We have already seen that the royal and sacerdotal vestments are closely related in their origin, and many of them more or less identical both in form and name, and therefore it is not surprising that men should have thought that this must mean that the king was in some way a minister of the Church. For example, a French order describes the Tunic, Dalmatic, and Pallium (Royal Mantle) of a king as ‘celuy qui représente le soubsdiacre, celuy qui représente le diacre, et le manteau royal représentant la chasuble.’ Again an English king is described by a lay witness as being arrayed at the time of his coronation like a bishop vested for Mass. There is certainly a general similarity between the rite of the consecration of a bishop, and the rite of the consecration of a king. It was undoubtedly this similarity that was the chief ground for the doctrine that an anointed king was a ‘mixta persona,’ a view that is still maintained by some. The closeness of the structure of the two rites is seen at a glance. _Consecration of a bishop._ _Consecration of a king._ Oath of canonical Oath to maintain Church obedience. and justice. Litany. Litany. Laying on of hands. Veni Creator. Veni Creator. Collect. Collects. Preface and Consecration Preface and Consecration prayer. prayer. Anointing. Anointing. Delivery of Crozier, Ring, Delivery of Sword, Pallium, Mitre, and Gospel-book. Crown, Ring, Sceptre and Rod. Mass. Mass. It will be seen that the similarity in the structure of the rites is striking, and the closeness in the forms of the two rites is equally noticeable.