomuch that his Partner was very much ashamed of his dishonest and unfaithful Dealing, and did utterly condemn him for what he had done, and renounced his having been engaged in approving or consenting to such a hase and disingenuous Proceeding, and did openly own and acknowledge so much to the Persons concerned. An account whereof was given to the World by Mr. Thomas Smith of Christ-College in Cambridge, in a little Book called a Gagg for the Quakers, with an Answer to Mr. Denn's Quaker no Papist. Lond. Printed for J. C. and are to be sold near the North-door of St. Paul's Church-yard, 1659. ‘—That which follows in your Book about Mr. Gunning and Mr. Pearson, who disputed against the Romanists, all who know these Ministers, know to be superfluous and frivolous. However I think fit to tell you, the Romanist who put forth an Edition [of that Dispute] hath so changed, transposed, added, diminished, and made of it what he list, that I believe it will be as soon owned for your (I mean not J. S. but H. D's) Conference, as Mr. Pearson's or Mr. Gunning's. I must now tell you further (what you have been oft enough told) that that Relation cannot expect to be regarded by Mr. P. or any sober Person which is disclaimed and disowned by Three of the Four who were Disputants, viz. by both the Protestants, and half the Papists. But chiefly I must entreat you to consider whether the inserting above 200 Lines at a time as a part of the Conference, which never was part of it, (besides all professed Additions) secondly, whether the leaving out whole Sheets of the Protestants, which the Papists thought too hard to answer, [Page] and thirdly, the scarce suffering any one Argument and Answer of both to come together, but casting usually parts of the same Paper of Mr. G. many score Leaves asunder one from another, be not a scandal that any Christian would desire might be cover'd with silence? And I would gladly know from any Ingenuous Person, whether this might not be Answer enough to a Book put out at the charge of the Romanist's own Purse and Conscience. A Discourse, by being mangled, rendred so unintelligible, that scarce any Man ever read it over or will.—Reverend Mr. William Moor the deceased Library-Keeper, was perswaded by J. S. to read one Leaf, but professed before many Witnesses he would not read another if you would give him the whole Impression, because it was so unintelligible for the Causes above-mentioned.’

This account was thought sufficient to satisfie the World, that the Relation of that Conference ought not to be regarded, and that it needed no other Answer.

But perhaps some will demand why was not the Conference then Printed whole and intire? Now, the reason of that was, because the Popish Adversary did run all the Dispute into obscure and metaphysical Niceties, that few could understand, and fewer would take the pains to read it, and so it was not thought fit, and a needless charge to trouble the World with it. Besides, both the Bishops did tell their Friends, when they discoursed with them about a fuller Answer, that they thought it altogether unnecessary, because though the Dispute were mangled and misrepresented, yet that which they had Printed was still unanswered by them, and unanswerable by any of their Party; and they were perswaded that all Men who would carefully read the Book, would be of the same mind. And as for this Paper that is added, at the end of the pretended Conference, and now Reprinted at Oxford, the Author do's not so much as say, [Page] that it was part of their Dispute, but a pure Addition of his own, wherein they were no more concerned than other Divines, and they did not think they were bound to answer whatsoever he should afterwards write and publish to the World; and yet this Oxford Paper would without any ground, or the least colour, impose upon the World, that this is a part of that forementioned Conference. Neither did the Cause it self, or the state of Affairs then require any particular Discourse upon that subject, the Books of Bishop Fern, Arch-bishop Bramhall, Dr. Hammond, and Dr. Heylin, being then in every Bodies hands, wherein they had fully vindicated the Church of England from any imputation of Schism; and the learned Men of that time were so well satisfied with what they had written, that it was needless to trouble the World upon that account. But now 'tis expected every thing that peeps out should receive a due Answer, I have therefore endeavour'd to prove from truly Catholick Principles (such as our Adversaries themselves cannot gain-say) that not only the Doctrine and Constitution of our Church is most sound and Catholick, but even the Order of our Succession, and the Method of our Reformation was truly Regular and Canonical, and that all the Author's own Arguments do return upon his own Head, and evidently prove himself, and other English Papists, guilty of Schism.

[Page]

An ANSWER to a Paper called the Schism of the CHURCH of ENGLAND demonstrated, &c.

IT has been the constant Profession of the Church of England, that the Word of God, interpreted by Catholick Tradition and a truly Oecumenical Council, (not a Patriarchal, one of a few Italians in the West) ought to be hearkened to in Matters that concern the Peace and Unity of the Church. Concionatores imprimis videbunt ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod à populo religiosè teneri & credi velint nisi quod fit consentanen̄ doctrinae Peteris & Novi Testamenti, quodque ex illa ipsa doctrina Catholici patres & veteres Episcopi collegerint. Now their sense does no where appear more undoubted than in the decrees of General Councils, and in the Practice and Tradition that was generally allowed in the Primitive Church. Synod. Lond. A. 1571. C. Concionatores. Firmil. Ep. ad Cypr. inter Ep. Cypr. n. 75. Contra Ep. Step. Papae. Eos qui Romae sunt non ea in omnibus observare quae sunt ab origine tr [...]adita, & frustra Apostolorum auctoritatem pretendere. Vide Concil. Trull. Can. 13. & can. 55. Where the Church of Rome is commanded by name to amend some Errors which yet she has never done; so the Church did not think the Bishop of Rome had authority to give Laws to her, but was himself bound to submit to the Canons, and the Order of the Church. And it has been also frequently and learnedly proved by our English Bishops and Divines, that the Points in difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome, are so far from being Matters of Faith, that they are modern Errors imposed upon the Christian World, besides and contrary to the Determinations of General Councils and Catholick Tradition; so that our dissent about them, from the Roman Church can be by no means accounted Heretical or Schismatical, but all these Arguments urged by the Oxford Paper, will evidently prove that those Bishops, Priests, and Lay-men that set up Altar against Altar, and hold separate Congregations in Opposition to the Church of England, do break the order of Catholick Communion, and are guilty of Schism.

[Page 2]But before I apply my self to return an Answer to the several Arguments, it will be requisite to give a short account of the Reformation.

In the Reign of Hen. 8. See the Subscription to a Book called the Institution of a Christian Man. there was an Assembly held, the Determinations whereof are now extant, and to be seen, wherein the Archbishops and Bishops, Bishop Bonner, and Gardner, Voysey, Heath, Tunstall, amongst the rest, did declare that the Bishop of Rome ought to have no jurisdiction here in England, but the Archbishops and Bishops and the National Church had Power to order all Matters within themselves without the concurrence of the Pope, so as they did keep to the Faith and Unity of the Catholick Church; and for this they alledged the Authority of the Council of Nice, and other General Councils.

And as for the byshoppe of Rome, it was many hundreth yeres after Christe, before he coude acquire or gette any primacy or gouernance above any other byshoppes, out of his province in Italie. Institut. of a Christian Man. Londini in aedibus Thomae Bertleti Regii impressoris A. 1537. p. 47, 48. Acts & Mon. v. 2. p. 346. dedicated to the King H. 8. by Thomas Archbishop of Canter. and Edward Archbishop of York, and all other Bishops, and Prelates, and Arch-deacons of this Realm. Sithe the whyche tyme he hath ever vsurped more and more. And though some parte of his power was gyven unto hym by the consent of the emperours, kynges, and princis, and by the consent also of the clergie in generalle councelles assembled: yet surely he atteyned the moste parte thereof by meruaylous subtiltie and crafte, and speciallye by colludynge with greatte kynges and princis, sometyme trayninge theym into his deuotion, by pretence and colour of holynes and sanctimonie, and some tyme constraining them by force and tyranny. Wherby the sayde byshoppes of Rome aspired and arose at lengthe vnto suche greatnes in strength and auctoritie: that they presumed, and toke vpon them to be heddes, and to put lawes by their owne auctoritie, not onely vnto al other byshoppes within Christendome, but also vnto themperours, kinges, & other the princis and lordes of the worlde, and that under the pretence of the auctoritie commytted vnto them by the gospell. Wherin the saide bishops of Rome do not onely abuse, and peruerte the true sense and meaning of Christis worde: but they doo also cleane contrarie to the vse and custome of the primitiue churche. and also do manyfestly violate as well the holy canons, made in the churche immediately after the tyme of the apostels, as also the decrees [Page 3] and constitutions made in that behalfe, Can. Apost. 34. by the holy fathers of the catholike churche, assembled in the fyrst general councels, Concil. Nicen. c. 4. 6. and finally they do transgresse theyr owne profession, made in their creation. For all the byshoppes of Rome always, Concil, Antioch. c. 9. whan they be consecrated and made byshoppes of that see, do make a solemn profession, and vowe, that they shall inuiolably obserue and kepe all the ordinances, Con. Const. p. 1. c. 2. made in the eight first general councels, amonge the whiche it is specially provided and enacted, Con. Eph. c. 8. that all causes shall be fynished and determyned within the prouince, Con. Calced. c. 28. where the same be begon, and that by the byshops of the same prouince, and that no byshop shall exercise any iurisdiction out of his owne diocese or province. See the Popes Oath, dist. 16. c. 8. sancta octo, &c. aud dyverse suche other canons were then made and confyrmed by the sayd councels, to represse and take away out of the churche, al suche primacy and iurisdiction ouer kinges and bishops, as the bishops of Rome pretend now to haue ouer the same.

In the Reign of King Edward 6. See Dr. Heylin's Reform. Vindic. Dr. Burnet's Hist. of the Reform. part. 2. book 1. p. 195. Coll. of Record. pag. 209. n. 55. The Bishops and Clergy having free Liberty to meet and debate of Matters of Religion without the Pope; did find other Abuses and Corruptions besides that of the Pope's Usurpation over the Governours of the Church, and did in the Convocation 1552. establish Articles of Religion, a publick Liturgy, and Book of Ordination, the same in substance with those that are now in use amongst us, and the Archbishops and a far major part of the Bishops were consenting thereunto, not above 5 or 6 were displaced for their disorderly behaviour and dissent from their Brethren, and others by the Metropolitan and Bishops of the Province ordained and settled in their Bishopricks according to the usual custom of that time, as all Historians, and our very Adversaries are forced to confess.

The Church of England, being thus regularly settled, was never from that time to this very day regularly changed by any Canonical Authority, but has oftentimes been confirmed since, both by the Authority of the Convocation, and of our Kings and Parliaments, and consequently the present Bishops are Lawful Pastors without any guilt of Heresy or Schism, and all within their several charges are bound by the Council of Nice, and other general Councils, to live in their Communion, and to submit to them as those that are appointed by the Holy Ghost to [Page 4] direct and govern them in Matters of Religion, and all Neighbour Churches are obliged to allow us the Communion of Coordinate Churches, and to own us as true Members of Christ's mystical Body The Holy Catholick Church.

The only Objection, of any Moment, that is made against this Regular Succession, is from the interruption it met with in the short Reign of Queen Mary: But when the Matter of Fact is looked into, it will appear that nothing which was done in her Reign will be any prejudice to our Succession, nor can by any means take off the Regular Settlement of the Church of England by the Convocation in King Edward's Reign, but that the Acts thereof are still in force, except in some particulars which have been changed by Convocations afterwards. For the Synods which were held, and the Ordinations that were made in Queen Mary's days were not carried on in a Regular Manner by the Archbishops and Bishops of the Province, but by the Authority of the Pope and those Bishops which were justly deposed and set aside, and so had no jurisdiction nor any right or title to exercise their Authority in this Realm, and therefore could give no right to the Bishops, or Authority to the Decrees they ordained; and tho' all the Art and Cruelty imaginable was used, to cut off a future Succession, by burning, imprisoning, and banishing the Lawful Bishops; yet it pleased God so to order it, that the major Part of the Lawful undoubted Bishops, who were made in King Edward's Reign, and which lived till Queen Elizabeth's days, joyned again in continuing the Succession of Bishops, and restoring the Reformation settled in Convocation, which has been preserved, without Interruption, to this very Day. And those Bishops that were set aside in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, were either justly deposed in King Edward's Days, and never rightly restored, or else were ordained by them who had no [Page 5] Authority to give them Jurisdiction in this Nation, and so had no further right, than the Civil Magistrate could give, which the same Power had again taken away. So that the Ordination of Archbishop Parker was so far from being irregular, that it was made by those, who only had proper Right and Title to ordain: For the rest of King Edward's Bishops being Dead, the sole Authority did Regularly devolve on the few that were left. And the Queen, the Nobility, and Gentry, the Clergy, and the Main Body of the Nation, were so well satisfied of the unlawful Authority of those Bishops that were set aside, and the undoubted Right of those who ordained Archbishop Parker, that of about 9400 Clergy, above 9200 did with great Joy receive the Bishops, and the Reformation; Qui undecennium primum meminerunt Regínae Elizabethae haud quicquam eomitius vel romissius fuisse praedicabunt. Decimo tertio demum anno biennio scilicet post quam Pius 5. Bullam hu [...] sua [...] parum piam misisset atque ex ea boreales illae turbae extitissent; paulo tum facta commotior, ut par erat statuere cepit contra bullas & tabellarios, sed praeterquam in eos nihil superstitionis vestrae causa sancitum est durius, &c.— audi Philopatrum ipsum Jesuitam Reginam de regni sui initiis sic alloquentem. Dum initio Regni tui mitius aliquanto cum Catholicis ageres, dum nullum adhuc vehementissimè urgeres, nullum admodum premeres, vel ad sectae tuae participationem, vel Fidei antiquae abnegationem, omnia sane tranquilliore cursu incedere videbantur, nec audiebantur magnae querelae, nec insignis aliqua dissensio aut repugnantia cernebatur nec deerant (quanquam male) qui Ecclesias vestras ut vobis placeant ac gratificarentur corpore saltem, etsi non animo frequentabant, legi [...] hic Jesuitico atramento depicta,—puta minus hic dici, plus intelligi. Bishop Andrew's Torturâ Torti, p. 148, 149. Ita religio in Anglia mutata, orbe Christiano mirante quod tam facile & sine [...] Cambden. Elizab. p. 36, 39. Ex hac religionis mutatjone ut observarunt politici Anglia facta est omnium reguorum in orbe Christiano liberrima—& oputentior quam secrdis superioribus. p. 40. and the rest of the Nation, even those that were formerly zealous for the Church of Rome, did joyn with them in Prayers and Sacraments, and there was an Universal Agreement and Concurrence in the Communion of the Church of England, for 10 or 11 Years together; so that there was no other Penal Law, but that of 12 d. a Sunday, to stir up lazy People to mind their Duty, and we might have continued so till this Day, in that happy Concord, had not the Pope excommunicated and deposed the Queen, and prohibited all her Subjects, under Pain of an Anathema, to own her Soveraignty, and submit to the Bishops of the Church of England. Upon which many separated from [Page 6] our Communion, and have disturbed our Government ever since. Vid. Bull. Pontif. apud Combd. p. 179. So that it is plain, the Schism is on the side of the Papists, who upon pretence of Papal Authority, did withdraw themselves from the Communion of their own Bishops, and make a formal division in the Church, which was before united in Peace and Truth.

But suppose there was some circumstantial defect in the Succession of some of our first Bishops, as to matter of Form, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign, after so many of their Predecessors, had been unjustly turned out, and destroyed in Queen Mary's Days, their Misfortunes do not at all concern, the present Bishops of the Church of England; for if the Matter of our Reformation, and the Constitution of our Church be Sound and Catholick, (as it is beyond all possible Contradiction) and the Consecration of our Bishops was Valid, as to the matter of Order, there being no Regular Succession of Bishops continued on by those, who were set aside in Queen Elizabeth's Reign (because they knew it was in vain, when they saw the Kingdom so well settled, and the People so unanimously joyning with the Reformed Bishops) after all those Popish Bishops were Dead, there could be nothing required in Reason, to give the Protestants a full Right and Authority, but the Reception of the Queen, and the whole Kingdom, and that they had long before, and all the Bishops for many Successions since that Time, came into vacant Places, and the Bishops that now are, were none of them Born, and come into none but void Places, and so are as Firmly and Canonically settled, as any Bishops in the World.

This being the true Account of the Reformation of the Church of England, I proceed now to consider the Argument, in the pretended Conference with Bishop Gunning, and Bishop Pearson, so many Years ago, and lately Reprinted by Henry Cruttenden at Oxon.

And first it begins, with a Definition of Schism, in [Page 7] this Manner. ‘Schism is a Voluntary Separation of one Part from the whole, true, visible [Hierarchical] Church of Christ:’ And then he goes on to a Syllogism in this manner.

Whoever make a Voluntary Separation of themselves, from the whole, true, visible Church of Christ, are Schismaticks.

But all those of the English Protestant Party, make a Voluntary Separation of themselves, from the whole, true, visible Church of Christ.

Therefore all those of the English Protestant Party, are Schismaticks.

He goes about to prove, that we separate from the visible Church; because, we separate from the Roman and Greek Churches, and all others in Communion with them, and this seems to be the full Substance and Design of the first Argument.

Now to avoid all doubt, and entring into Disputes about Foreign Churches, whose Case is in some Regard, much different from ours of the Church of England; I shall therefore, instead of the Protestant Party, proceed to Answer, for the Protestants of the Church of England.

I will not go to examine, the definition of Schism, any one that desires further Satisfaction about it, may look into the Conference it self, as it is printed, where it is learnedly and acutely examined, by the Bishops themselves.

In Answer therefore to the major Proposition, it is so far from being true, that we separate from the visible Church of Christ, that we separate from no true Church or Society of Christians in the World. Synod. Lond. An. 1603. c. 30. Tantum aberat ut Ecclesia Anglicana ab Italiae, Galliae, Hispaniae, Germaniae, aliisve similibus Ecclesiis voluerit per omnia recedere, quic quid eas sciret tenere aut observare ut (quod Ecclosiae Anglicanae Apologia profitetur.) cenemonias illas cum Reverentia susciperet quae utra Ecclesiae incommodum & hominum sobriorum offensionem retinere posse senserat, & in iis tantum articulis à praedictis Ecclesiis dissentiret in quibus eadem ipsae tum à pristina sua integritate prius desciverant, tum etiam ab Ecclesiis Apostolicis à quibus proseminatae sunt. That is, we only separate from and reform their Errors, but do not separate from their Persons and Communion. But to the better [Page 8] stating of this Matter, we must consider, that there is a twofold Communion, one of Coordination, and another of Subordination. Churches Coordinate, i. e. of several Provinces, several Nations, and Countries, owe no Obedience one to another, and are not bound to observe the same Rites and Customs, and to agree in all School-disputes and Niceties, concerning Theological Opinions; no more than several Kingdoms are bound, to have the same Laws and Constitutions. This is acknowledged by all sober Divines, in all Ages. Accordingly several Churches and Countries, have had their peculiar Rules and Orders, See how the Church of England does Communicate with all Churches in the Vindication of Bishop Gunning the late Lord Bishop of Ely, by Dr. Saywell, in his Evangelical and Catholick Unity, pag. 302, &c. Guide in Controversy dis. 3. c. 8. n. 84. B. Churches Coordinate may without Schism or fault differ from one another, or one of them from all the rest in several Doctrines and Opinions, &c. Thus he vindicates the Church of Rome wherein it differs from the Greek and other Churches, and by the same Reason other Churches may differ from her without Schism or Fault. still living in Peace and Unity, and so might it be at this Day, did not the Church of Rome by Force and Subtilty, go about to enslave all Mankind to their private Errors and Impositions. As therefore several Kingdoms do maintain Peace one with another, and give all friendly Assistance if there be Occasion, for their mutual Happiness and Defence, yet keep to their own Laws and Customs in other Matters; so tho' we differ in some Opinions and Practices from Rome and other Churches, yet we retain that Christian Charity and Respect for them, which one Coordinate Church or Kingdom ought to have for another, and so there is no Schism made at all by us, nor so much as any Separation, but what distance of Place and difference of Circumstances do necessarily make. Neither do we send Emissaries Abroad, to withdraw their People from their Obedience, and set up Altar against Altar in a Schismatical manner, and I wish they could say as much, that they did not go about to disturb our Peace and Communion.

But secondly, there is a Communion of Subordination, that which all Bishops, Priests, and all others [Page 9] owe, of submission to the Archbishops and Bishops, &c. and to the Canons and Constitutions of each Province and Nation, in all Lawful things; and this is heartily done by all true Members of the Church of England; herein we follow the command of God, Heb. 13. 17. Firmil. inter Ep. Cypr. 75. de Stephano Epis. Romano ait peccatum verò quam magnum tibi exaggerasti, quando te à tot gregibus scidisti, excidisti. n. teipsum: noli te fallere. Siquidem ille est verè Schismaticus qui se à Communione Ecclesiasticae unitatis apostatam fecerit, dum n. putas omnes à te abstinere posse, solum te ab omnibus abstinuisti. S. Cyprian did joyn with Fermilian in the same Cause, and it was thought by them in those early Days that there was no Obligation to adhere to the Bishop of Rome, and if he did Excommunicate any upon such Account; he did cut himself off from the Unity of the Catholick Church. Unless in such Matters, wherein the whole Church did agree, with the Bishop of Rome; and yet though St. Cyprian lived and died, in Opposition to the Bishop o [...] Rome, as much as we do now, he is more Honoured, and of greater Renown in the Church, than Pope Stephen himself. Vide Ep. Jo. Launoii. Jacob. Bevilaqu. Tom. 8. Obey them that have the rule over you; the command of the Council of Nice and other General Councils, the Laws Ecclesiastical and Civil of this Church and Nation. But those that call themselves Roman Catholicks are plainly guilty of Schism, for they separate from the Communion of all Coordinate Churches, which will not embrace their Errors, and be subject to their Authority, they send Emissaries abroad all over Christendom, to withdraw Persons from their Obedience to their own Bishops, and set up Altar against Altar, Communion against Communion, contrary to the constant Order of the Catholick Church. So that the Disorders, Tumults, Conventicles, which he complains of in England are Chargeable upon them. But the Protestants of the Church of England are in Doctrine most Pure, in Charity most Catholick, and in their Practice and Publick Service most conformable to the Primitive and Catholick Church of any in the World.

The second Argument.

WHoever adhere, to Schismatical Pastors (as Schismatical is understood in our Definition) are Schismaticks. But all English Protestants adhere to Schismatical Pastors, as Schismatical is understood in [Page 10] our Definition, therefore all English Protestants are Schismaticks.

He goes about to prove that we adhere to Schismatical Pastors, because we derive our Succession from those that Ordained Archbishop Parker, and others, in Opposition to the major Part of the English Bishops, who were then alive, and into the Places of many of them while they were alive, and never Lawfully Deprived. This is the Substance of the second Argument.

In Answer to which, I deny that the Bishops set aside in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, were Lawful Bishops of the Church of England, because they were violently and uncanonically thrust in, or rather they invaded those Bishopricks in Queen Mary's Days. So that the Bishops which Ordained Archbishop Parker and others, and those that held Communion with them, were the only Lawful Regular Bishops of the Church of England at that time, they being Regularly constituted in King Edward's Days, and never legally Deprived. All the other of King Edward's Bishops which complied, except Thirlby and Kitchin, were dead, and so the full Authority must remain with the rest that survived, and they all but Thirlby did concur in the Ordination of Archbishop Parker, and others, or Communicated with them. Compare our English Form with the ancient Forms in Morinus de Ordinationibus, and you will find nothing wanting that is essential. Neither was Archbishop Parker, and many others, consecrated into other Mens Places while they were alive, for Cardinal Poole the Archbishop of Canterbury, and about nine or ten Bishops more were Dead, and Archbishop Parker, and others, were elected, confirmed, and consecrated into vacant Places in due Order, according to the usage of this Kingdom for many Ages (except in the Form of the Ordinal) in which there was nothing wanting to the Essence and Validity of their Consecration. So that Archbishop Parker's Authority, and many others, is beyond Dispute, also by the tacit consent of the rest, who ought to have opposed it at their Confirmation, when they were summon'd to that purpose, [Page 11] if they had any Legal Exception to make against their being made Bishops, which being not done, and the Consecration proceeding, they are in all Reason and Justice shut out from any further Opposition, and they ought to be concluded to have given their tacit Consent; which we may the rather believe, because many of them agreed to the Reformations in King H. 8. and King Edw. 6. Days, and seem more now for Political than Ecclesiastical Reasons to refuse to comply, because they had made themselves Obnoxious to all Parties already, by their former Changes and Cruelty. So they thought it better to regain their Credit with the Romanists by their standing out, than to be looked upon as Time-servers, and little regarded by the People. But then this Argument does demonstratively return upon the Author himself, and the Popish Bishops in Queen Mary's Days, as will appear by the following Catalogue.

Bishops justly Deposed in King Edward's Days, for not obeying the Laws, and their Deposition consented to, and approved by the Bishops, as appears by their Ordaining others into their Places.

Bishop Bonner of London.
Bishop Gardner of Winchester.
Bishop Day of Chichester.
Bishop Heath of Worcester.
Bishop Voysey of Exeter. Some say he resigned.
Bishop Tunstall of Durham. Who is said to have resigned.
See the Protector's Letter to Bishop Gardner quoted below.

Bishops rightly Consecrated, and in actual Possession at King Edward's Death.

Archbishop Cranmer of Canterbury: Consecr. Hen. 8.
Bishop Ridley of London.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Poynet of Winchester.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Goodrick of Ely.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Salscot alias Capon of Salisbury.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Chambers of Peterburgh.: Hen. 8.
Bishop King of Oxford.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Bulkley of Bangor,: Hen. 8.
Bishop Parfew alias Wharton of St. Asaph.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Samson of Lich. and Coventry.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Kitchin of Landaffe.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Bush of Bristol.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Bartow of Bath and Wells.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Ferrar of St. David's.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Scory of Chichester.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Hooper of Worcester and Glocester.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Coverdale of Exeter.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Taylor of Lincoln.: Edw. 6.
Bishop Harley alias Harvey of Hereford.: Edw. 6.
Rochester void.

In the Province of York.

Archbishop Holgate of York: Consecrated. Hen. 8.
Bishop Aldrich of Carlisle.: Hen. 8.
Bishop Bird of Chester.: Hen. 8.
Durham void.

Of these in the Province of Canterbury.

Archbishop Cranmer, Bishop Ridley, Poynot, Scory, Coverdale, Taylor, Harvey alias Harley, Bush, Hooper, Ferrar, and Barlow were removed, A. D. 1554 as Dr. Burnet relates:
Burn. Hist. part. 2. pag. 276.
Bishop Goodrick died about that Time, and all the rest that complied, except Bishop Thirlby and Bishop Kitchin, either before or about the Time of Queen Mary's Death. And it does not appear, they were at all Active in turning our their Brethren.

In the Province of York.

Archbishop Holgate, Bishop Bird, turned out.

[Page 13]In the Province of Canterbury (Rochester being void, and Worcester and Glocester united) there could be but Twenty in all, and we find here Eleven, i. e. the Archbishop, and Major Part of the Bishops unjustly and uncanonically turned out.

In the Province of York, Durham was void, so Archbishop Holgate, and Bishop Bird were the Major Part, unjustly turned out.

Now let me take up our Author's Argument. Whosoever possess the Sees and Offices of Lawful Bishops (those Lawful Bishops yet living) or unite themselves to such as possess them, are such Schismatical Pastors.

This is our Author's Major Proposition; to which I add this Minor. But the Popish Bishops that were set aside in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, did possess the Places of Lawful Bishops yet living, or united themselves to such as did possess them, therefore they were Schismatical, and no Lawful Bishops of the Church of England: For as soon as these Lawful Bishops were turned out, others were put into their Places, and not only so, but contrary to all Rule and ordorly Government in the Church. For, the most certain Fundamental Constitution of the Church in all Ages; and the constant Order of all Societies (which is always tacitly supposed, tho' not formally observed) is, that while particular Churches keep to the Faith and Unity of the Catholick Church, as ours had done, all things ought to be managed by the Archbishop and Bishops of the Province, and so by the Chief Governors and main Body of the Society, or else things cannot be Regularly done; Vid. Pet. de Marca. de Concord. Sacerdotii & Imper. lib. 8. & alibi. Jo. Launoi. Ep. Hen. Gondrino sen. Arch. T. 8. Out of Archbishop Parker. but here the Archbishop and the Major Part of the Bishops are set aside, and others put into their Places while they were yet alive, and Dr. Burnet adds that of the inferiour Clergy, who were Sixteen Thousand, Twelve Thousand were likewise turned out, so there could be nothing Regularly done by the Convocation, either in [Page 14] the Upper or Lower House. And further, they were not content with the present Possession, but secretly said in their Minds, These are the Heirs come let us kill them, and their Inheritance shall be ours; therefore, after they had bereaved them of their Bishopricks and their Livings, they quickly took away many of their Lives. And are not all these Men Schismaticks with a Witness, and all those that were Ordained by them into other Mens Places and Government? It matters not to our business to pursue all the Successions and Changes in Queen Mary's Days, I will rather proceed to consider the State of the Bishopricks after Queen Mary's Death, when Queen Elizabeth restored the Church to that Regular Constitution which was settled before, by the undoubted Lawful Archbishops and Bishops in King Edward's Days.

Bishopricks void by Death.

Archbishop Poole of Canterbury.
Bishop King of Oxford.
Bishop Capon of Salisbury.
Bishop Parfew of Hereford.
Bishop Holyman of Bristol.
Bishop Glin of Bangor.
Bishop Brookes of Glocester.
Bishop [...]
Norwich void.
Rochester void.

Bishops in Possession of the other Bishopricks but uncanonically for the Reasons above named.

Bishop Bonner of London.
Bishop Thirlby of Ely.
Bishop White of Winchester.
Bishop Watson of Lincoln.
Bishop Pool of Peterburgh.
[Page 15]Bishop Bourne of Bath and Wells.
Bishop Turbervill of Exeter.
Bishop Bayne of Lichfield and Coventry.
Bishop Christophorson of Chichester.
Bishop Pates of Wonchester.
Bishop Goldwell of St. Asaph.
Bishop Kitchin of Landaffe. Who conformed.

In the Province of York.

Archbishop Heath of York.
Bishop Tunstall of Durham.
Bishop Scot of Chester.
Bishop Oglethorp of Carlisle.

'Tis confessed that 14 or 15 were turned out or went away in Queen Elizabeth's Days, but according to our Author's own Argument, they were Schismaticks and no Lawful Bishops, because they came into the Places of Lawful Bishops while they were alive, or else were ordained by and communicated with such Schismaticks. I add, they usurped their Places by turning out the Metropolitans and Major Part of the Bishops of each Province, and so could have no Lawful Authority or Jurisdiction. Queen Elizabeth therefore set them aside, and so removed this Violence and Usurpation. And being willing to restore all things as they were settled in King Edward's Reign, she calls back the Bishops that were still alive, which were only Five in number. Bishop Barlow, Scory, Coverdale, Kitchin, and Thirlby. And all but Thirlby concurred in settling the Reformation; so we had still the Major Part of the Lawful Bishops to renew the Succession, and they did Ordain Archbishop Parker and others, and it has been Regularly continued ever since. Thus the Authority of our present Bishops as to Order and Jurisdiction is beyond dispute.

One Objection was insisted upon by Queen Mary and others, to justify the Deprivation of the Protestant Bishops, [Page 16] and others of the Clergy, because some of them were married Men, and perhaps they married after Orders, which was threatned with Deposition by many ancient Canons.

To which I Answer, that living in a Married Estate is not by Divine Authority inconsistent with the Exercise of the Priesthood, but was always allowed in the Church, and ever practised in the Greek Church till this Day, and has been oftentimes dispensed withal in the Roman Church for secular Ends. So that the allowing Marriage before or after Orders, is a Circumstance that depends upon the Discretion of the Church; and if for some Reasons Clergy-men were heretofore prohibited to marry after Orders, yet in this long Interval of General Councils, upon the great Experience of the Mischiefs and Inconveniences that came by forbidding it, particular Churches may dispense with that Rigour; accordingly this Provincial and National Church, and the Law of the Land, which had much better Authority than the Pope, had left every body to their Liberty to marry or not to marry, as they saw good, and so they that did marry offended against no Law of God and Man, and therefore were unjustly Deposed from their Bishopricks upon that Account.

But then our Author says, that they in Queen Mary's Days were Lawful Bishops, and he proves it from the Confession of Protestants, who grant that the Church of Rome, and all those of her Communion are true Churches of Christ.

Now as to the first Part of the Argument, I Answer, In time of great Schism and tumultuous Proceedings, there may be so far the Remains of a true Church, that many Pious Christians, who are not at all, or else ignorantly ingaged in the Schism, may be saved; but we have no Reason to say that the Popish Bishops in Queen Mary's Days were Lawful Bishops, or the governing [Page 17] Part were then the National Church of England; the true Right and Authority of the Church was in those Lawful Bishops that were made in King Edward's Days, and that was the true Church of England which did adhere to them and their Constitutions.

But then the Author does Object, that Protestants do grant that the Church of Rome and all those of her Communion, are true Churches of Christ.

Never was People's Charity more abused than ours of the Church of England has been in this kind, to justify the Errors and Schism of the Church of Rome, and all upon a mere and generally wilful Mistake. In short therefore 'tis true, and we do acknowledge, that the Substance of the Christian Religion is professed by the Church of Rome, tho' mingled with Errors. And so many that honestly and sincerely serve God in her Communion, may be saved; but yet many may be damned for too pertinaciously maintaining and propagating the Errors of the Church of Rome, especially those that desert and refuse Obedience to the Bishops of the Church of England, setting up Altar against Altar, and so keeping up a Schism amongst us, where they have such plentiful Means of being better informed, and all the Opportunities of serving God, according to the highest Perfection of the Apostolick and Primitive Church.

Come we now to the second Part of the Argument; where the Author goes to prove, that the Popish Bishops did nothing whereby they became unlawful Bishops, for if they did, it ought to be supposed it was that, for which they were deprived, and then he says, all the Reasons for which they were deprived, were resisting the pretended Reformation, and refusing the Oath of Supremacy; and that was but proceeding in Practice according to the common Tenets, the holding whereof made them not unlawful Bishops. Again, whilst they were lawful Bishops in Queen Mary's Days, they held [Page 18] it a common necessary Point of Religion to resist the Reformation, and refuse the Oath of Supremacy.

In answer to all which I say, That according to the Author's own Argument, they were no lawful Bishops, because they either did Schismatically invade the Places of the lawful Bishops, or else were willingly Consecrated, and did joyn in Communion with those Schismatical Bishops. When the Queen therefore did set them aside, she did but dispossess Men who had no just Right, and remove those by her Civil Authority, who had no Power, but what they had from Force and the secular Constitution.

But perhaps it may be objected, that though their Title were at first defective, and they did Schismatically usurp those Bishopricks, yet when their Predecessors were dead, that Defect might be overlook'd, and by the Reception of the Kingdom, their Title might be made good, and they very well confirmed in their Possession. It would have, I confess, been happy, if there had been such a Catholick Disposition in those Bishops, that they would have willingly repented and forsaken their former Errors, that so the Kingdom might have confirmed their Authority by the Universal Reception. But there were many Reasons why they did refuse, and could not own and receive them as lawful Catholick Bishops.

1. Many of them had been guilty of shedding much Innocent Blood,
Exod. 21. 14.
and the rest had been consecrated and joyned in Communion with them, and so in some measure were Partakers of their Guilt;
1 Chron. 22. 8.
and it was not fit such polluted Hands, should be permitted to Minister at God's Holy Altar. For though there was a Law brought in by the Corruption of later Times, whereby Hereticks might be put to Death, yet it was a great Abuse of that Law, to condemn their Spiritual Fathers and better Catholicks than themselves, for Hereticks:
Dist. 50. c. 8. siquis viduam, &c. decret. lib. 5. de homicid. Voluntar.
It being contrary to the Divine and Canon Law, that such Men should [Page 19] be allowed to exercise the Episcopal Function, the Kingdom had great Reason to set them aside.
2. It is a known Doctrine in the Canon Law and Roman Schools, and a frequent Practice of Roman Catholicks to depose Princes and absolve their Subjects from their Allegiance,
15. Q. 6. c. 3, 4. 5. Decret. lib. 5. de Haeret. c. 13. sext. Decret. lib. 2. Tit. 14. c. 2. ad Apostolicam Tit. Papa Imperatorem deponere porest. Thomas. 2. 2dae q. 12. Art. 2.
and endeavour to exterminate those they call Hereticks, under which Pretence many Princes have been destroyed, many Rebellions and Tumults have been fomented, much Innocent Blood has been spilt, and Christendom has been a miserable Theatre of War and Confusion. These Bishops therefore who formerly had consented to most Parts of the Reformation, now growing such Zealots all of a sudden, and refusing to Crown the Queen, and to give the Kingdom Security of their peaceable Conformity to the Government,
See Acts & Mon. vol. 2. p. 337. &c. Tortur. Tort. p. 150. nihil ab iit quesitum ut facerent quam quid his jam anto fecerant sub. Hen. scit. 8. & Ed. 6. Heathus, Bonnerus. Tonstallus, Thurlbeius tum Episcopl; Baynus, Burnus, reliqui, nondum Episcopi—aliis quoque ut praestarent Authores fuere etiam idorum quidam libris scriptis defenderent quid hic iniqui si de eodem iterum compellentur.
by taking the Oath which they had formerly taken, and had nothing to except against, gave just Reason to suspect they were guilty of the Heretical Doctrine of deposing Princes, and stirring up Rebellion, to exterminate the Nobility and Gentry that would not Comply with them. And these are sufficient Reasons, why they could not allow them to have Care of the People's Souls, which might have been to the utter Destruction of the Queen and Kingdom. For 'tis notorious there were many Attempts made, and by some of them to that purpose, and the Pope some Years after did actually Excommunicate and Depose the Queen, and charge all Men under an Anathema to withdraw from her Obedience and Communion, and that was the Foundation of the present Schism of English Papists, and many Rebellions and Treasons amongst us.
3. If there had been none of these Exceptions against the Persons of these Bishops, yet the Publick Service which they did impose, will justify all Men before God and the Catholick Church, for not joyning in Communion with them. Because
- 1. All People were in common Account obliged to [Page 20] Worship that which is in the Priest's Hand,
  Vid. Bull Pii 5. apud Cambd. p. 179. Tortur.Tort. p. 148. audet Apologia Author asserere neminem [Pontificiorum] Religionis causa in judicium vocasse [Reginam scil.] neminem ad supplicium condemnasse quamdiu scili cet rem religionisagerent, nec cum religione Rebellionis semina permiscerent, neque priusquam Pius Papa per Bullas suas hic in Angliam, per copias vero & cohortes suas ibi etiam in Hiberniam impetum & impressionem fecisset. hic plumbo ibi ferro, in Anglia clavibus in Hibernia gladiis rem gessisset. Conf. Aug. c. 10. Chem. exam. Ger. de coena Dom. Cal. l. 4. instit. c. 17. §. 19. John 6. 53. Card. Bona Rer. Lit. l. 2. c. 18. semper & ubi (que) ab Ecclesiae primordiis usque adseculum XII subspeciepanis & vini, &c.
  and in the Pix, with Divine Honour, as God himself, when we have Reason, Scripture, and the Authority of Catholick Tradition to perswade us to believe it to be Bread and Wine, and therefore they could not Worship it without the guilt of Idolatry, while they were of that mind. For though it be the general Belief of most Christians Ancient and Modern, that the Body and Blood of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper, yet there is no Reason to believe the Body of Christ is in the Hand of the Priest, or in the Pix; for our Saviour says only take eat this my Body, and many Churches and Divines say 'tis the Body of Christ vescentibus & sumentibus. But none but the Church of Rome does teach it is upon the Altar, and in the Hand of the Priest, and that what is there is to be adored.
- 2. Our Saviour says, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood ye have no life in you. And the Church of God did partake of the Holy Communion in both Kinds for above twelve hundred Years together, and all other Churches, but the Roman, do receive it in both Kinds at this time. The Niceties therefore of the Council of Trent, and the Roman Schools cannot justify our Disobedience to the Command of Christ, and the constant Tradition of the Catholick Church.
- 3. They would allow no other Publick Service but in Latin, which People generally did not, nor never were likely to understand. Contrary to the plain Word of God, 1 Cor. 14.
  
  These were sufficient Reasons to omit many others, why the Queen and Kingdom should refuse to receive and to confirm those Popish Bishops; and consequently the Schism that was made was wholly at their Door. And the Protestants in joyning with the Reformed Bishops, [Page 21] did nothing but that they had warrant to do from the Word of God, and the Catholick Church, and all other Churches ought to endeavour in a Christian and Peaceable manner, to reform these and other Abuses as we have done.

The third Argument.

THat Archbishop Parker, and all his Associates, and consequently all who adhered to him, or adhere to their Successors, were and are Schismaticks, separate from the whole true visible Church of Christ, because they were consecrated by Barlow, who was intruded into the Place of Christophorson Bishop of Chichester. Scory was put by King Edward 6th into Day's Place, then being Bishop of Chichester. Coverdale into Vesey's Place, Hodgkins was only a Suffragan, but communicated with these three in the Consecration, and therefore became a Schismatick.

As our Author does only in this Argument vary in Form and Circumstance from his former Arguments, so I must apply the same Answer for Substance to his Assertions. Coll. of Record. part 2. p. 155. This is our express Pleasure's—where there is a full consent of others the Bishops and Learned Men in a truth, not to suffer you, or a few others with wilful headiness to disswade all the rest. Day and Veysey were justly set aside in King Edward's Days, for not consenting to the Decree of the major part of the Bishops, as appears by the Protector's Letter to Bishop Gardner in Dr. Burnet's Collection; and Bishop Scory and Coverdale were by the consent of the Archbishop and Bishops Regularly settled in their Places, in peaceable Times wherein no Cruelties were exercised, no Man was put to Death for his Religion, and only that Discipline was used, to turn out those that would not quietly submit to the Determinations of the major part of the Bishops of the Province; and as for Bishop Barlow, he was Consecrated a Bishop of this Church near 'twenty Years before, in King Henry the Eighth's Days, and so was Bishop Hodgkins Suffragan at Bedford. So that we have the Four Consecrators of [Page 22] Archbishop Parker duly consecrated in quiet Times, by the Archbishop and Bishops of the Province, and therefore endued with the undoubted Power both of Order and Jurisdiction beyond all Dispute. Therefore unless any can shew a better Title, not only the Power of Order which they did Confer, but of Jurisdiction also, must be unquestionable, and consequently the whole Succession of English Bishops ever since, is exactly Regular and Canonical. About the beginning of the Queen's Reign Bishop Jewel's Defence of the Apol. 2. part. Ed. 1567. p. 130. Our Bishops are made in Form and Order as they have been ever by free Election of the Chapter, by Consecration of the Archbishop and other three Bishops.—p. 131. To be short, We succeed the Bishops that have been before our days. We are Elected, Consecrated, Confirmed, as they were. The only Pretenders to a better Title, were those fourteen Popish Bishops set aside by Queen Elizabeth: But these four Mens Title is more Firm and Ancient than theirs, for the Popish Bishops were either such as were legally Deposed; and thrust themselves afterwards in the Places of the Lawful Bishops, and then put many of them to Death, or all else but Bishop Thirlby, were ordained by, or communicated with them during their Schism and Usurpation, and therefore, neither the Ordainers nor Ordained had any Right or Jurisdiction in the Church of England; so that Bishop Barlow, Bishop Scory, Bishop Coverdale, being undoubted Regular Bishops of the Church of England at King Edward's Death, and all that was done in Queen Mary's Days being acted by Bishops that had no Lawful Jurisdiction, the Regular Authority of Ordaining and Conferring Jurisdiction, as well as Order, was devolved to them, and they might take Bishop Hodgkins into their Assistance to add the greater Solemnity to their Ordination, so that those Fourteen, were so far from being Regular Bishops of the Church of England, that they will not be able to clear themselves of Schism, Murder, and the damnable Heresy of the Deposing Doctrine. 'Tis very unreasonable therefore that the Bishops of the Church of England should be charged with Schism, That they concurred in Consecrating Archbishop Parker, &c. See Mr. Mason de Minister. Angl. p. 353. out of the Regist. Cambd. Eliz. p. 38. Bishop Godwin de presulib. Angl. in Vita Parkeri. Archbishop Bramhall. The Consecration and Succession of the Protestant Bishops justified, and many others. for declining their Authority, so long as they have a Regular Succession, from [Page 23] the undoubted Lawful Bishops, who were free from any such foul Guilt or Suspicion, Cambd. Elix. p. 36. and the Clergy were so well satisfied with their Authority, that of 9400, above 9200 did really submit to it, and heartily embrace the Reformation; and the Queen, Nobility, Gentry, and the whole Kingdom, as I said before, did willingly and joyfully adhere to their Communion, and for ten or eleven Years lived in Peace and Unity; till the Pope by his Bull of Excommunication and Deposition made a Disturbance. See Cambd. Elix. p. 179.

The fourth Argument.

WHosoever Subject themselves unto these as their Lawful Pastors, who have no Jurisdiction over them, are Schismaticks. But English Protestants ever since Queen Elizabeth's Time, have Subjected themselves to these as their Lawful Pastors, who have no Jurisdiction over them? Therefore, &c. are Schismaticks.

The second Proposition he proves, because we had no Regular Succession at home, nor derived none from abroad, and could have none from Rome, Constantinople, or any other Church.

But all this is founded upon a false and groundless Supposition. Whereas we had Four True, Lawful, Regular Bishops with full Power of Order and Jurisdiction, from whom we derive our Succession (and might have had many more, had not they unjustly put them to Death) and so needed not any Assistance from Rome or Constantinople, or any Place else.

And as for the Coustitution of our Church, it is established by Divine Right, committed to us by Succession from Christ and his Apostles, and we Act by the Power we received from the Holy Ghost, Acts 20. for the Pastoral Charge, the Care of Souls, the Right and Power of Baptizing and Consecrating the Eucharist, the Power of binding and loosing, the Power of Ordination, &c. are [Page 24] all Spiritual Offices received from God. Neither do we derive them from any secular Magistrates; Artic of the Church of Engl. 37. but from the Bishops of the Province The Book of Ordination, receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Bishop in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our hands. Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn. & Trall. Tertull. de Bapt. c. 17. according to the constant Tradition of the Church, which St. Cyprian Cypr. Ep. 68. says, did descend down from Divine Tradition and Apostolical Observation, and the Council of Nice, and other General Councils Approve and Confirm the same: And as for many of the Formalities that are used in the first Nomination, Election, and Confirmation of Bishops, they were not observed by Christ and his Apostles, nor commanded by the Church, and so are accidental Ceremonies Appointed by the State to testify their good liking of the Person, that as the Church doth think him well qualify'd and fit to be Preferred to such a Sacred Office, so the State is well satisfied, that he is a Man that will be Useful and Faithful to the Temporal Government; which is agreeable to the Apostles Direction, 1 Tim. 3. 7. that he should have a good report of them that are without. But still that which is Essential, and the Authority and Power to execute the Sacred Office of a Bishop or Priest in their respective Charges, is derived from the Bishops of the Province; and after great Violence and Disorder, from as many, or the major part of them which survive. And this Method is established and allowed by the Catholick Church, as long as Provincial and National Churches keep to her Faith and Unity, as Ours has done. So that every Bishop and Priest orderly constituted in his Place, does act by the Power and Appointment of the Catholick Church, and they contemn the Catholick Church, that desert and disturb them in the Performance of their Office. Hence we may understand our Saviour's meaning, Matt. 18. 17. when he says, if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an heathen man, and a publican. Which in the first Place, does require us to hear our own particular Parish Priest and Bishop, while they are Constituted, and live in the Unity of the Church, but principally [Page 25] if does oblige us to hearken to the Catholick Church. So that if our own Pastors turn Hereticks, or set themselves up by undue means, and not according to the Order of the Church, they are not to be hearkned to, but we must according to our Saviour's Command here the Church, and not those Pastors that will not themselves hear and obey the Church, as the Pope and his Adherents in England do not.

So that though Archbishop Parker and others, Can. Apost. 1. Concil. Nicen. Can. 4. were Ordained but by Four Bishops (which is more then the Canons do require to be present) yet it was according to the Constitution and Order of the Catholick Church, and so all Catholick Bishops must allow and approve of what was done: And they and their Successors are established by Christ, according to that Command and Authority which he gave to his Apostles, Matt. 28. 19. 20. to whom, as he gave Authority over the whole World, so he hath promised to be with them and their Successors to the end of the World.

And none have better asserted and maintained the Divine and Apostolical Right of Episcopal Government, as well against the Pope and Jesuits, See what opposition was made by the Pope and Jesuits to the Divine Right of Episcopacy in the Council of Trent, in the Hist. of Father Paul & Card. Pallavicini: as the Presbyterians and Erastians, than the Bishops Bp. Andrews, Bp. Bilson, Bp. Dounham, Bp. Hall, Bp. Taylor, Dr. Hammond, Dr. Heylin, &c. and Divines of the Church of England. Our Author therefore does take wrong Measures, and seems not to be acquainted with the State of our Affairs, when he does Object to us, the deriving our Spiritual Authority from secular Magistrates: For no Church in the World hath more heartily defended the Episcopal Primitive Church Government, in Opposition to the Pope Petrus de Marca. de concordia Regni & Sacerdotii lib. 3. c. 5. n. 1. Antiquo juri universalis Ecclesiae assensu roborato successit jus novum quod anno Domini 836. publicari cepit adnitente Nicolao primo & allis Pontificibus, &c. Voell. in Praefat. ad Codic. Can, justell. pag. 1. jus novum veteri successit circa annum Christi 836 & paulatim invaluit in occidente, &c. This New Law was the Pope's usurping the Power of Choosing and Confirming of Bishops and receiving the last Appeals from all Churches, which before did belong to the Archbishops and Bishops of the Province, as the General Councils do shew, & de Mayca, and others, have learnedly, proved, and so acknowledge that Usurpation which we charge upon the Pope. and other Innovators, than ours has done.

[Page 26]And now we have been Governed by many Successions of Archbishops and Bishops, according to that Divine Tradition and Apostolical Observation; and are at this Day settled under the Conduct of as Learned, and Pious Bishops and Clergy, as perhaps ever has been in any Age, since the first Founding of the Christian Church, and heartily United in the Profession of, and Conformity to, the truly Ancient, Catholick, and Apostolick Faith and Discipline, See our Articles, Liturgy, and Canons; besides, We retain great part of the Ancient Canon Law, though We reject the jus novum, brought in by the Pope 836 Years after Christ. which is Established in the Church of England, in Provincial and National Synods, and likewise by the Law of the Land, neither are there any that pretend any Succession derived down in Opposition to ours, much less a Regular and Orderly Jurisdiction over us; and if the Popish Bishops in the beginning had a pretended Claim, yet they being all long since Dead, and none continued to succeed in their Places, all Pretence is now wholly out of Doors, and the Present Bishops are guilty of no Schism, their Order is undoubted, and their Succession uninterrupted, and so their Title and Authority is as firm and unquestionable as any upon Earth; and they must be Schismaticks before God and the Catholick Church, that do not submit to them, and joyn in their Communion in all Lawful Things, as the Service of our Church is in all its Offices and Administrations beyond Dispute; and to joyn in them is all that is required of any Lay-person to be a Member of our Communion.

And now I have vindicated the justness of the Authority of the Church of England, let us consider with what a different Spirit and Temper the Reformers did proceed, from that of the Papists; on the side of the Reformers nothing but Love, See B. Andrews Tortur. Tort. from p. 144. to 152. largely shewing the Treasons and Cruelties of the Papists, and the Mercy and the Clemency of the Reformers, besides what does appear in Acts and Monuments, and other Histories of those times. Kindness and Charity; on the Part of the Papists, nothing but Cruelty, Murder, and Destruction. For they did not only uncanonically Depose [Page 27] their Spiritual Fathers, the Lawful. Bishops in Queen Maries Days, but Archbishop Cranmer of Canterbury, Bishop Ridley of London, Bishop Latimer, Bishop Hooper, and Bishop Ferrar, were burnt to Death, with many other Priests and Lay-persons, and others were forced to fly their Country to avoid the like Destruction.

Now come we to consider how these Bishops that had been the cause of all this Cruelty, and Bloodshed in Queen Maries Days, and were wrongfully thrust into the Places of the True and Lawful Bishops whom they Murthered, or forced to fly their Country, were treated themselves by the Reformed Bishops when the Tide was turned another way, as it was in the Days of Queen Elizabeth. And one would think, that the Nation being thus exasperated against them, by the cruel Usage they shewed to others, they would meditate the like Revenge, aud retaliate upon them with the like Severity, but it is quite contrary to the meek Spirit of Orthodox Christians, thus to imbrue their Hands in Blood upon the Account of Religion, or to seek to Revenge themselves in the like manner. They committed their cause to God, in whom they did put their trust, and left it to him to plead it with their Adversaries. But they themselves did render nothing but Good for Evil, Mercy for Cruelty: And though they did remove the Bishops from those Sees to which they had no just Title, because they were Men of Blood, and would not conform to the Publick Order settled in King Edward's Days, and give such Security to pay due Allegiance to her Majesty, as in justice they ought to have done, Bp. Andrews Tortur. Torti pag. 146. yet they were treated with all Civility. Archbishop Heath was suffered to abide in one of his own purchased Houses, never restrained to any Place, and died in great Favour with the Queen, who bestowed many Gracious Visits on him during his Retirement. Tunstall Bishop of Durham spent the remainder of his time with Archbishop [Page 28] Parker, by whom he was kindly entertained and honorably Buried; Cambr. Eliz. p. 28. adeo indignati sunt Lincolnsensis & Wintoniensis [Watsonus & Whitus] ut Regina & [...]iljus ab Ecclesiae Romana defectionis Authoris excommunicationis censura feriendos censuerunt qui ab hanc causam incarcerati. Prudentiores à. Pontifici Romano hanc potius committendam esse statuerunt. Acts & Mon. vol. 3. p. 988. the like Civility was shewed to Thirlby Bishop of Ely in the same House, and to Bourn Bishop of Wells by the Dean of Exon, in which two Houses they Died about ten or eleven Years after. White Bishop of Winchester, though at first imprisoned for his Insolencies, after some time was suffered to enjoy his Liberty, and to Retire himself to what Friend he pleased. The like Favour was shewed to Turbervile Bishop of Exeter, who being a Gentleman by Birth of an Ancient Family, could not want Friends to give him Entertainment. Watson Bishop of Lincoln having endured a short Restraint, spent the remainder of his Time with the Bishops of Ely and Rochester, till being found practising against the State, he was finally shut up in Wisbich Castle, where at last he Died. Oglethorp, Bishop of Carlisle Died soon after his Deprivation, of an Apoplexy. Bayne Bishop of Lichfield of the Stone; and Morgan Bishop of St. Davids of some other Disease the December following his Deprivation, but all of them in their Beds and at perfect Liberty. The rest disposed of themselves as they pleased, but no Restraint was laid upon them, and were perfectly out of all Fear or Danger of hard Usage, so far were the Reformers from putting them to Death upon the Account of Religion. Only Bishop Bonner was kept in the Tower for his own Security, to preserve him from the Outrage of the Multitude, which he had highly exasperated against him by his former Cruelties; But so gentle was his Usage, and so answerable in all Respects to his Character; that one would have look'd on it rather as a chosen Retirement, than a Restraint.

This clear Account being given of the Lawful Authority, and undoubted Succession of the Bishops in Queen Elizabeth's Days, by whom the Reformation was continued, which was happily begun in King Edward the sixth's Reign; come we now to consider the state of the [Page 29] inferior Clergy at that Change, as we have set it down by Mr. Cambden, Camb. Eliz. p. 36. who wrote the Annals of those Times. The Account that he gives us is this, that the Number of Ecclesiastical Promotions was 9400, of all which, only 80 Rectors of Churches, 50 Prebendaries, 15 Presidents of Colleges, 12 Archdeacons, 12 Deans, and six Abbots were turned out, in all 175, most, if not all of them very likely put in unjustly in Queen Maries Days, or else chosen out particularly for their known Obstinacy and Humour, in contending for the Errors of the Church of Rome. And yet what a poor handful they were to the rest, which were above 9200, who did Return to Lawful Settlement of the Church in King Edward's Days, and the true Canonical Bishops then remaining, who concurred in Ordaining Archbishop Parker and other Bishops, restoring and setling the Reformation.

God Almighty in his due Time, put an end to all those immoderate Heats and Contentions; and inspire Papists and other Dissenters with that Charitable and Peaceable Temper, which always eminently appeared in the true Catholicks of the Church of England: And let all those that heartily desire the Advancement of Religion, and the Salvation of Mankind, consider, that the way to promote the Glory of God, and the Peace and Unity of the Church, is not to carry on secular Designs, to impose the private Opinions of the Council of Trent and Roman Schools, nor yet the Fanatical Devices of some Modern Reformers, but by maintaining the truly Ancient and Apostolick Faith, Devotion and Discipline, delivered and recommended to us by the Word of God, and Example and Authority of the Primitive and Catholick Church, which is, and can be observed no where in greater Perfection, than in the Church of England, as is Established by Law.

THE END.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.