To The Editor Of The Time...
The Times, 1824-12-04T00:00:00

Sir,_Aiq a regularly ordained 'dinisterofthc BssablisbedVhuch I feel it incumbent upon -ttieo assert the validityof theorders which, in co immon with ni brethren of the clergv, I have received from episcopal hatds, in reply Io" A Catholic," whose letter appearnedir your paper for Nov. 25. That-individual has revived aua old and o, -refuted charge_.namely, " Thiat certain persons appointed id episcopal sees in the time of Queen Elizabeth, not being able to pro- cure any one oF the Roeman Catholic Bishops,who were then deprsved of their sees, to -assist in ordaining them, metat the Nag'shead Tavern, in Gracechurch-street, -nd pretended to consecrate- one another, by laying the Bible on each otler's head." The wholeof this" Nni's-heatd fable," as it hms been appropriately called, is thoroughly examined and reftited in a work publisbed by Thr-_:sn Browne, B. D., lbrmerly Fellow or St. John's' College, C-ambridge- to which I tefer your renders who wish to examine the stbject tG the bottoi,. To those whose leisure may not suffice for such an ex- amination, it may be satistactory to state, thatthelearned azzd pious ' persoes appointed to episcopal sces in the time of Queen Eliza. beth," did receive dte episcopal ordination. .satthew Parker, the fr.t of them, Archlbislkop of Canterbury,was ordained or consexarted Bishop and Aletropolitan, by four regularly consecrated bishops-. BarlGw, consecrated Bishop o' St. Asaph , Coverdlde, conu secrat ed Bishop of Exeter; Scory, consecrated Bishop of Rocheter - and Hodgskins, consecrated Bishop Suffsaan of Bedfbru Bishop Barlow was consecrated under ienrv VILI. in 1535, by English Bishopsof the Churchof Rome, whose names are not preeiselyknown Bishop Hodg%kins wgas consecrateel also under Henry VIII. in IS38, by the then Bishops of London,Richester,and St.Asaph,nl oF them,. in the Papal sense, regularly consecrated Bishops. Bishops Cover.. dale and Scory were consecrated under Edward VrI. in 1551 by Arch. bishop Cranmer, of whese consecration there is no dispute; by Bishop, I Ridley, consecrated by Cranmer and two other Bishops in 1547; and by Bishop Hodgskins before mentioned. It appears, then, that.2l1 the consecrasnrs of-Arclibishop Parkcer had been themselves ordained or conssc~ratt.d Bishiops, eithe-r by Popish Bishops, or by BJishops conscerated by Popis e Bishops. Of the validitv, tberefore, of ais epibcopal ordana';ion there can he no reasonable doubt- and thiu being proved, the validity of the episcopal ordination or consecration of thie other einent iershons appoeinted to episcpal seesh in tp time of Queen Elizabeth" subsequenaly to the appointenstn and conscz'sti;n of their vnetroipolitan, follows of -onrase. The ground less charge of irregular, self-authorized ordination or consecnemdon, brought against these excellent persons,has ardsen from thes,e circum- stances -The four Bishops whio consecrated Archbishop Ilarkerz having returned from exile on the accession of Elizabeth, were no, at the timne of his consecration, in possession of their resnective sees, of which they had bern deprived by Qaeen Mary: but this. cir- cumstance cannot detract from the validity of the Archhishon's ordi- nation, inasmuch as the actual pnssession of a see does n&tsti- tute a Bishop, but episof nal oilination or episcopal handg. Again - Archbistop Parker, ana Iiis colleagues in episcopaty in the timbe of Queen Elizabeth, were ordained or consecrated accord. ing to the form in the ordinal of King Edward VI. This circumstance likewise cannot detract from the validity of their ordination, gince every state hias an inherent right to adopt whatever fobrn of ordain.. tng or consecrating its Bishops, itrmay deem to he most consistent with the written word of Godt ; and, oncemre, the essence of Episco-. pacy, is Episcopal ordination. It is neecdless to attemTpt the refutation of that part of the clsavge ini "the Nag's-head fable," which accuses suchl distinguishred pe'on. ages, and prelates elect, as Parker, Grirdall, Co%, Sanqds, Jerseli, and others, of meeting fotr solemn EpiscoDpal ordination at a ae in Gracechurch-street and more than this, whichi in a barefaced amanner declares thart Queeni Elizabeth approvedi of, and sanctionedl s-uch an ordination. I have no doubt that your usual c-andour 'will give publicity to this plain, and to eyery one who trisites well to o-ur establishment, important refuxtation of a charge whichb affeets the validity of the ordinationi of' every Bishop antI clergymon of our established church ; anid which, if it could be preved to be well forinded, would tinquestionably reduce "the highest minister," or prelate, amongst us, to the sittiatinn of' " --" | ^ e 1e; l 1-a-m, Sir, your veqry obcdjcnt berVantL R.. G. --,uv ,aurcn shouldi b-- alloed nswe th atack f " Caholic:" but lye MeSg no, clos thesnb3ct: nespapr isnot he aenafor this kind of sivhy evoed o tc dscusio ofrelgios qes:o8, whether dye- TO TI M E S EDIToR OF THETE