Majesty his Heirs and Successors in England and which were granted to them with non-obstante's to all Acts of Parliament B. And the Act 22 o Car. 2. entitled Seditious Conventicles prevented and suppressed passing in the Parliament of England in the same Year that the Act against Conventicles did in Scotland and concluding with a Proviso That nothing therein contained shall extend to invalidate or avoid his Majesties Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs but that his Majesty and his heirs and Successors may from time to time c. exercise and enjoy all Power and Authority in Ecclesiastical Affairs c. any thing in this Act notwithstanding shewed such a Concordant Sympathy between the two Realms in tenderness for the prerogative of dispensing with the Penal Laws Ecclesiastical as is between the Strings of two distant Lutes on the touching the String but of one of them But I must tell you that tho by this Proviso the benefit of the Dispensative Power hath been sufficiently secured to the Churches of Forreigners here and the King 's Ecclesiastical Supremacy justify'd in its power of indulging the Conventicles of all sorts of Recusants yet as in the Scotch Act the Crown 's dispensing with Conventicles hath been more express then in the English Act so hath the administration of Prerogative in that kind been more tenderly and signally exercised in Scotland then I have observ'd it to be in England For I find in a Look call'd A Compendious History of the mâ—…st remarkable Passages of the last 14 Years c. printed An. 1680. that in p. 205. the Author referring to the Month of Iuly 1677. saith that upon a Rebellion in that Kingdom being nipt in the Bud his Majesty was pleas'd to publish a Proclamation Commanding the Iudges and all Magistrates to apprehend and punish all such as frequented any Field-Conventicles c. according to the Prescript of the Law as also to prosecute with all Legal Rigour the execrable Murtherers of the late Arch-Bishop of St. Andrews declaring withal that his Majesty being desirous to reclaim all such as had been mis-lead through Ignorance or blind zeal had according to the Power reserved to his Majesty by the 5th Act in the 2d Session of the 2d Parliament suspended the execution of all Laws and Acts against such as frequent house-Conventicles on the south-side of the River Tay excepting the Town of Edenburgh and two Miles round the same c. And the truth is it must likewise be to the honour of that Nation acknowledged that in the worst of Times they after their Covenant did not Contract any such guilt of Perjury by a superfetation of enterfering Oaths as great Numbers of our Land did and that they were exemplary to England in Loyalty and in propping up the hereditary Monarchy while so many here in the Plott-Conjuncture were infatuated with the Project of the EXCLUSION as to give me occasion by a fresher instance and but of yesterdays occurrence to invite you to behold a Spectacle of the divine Iustice in abandoning such Men here to the guilt of Superstition who used unjust means to extirpate it Such among us who had not took notice of that English and Scotch SAINTE LIGUE and its being so generally exploded and who in the late Ferment about Popery would have fortify'd an Exclusion with an Association and again set up Association as of Divine-Off-spring you see how being wild with excessive Fears and Iealousies of the growth of Popery they were guilty of the Superstition of founding Dominion in Grace A. Considering how Men here have laughed at the Obligation of their lawful Oaths and that for unlawful Oaths a Land mourns methinks 't is an adventurous thing for a Prince to take possession of his Inheritance of the Empire of such a Land so encumbred with the guilt of Swearing and Forswearing O when may we see that antient general tenderness in point of Oaths here that flourished among us in the days of our first Reformation nay even in some times of our Roman Catholick Ancestors B. I believe never till after all the living here being resolved to dust and a new Race of Mankind enriching themselves and their Country by the Culture of the Earth and Manufactures men shall be above Temptations from necessity to take God's Name in vain and when the very use of Oaths Assertory or Promissory will be dispens'd with by Nature I am sure the Spectacle of mangled and slaughter'd Bodies covering a Field immediately after a Battle hath not more horror in it then the sight of the Consciences mai'md and wounded by the inobservance of publick Oaths hath been since the Aera of 41. And as our Chronicles mention that they who were born in England the Year after the great Mortality An. 1349. wanted some of their cheek Teeth I may say that generally they who have been born here the Years after 41. wherein the Plague of Perjury by the outraging those Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy was so epidemical have seem'd able only to swallow those Oaths but not to â—…hew upon them in serious and considerate thoughts no not at the very frequent times of their taking them And still tho in speculative Points in England Consulitur de Religione yet conclamatum est as to a general tender regard to the Religion of those Oaths There was I think a want of tenderness in some as to their sworn assisting and defending all the Priviledges and Preheminences belonging to the Crown during the late Ferment about my Lord Danby's Pardon and I may more sadly reflect on the same Mens want of recollecting their Oath obliging them to the King his Heirs and Successors at the time of the Ferment about the Exclusion A. I think that many who by repentance have been cured of the Epidemical Plague of Perjury that reged here in 41. and of such a Plague and another of Fears and Iealousies since 81 have yet sustain'd more damage thereby then they who were born the Year after 1349 did in wanting some of their Cheek Teeth and that their case is like that of those who were recover'd of the great Plague at Athens that Thucydides hath described and who tells us that after their recovery their Souls had lost the faculty of Memory and were dozed with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about what themselves had done or what had passed in the World during the horror of that very Plague or before or since But after all this said I am to ask you if you will make all those perjured who having took the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy promoted the exclusion B. By no means I have more Humanity and Christian Charity then to do so I shall here observe to you that Divines in their measures of Mens sinful Actions do often make use of the distinction of materialiter and formaliter Thus for example Ames in his Cases of Conscience l. 5. c. 53. Si quis falsum dicit putans esse verum mentitur tantum
commonly call'd Ecclesiastical Court c. as by the said Councils and Constitutions Provincial appeareth which standing and remaining in their effect not abolish'd by your Grace's Laws did sound to appear to make greatly for the said usurp'd Power of the Bishop of Rome and to be directly repugnant to your Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church and Prerogative royal your GRACE being a LAY-MAN and albeit the said Decrees Ordinances and Constitutions by a Statute made in the 25th year of your Reign be utterly abolish'd c. But forasmuch as your Majesty is the only and undoubted Supreme Head of the Church of England and also of Ireland to whom BY HOLY SCRIPTURE all Authority and Power is wholly given to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Uice and Sin whatsoever and TO ALL SUCH PERSONS AS YOUR MAIESTY SHALL APPOINT THEREUNED that in Consideration thereof as well for the Instruction of Ignorant Persons c. and setting forth of your Prerogative Royal and Supremacy It may therefore please your Highness that it may be Ordain'd and Enacted that all and singular Persons as well LAY as those that be now Married or hereafter shall be Married c. which shall be made ordain'd constituted and deputed to be any Chancellor Uicar General c. Scribe or Register by your Majesty or any of your Heirs and Successors or by any Archbishop Bishop c. may lawfully execute and execute all manner of Iurisdiction commonly call'd Ecclesiastical c. Here you see the enacting clause founded on the previous solemn acknowledgment of the King's supremacy and on his having the power given him not by Parliaments or People but by SCRIPTURE to appoint such to be ecclesiastical Judges who were by Custom and by the Laws of Councils and Provincial Synods formerly equivalent to Acts of Parliament incapacitated so to be And from whence it is consequently apparent that no positive humane Laws whatsoever inflictive of Penal incapacity could against the Right inherent in him by the positive Law of God oblige him not to dispense with the others by his supreme Power when he found it necessary so to do For 't is on all hands confessedly true that Parliaments can no more then the Bishop of Rome delete such Power as is given by God to the Princes of the Earth A. But because a Parliament declared that such a supreme Power is given by the Scripture to Princes you know it doth not follow that it is so And moreover you know that was a Popish Parliament that so declared it B. But I likewise know that as 't is in my Lord Chief Iustice Vaughan ' s Reports in Hill and Good ' s Case that if a Marriage be declared by Act of Parliament to be against Gods Law we must admit it to be so for by a Law that is an Act of Parliament it is so declared so that Act of Parliament having declared it that by Holy Scripture all Authority and Power is wholly given to the King and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to hear and determine c. tho such Persons were by a lawful Canon incapacitated so to do a Canon that that Iudge in the words immediately following the other makes to be the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament we must admit such Power and Authority inherent in the King's Supremacy by the Word of God thus to supersede incapacity And whether the incapacitating Canons were lawful ones or no it is not tanti to enquire since as we know a Power inherent in Kings by the Word of God cannot be either by lawful Canon or Act of Parliament taken away and much more ought such Power to be construed and admitted as inherent in him by the Scripture while the Act of Parliament continues in being But I shall yet bring the acknowledgment of your Prince's Supremacy in this point as thus founded on Scripture closâ—…r to your Conscience by letting you see that you have not only the Judgment of a Popish Parliament in the Case but of that very Statute of Queen Elizabeth that enjoyns your Oath of Supremacy for it revives that Statute oâ—… Harry the 8th and all and every branches and Articles in it as you will find it in your Statute-book A. You have mention'd one thing in that Statute of Harry the 8th that doth a little startle me and that is that he and the three Estates apply'd there the design of keeping up those Canons of Councils and provincial Constitutions that incapacitated LAYMEN as level'd at the exclusion of the King himself not only from his Prerogative but from being in a capacity to exercise ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as supreme head of the Church as I find by those remarkable words YOUR GRACE BEING A LAY-MAN B. You do well to take notice of that and are therefore not to wonder at it if you should hear your Prince who was a Dissenter to the Church of England and others concern'd for him to have apprehensions of what prejudice might be meant him by some subtle Projectors of Laws to incapacitate all Papists and Presbyterians from acting in any Office in Church or State however many loyal Persons might be far from intending such prejudice thereby his Grace being a Papist or Presbyterian A. I must confess that if the Kings Power of commanding the Services of all his Subjects be inherent in him by the Word of God and as such declared by Parliament any Mens endeavours to take away that Power may well be imputed to great incogitancy B. You say right and I was hence induced to wonder that after the Act and Acknowledgment of his Majesty's Prerogative in the Choice of his Officers of State-Councellors and Iudges had thus passed in the first Parliament of Scotland in the late King's reign viz. The Estates of Parliament considering the great Obligations that lie upon them from the Law of God the Law of Nations the Municipal Laws of the Land and their Oathes of Allegiance to maintain and defend the Soveraign Power and Authority of the King's Majesty and the sad Consequences that do accompany an encrochment upon or diminution thereof do therefore from their sense of humble duty declare that it is an inherent privilege of the Crown and an undoubted part of the Royal Prerogative of the Kings of this Kingdom to have the sole Choice and Appointment of the Officers of States and Privy Councellors and Nomination of the Lords of Session as in former times and that the King 's sacred Majesty and his Heirs and Successors are by virtue of that Royal Power which they hold from God Almighty over this Kingdom to have the full exercise of that Right c. any Men could by a following Act of Parliament there be incapacitated to serve their Prince in those Stations I shall here tell you that the incapacitating a few Papists or Quakers Presbyterians or Anabaptists to serve their Prince may to some seem materia
the Statute of 37 o. H. 8. beforemention'd that speaks of Bishops Vicars-General useth only the Style of Vicegerent for Cromwel's Office. And I have observ'd in his Injunctions to the Clergy that he styles himself Lord Privy Seal Uice-gerent to King Henry the 8th for all his Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical within this Realm c. But the word Vicar being perhaps by the envy of the Monks put on him and his Office in common Discourse the word Vicar in the Proper signification of it signifying a Servant to a Servant according to that in Martial Esse sat est servum jam nolo Vicarius esse the Archbishop speaking Cum vulgo might then call him the King 's Vicar-general and so others since I should before have mention'd what he saith p. 323. speaking of Cromwel Inter hunc Cranmerum summam necessitudinem Evangelium conciliavit ut dum ille Experientiâ hic Doctrinâ câ—…nctos anteâ—…elleret tum utrique Regi intimi chari essent Ex horum Consilio impiis atque odiosis Papoe Wolsoei Cardinalis Actis summum supplicium exitium Romanoe Curioe divinitùs paratum est A. You have enough minded me of the King 's dispensing with the disabiity incurr'd by the Canons both in the C se of Cromwel a Lay-man intermedling in Ecclesiastical Matters and of Câ—…anmer a Clergyman intermedling in secular proving so necessary to the Reformation and accordingly as Queen Elizabeth's dispensing with disability proved so to the Establishment of the present Hierarchy of the Church of England And I shall most seriously consider what the Act of the 37th of H. the 8th hath in such plain and liquid terms declared of the Power given to the King by Scripture and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to exercise Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction however incapacitated so to do by lawful Canons and Constitutions and which were by that Eminent Iustitiary you mention'd held Equivalent to Acts of Parliament and shall grant that iâ—… never so many Acts of Parliament had attempted to deprive the King of a Power inherent in him by Scripture such attempt would be nugatory and the fremuerunt gentes against it would be but the Peoples imagining a vain thing And I shall consider it how far by clear and necessary Consequences and no wire-drawn ones it follows from what is declared by this Act of Parliament as to the King 's being authorized by Scripture to choose some sorts of Officers to serve the Crown in Church and State that he is so authorized to choose others in like manner as you mention'd it to me declared by the Scotch Act of Parliament that the King by virtue of the Royal Power he holds from God All-mighty is to have the SOLE choice and appointment of the Officers of the State c. But I Pray do not many other Acts of Parliament in Harry the 8ths time whereby the Royal Prerogative is so much advanced and particularly that of the 25th of Harry the 8th that sets up the Dispensative Power seem to make it depend on statute-Statute-Law And may it not seem to be more than a flaw in the Diamond of Prerogative and a great depretiating of it in cutting it out as it were into four by making its Establishment depend on the King and three Estates B. I shall therefore here once for all tell you that the occasion of so many mens mistake in thinking so many of those Acts of Parliament in Harry the 8th's time prejudicial to Prerogative as seeming to found it on statute-Statute-Law is their not considering that such Statutes were but declaratory of old Laws and not introductive of new ones My Lord Primate Bramhal in his Schism guarded p. 155. saith I profess clearly I do not see what advantage Henry the 8th could make of his own Laws which he might not have made of the ancient Laws except only a gawdy Title of Head of the English Church which survived him not long and the Tenths and first-fruits of the Clergy c. But you may as fully take notice how Harry the 8th throughout his great Declarative Laws so often declares in effect his Regal Power to be given him by God. My Lord Coke in his Caudry's Case instanceth in the famous Statute of 24 o H. 8. c. 12. and calls it declaratory of the ancient Law and you see how it is declared there That the King is by the goodness of God furnish'd with Prerogative c. And the Statute of 37 o H. 8. begins as I shew'd you with the three Estates DECLARING That the King's Majesty is and hath always justly been Supreme Head in the Earth of the Church of England by the Word of God. You know too how the style runs in another of his Acts of Parliament viz. The Bishop of Rome and See Apostolick contrary to the great and inviolable Grants of Iurisdictions by God immediately to Emperors Kings and Princes c. And thus tho there are various Statutes in his Reign and particularly that of the 25th year of his Reign c. 19. by which it was Enacted That the King's Highness shall have Power and Authority to nominate and assign at his pleasure Two and thirty persons whereof Sixteen to be of the Clergy and Sixteen of the Temporalty of the Upper and Nether House of the Parliament to view search and examine the Canous Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial and that such of them as the King's Highness and the said Two and thirty or the Major part of them shall deém and adjudge worthy to be continued kept and obey'd shall beÌ„ from henceforth kept obey'd and executed within this Realm so that the Kings most Royal assent under his Great Seal be first had to the same c. and tho according to the ancient usage of the Realm as well as to those Canons Lay-men were not only incapacitated to make Ecclesiastical Constitutions and Canons but Kings Bishops or Noblemen who believed that the Decrees of the Bishops of Rome may be violated or shall suffer them so to be are in the Canon Law anathematized yet as this enacting Clause was made on the Clergy's Petition to the King as the Preamble of the Act mentions that those Constitutions and Canons may be committed to the Examination and Iudgment of his Highness and of Two and Thirty persons of the King's Subjects whereof sixteen were to be of the Upper and Nether House of the Parliament of the Temporalty and all the said Two and thirty persons to be chosen and appointed by the King's Majesty c. and be empower'd to do what I mention'd out of the enacting Clause and whereby the King alone was in effect both according to the Clergy's Petition and the enacting Clause vested with the jus vitoe necis of the Canons so in a Memorable Epistle of Harry the 8th Printed before the Reformatio legum Ecclesiasticarum and intended as a draught for a Publication or Promulgation of the King 's new Ecclesiastical Laws after the draught of
submit willingly And in the clearing of which Point he refers to the Proviso aforesaid in the Statute of the 25th of Harry the 8th and the 37th Canon of the Church of England as rendring the Power by both given to the King to be purely Political But in p. 159. he refers by way of Objection to two Statutes of Harry the 8th the one an Act for extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome the other an Act for Establishing the Succession wherein there is an Oath that the Bishop of Rome OUGHT not to have any Iurisdiction or Authority in this Realm then faith it is declared in the 37th Article of our Church that the Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in the Kingdom of England and in the Oath ordain'd by Queen Elizabeth that no Foreign Preiate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm and he then by way of answer to which says That those two Statutes were long ago repeal'd by Queen Mary and never afterward restored c. and that altho it were supposed that our Ancestors â—…ad over-reach'd themselves and the truth in some Expressions yet that concerns not us at all so long as we keep our selves exactly to the line and level of Apostolical Tradition and saith that our Ancestors meant the very same thing that we do Our only difference is in the use of the words Spiritual Authority or Iurisdiction which we understand of Iurisdiction purely Spiritual which extends â—…o further then the Court of Conscience But by Spiritual Authority or Iurisdiction they did understand Ecclesiostical Iurisdiction in the exterior Court which in truth is partly Spiritual partly Political And he in p. 161. takes notice of the Apostles Dispensative Power 2 Cor. 2. 10. to whom I forgave any thing for your sakes forgave I in the person of Christ But all this is only in the interior Court of Conscience But the Primate having in p. 73. discours'd of the Act of 1 o Eliz. c. 1. saith here is no new Power created in the Crown but only an ancient Iurisdiction restored here is no foreign Power abolish'd but only that which is repugnant to the ancient Laws of England and the Prerogative Royal. In a word here is no Power ascribed to our Kings but merely Political and Coactive to see that all their Subjects do their Duties in their several Places Coactive Power is one of the Keys of the Kingdom of this World it is none of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven This might have been express'd in words less subject to Excâ—…ption A. The Primate hath shewn an eminent Candour of mind in these Passages of his you have cited and if our Ancestors had but over-reach'd themselves and the truth in some Expressions and in any part of a Statute but that which forms an Oath it had not much concern'd us and as long as they had kept exactly to the line and level of plain Truth in all the words of the Oath but Oaths being stricti juris and being to be taken in truth and in righteousness and in the common sense of the words may I not here to the Assertory Clause of No foreign Prelate or Person hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction c. apply those other words of the Primate This might have been express'd in words less subject to Exception But according to what he cited out of St. Cyprian it may be said instead of no foreign Prelate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction c. that Every foreign Prelate hath it and not only the Bishop of Rome as claiming a Succession under St. Peter but Thousands of other Bishops in Christendom who as the Primate saith there p. 162. do not at all derive their Holy Orders from S. Peter or any other Roman Bishop either mediately or immediately especially in Asia and Africa but from the other Apostles And suitably to what the Primate observ'd out of S. Cyprian by which we see that as there is but one Universal Church so there is but Episcopatus Unus in that Church and that undivided I find it observ'd in Sir Geffery Palmer's Reports in the Case of Evans Kiffin vers Ascuith Trin. 3. Car. B. R. Whitelock Evesque ad 3 Powers Le Primer est Ordinations and that comes to him by his Consecration and not before By that he can take the resignation of a Church He can give Orders and Consecrate Churches and it belongs not to him as he is a Bishop of one place or other mais il est universel sur tout le monde And therefore the Archbishop of Spalato when he was here could give Orders The Chief Iustice agreed with him herein The second is Potestas Jurisdictionis which is not Universal but tied to certain places as to take an Oath to Excommunicate and Punish offences and this Power he hath by Confirmation The third is Administratio rei Familiaris the Government of his Revenue and this is gain'd by Confirmation By this you see that the Bishop of Rome as every other foreign Bishop may have some Spiritual Power here viz. what the Reporter mention'd as the first And therefore I could wish that the 37th of our 39 Articles to which the Primate refers for the Interpretations of this Clause in the Oath had in those words there the Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm express'd such a distinction of his Iurisdiction as the Bishop hath done and otherwise that common and trite Rule of Non est distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit being here applicable you know what is to be thought of an ambiguous Oath and that as the sagacious Author of the History of the Council of Trent hath told us p. 187 as one Particular makes false the contradictory Universal so one ambiguous Particular makes the Universal to be ambiguous Moreover tho you will suppose that he might lawfully take the Oath in his sense of the Pope's Jurisdiction yet all his great Learning and Reason could not qualifie him to be an Authentical Interpreter of the Oath to me In some parts of the Oath that were obvious to doubt you have already given me satisfaction and particularly in making me by vertue of the Canons of King Iames a participant with the Clergy in his authentical Interpretation of the 37th Article And since as Suarez in his learned Book De Legibus 4. c. de Interpretatione humanarum Legum saith that there may be an interpretation of Law which hath the Authority of Law and that qui in eadem potestate succedit semper potest Praedecessotum leges interpretari I shall account King Iames his Interpretation as good as Queen Elizabeth's and that if he had there declared his mind about the Pope's spiritual Power in foro interno being not renounced by this Clause in the Oath I should then be content with it But 't is otherwise for he there Confirms it in effect as 't is in the Article
Godly Iealousie and tenderness to support one another and that Tender-Conscienced Prince who confirm'd this Canon did in it variously dispensare in lege as I may properly say with Allusion to Suarez de Legibus where in stead of using the Common Expression of dispensing WITH Laws he so frequently mentions that of dispensing IN them and thereby doth seem to take off somewhat of the harshness of Questions about Popes or Princes dispensing WITH Laws For when Sovereigns do dispensare in lege they really distribute their Sovereign Power throughout the Body of their respective Laws for their Preservation and as the heart doth dispense or distribute Blood in and throughout the Body-natural and the Brain Animal Spirits throughout the genus nervosum all the Body over And here the King having a tender regard to the firm and infirm Consciences of his People respectively and to their various Capacities of understanding and he being as Zealous for all their keeping their Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance as any Prince could be for their taking them doth in the beginning of the Canon let such as you know who have been brought up to Study and who have a tenacious Memory and could remember more interpretations of the Oath then I have recounted to you if they had been given by our Princes that whereas sundry Laws Ordinances and Constitutions have been formerly made for the acknowledgment and profession of the most lawful and independent Authority of our Dread Sovereign Lord the King 's most Excellent Majesty over the State Ecclesiastical and Civil c he doth enjoyn them all to be carefully observ'd by all such Persons whom they concern upon the Penalties in the said Laws express Here then the Acts of Parliament before-mention'd and the Oaths and Articles and Canons and Authentick interpretations appear to look you in the face and the Articles particularly do so to the Clergy as having subscribed them But that Pious Prince as their Sovereign Pastor being desirous that his Clergy should gently allure the Layety with Line upon Line and Precept upon Precept to keep their Faith to God and Loyalty to himself rather then by Interpretation upon Interpretation of their Oaths would not in this Canon have them frighted with the sight of the Oaths themselves and which are there not named and all Archbishops Bishops and inferior Priests are moreover by the Canon required to Preach Teach and Exhort their people to obey honour and serve their King and that they presume not to speak of his Majesty's Power any other way then in this Canon is exoress'd but which Canon gives them a very fair licence to speak to their People of and for the King's Power of disabling and of rehabilitating his Subjects For it disables the publick Abâ—…ttors of any Position contrary to the Explications of the Regal Power therein by Excommunicating them till they repent and for the first Offence suspends them two years from the Profits of their Benefices and for the second deprives them of all their spiritual Promotions and it was in the Canon before said That if any Parson Uicar Curate or Preacher shall neglect his Duty in Publishing the said Explications c. he shall be suspended by his Ordinary till such time as upon his Penitence he shall give sufficient assurance or Evidence of his amendment and in case he be of any EXEMPT Iurisdiction he shall be censureable by His Majesty's Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical And the Canon makes any Offenders against it in the Universities as being exempt Jurisdictions there censureable or before His Majesty's Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes and so you have the Canon likewise by securing the Rights of exempt Jurisdictions asserting the Dispensative Power But if you will take Mr. Bagshaw's word in his first Argument in Parliament concerning the Canons he there tells you that that very Canon of the Convocation containing the Explanation of the Regal Power did necessarily imply their declared sense of the Laws being dispens'd with For saith he in making Determinations concerning Royal Power they have done against Law and have medled with things of which they have no Conusance for the Exposition of them belongs to the Iudges of the Land and they have no more right to expound them then the Iudges have to expound Texts of Scripture And we know that our Laws have been so careful of preserving the Judges right of interpreting them that they allow not the Bishops and their Officials Power to interpret any Acts of Parliament tho made about Matters of their Jurisdiction and Matters merely Spiritual as appears out of Hobart 84. Spenloe's Case and Coke 3. Inst. where he saith that an Act of Parliament made about things merely Spiritual shall be construed by the Common Law 〈◊〉 Judges But how far the disabling by the Power of His Majesty's Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes such who explain'd not the Regal Power according to that Canon might appear as an Instance of the Prerogative of Disabling and of occasional re-ennabling Mr. Bagshaw's second Argument in effect exposeth it to Consideration by mentioning that the last Letters Patents of the High Commission were Mich. 9. Car. in which are contain'd all things wherein the Commissioners were to meddle and that therefore the Punishing of any there on the account of this new Canon made not a year ago could not be pursuant to those Letters Patents His first Argument likewise wherein he gives his Iudgment that by Law that Convocation was dissolv'd by the Dissolution of the Parliament may let us see how far they in making any Canon depended on the Dispensative Power of Prerogative But any one who hates Faction will find that that Author did needlesly inflame the minds of that Parliament of Forty against those Canons and particularly with the foremention'd Exception against the first on the Account of the Explanation of the Regal Power having not been made by the Iudges and where the Exception doth through the sides of the Convocation strike at the honour of that King by whom those Canons were Confirm'd His Majesty in his memorable Speech at the Prorogation of the Parliament on the 20th of October 1628. occasionally said I Command and all you that are here to take notice of what I granted you in your Petition i. e. the Petition of Right but especially you my Lords the Iudges for to you only under me belongs the interpretation of the Laws for none of the Houses of Parliament joynt or separate have any Power either to make or declare a Law without my Consent Nor will any one wonder at the tenderness of any Crown'd heads in preserving their Right as to the interpretation of their Laws who hath consider'd that the usage of the ancient Romans in making their Civil Law to be among the things Sacred and Ceremonies of their Gods preserv'd in the Collegium Pontificum and appropriating the interpretation of it to their Pontifices did induce Augustus to be inaugurated Pontifex Maximus and
leaving Aliens or Foreigners of the Reform'd Churches that were then allow'd or tolerated by the King's Majesty or that should be allow'd by him his Heirs and Successors to be secured under the Wing of Prerogative from all the Penalties in that Act was a greater President of a Parliament's deference to the Dispensative Power But here it falls in my way to ask you if the Parliament in that Act interpreting and expounding the Sulscription to the 36th Article as you before mention'd did not shew some want of tenderness to the Regal Power of interpreting B. Not in the least The King thought fit in his Legislative Capacity and with the Concurrence of the three Estates to issue forth such interpretation to the end it might be perpetuated But you will find that they were so tender of that branch of Prerogative namely of the Regal Power of interpreting out of Parliament that having referr'd to the King's Declaration of the 25th of October 1660. i. e. that concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs we spoke of before and mention'd that according to that he had granted his Commission to several Bishops and other Divines to review the Book of Common Prayer and to prepare such Alterations and Additions as they thought fit to offer and that afterwards the Convocations of both the Provinces of Canterbury and York being by His Majesty called c. His Majesty hath been pleas'd to Authorize the Presidents of the said Convocation and other the Bishops and Clergy of the same to review the Book of Common Prayer and the Book of the form and manner of the making and consecrating of Bishops Priests c. and that they should make such Additions and Alterations in the said Books as to them should seem meet and should present the same to His Majesty for his further Allowance or Confirmation and then setting forth that the same was accordingly done and that some alterations were inserted into those Books by the Convocations and by them Presented to His Majesty and all which His Majesty having consider'd hath fully approved it then follows that His Majesty hath recommended to this present Parliament that the Books of Common Prayer c. with the Alterations and Additions which have been so made and presented to His Majesty by the said Convocations be the Book which shall be appointed to be used c. in all Parish Churches and Chapels c. And it is upon the foundation of what His Majesty did as before-mention'd that the following enacting Clauses with their Sanctions and Penalties are built And you may if you will take notice of a Proviso toward the end of the Act being very tender of not hurting what King Iames by his Prerogative did in Uniting the Prebendship to the Professor of Law in Oxon for the time being and whereby that King dispens'd with the incapacity of Lay-men as to the enjoyment of such Prebendship but the Act and the Proviso takes care to perpetuate the King's Professor's enjoying the same and leaves the Prerogative at liberty to dispense with such disability in the Case In short you see how tender that Parliament was of Prerogative and tho they thought it not fit to give such loud Applauses to his late Majesty's Declaration of October the 25th A. 1660. before-mention'd wherein so much of the Dispensative Power was exerted yet you find they refer to it with respect A. I have almost forgot the particulars of the Dispensative Power therein exerted B. I shall tell you that the King having there mention'd and what the Act takes notice of his saying that he would appoint some Divines to review the Common Prayer Book and to make such Alterations as shall be thought most necessary c. it then saith Out Will and Pleasure is that none be punish'd or troubled for not using it until it be review'd and effectually reform'd He there speaks several times of Dispensing with Ceremonies that were by Law establish'd It is there likewise said Because some men otherwise Pious and Learned say They cannot conform unto the Subscription required by the Canon nor take the Oath of Canonical Obedience we are Content and it is Out Will and Pleasure so they take the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy that they shall receive ordination institution and induction and shall be permitted to exercise their Function and to enjoy the Profits of their Livings without the said Subscription or Oath of Canonical Obedience c. A. I see here is King Iames the First 's incapacitating Canon dispens'd with and indeed suspended B. The Declaration goeth on with taking care that None be Iudged to forfeit his Presentation or Benefice or be deprived of it upon the Statute of the 13th of Elizabeth c. 12. so he read and declare his Assent to all the Articles of Religion which only contain the Confession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments comprised in the Book of Articles in the said Statute mentioned And this Declaration had before express'd His Majesty's mindfulness of his Declaration from Bredagh and his saying We publish'd in our Declaration from Bredagh a Liberty to tender Consciences and that no man should be disquieted or call'd in Question for Differences of Opinion in Matters of Religion which do not disturb the Peace of the Kingdom and that we shall be ready to consent to such an Act of Parliament as upon mature deliberation shall be offer'd us for the full granting that Indulgence Here was a Liberty of Conscience granted and publish'd and Heterodoxy about the very Articles of Religion tolerated and a throwing off of Penal Laws and for which Declaration I should have told you that Baker's History p. 703. mentions that the House of Lords order'd Thanks to be given to the Messenger who brought that gracious Declaration A. And yet you say the Declaration October 25. 1660 thus dispensing with disability incurr'd by the Canon and the 13th of Eliz and by Queen Elizabeth's Act of Uniformity was both approved and applauded by the former Parliament I have not heard of the like in the kind of it B. No doubt but the Author there referr'd to the Declaration of Octob. 25. A. 1660. for which the House of Commons so express'd their thanks however by the supposed carelessness of the Printer the Publication is said to be October 8th 1660. For the words by him cited as said by his Majesty viz. Our present Consideration and work is to gratify c. are in that Declaration p. 15. and 16. But if it were not for cloying you with other like Instances I could tell you of the like in the beginning of the Reign of King Iames the First A. I pray speak not of cloying My Patience may be soon surfeited with two or three such things as some call Presidents But this thing call'd Iudgment of Parliament carries with it so much weight as well as Veneration that you can no way more oblige me then by going on to entertain me with Instances of that
other Penalties incurr'd by Popish Recusants pursuant to any Statutes as for example those of Queen Elizabeth or King Iames and even that of 3 o Iac. c. 5. whereby Convicted Recusants are disabled from Military Offices and Offices in the Navy and in the Law and fâ—…m the Practice of Physick and any publick Office and Charge in the Commonwealth or the test-Test-Act 25 o Car. 2. No question is to be made of the King 's absolute and undoubted Power of dispensing with particular persons in such a Case And during the ferment about the Laws and Statutes whereon the Petition of Right was founded and which were of another Nature as Mr. Glanvile's words are you will not forget that there was a tenderness for Prerogative avow'd by both Houses while you remember those words of the Royal Martyr in his Speech at the Prorogation of the Parliament the 20th of October A. 1628. viz. That the Profession of both Houses at the time of hammering the Pâ—…tition of Right was no way to entrench upon his Prerâ—…gative and their saying that they had neither intention noâ—… power to hurt it c. You may too call to mind that as during the fâ—…rment that the suspending the Penal Laws by His late Majesty's Declaration of Indulgence his Power of Dispensing in them came not in question so the heat about his Preregative to SUSPEND them was soon over The Opinion of that loyal Patriot and learned and upright Iustitiary Sir William Ellis deliver'd in his Argument about Thomas and Sorrells Case I told you of namely that the King may SUSPEND an Act of Parliament till next Session which was a flâ—…ght beyond what was moved for or adjudged in the late Case of Gâ—…dden and Hales did never meet with any angry reflection that I have heard of from any Person either of the People diffusive or representative tho yet that Argument of his containing such Opinion was both after the Votes of the House of Commons about the illegality of the suspending of Penal Laws in Matters Eccleâ—…iastical otherwise then by Act of Parliament and after the Act for the Test. And how near the Prerogative of Dispensing as allow'd by my Lord Chief Justice Vaughan in his Argument in Thomas and Sorrell's Case and who argued after Sir W. Ellis came up to SUSPENDING you may see there by what he saith p. 347 Where the King can dispense with particular Persons he is not confined to number or place but may Liceâ—…s as many and in such Places as he thinks fit But further to shew you to how quiet and temperate a State that ferment of the Prince's suspending all the Religionary Penal Laws without an Act of Parliament was grown I shall let you see that several years after the late King's Declaration of Indulgence and the Act for the Test the late Earl of Sâ—…aftsbury appear'd in Print as owning the legality of the King's Prerâ—…gative in that kind and without his Lordship's being in the least censured for it by any of that numâ—…rous Party he was then the Head of And here I am to tell you that in a Book call'd A Letter from a Person of Quality to his Friend in the Country Printed in the year 1675. the Earl of Shaftsbury is by Mr. Marvell the supposed Author of the Book introduced as owning that the Power of the King's Supremacy meaning in Matters Ecclesiastical was of another Nature then that he had in Civils and had been exercised without exception in this very Case i. e. as in the Declaration of Indulgence by his Father Grandfather and Queen Elizabeth under the Great Seal to foreign Protestants become Subjects of England c. A. Did the Earl of Shaftsbury then in the year 1675. own the Prerogative of suspending Penal Laws in Matters Ecclesiastical when the King had long before quitted it and when his Lordship was Embarqued with those Men to whom nothing could once seem more unpopular then the owning of any such Prerogative B. I refer you to the Book it self and where you will see that that Great Statesman did then assert the extent of Prerogative in that Point with as much strength of Wit and Reason as if he had been then fitting at the Helm of State and where he further shews the Necessity of a standing Supreme executive Power to mitigate or wholy to SUSPEND the execution of any Penal Laws c. But I shall best entertain you with his Lordship 's own words as so great a Narrator as Mr. Marvell relates them and who as he saith telling his Lordship that the Declaration of Indulgence assumed a Power to repeal and SUSPEND all our Laws his Lordship â—…eplyed that he wonder'd at his Objection there being not one of these in the Case For the King assumed no Power of repealing Laws or suspending them contrary to the will of his Parliament or People and not to argue with me at that time the Power of the King's Supremacy which was of another Nature then that he had in Civils and had been exercised without exception in this very Case by his Father Grandfather and Queen Elizabeth under the Great Seal to foreign Protestants become Subjects of England nor to instance in the SUSPENDING the execution of the two Acts of Navigation and Trade during both this and the last Dutch War in the same words and upon the same necessity and as yet without clamour that ever we heard But to pass by all that this is certain a Government could not be supposed whether Monarchical or other of any sort without a standing Supreme executive Power fully enabled to mitigate or WHOLT to SUSPEND the execution of any Penal Law in the intervals of the Legislative Power which when assembled there was no doubt but wherever there lies a Negative in passing of a Law there the Address or sense known of either of them to the Contrary as for instance of either of our two Houses of Parliament in England ought to determine that Indulgence and restore the Law to its full execution For without this the Laws were to no purpose made if the Prince could annul them at pleasure and so on the other hand without a Power always in being of dispensing on occasion was to suppose a Constitution extremely imperfect and impracticable and to Cure those with a Legislative Power always in being is when consider'd no other then a perfect Tyranny A. I find that his Lordship doth not in the least distinguish between the Right of Prerogative in suspending the Disabling or incapacitating Penal Laws and others And he by giving the Power of suspending all the Penal Laws to the Prince during the Intervals of Parliament and till an Address should be thence made to the Prince to revoke such suspension hath given his Prince this Power in effect during life For 't is obvious to consider by how many accidents a suspension of Penal Laws revocable on an Address from the Parliament may happen to be not so revoked B. You
Numb 35. 33. A. But by the way do you think then that Sovereign Princes offend the Law of God in Pardoning Murther B. I do observe that many presume to censure Kings for so doing and are superstitiously misguided by thinking that those two places of Scripture referr'd to by my Lord Coke do necessarily make it a sin in Princes to Pardon Murther But I shall when we meet again shew you the mistake of such therein and shall shew you that David at that time when the Law of God and the lex terrae was the same thing and who had Sworn and would perform it that he would keep God's righteous Iudgments was not to be censured to have sinned either in the reprieve of Ioab who had murthered Amasa and Abner and in delaying the Execution of the Law and leaving it to Solomon his Son or in the Pardon of Absolon who had slain his Brother Ammon and that when the Law faith in Numb 35. The Murtherer shall surely be put to death our best Commentators and out of the Rabbins say that this is spoken to the Iudges before whom such Causes regularly came and under the Supreme Power and by authority thereof judged those Causes and that tho the Iudges who were subordinate to the Supreme Power were to take no Satisfaction for the life of a Murtherer but were by that Law to Condemn him yet that it followeth not that the Supreme Power who made them Iudges might not in some Cases Reprieve and Pardon some whom they had Condemned A. I shall be glad to hear you discourse of this and the rather for that 't is so Customary to many when they find the Prince exercising this Prerogative of Pardoning to be apt too much to busy their heads with those two places in the Old Testament to their neglect of others there viz. Exod. 22. 28. Prov. 24. 21. Eccles. 10. 20. and of Acts 23. 5. in the New and likewise there of Rom. 13. 2. 5. 1. St. Peter 2. 17. and from whence they might Collect their moral offices of not doing or speaking or thinking dishonourably of the Lord 's annointed and of paying honour and obedience to his Sovereign Power and that for Conscience sake But in the mean time give me leave à propos to ask you if ever you heard of any one of the Iudges of the Realm in the Reign of our former Princes that gave his judgment for the allowance of the King's Pardon of disability Shew me but that and I shall not be affrighted with my Lord Ch. Justice Vaughan's Simoniacal Dead man. B. I shall tell you of a Case that was well enough known to him and which you may find in Croke 3d p. 55. Sir Iohn Bennet v. Dr. Easedale where you may see that Sir Iohn Bennet being fined 20000 l. for Bribery by the Star-Chamber and Censured to be Imprison'd and made uncapable of any Office of Iudicature and that he having a Pardon from the King reciting the Bribery and Offences mention'd in the Decree and all Penalties and Punishments by reason thereof and all Disabilities and Incapacities and all things concerning the said Sentence except the Fine of 20000 l. and the Court of Star-Chamber having the advice of all the Iudges relating to the Decree and Pardon it was resolv'd by them all that this Pardon hath taken away all force of the Sentence in the Star-Chamber except for the Fine of 20000 l. and all Disabilities are discharged thereby That Lord Chief Iustice knew that as it was set down in that Chapter of Pardons Inst. 3. the King's Pardon extends to all Suits in the Star-Chamber and he knew of what was mention'd Inst. 4. Chap. 1. Of the High Court of Parliament viz. Of a Pardon to the Lord Latimer of a Iudgment in Parliament and he knew that by his own and other Iustices of Assize going into their own Countrys in the Execution of their Offices by vertue of the King 's Non-obstante to the Statutes of 8. R. 2. c. 2. 3. H. 8. c. 24. himself and as many as went Iudges of Assize so into their own Countrys gave Judgment by so doing for the Prerogative of dispensing with such Acts of Parliament and he likewise knew that as it is well express'd in Theâ—… Answer of King Charles the First to the Declaration of both Houses of Parliament concerning the Commission of array A. 1642. An Act of Parliament in any Matter tho mistaken being assented to by the King and his two Houses is equally binding as having equal Authority with an Act introductive of a new Law and that therefore Acts of Parliament having so particularly declared the justness of the Prerogative's dispensing with disability no magna nomina of any particular Sages of the Law in otherwise opining can expect any deference And if you will consider what my Lord Coke in that Chapter of Pardons hath mention'd of the operation of Prerogative over the dead in Law and consider the President he refers to viz. Pasch. 22. E. 3. tit Cor. 239. Coram Rege Quidam indictatus de Felonia inde Culp dicit quod Rex eum Conduxit inde producit Chartam quod Rex eum Conduxit in Vasc. in exercitu dicta Charta allocata fuit per Curiam and there see his opinion grounded on it that if a man be Indicted of Felony and found Guilty and being in Prison the King may under the Great Seal reciting the Offence c. retain him to serve in his Wars on this side or beyond the Seas this Charter he may Plead and the Court ought to allow it I believe you will be of Opinion that any one who will desire any more Presidents for the Commanding the services of dead men ought to be sent for one to the REHEARSAL viz. that of Arise you dead Men and get ye about your business A. Well Sir As for this objected Dead-man requiescat in Pace I have done with him and since from some things you have said I gather that the dispensing with disability by Roman Emperors and Popes of Rome did never by any ferment disturb their Governments and moreover since no men of sense here have ever troubled themselves or the Government with any vexatious Question about the King's Power in discharging a man from a Praemunire but not from a Penal disability incurr'd whereas by a Praemunire as my Lord Coke shews us Inst. 3. c. 54. men are put out of the Protection of the King and DISABLED to have any Action or Remedy by the King's Law or the Kings Writs and exposed to many other dreadful Punishments I do now begin to wonder whence it is that the mistake in some mens Minds hath come about a Penal disability being so unremoveable And thus I think too one might wonder how such as will allow the King's Pardon to discharge one from an Excommunicatio minor or major do look on disability as such an anathematizing thing as is not to be touch'd or that cannot be
thing of that nature but in such a fair and legal way as should satisfie all his loving Subjects The Duplys of the Divines of Aberdene p. 54. and p. 130 131. Whereupon Mr. Ley thus goes on viz. Wherein Wise men who judge of Consultations and Acts by their probable Effects and not unexpected Events cannot but highly commend His Majesty's Mildness and Clemency which we doubt not would condescend to your Requests for a removal of this great aggrievance if you would please to interpose your Mediations to so acceptable a purpose and upon our humble sute which in all submissive manner we tender to your Lordship and by you to the rest of your Reverend Order we hope you will do so since we have it upon his word His Royal Majesty's word which neither in Duty nor Discretion we may distrust that the Prelates were their greatest Friends i. e. of his Scottish Subjects their Councels were always Councels of Peace and their Solicitations vehement and earnest for granting those unexpected Favours which we were pleas'd to bestow upon our People The King 's large Declaration p. 420 Thus then the Royal Dispensation with the five Articles of Perth was at the Intercession of the Bishops tho' they knew the same Establish'd by Act of Parliament graciously afforded to his Scotish Subjects Those Articles of Perth related to various Religionary Matters viz The introducing of Private Baptism Communicating of the Sick Episcopal Confirmation Kneeling at the Communion and the observing such ancient Festivals as belong'd immediately to Christ and of which Doctor Heylin in his History of the Presbyterians having spoken saith That the King 's indulging the Scots in Dispensing with the Penal Laws about them was an Invitation to the Irish Papists to endeavour by armed force to Compass the King's Dispensation But how tenderly the Consciences of the Roman Catholics in Ireland were in the Reign of the Royal Martyr THEN Protected under the Wing of the Dispensative Power contrary to what the Dr. observ'd any one may see who will Consult my Lord Primate Bramhal's Replication to the Bishop of Chalcedon where he saith That the Earl of Strafford Lord Lieutenant of Ireland did commit much to my hands the Political Regiment of that Church for the space of Eight years In all that time let him name but one Roman Catholic that suffer'd either Death or Imprisonment or so much as a pecuniary Mulct of Twelve Pence for his Religion upon any Penal Statute if he can as I am sure he cannot c. And such was the acquiescence of the Populace and of the three Estates in the Penal Lawes there against the Roman Catholics being thus dead or asleep that in the Printed Articles of Impeachment against the then Lord Chancellor of Ireland and that Lord Primate thâ—…n Bishop of Derry and others of His Majesty's Publick Ministers of State exhibited by the Commons to the Lords in the year 1640. there is not a syllable of Complaint against those Lawes being so dispens'd with by Connivence Nor yet in the Printed Schedule of Grievances of that Kingdom voted in the House of Lords there to be transmitted to the Committee of the same House then attending in England to pursue Redresses for the same is there any representation of such Indulgence being any Gravamen nor yet of the great Figure the Irish Papists then made in the Government the Majority of the Parliament and of the Iudges and Lawyers then being such And pursuant to that Prince's Indulgence offer'd to the tender Consciences of his Subjects in the year 41. he was graciously pleas'd in the Treaty at Uxbridgâ—… to order his Commissioners who were such renown'd Confessors of the Church of England to make the first Royal offer there that freedom be left to all Persons of what Opinion soever in Matters of Ceremony and that all the Penalties of LAWS and Customs be SUSPENDED And the truth is since the Christian Religion did in its first settlement so rationally provide for its Propagation in the World and its bespeaking the favour of Princes by its enjoyning Subjection and Obedience to their Lawes not only for Wrath but Conscience sake and since that Principle of humane Lawes binding the Conscience which was so often and so publickly avow'd by that Prince and Arch-bishop Laud and Bishop Sanderson and the Divines of the Church of England in General is the surest guard to Princes Thrones and their Tribunals and that therefore 't is the Interest of the Prince and People to be more watchful in preserving that Principle then all the Iewels of the Crown or Walls of the Kingdom that Prince did therefore necessarily take Care to preserve and to perpetuate in some of his tender-Conscienced Subjects a continued Tenderness for his Lawes by his lawful Dispensative Power as particularly in the Case of his Scottish Subjects in taking off the Obligation of Obedience and of Conforming themselves to the Establish'd Lawes for such Dispensation intrinsecally notes the taking off such Obligation from the Persons dispens'd with And it is indeed a Solecism for any one to ask Indulgence from a Prince who owns the Law of the Land binding him in Conscience if he doth not think such Prince perswaded that his Power of granting it is a part of that LAW He was not ignorant of his Father's Aversion against the Penal Lawes in general and on which Account my Lord Bacon celebrating him saith As for Penal Lawes which lie as snares upon the Subjects and which were as a Nemo scit to King Henry 7. it yields a Revenue which will scarce pay for the Parchment of the King's Records at Westminster And religionary Penal Lawes requiring the greatest tenderness as he found when he came to the Government that the two most famous Puritan Divines Mr. Hildersham and Mr. Dod Men of great Probity and Learning had often been in his Father's time Pursuant to the Act for Uniformity disabled from Preaching and been re-inabled to it by particular Indulgence and as likewise Fuller tells us in his Church History that Bishop Williams when he was Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England procured a Licence from King Iames under the Great Seal for Mr. Cotton the famous Independent to Preach notwithstanding his Non-Conformity so he in the same manner that his Royal Father did held the Reins of the Law loose in his hands as to those two other Non-Conformists beforemention'd The History of Mr. Hildersham's Life mentions that he was silenced in Iune A 1590 and restored again in Ianuary A. 1591. Again he was deprived and silenced April 24 A. 1605. for refusal of Subscription and Conformity and after some time again restored and was again Silenced in November A. 1611. by the King 's particular Command and on April 23. A. 1613. he was judicially admonished by the High Commission that saving the Catechizing of his own Family only he should not afterward Preach Catechize or use any of the Offices or Function of a Minister
Estate of Prelacy by the Kings and Peers thereof But now further to entertain your thoughts with the great Scene of the New Heaven and the New Earth in that Kingdom and of Men there walking at liberty as the words in the Psalms are or at large as 't is in the Maâ—…gin and as in the Latin indesinenterque ambulabo in ipsa LATITUDINE quia mandata tua quaero whose measures were before staked down to the Narrow tedder of Presbytery and whose Souls were once enslaved to a blind Zeal for that Church-Government as what they then fancy'd to be the putting the Scepter into Christ's hand and the only efficacious means to keep out Popery I shall tell you that they have now put the Scepter into their Prince's hand to rule the Church with what external Government he will who were formâ—…rly so ready to enslave both Kingdoms by designing to put the Royal Scepter of Scotland into the French King's hands and to bring a Popish French Army into Scotland to enforce the setlement of Presbytery A. One would hardly think it possible that they should then design any such thing B. As the Civil Law rangeth things that wound mens Piety Reputation or good Manners among Impossibles so one would think those of the Scots then designing a thing of that Nature to be an Impossibility And any one would thus think it impossible who consider'd that the Crown of England A. 1560. sent Forces into Scotland whereby the French were driven out of that Kingdom and that thereupon in the Publick printed Prayer prefixt to the Scots Psalm-Book it is said viz. And seeing that when we by our own Power were altogether unable to have freed our selves from the tyranny of Strangers thou of thine especial goodness didst move the hearts of our Neighbors of whom we had deserv'd no such favour to take upon them the common burden with us and for our deliverance not only to spend the lives of many but also to hazard the Estate and Tranquillity of their Realm grant unto us O Lord that with such reverence we may remember thy benefits receiv'd that after this in our default we never enter into hostility against the Realm and Nation of England Suffer us never O Lord to fall to that ingratitude and detestable unthankfulness that we shall seek the Destruction and Death of those whom thou hast made Instruments to deliver us from the tyranny of merciless Strangers c. But he who shall read Kâ—…ng Charles the First 's Declaration concerning his Proceedings with his Subjects of Scotland since the Pacification in the Camp near Berwick Printed A. 1640. will find this Fact too true and the Letter there likewise Printed which was under the hands of the Leading men of the Presbyterian Faction in Scotland writ to the French King and wherein his assistance is implored A. But by that Act about the Supremacy in Scotland A. 1669. that you read to me I see that the old Leaven of Presbytery is there sufficiently purged out and that the very mass of Blood in mens Principles relating to the Regal Power is universally sweeten'd B. You have great reason to judge so and if you had read the Scotch Statutes since the year 1660 you would find the Body of that Nation having the temperamentum ad pondus for Loyalty And your having mention'd the old Leaven there purged away minds me of minding you that that Nation having so nobly discharged its moral offices in that Case ought to be absolv'd in the thoughts of all the Loyal from the Fact of its former deflection from Loyalty and that the great measures of Christian Charity ought to extend beyond that Judgment of Seneca that poenitens est fere innocens and even as far as S. Paul's generous discharge of the Corinthians on their having purged out that ferment viz. For behold what carefulness it wrought in you what clearing of your selves yea what indignation yea what fear yea what vehement desire yea what zeal c. In all things ye have approved your selves to be clear in this Matter Look on their Acts of Parliament in the time of K. Charles the Second by one of which it is declared That his Majesty his Heirs and Successors by Uirtue of the Royal Power which they hold from God Almighty over this Kingdom shall have the sole Choice and Appointment of Officers of State and Councellors and Iudges and by another That the Estates of Parliament considering that the Kings of this Realm deriving their Power from God Almighty do succeed Lineally thereunto And I can direct you to another that contains in it so strange a Resignation to the King's measures as may make you again wonder at the possibility of such a temper and not to be equall'd by any thing I have read of but that pang of Zeal wherewith so many once at Cambridge were affected for Edward the Senior when they swore to will what he willed I mean that Act of Parliament in Scotland An. 1661. Concerning the League and Covenant and discharging the renewing thereof without his Majesties Warrant and Approbation The Act concludes with an Inhibition That none presume to renew that Covenant or any other League or Covenant without his Majesties special Warrant so to do Thus then that Covenant tho by them so much nauseated they shew'd themselves ready again to swallow if his Majesty for any such reasons of State as they could not foresee should enjoyn them so to do A. You do indeed make me wonder at this great example of the tenderness and extent of loyal Obedience in Scotland B. I can tell you of another Act of Parliament viz. the 5th Act of the second Session of the second Parliament of K. Charles the 2d Edenburgh 13. August The Act against Conventicles where their very Zeal against them is a Wall of Fire to guard the Dispensative Power The Act runns thus Forasmuch as the Assembling and Convocating his Majesties Subjects without his Majesties Warrant and Authority is a most dangerous and unlawful Practice prohibited and discharged by several Laws and Acts of Parliament under high and great Pains c. for the suppressing and preventing of which for the time to come his Majesty with Advice and Consent of his Estates of Parliament hath thought sit to Statute and Enact c. That no outed Ministers who are not LICENSED by the Councel Persons not Authorized or TOLERATED by the Bishop of the Diocess presume to Preach expound Scripture or pray in any Meeting c. and that none be present at any Meeting without the Family to which they belong where any not licensed authorized nor tolerated as said is shall Preach expound Scripture or Pray c. A. The Act for Uniformity here 16 Car. 2. doth justice to the Prerogative of the Crown in dispensing by taking care that the Penalties in it shall not extend to the Foreigners or Aliens of the forriegn Reform'd Churches allow'd or to be allow'd by the King's
Harvey who open'd such great Springs of real Learning as refresh'd that noble thirst so it seems before the Date of His late Majesty's Declaration of Indulgence in the 24th year of his Reign and of the Act about the Test in the 25th year of it and both which were likely to produce among the Learned so many Inquiries into the Legality of the Dispensative Power inherent in the Crown and even among the unlearned an Epidemical Disease of talking about the same it came to pass in the course of Providence that by as Learned Iudges as ever sate on the English Bench and as Learned Councel as ever appear'd at its Bar the Learning about the Dispensative Power was ventilated and discuss'd in a Series of several years in the Case of Thomas and Sorrell For the Cause began in the King's Bench 18. Car. 2. and was there argued by some of the Great Councel of the Kingdom and there again argued on both sides by other Councel in Michaelmas-Term in the 19th year of his Reign And in Hilary-Term in 25. and 26. Car. 2. this Cause for the weight and difficulty of it was adjourn'd out of the King's-Bench into the Exchequer Chamber and there argued by others of the Greatest Councel of the Kingdom and many Law-Books quoted And the Case was afterward argued by all the Iudges of England at six several Days in Easter Trinity Michaelmas and Hilary Terms viz. by two Iudges each day and the Iudges differ'd in several Points and even about the definition or meaning of Dispensation For so that learned Chief Iustice tells you and saith That some of his Brothers defined it to be liberatio à poenâ and others to be Provida relaxatio Juris which saith he is defining an ignotum per ignotius and liberare à poenâ is the effect of a Pardon not of a Dispensation c. Thus as I may say there was a Circumvallation by the Learning which concern'd Dispensing that encompass'd some time preceding that Declaration of Indulgence in the 24th year of his Reign and some time following both it and the Act of the Test. I shall some other time perhaps entertain you with the Learned Manuscript Report of the whole Case but shall now tell you that during that Series of years there was no angry motion in the Sea of the Populace occasion'd by any thing said in any of the Arguments that propp'd up the Dispensative Power no not by that mention'd in Keeble's Reports about Thomas and Sorrell's Case to have been said in the Exchequer Chamber by Ellis the King's Serjeant and whose Opinion was as Currant for sterling-Sterling-Law as any Man 's of the long Robe Viz. That the King may SUSPEND an Act of Parliament till next Session And now since it hath thus appear'd out of that Chief Iustice his Report that at least a sixth part of the Sworn Iudges of the Realm as he thought were unacquainted with the meaning of Dispensing I think it may pass for a Miracle if any great number of the mobile did understand it But without their troubling their heads with Law-Books if they would but mind their English Bibles and there consult the 12th of S. Mathew they would soon forbear calling the lawful Dispensing with the Laws establish'd a Contradiction Our learned Ames on the Priests in the Temple Prophaning the Sabbath and being blameless observes very well in his Cases of Conscience 1. 3. c. 17. That Praecepta Deiex suâ naturâ nunquam ita Concurrent at necesse sit alterum eorum propriè violare per peccatum Quum enim praeceptum aliquod minus negligendum est ut majus observetur minus illud cessat pro illo tempore obligare that is to say is dispens'd with ita ut qui ex tali occasione illud negligunt sint planè inculpabiles id est non peccent Matth. 12. 5 7. And as to that in the Chapter of David's entring into the House of God and eating the Shew-bread which was not lawful for him to eat c. the Lord Bishop of London in his Second Letter to his Clergy Printed A. 1680. in the Paragraph about The half Communion occasionally thus observes with great Judgment That a positive Command of God cannot be disobey'd without guilt unless on some one or more of these grounds either 1. That God dispenses with it as he did with Circumcision in the Wilderness Or 2. That some Evil greater then the Consequence of the Non-Performance of it will certainly follow as when David ate the Shew-bread and they that were with him which depends on that rule of our Saviour which tho apply'd to the Sabbath yet extends to all other positive Commands that man was not made for them but they for man Or lastly in case of incapacity as the Children of Israels not going up to Ierusalem in the time of Captivity And there are other words in a foregoing Chapter of S. Matthew that are still applicable to the Pharisaical ignorance of such as reproach DISPENSING as unlawful Go and learn what that means I will have mercy and not sacrifice But according to the Example of our Blessed Lord in Having Compassion on the multitude I think you have taken a just occasion for the pitying so many of your Countrymen who in the present Conjuncture presume to exercise themselves in great Matters or in things too high for them relating to Law and State and who without enquiring about the modus of Dispensing with the Laws establish'd wherein Lawyers differ cry down the thing it self wholly and absolutely as a Contradiction to the lex terrae and in which not being so all Lawyers agree My Lord Primate Bramhal in his Book of A fair Warning to take heed of the Scottish Discipline shewing in Chap. 6. that I have before referred to That it robs the King of his Dispensative Power doth wish any one averse to that Power no greater Censure then that the Penal Laws might be duly executed on him till he recant his error And how Penal a thing by the Laws of Nations it is to alienate the hearts of People from the Prince's Government all the great Writers of those Laws and of the Iura Majestatis have enough shewn Moreover how Criminal a thing of that Nature is in the Court of Conscience our two great Writers of it Ames and Sanderson have enough taught us The Moral offices of Subjects toward their Princes are well set forth in Ames his Cases of Conscience 1. 5. c. 25. and where he saith Debent ex singulari reverentiâ cavere ne temerarium judicium ferant de ipsorum administrationes Exod. 21. 28. Eccles. 10. 20. 2 Pet. 2. 10. Jud. 8. Fundamentum hujus cautionis est 1. Candor ille qui cum erga omnes debet adhiberi tum singulariter erga Superiores 2. Difficultas explorandi fontes causas negotiorum Publicorum 3. Moderatio illa quâ leves infirmitates offensiones tolerare debemus communi tranquillitati
Consciences and who might thereby think that according to the Rule of ejus est interpretari cujus est condere that the Oath of Supremacy enjoyn'd by Parliament 1 o Elizabethoe could not receive an Interpretation but from the Queen in Parliament and that that Consideration might therefore be supposed to be the cause of the Queens interpreting being approved or declared good by the Parliament in the Fifth year of her Reign B. I shall tell you that as to the sufficiency of the Queen's Power to interpret the Oath by her sole Authority it appears not that the Proviso in the Statute of 5 Eliz. did in the least arise from any such scruple and so De non apparentibus c. And here without troubling you with the Notions of the Royal assent creating the Soul of the Law and by the words of le Roy le veult after the Body of it hath been prepared by the three Estates and that the three Estates have nothing to do to interpret a Law that is once made and accordingly as Sir C. Hatton formerly Lord Chancellor of England in his Treatise of Acts of Parliament and their Exposition tells us That the Assembly of Parliament being ended functi sunt officio and speaking particularly of those of the Lower House saith their Authority is return'd to the Electors so clearly that if they were all together assembled again for interpretation by a voluntary meeting eorum non esset interpretari c. I shall once for all observe to you that our Monarchs when in the exercise of the Prerogative inherent in them and inseparable from them relating to Matters of Peace and War the Coining of Money or the Dispensing in Matters Civil or Ecclesiastical they condescend to have the same in particular â—…ases approved or strengthâ—…n'd by Parliament are no more deprived of their Sole Supremacy therein then the Body of the Sun is devested of its Heat and Light by diffusing the same through the Air. But I have before observ'd to you that the apparent Cause in the Proviso of 5 o Elizabethoe whereby the Queens Interpretation is Enacted is the better to transmit the obligatoriness of the Interpretation in point of Conscience beyond her Life and to the Reigns of her Heirs and Successors and to bind us who live now to acknowledge such Power due to our present King over the Persons of all his Subjects as was in her interpretation challenged to be due to Harry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth I shall not trouble you with my Judgment about Moot-points of Law relating to the Regal Power of interpreting Acts of Parliament and particularly such wherein Oaths are founded My Lord Coke Inst. 3. c. 74. tells us That an Oath cannot be ministred to any unless the same be allow'd by the Common Law or by some Act of Parliament neither can any Oath allow'd by the Common-Law or by Act of Parliament be alter'd but by Act of Parliament and saith in the Margin So resolv'd An. 26. El. in the Case of the Under-Sheriff And then saith the Oath of the King 's Privy Councel the Iustices the Sheriffs c. was thought fit to be alter'd and enlarged but that was done by Authority of Parliament For further proof whereof see the Statutes here quoted i. e. those referr'd to in his Margin and it shall evidently appear that no old Oath can be alter'd or new Oath rais'd without an Act of Parliament I have only here referr'd you to Matters of Fact in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth a Reign that the Royal Martyr in p. 3. of his Declaration to all his Loving Subjects of Aug. 12. 1642. refers to with so much honour by saying We declared our Resolution c. and desired that whatsoever mistaking had grown in the Government either of Church or State might be removed and all things reduced to the order of the time the memory whereof is justly precious to this Nation of Queen Elizabeth c. and do leave it to you to consider how Great the Power of Interpretation of Laws is in it self a Power almost infinitely greater then the discharging either the Obligations of some Penal Laws or their Penalties Pro hic nu c and as to some particular Persons as any one will grant who hath seen the extent of the Power of interpreting in the Canon Law where the Glossa ad Cap. Statuimus 4. Distinct. 4. gives us this Interpretation of Statuimus STATUIMUS i. e. ABROGAMUS And I can for this purpose tâ—…ll you that Bartolâ—…s in his Tractatus testimoniorum speaking of the Imperial Power concedendi veniam oetatis saith Carolus quarâ—…us sanctissimus nebilissimus Imperator inter 〈◊〉 multâ—… concessit ut ego meique descendentes quos legibús dâ—…los esse contigerit per un versum imperium oetatis venâ—…am concedere valeâ—…mus servataÌ„ formaÌ„ quoe legibus reperitur insâ—…rta and whereby you see that a Power of dispensing with incapaciâ—…y was by the Prince given as an inheritance But none can imagine that the Power of interpreting Laws can be so conferr'd So that therefore according to the Rule of Law Non debet cui plus licet quoÌ„d minus est non licere you neâ—…d not wâ—…nder at the Prince's dispensing with incapacity in particular cases whom you have seen interpreting Laws And you may consider that if the Queen did contrary to the measures of Law referr'd to in my Lord Coke by her sole Supream Ecclesiastical Authority seem to alter the interpretation of a Stature Oath for the better what she did found afterward its approbation in Parliament and in fine I leave it to you to consider how much the Power of dispensing with any Law may be thought Coincident with interpreting since as I shall some other time shew you at large that the dispensing with Laws is in effect the equitable interpreting that in such and such cases and circumstances they were not intended and ought not to bind but ought to be relax'd And now I must take the occasion offer'd me to give you a prospect of the Queens Dispensative Power both of the Interpretation of this Oath and of the acquittal from Disabilities that is not bounded by the Statutes of 5 o or 8 o Elizabethoe beforemention'd and wherein she again stood on the single basis of her own Supreme Authority Ecclesiastical without having recourse then to a Parliaments approbation Mr. Ney in his learned Observations on the Oath of Sâ—…premacy having spoke of the Queens Interpretation of the Oath in her Admonition and of the Parliamentary Proviso 5 o Eliz. doth thus go on There is something of Explication further meaning of the Oath in the Artiâ—…les of Religion concluded in the year 1562 and then recites the 37th Article as followeth viz. The Queens Majesty hath the Chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the Chief Government of 〈◊〉 Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes
and State resented it in the Conjuncture of A. 1640. I mean Archbishop Williams who in his famous Speech in Parliament that year against the Bill that afterward passed into a Law to Disable Persons in Holy Orders from exercising any Temporal Jurisdiction doth thereupon represent it that under a CAIN ' s mark an eternal kind of disability or incapacity is laid on them from enjoying hereafter any of those Rights Favours or Charters of former Princes and which is the heaviest Point of all without killing of Abel or any Crime laid to their charge more then that in the beginning of the Bill 't is said roundly and in the style of Lacedaemon that they ought not to intermeddle c. And what his thoughts were of the Injustice of such incapacity put on the Clergy and of the odiousness of that Punishment of incapacity appears by what he afterward saith viz. I come to the 4th part of this Bill which is the manner of the inhibition every way heavy in the Penalty heavier a great deal in the incapacity In the weighing the Penalty will you consider the small wyers that is poor Causes that are to induce the same and then the heavy load that hangs upon these wyers It is thus If a Natural Subject of England interessed in the Magna Charta and Petition of Right as well as any other yet being a Person in Holy Orders shall happen unfortunately to Vote in Parliament to obey his Prince by way of Councel or by way of a Commissioner be required thereunto then is he presently to lose and forfeit for his first offence all his Means and Livelyhood c. This Peradventure may move others most but it doth not me It is not the Penalty but the Incapacity aâ—…d as the Philosophers would call it the Natural impotency imposed by this Bill on men in holy Orders to SERVE the KING or the STATE in this kind be they otherwise never so able or never so willing or never so vertuous which makes me draw a kind of Timanthe ' s veil over this Point and leave it without any amplification at all to your Lordships wise and inward Thoughts and Considerations But if with so much thunder of Passion as well as lightning of reason that learned Speech from the Bishops Bench did so much resent the punishing the Clergy with disability to execute secular Offices and to have the honour of serving their Prince and Country therein and for the imposing of which disability that known place of Scripture 2 Tim. 2. 4. No man that wars entangles himself with the Affairs of this life was alledged in the House as thus disabling them by the Law Divine and as to which the Bishop in his Speech gives a learned Answer we may well imagine how Lay-men of good Births and Educations and whose Diligence employ'd in Courts and Cities and Camps abroad may have qualify'd them here to stand before Kings must necessarily aggravate in their thoughts the dishonour of incapacity to serve their Prince in secular Employments A. Was that Speech of the Archbishop ever printed B. You will find it in the Apology for the Bishops to sit and Vote in Parliament printed in London A. 1661. And he hath in that Speech some other Expressions which corroborate that obvious natural notion of the King and Kingdom being disabled by disabling of Clergy-men from secular Employments For having reflected on the Bill for disabling them from sitting in the Star-chamber and at the Council-table sitting in Commissions of the Peace and other Commâ—…ssions of secular Affairs he afterward saith But my noble Lords this is the Case Our King hath by the Statute restored to him the Headship of the Church of England And by the word of God he is custos utriusque tabulae And will your Lordships allow this ecclesiastical Head no ecclesiastical Senses No Ecclesiastical Persons to be censulted with at all No not in any Circumstances of time and place If Cramner had been thus dealt with in the Minority of our young Jâ—…sias King Edward the 6th what had become of that great work of our Reformation in this flourishing Church of England A. The truth is it being a kind of a Rule that all Men of Parts who have been liberally educated and even those excelling in mechanical professions do naturally desire to serve the King and standing before Kings having been annext in Scripture as a reward to diligence in ones calling a Mark of disability put on Lay-men to serve their Prince cannot but tempt them to passion on that account more then it ought to have troubled the Bishop when he call'd it a Caiâ—…'s Mark in regard you have mention'd it that Clergy-men to some did seem by the Law-Divine disabled from secular Employments B. According to the Opinion of Iudge Vaughan in his Reports who in Hill and Good 's Case there makes a lawful Canon to be the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament and whatever is the Law is as much the Law as any thing else that is so for what is Law doth not suscipere magis aut minus they were by the Canon Law disabled from intermedling in secular Affairs And according to his description of malum prohibitum in Thomas Sorreâ—…'s case p. 358. you may say they were by the Statute so disabled from intermedling For he there saith malum prohibitum is that which is prohibited per le statute Per le statute is not intended only an Act of Parliament but any obliging Law or Constitution as appears by the Case for it is said the King may dispense with a Bastard to take Holy Orders or with a Clerk to have two Benefices with Cure which were mala prohibita by the canon-Canon-Law and by the Council of Lateran not by Act of Parliament The Lateran Council his Lordship there means is that held under Alexander the 3d A. 1180 and which Council hath it in these words viz. neque servi neque spurii sunt ordinandi And uni plura ecclesiastica beneficia non sunt committenda And therefore the Bishop in that Speech saith That this Doctrine of debarring Persons in Holy Orders from secular Employments is the Doctrine of the Popish Church and first brought into this Kingdom by the Popâ—…s of Rome and Lanfrank Anselm Stephen Langthon and Othobone and with an intent to withdraw the Clergy from tâ—…eir receiving Obligations from either King or Lords and make them wholly dependants on the Popacy But Bishop Iewel tells us in his Apology p. 122. that Veteres Canones Apostolorum illum Episcopum qui simul Civilem magistratum ecclesiasticam functionem obire velit jubent ab officio summoveri A. Yet notwithstanding their being disabled by the antient Canons and the Nemo militans c. 2 Tim. 2. as often alledged against them by the Canons and Canonists I think they were frequently employ'd by our Princes in the greatest Offices of the State. B. They were so and the
them had been by those Clergymen and Laymen prepared for his Royal Consideration and been by him establish'd he there declares his Power of so doing to be pursuant to his Supreme Headship of the Church of England recogniz'd quemadmodum divini atque humani juris tatio postulat and mentions the Power granted to him and his Ancestors ipso jure divino as recognized and applies to himself the words Sapientioe cap. 7. Audite Reges intelligite quoniam data est a Domino potestas vobis c. and founding his Power of making Ecclesiastical Laws on that jus Divinum he saith En vobis authoritate nostra editas leges damus c. And here I shall tell you that as my Lord Coke in Cawdry's Case calls the Act of the 24th of H. 8. beforemention'd An Act declaratory of the Ancient Law so he likewise doth the Act of the 25th of his Reign c. 21. that so much props up the Dispensative Power And I assure you that they look but at a few things in general and in that Statute in particular who think that the Dispensative Power inherent in the King lost any ground thereby and he who takes the Statute altogether will find that that Power if it seem'd in any words to go back from it self was but by such retreat to leap the further forward For if you will take a glancing view of the intent of that Statute to that end you will see that instead of that Law making it self to be the Fountain of the Dispensative Power it makes the Dispensative Power to be the very Fountain of a great part of the Common Law it self for its style gives you the figure of our Laws as either devised made and obtain'd within this Realm for the wealth of the same or such as by SUFFERANCE of your Grace and your Progenitors which is a Dispensation by way of Permission or Connivence the People of this your Realm have taken at their free Liberty by their own Consent to be used among them and have bound themselves by long use and Custom to the observance of the same c. And the King in his Legislative Capacity having with the consent of the three Estates superseded the Pope's Dispensative Power that had so long Usurp'd on the King's Laws and having provided that the Money that should be paid as Fees for Dispensations should be rais'd and moderated by their Consent obtain'd from them a Clause in the Act containing so great a deference to the Dispensative Power of the Crown as that after the Act had authorized the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Successors to grant such Dispensations Licences and Faculties as were accustomed to be had from the See of Rome and not grant any others till the King his Heirs and Successors or their Councel were first advertised thereof and determined whether they should pass It Provided that if it were thought and determin'd by the King his Heirs and Successors or their Councel that Dispensations Faculties Licences or other Writings in any such Case UNWONT shall pass that then the said Archbishop or his Commissary having Licence of His Majesty his Heirs and Successors for the same shall dispense with them accordingly and in Case of his refusing to dispense that any other two Bishops the King his Heirs and Successors should nominate should be appointed to dispense in such Cases And this Act with all the Clauses in it you find reviv'd by the 1st of Elizabeth c. 1. The Pope's rehabilitations did customarily extend to Lay-men as well as Clergy-men and that particularly in case of Heterodoxy in Religion then call'd Heresy which both by ancient usage and Acts of Parliament loaded men with various incapacities And his relaxing the incapacities that relate to Clergy-men any one may see by the Taxa Cameroe and the Fees thereby payable viz. in the Age of those who were to take Orders and were defective in some of their Members and in the Case of Clergy-mens incapacity incurr'd by irregularity But after this Act of the 25. of H. the 8th had shew'd the World the Authority the King had to rehabilitate and dispense here in his own Country both as to matters customarily dispens'd with at Rome and such as were not so and how small the Fees were for the same the bringing rehabilitations and Perinde valere's from Rome to England was like carrying Coals to New-Castle A. I was not satisfy'd with your extending the King's Power of Dispensing here as far as the Pope's reach'd and it seems you extend it further I hope you intend not to bring in here the Tax of the Apostolical Chancery and which Mr. Crashaw translating into English in the year 1625. call'd it The Rates of the Pope's Custom-house and wherein are contain'd Indulgences for Sins past present and to come and such a kind of Pardoning Power as in The historical Narration of the first Fourteen years of King James appear'd to that King so scandalous in the Case of the Draught of the Earl of Somerset's Pardon and in which Sir Robert Cotton having been desired by the Earl to find out the largest Pardon that former Presidents could shew brought him one that was made by the Pope to Cardinal Wolsey and by a fac simile after which the Draught of the Earls ran for Pardoning all manner of Felonies and Treasons committed and to be committed B. Premising to you that the Christian offices do more call on you to mind what Sins you dispense with in your self then what the Pope dispenseth with in others and that this present Pope hath spoil'd the Trade of raillery about Indulgences by spoiling the Trade of them and damning so great a number of them and that in his vast Supplies of Money toward the taking of Buda the Souls in Purgatory contributed nothing and that Sir Paul Ricaut in the Life of this Pope having done right to his Vertue in mentioning his having suppress'd an Office of the Virgin Mary and a multitude of Indulgences hath further judiciously observ'd That Wisemen at the Councel of Trent finding that the Doctrine of Indulgences was not solid did but slightly touch it and tho yet it was the CHIEF matter for which that Councel was assembled nothing was determin'd therein but only that Indulgences be used with such Moderation as was approved by the Ancient Custom of the Church that is not at all I say premising all this I shall mind you that I have said enough already to let you see that it is only the ancient Dispensative Iurisdiction of the Crown that I direct you to prop up and more particularly with respect to the Case before you While we are considering the Obligation of an Oath it were pity that the thoughts of either of us should be embarras'd with Moot-points and so without troubling you with a reference to More f. 463. where all the Power of the Pope is not given to the King by the 25th of H. the 8th but is extinct Hallywel ' s
confirm being firmum facere i. e. what was not so before you are not to think that the Parliament in 13 o Eliz. did so They Enacted what was by the Queen before authorized and as the words there are about the Articles viz. Put forth by the Queen's Authority And you may too for this purpose Consult the style of the Act 23 o Eliz. c. 1. Entituled An Act for retaining the Queen's Subjects in their due Obedience and where 't is made Treason for any to withdraw any Subjects from their Natural Obedience to her Majesty or to withdraw them for that intent from the Religion now by her Highness Authority establishâ—…d within her Dominions Thus too as to the Queen's disabling several of the Roman-Catholick Bishops and Deans by her Ecclesiastical Commissioners in the beginning of her Reign pursuant to the Act of 1 o Eliz. c. 1. for restoring to the Crown the Ancient Iurisdiction the Act of Parliament 35 o Eliz. c. 8. entituled Every Deprivation of any Bishop or Dean made in the beginning of the Queen's Reign shall be good and Archbishops Bishops and Deans made by the Queen shall be adjudged lawful begins with acknowledging that the former were justly deprived and it is therefore Declared and Enacted by Authority of this Parliament that all and every Deprivation c. and all and every Sentence of Deprivation c. had pronounced and given c. shall be adjudged deem'd and taken good and sufficient in Law c. and as to the latter viz. That all such Archbishops Bishops and Deans as were ordain'd or made by the Authority or Licence of the Queen's Majesty c. shall be taken and adjudged to be lawful c. Thâ—…y confirmed not what the Queen did in disabling the former and enabling the latter but only declared and enacted the validity of what the Queen had done And here you have again the Judgment of Parliament for approving the Queen's Power of Enabling and Disabling And here too by the way I am to tell you that you have another judgment of Parliament suitable to that in 8 o Eliz. and for the adjudging and taking to be Lawful the making and ordaining of the Archbishops and Bishops by the Authority or Licence of the Queen's Majesty c. any ambiguity or question in that behalf heretofore made to the contrary notwithstanding and which QUESTION before made in the Case I have before shew'd to be disability A. But I suppose you have read of that TWO-FOLD Subscription my Lord Coke speaks of represented as a Gravamen by some B. I have so and the last Book I read that so represents it is the Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet ' s Sermon by some Non-Conformists c. Printed A. 1680. and where in p. 29. they thus express their desires viz. That all New devised Oaths Subscriptions and Declarations together with the Canonical Oath and the Subscription in the Canons be suspended for the time to come If that be too much we shall consent our selves with a modester motion that whatsoever these Declarations be that are required to be made subscribed or sworn they may be imposed only as to the matter and end leaving the takers but free to the use of their own Expressions And this expedient we gather from the Lord Coke who hath providently as it were against such a Season laid in this Observation The form of the Subscription set down in the Canons ratify'd by King Iames was not express'd in the Act of the 13th of Eliz. 4. Inst. c. 74. And consequently if the Clergy enjoy'd this freedom till then in reference to the particulars therein contain'd what binders why they might not have the same restored in reference also to others It was the second Article enjoyn'd by that Canon to be subscribed viz. That the Book of Common-Prayer c. containeth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God and that it may lawfully be used c. at which they took so much offence and to which the Act of Parliament required not their Subscription A. I perceive then my Lord Coke doth not reflect on the form of Subscription as enjoyn'd by the 36th Canon of King Iames and by his Regal Authority out of Parliament as illegal notwithstanding what had been enacted in the 13th of Queen Elizabeth B. He doth not And he there further faith By the Statute of 13. Eliz. the Delinquent is disabled and deprived ipso facto but the Delinquent against the Canon of King James is to be proceeded withall by the Censures of the Church And I heard Wray Chief Iustice in the King's Bench Pasch. 23. El. report That where one Smith subscribed to the said 39 Articles of Religion with this addition so far forth as the same were agreeable to the Word oâ—… God that it was resolv'd by him and aâ—…l the Iudges of England that this Subscription was not according to the Statute of 13. Eliz. because this Statute required an absolute Subscription c. Besides this Subscription when any Clerk is admitted and instituted to any Benefice he is sworn to Canonical Obedience to his Diâ—…cesan But as to his saying that the Delinquent against this Canon is to be proceeded withall by the Censures of the Church I shall observe that the beginning of the Canon doth incapacitate any to be receiv'd into the Ministry who doth not subscribe the three Articles in it and that the Canon doth afterward put some temporary Disabilities on Bishops who shall Ordain Admit or License any one except he first have subscribed in manner and form there appointed and it is the Universities if offending that the Canon leaves to the Danger of the Law and His Majesty's Censure Here then you see King Iames the First did out of Parliament add a new Subscription to what was required by the Act of Parliament and did likewise out of Parliament make incapacity to be the Punishment of refusing such new Subscription And I need not tell you that that Power so exercised by that Prince out of Parliament hath been approved not only by all the Bishops of the Church of England as putting the Form of Subscription required by that Canon in execution ever since and to this day in lieu of the form required by the 13th of Eliz. but as I may say virtually and tacitly by all our Kings and Parliaments ever since who have acquiesced in the same But what if I should tell you that the Authority of the King in thus making that Canon about Subscription hath been since expresly approved in Parliament A. I should be most ready to hear it B. You may therefore please to consult the Act for Uniformity 16 o Car. 2. and in the latter end of it you will see that in a Proviso referring to the 39 Articles as agreed on by the Archbishops c. A. 1562. and particularly to the 36th therein about the Book of Consecration of Archbishops c. set forth in the time of Edward the 6th as
containing all things necessary to such Consecration and Ordering c. It is Enacted c. that all Subscriptions hereafter to be had or made to the said Articles by any Deacon Priest c. or other person whatsoever who by this Act or any OTHER LAW now in force is required to subscribe unto the said Articles shall be construed and taken to extend and shall be applyed for and touching the said 36th Article to the Book containing the form and manner of making ordaining and consecrating of Bishops Priests c. in this Act mentioned in such sort and manner as the same did heretofore extend to the Book set forth in the time of King Edward the 6th mention'd in the said 36th Article any thing in the said Article or in any Statute Act or Canon heretofore had or made to the Contrary hereof in any wise notwithstanding It is clear that the Parliament had then their Eye on the Act of 13. Eliz. and on that Canon of King Iames and which you may take as referr'd to by the words or any other Law now in force for so they then knew it to be and as it still is tho with the interpretation extended by the Act to it and afterward by the word Canon But one may guess that by the Authority of some of the Lords the Bishops there was before the making of this Canon of King Iames and after the Act of 13. Eliz. in her Reign some Subscription under disabling Penalties required of Ministers beyond what that Statute required by what the Author of Certain Considerations tending to promote Peace mentions in p. 4. viz. That in the 30th year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth the House of Commons presented to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal a Petition containing divers particulars for the redress whereof they desire that no Oath or Subscription might be tender'd to any at their entrance into the Ministry but such as is expresly prescribed by the Statutes of the Realm except the Oath against Corrupt entring that they may not be troubled for the omission of some Rites or Portions prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer that such as had been suspended for no other Offence but only for not subscribing might be restored A. It seems those Bishops then did as your Expression was Dispensare in lege and were as I may say Non-conformists to it by going beyond it For they were obliged sapere ad Regulam and all Conformity is respectu regulae and he who doth over-shoot or who over-does what is enjoyn'd is a Non-conformist B. You here put me in mind how some of our Bishops and Clergy have been thus Non-conformists in over-shooting their mark at the same time that they have with undistinguishing severity executed the rigour of the Laws against all who did shoot short The Royal Martyr in his Declaration to all his Loving Subjects Publish'd with the Advice of his Privy Councel A. 1641. refers to some Ceremonies in our Church which have been used without any legal Warrant or Injunction and which already are or speedily may be abolish'd A. But I a little wonder that a House of Commons should Petition for the Dispensing with some legal Rites and required both by Injunctions and Canons and by Acts of Parliament B. I do not wonder at it at all For Conjunctures having happen'd when some Non-conformists having been tender of the Peace of the Government you need not wonder at any tenderness in it for them For as in the Conjuncture of the Resteration of King Charles the Second very many of the Presbyterians and of other Sects then shewing their Loyalty the Author I lately cited taking notice thus of the Declaration A. 1660. viz. in which his Majesty saith Our present Consideration and work is to gratifie the private Cosciences of those who are grieved with some Ceremonies by indulging to and dispensing with the omitting of those Ceremonies A Member of the House of Commons in an Epistle to His Majesty useth these words viz. which Indulgent Declaration so ravished the hearts of all your Loving Subjects that your whole House of Commons their Representatives then assembled in Parliament immediately after the Publication October 8th 1660 repair'd in a Body to White-hall and there by their Speaker's Oration in the Banquetting-House express'd their extraordinary great Ioy and presented their general Thanks to your Majesty for this your Majesty's most gracious Declaration and Dispensation with their Consciences in Matters not being of the substance or essence of Religion which gave abundant satisfaction to all peaceable sob rminded Men and such as are truly Religious in which return of their Thanks they were all unanimous Nemine Contradicente then Ordering a Bill in Pursuance of your Majesty's Declaration Note that this was that House of Commons which together with the House of Lords brought His Majesty to the Throne so long before namely in the first year of King Charles the First and A. 1625. both Houses presented a Petition to the King wherein they desire that His Majesty would please to advise the Bishops by fatherly entreaty and tender usâ—…ge to reduce to the peaceable and orderly Service of the Church such able Ministers as have been formerly SILENCED c. and which is in effect all one such able Ministers as have been formerly disabled A. I am highly pleas'd with your further bringing any thing to me like Iudgment of Parliament that may strengthen the Regal Power of interpreting or of dispensing with disability We have discours'd of the Subject a pretty while together at this Meeting and I must acknowledge you have entertain'd me with an account of many Statutes that have propp'd up the Regal Power of dispensing with disability and that too tho you observ'd it not to me not only in their Preambles but in their enacting parts the which I account more momentous Nor can I forbear observing it to you that in the late Printed Books of some who asserted this dispensative Power nothing like Iudgment of Parliament hath been cited in the case for it but that out of Rot. Parl. 1. H. 5. 11. 22. out of Rolle Tit. Prerogative le Roy fol. 180. viz. The Commons prayed that the Statutes for voiding of Aliens out of the Kingdom might be executed to which the Kiâ—…g agreed saving his Prerogative that he might dispense with such as he pleas'd And upon this the Commons answer'd that their intention was no other nor ever should be by the help of God. But this was only the judgment of a House of Commons and that is short of the Authority of a House of Lords concurring with them tho but in a Petitionary manner that the Regal Dispensative Power might be exerted and which latter is far short of the Authority of an Act of Parliament And among the many Parliamentary Recognitions of the Dispensative Power you have mentionâ—…d to me that which you told me at our first meeting of the Act of Uniformity 16 o Car. 2.
Religion being the same almost Verbatim with those formerly agreed on in the Spanish Treaty And he there refers to Rot. Tractationis Ratificationis Matrimonâ—… inter Dom. Carolum Regem Dom. Henret Mariam Sororem Regis Franc. 1 o Cat. in the Rolls and then in p. 71. saith Besides these general Articles of the Match these particular ones were concluded and agreed on in favour of the Roman-Catholicks the same in Substance with those of Spain and where he saith the Second is to this effect that the English Catholicks should be no more searched after or molested for their Religion But Mr. Prynne there particularly sets down only three short Articles and those comprised in about six lines and the words or molâ—…ted in the second Article are Printed in a different Character from the others as if he thereby intended them as his own Explication of the word searched A. You just now mention'd King Iames his having in the year 1622. order'd all the Popish Recusants who were in Prison on the account of their Religion to be set at liberty and you told me how he tacitly dispens'd with the Disability that Popish Physicians and Lawyers had incurr'd by Act of Parliament Was that all the favour he shew'd Roman-Catholicks B. No He allow'd them to make a very Considerable figure in the Government as you may find if you consult the Iournals of Parliament as referr'd to by Mr. Prynne p. 66. Seq of that Book For he there mentions that in the year 1624. The Commons sent a Petition to the Lords desiring their Concurrence with them in presenting it to His Majesty for removing Popish Recusants and those whose Wives were Papists from Offices of Trust which by Law they were DISABLED to execute which the Lords took into their Consideration and which Mr. Prynne saith was enter'd in their Iournal in this manner Die Jovis viz. Vicessimo die Maii 1624. The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury reported that at the meeting this Day with the Commons they Presented an humble Petition to the King desiring this House to joyn therein with them The which Petition was read in haec verba c. In short the Commons in their Petition take notice of the Growth of the Number of Popish Recusants in this Kingdom and of their insolency in all the Parts thereof and that many of them contrary to the Laws were gâ—…t into Offices and Places of Government and Authority under the King And the Prayer of the Petition is That the Lords and Gentlemen there undernamed may be removed from all His Majesty's Commissions of great Charge and Trust Commissions of Lieutenancy Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace and from all other Offices and Places of Trust. And they in their first Schedâ—…le there name 11 Lords and 18 Knights And in their second they name many Persons of Quality who were in Places of Charge and Trust in their several Counties and had marry'd Popish Wives and whose Children and Servants were bred up to Popery A. Doth any Act of Parliament disable a man from bearing Office because his Wife is a Papist or because his Children or Servants are bred up to be Papists B. Yes the Act of the Third of King Iames the First cap. 5. doth it as you will see if you consult it for 't is there Enacted That no Popish Recusant Convict nor any having a Wife being a Popish Recusant Convict shall at any time after this Session of Parliament or any Popish Recusant hereafter to be Convict or having a Wife which hereafter shall be a Recusant Convict at any time after his or her Conviction shall exercise any publick Office or Charge in the Common-wealth but shall be utterly DISABLED to exercise the same by himself or his Deputy except such Husband himself and his Children which shall be above the age of Nine years abiding with him and his Servants in Houshold shall once every Month in the least repair to some Church usual for Divine Service and there hear Divine Service and the said Husband and such his Children and Servants as are of meet Age receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and do bring up his said Children in true Religion A. Now have you set me a longing to know what the House of Lords did in the Case of that Petition about removing those disabled Persons from serving the King in those great Stations And since the Judgment of Parliament was always had in such great veneration I think if the result of the desire of the House of Commons was that the Lords had joyn'd with them in the Petition and had urged that the King could not dispense with that Act of Parliament and Pardon Disability it may make a notable President in the Case we have been discussing B. You will find that the Commons urged nothing to the prejudice of Prerogative in the Prayer of their Petition Their style there was We humbly beseech your Majesty graciously to vouchsafe that the said Lords and Gentlemen here under-named for this important Reason and for the greater Safety of your Majesty and of your Realm may be removed from all your Majesty's Commissions of great Charge and Trust Commissions of Lieutenancy c. And the important reason did refer to the great Countenance hereby given to Popery the great grief and offence to all his best affected and true loving Subjects by putting the Power of Arms into such mens hands as by former Acts of His Majesty's Councel are adjudged Persons justly to be suspected c. But to let you see what the House of Lords did hereupon Mr. Prynne tells you p. 69. That this Petition being read the House did defer the Debate thereof at this time for that the day was far spent And answer was given to the Commons who attended for the same in the Painted Chamber that the Lords will send them an Answer of this Petition hereafter when they are resolv'd thereof Whereupon Mr. Prynne concludes his account of this Transaction thus Whether any of these were displaced upon this Petition I find not in any Memorials it being certain some of them were not but continued still in these Offices of Trust. A. How have you here disappointed my Curiosity in making that ferment then in the Government about the Disability of the Papists being dispens'd with thus silently to go off through the House of Lords forbearing to joyn with the House of Commons in their Petition B. I shall here afford your Curiosity a recompence by observing it to you with allusion to some of the words of the Royal Martyr in his Answer to the 19 Propositions That the ancient equal happy well poysed and never enough commended Constitution of the Government of this Kingdom having made this Nation so famous and happy to a great degree of Envy c. and the Lords being trusted with a Iudicatory Power are an excellent Screen and Bank between the Prince and the People to assist each against any Encroachment of
the other c. that the Wisdom of that House in acting as it hath done in many Conjunctures hath put an end to many ferments accidentally occasion'd by others mistakes about Prerogative and whereby that august Assembly did sometimes Cunctando restituere rem and by its forbearing out of tenderâ—…ess for Prerogative to give judgment about it hath often to the Satisfaction both of the Prince and People left the Regal Rights in their ancient quiet Estate I shall for this purpose observe to you that I once reading to the late Earl of Anglesy when he was Lord Privy Seal what I had in a Manuscript of mine set down as the Fact of what had passed between the late King and the House of Commons concerning his Declaration of Indulgence on March the 15th 1671. and the Penal Laws being thereby suspended and the suspension of which the Commons then urged could not be but by Act of Parliament and whereupon they apply'd to the King for the Vacating that Declaration his Lordship did dictate to me in order to my Compleating the state of that Fact and which I writ from his Mouth as followeth viz. But it is to be observ'd upon this whole Transaction between the King and the House of Commons that the Lords had no hand in the Address to the King about this great Point altho it be uncontroverted that the Lords are the only Iudicatory that can determine any controverted Point without an Act of Parliament and either the King or the Commons might in a particular Case have had this Point brought by Appeal to the Lords if they had pleas'd and consequently might have effected the judicial decision of the same A. In your State of that part of the Fact that concern'd the Commons did they Address against the Dispensing with Acts of Parliament B. No but only against the Suspending them which are things of a different Nature The same House of Commons by having Iuly the 10th 1663. resolved That His Majesty be humbly desired to issue forth his Proclamation for the punctual and effectual Execution and Observance of the Act of Navigation without any Dispensation whatsoever whereby the Act may be in the least violated and to recal such Dispensations as are already granted c. did virtually shew a Deference to His Majesty's right of Dispensing Nay let me tell you that the very many Acts of Parliaments which expresly provide against the Crown 's dispensing by Non-obstante in some particular Cases may all be cited as Presidents or Iudgments of Parliaments for the propping up the Dispensative Power and of Parliaments having admitted that Power in our Kings the exercise of which they provide against and desire to take away in such particular Cases But by referring to the Fact of the entercourse between the late King and the House of Commons about the suspending the Penal Laws I have took occasion to point out to you the Wisdom of the Government in then passing that affair over without a judicial decision And I can give you an instance of the Prudential measures formerly observ'd by Persons who made a great figure in the Administration of the Ecclesiastical Government of the Church of England and who at the Consecration of Bishop Manwaring when on the usual Process at Consecrations to call all Persons to appear to shew cause why the Elect should not be Confirm'd some then appear'd objected against him that upon his being Impeached 3 o Car. 1. by the Commons the Lords had given Iudgment against him to disable him from all Preferment in the Church forbore to consider the merits of the Exception and throwing them off by a Pretence of their being defective in some Formalities of Law went on in the Confirmation And which is more I can tell you that long afterward viz. A. 1640. the Lords highly resenting both the Pardon and Bishoprick he had obtain'd and calling to mind the Sentence they had pronounced against him did on the 18th of April that year refer the Consideration thereof to their Grand Committee for Privileges it being also moved that what can be alledged on the Lord Bishop of St. David ' s part either by Pardon Licence or otherwise may be produced and seen at the Sitting of the Lords Committees for their full and clear understanding and better expedition in the business and on the 21st of April that year order'd that on the following Monday the Records be brought into the House that the House might determine the Cause and on the 27th of April following order'd the Cause to be heard the next day and upon which day some such fatal Sentence being expected against the Bishop as And his Bishoprick let another man take by reason of his having been judicially disabled His Majesty commanded that Bishop not to Sit in Parliament nor send any Proxy thither and the serment of the debate went off without any Iudgment given by the Lords that might touch Prerogative in the Point And if in the year 1640. when the air of mens fancies was so much infected with the Pestilence of Faction so much tenderness was shewn to Prerogative and that too in the Case of a Criminal whom the Commons had for so many years made the great object of their anger as one whom they look'd on as a Proditor or Betrayer of his Country and Betrayer of their Properties the Loyal may well say quid non speremus as to any future ferment that can rise in Parliament being allay'd without Prejudice to the Crown The Iournals of Parliament in the Beginning of the Reign of King Charles the First do tell us of the great ferment about the Pardon of Bishop Montague whom the Commons had impeach'd before the Lords and who after the Parliament was Prorogued to the 4th year of the reign of that Prince had obtain'd his Pardon in the time of the Prorogation and that such Pardon was by the Commons question'd and that such questioning soon evaporated But according to that Great Saying of Sir Harry Martin in his Speech at a Conference between both Houses as you will find it in Râ—…shworth after he had mention'd the inconvenience of nice debates about the Original Latitude and Bounds of Sovereign Power viz. I have ever been of opinion that it is then best with Sovereign Power when it is had in tacit veneration and not when it is prophaned by Publick Hearings and Examinations you will find that it hath been the usual Practice of our great Loyal Patriots in many Critical Conjunctures of time to prevent the popular Criticising on Controverted Points of Prerogative and to provide for the ease both of Prince and People by giving no other rule in the Cause then the putting it off in longissimum diem A. I suppose that excellent Political remark of Sir Harry Martin's was so made by him in the Conjuncture of the Petition of Right I have read of the great ferment the Petition of Right made in the beginning of the Reign
have a Legislative Power in the Affairs of Religion and the Church and where he saith that the LEAST part of this Power is to permit the free exercise of it and to remove all Impediments and to give it Advantages of free Assemblies and Competent maintenance and Publick Encouragements c. And shall then shew you what Power Circa Sacra the Church of England with great Prudence and Justice allow'd our Princes in the introducing the Reformation and which its Constitutions and Canons have since owned and from the allowance of which Power our great Church-men then knew there could be vestigia nulla retrorsum in the Case of a Prince of any other Religion coming to the Crown But I shall at present tell you that as to what I have mention'd to you out of Suarez and that Bishop altho you need neither now nor at any time to charge your memory with the subtlety of Distinctions and of the Propriè and minus Propriè when you are in eager pursuit of the substance of things you will find in both those Authors what is very substantial about the Doctrine of Dispensing and what I have cited of their rendring Dispensing and Interpreting thus Co-incident is à propos and may mind you of Princes being both empow'red and obliged in Justice in their administration of the executive Power of their Laws to declare or interpret their Religionary Penal Laws as dispensable in relation to particular times and Persons And you may therefore here call to mind that passage in the Council of Trent viz. That on Fryar Adrian ' s vociferating there about the Pope's dispensing being an Arbitrary favour Verdune the famous French Divine took him down with saying that it is a fond Perswasion that Dispensing is a mere favour for it is as good distribute Iustice as what is most so And the Priest sins if he giveth it not for it is nothing else but a right Interpretation of Law. You may very well suppose that thoughts arising from those words in the Ordination of Bishops viz. That you have your Authority not to destroy but to save not to hurt but to help c. to be so merciful as not to be remiss so to administer Discipline as not to forget Mercy c. have formerly inclined our Bishops in the Reigns of King Iames and King Charles the First to think themselves obliged to interpret and declare the Laws about Church discipline as dispensable and to dispense with them in the Cases of Mr. Hildersham and Mr. Dod as I told you at our last meeting And can you here see an Act of Parliament that thus sâ—…tleth the Ordination of Bishops and which Act not only allows but requires them thus to Interpretari dispensare in lege or in an Act of Parliament and fancy it possible for the King when as the Act of 37 o H. 8. tells you that Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons and other Ecclesiastical Persons have no manner of Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical but by under and from His Royal Majesty not to be empow'red to exercise such Jurisdiction And I may here add that when it is declared in the Statute of 1 o Eliz. c. 2. that the Queen's Majesty may ordaâ—… such further Ceremonies and Rites as may be most for the advancement of God's Glory c. will any one wonder at the Crowns relaxing the Penal Laws about Rites and Ceremonies in the Case of particular Persons and as Edward the 6th as is known did in the Case of Bishop Hooper And if you have a mind to see an Act of Parliament that not only approves the Prince's remitting of his Penal Laws but what applauds some excess in so doing I can for that purpose direct you to the Act of 1 o Edw. 6. c. 12. in the beginning of which 't is said Nothing being more Godly more sure more to be wish'd and desired between a Prince the Supreme Head and Ruler and the Subjects whose Governor and Head he is then on the Prince's part great Clemency and Indulgency and rather too much indulgency and remission of his Royal Power and just Punishment then exact Severity and Iustice to be shew'd c. But as when we were near the end of our former Conference you rightly observ'd that many perverse People would be crying out that any lawful Dispensing with the Laws establish'd was Contradictio in adjecto so I shall now observe to you that any who to the diminishing from a Prince's Character of being just presume to insinuate it that a Prince's valuing himself on that Character and yet shewing mercy to some in releasing them from the Bonds and Penalties of some of his Laws is a Contradiction do appear to me great objects of Compassion in so erring And for this I shall refer you to the Happy future State of England where in p. 233. 't is said that He who separates Mercy from Iustice is unjust to the very name of Iustice and robbeth it of the better half of its signification leaving its teeth and claws and taking away its heart and bowels Jarchas the Indian and Chief of the Brachmans in Philostratus is brought in finding fault with Apollonius Tyaneus and others of the Greeks for that they confined and apply'd the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those only who do no wrong to one another and telling them that they were in an error for saith he among the Chiefest Offices of Iustice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 together with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be reckon'd up And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 just and kind men are convertible terms in Aristophanes and joyn'd both together in Plutarch and Aristotle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moderation or Clemency is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a piece of justice better then all justice And you will find Mr. Gregory there cited for relating it in his Opusâ—… That the Mahumetans have another Lord's Prayer call'd by them the Prayer of Jesus the Son of Mary and that endeth thus And let not such a one bear rule over me that will have no Mercy on me for thy Mercies sake O thou most merciful A. I say Amen to that Petition and do at the same time pay my thanks to Heaven for that one doth bear rule over me in whose great Genius Iustice and Mercy do appear to the World as the same thing and whose Iustice when ever any one shall come to Paint in Story he will not need to do it in the way of a half-face to hide any defect of Mercy and wherein if any Prince be deficient his Historian will be put to do it in the way I mention'd and as Pliny tells us Appelles drawing the Face of a King who had but one Eye and intending to conceal that defect was put upon the Painting him turning his Visage a little away and so shewing but the one side of his Face and from whence Pliny makes the Invention of that
all his Subjects it might have sufficiently satisfy'd you therein and if at our next meeting you will have me dilate more on what our Lawyers have said about the Point of the debt of our Natural allegiance I shall do it A. Our great Lawyers Judgments in that Point being known may be variously useful and directive to the many illiterate and presumptuous Reflecters on the exercise of Prerogative and especially if so learned and so popular a Lawyer as Sir Edward Coke shall be by you further cited in such a Case And so what you shall acquaint me with as from any such one of them shall be kindly welcome B. What you have now said brings it into my mind how that Great popular Man Sir Edward Coke was cited for this purpose by that great popular Man Sir William Iones in his learned Argument in Thomas Dorcel's Case and where he did so much right to the DISPENSATIVE Power A. What Did Sir William Iones maintain the King's Power of Dispensing with Acts of Parliament B. Yes and I believe was never censured for so doing by any one A. I pray tell me what was said by him in his Argument B. Then according to the very Learned and Judicious and Candid Manuscript Report I have of the Case thus it was Among the three Points made the first being if the Non-obstante in the Patent of King James was good against the Statute of Edw. 6. Jones agreed that the King may by Non-obstante dispense with a thing Prohibited by Statute if the thing were lawful before the Statute were made And he afterward said that a Dispensation to one and his Heirs was never good but only in that of a Sheriff 2. H. 7. 6. Grant of a Shrievalty in fee Non-obstante the Statute But Coke 7. R. 14. Calvin's Case the Reason of that is because the King hath interest to have the Service of all his Subjects by the Law of Nature And the truth is that on this noble and great Consideration it is that our Divines who have treated of the OATH of SUPREMACY have fix'd the reasonableness and intent of that Oath and of the King 's having a right to Command the Obedience of all his Subjects upon the basis of the Law of Nature as well as on the Divine Law Positive And thus too the style of the Acts of Parliament about the Oath of Allegiance runs and which Acts you may Consult if you want any more Iudgments of Parliament about the indissolubility of the King 's right to Command the Obedience of the Subject and of the Subjects duty to obey before we meet again The reasonableness of the words in that Oath contain'd in the Statute of 3 tio Iacobi viz. Of declaring that the Pope hath no Power to discharge any of his Majesty's Subjects of their Obedience appears from its being call'd in that Statute their Natural Obedience And the putting in Practice the perswading or withdrawing any of the King's Subjects from their Natural Obedience to his Majesty or to reconcile them to the Pope or See of Rome is there made Treason We will speak more of other Statutes of this nature at our next meeting And in the mean time let me observe to you how as in the Conjuncture of the Exclusion so many were infatuated as for fear of Popery to come to run upon the very Court of Rome-Popery at present namely that of Dominium fundatur in Gratiâ so likewise many mens fear of the belief of perhaps some Religionary Tenets of Popery gaining ground for the future hath hunted them upon the Popery of thinking that Subjects CAN in part or in whole be discharged from their Natural Obedience to their Prince A. I thank you Sir for suggesting that to me for the truth is the tenet of thinking it lawful so to discharge Subjects from such their Natural Obedience is the very odiosa materia charged by so many on the Councel of Lateran B. You say right But however let me occasionally advise you not to charge the odious matter in that Councel on the Communion of the Church of Rome For I shall tell you that the great Writers of our Church did after the real Plot of the Gun-Powder-Treason pursue such noble Methods of Christian Charity as with an intent of improving the Principles of Loyalty and Allegiance among all our Roman-Catholick Countrymen to endeavour to prove with all their Learning that the Decrees of that Councel obliged no Papist in point of Conscience King Iames in his Works calls it but a Pretended Councel and Dr. Donne in his Pseudo-Martyr endeavours to prove it no Councel Moreover Bishop Bilson in his learned Works for maintaining the Oath of Supremacy saith that Nothing was Concluded in the Councel of Lateran I have here on the Table his Book call'd The Difference between Christian Subjection and Un-christian Rebellion Printed A. 1586 in which his Learned and Iudicious Assertions and Explications of the Regal Supremacy and of our Moral Offices to defend the same are comprised and there in Part 3. p. 6. you will find what he saith of the Lateran Councel A. I have not the Book and shall be glad I may borrow it from you that thereby I may have the better prospect of the Measures of our Divines in their Sense of the Assertory part of the Oath of Supremacy as making the Rights of our Kings to Command the Services of all their Subjects to be indissoluble B. I pray take it along with you And I am the rather desirous you should do it because in this Crooked and Perverse Generation many who strain their Consciences by the inobservance of the Oath may be so vain as to fancy that others strain the Oath who endeavour as I have done to build the Right of our Kings to Command the Services of their Subjects on its so firm Foundation He was trusted by the Government to write on the Subject of the Oath and so his Authority is of the more weight and I shall here at parting read to you what he saith in Part 2. p. 183. where he so well insinuates it that the Prince can freely permit safely defend generally restrain and externally punish within the Realm but in p. 328. having spoke of the true Supremacy of Princes he saith This is the Supremacy which we attribute to Princes that all Men within their Territories should obey their Laws or abide their Pleasures and that no man on Earth hath Authority to take their Swords from them by Iudicial Sentence or Martial Violence And he there had before said in his Margin the Sword of Princes is Supreme in that it is not Subject to the Pope and must be obey'd of all in things that are good What he saith likewise in p. 346. there is worth your reading where he makes the word Supreme to be a plain and manifest deduction out of the 13th of the Romans Let every Soul be subject to the Superior Powers If all Men must be subject to them ergo they are Superior to all and Superior to all is Supreme He then thus goeth on in his Dialogue-way Phil S. Paul maketh them Superiors over all Persons but not over all things Theop. That Distinction is ours meaning Protestants not yours we did ever interpret Supreme for Superior to all men within their Dominions Phil. And so we grant them to be but not in all things For in Temporal things they are Superior to all men in Spiritual they are not Theop. That restraint comes too late the Holy Ghost charging you to be subject to them simply without addition It passeth your reach to limit in what things you will and in what things you will not be subject And he there saith Out of all Question where Princes may by God's Law Command all men must obey them not only for fear of wrath but for Conscience sake To this purpose too he asserts the Supremacy in the following Page All men are bound to be subject to the Sword in all things be they Temporal or Spiritual not only by Suffering but also by Obeying but with this Caution that in things that are good and agreeable to the Law of God the Sword must be obey'd in things that are otherwise it must be endured At the same rate you will find him writing in his Third Part p. 7. The Word of God bindeth you to obey Princes the words of men cannot loose you But if you will there take notice of the fire of his Zeal breaking into a flame at the thoughts of the displacing of Princes from their Thrones and of the discharging of the People from the Oath and Obedience toward Princes he saith that they who will go to that turn Religion into Rebellion Patience into Violence Words into Weapons Preaching into Fighting Fidelity into Perjury Subjection into Sedition and instead of the Servants of God which they might be by enduring they become the Soldiers of Satan by resisting the Powers which God hath ordain'd A. I thank God I am a Member of the Church of England that may value it self not only on its Doctrine of NON-RESISTANCE but on its DOCTRINE of Positive ASSISTANCE and DEFENCE of all Iurisdictions Privileges Pre-eminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the King c. or united and annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm B. And how from this great Promissory part of our Oath our Obligation to assist and defend the Iurisdiction Privilege Pre-eminence and Authority of the Dispensative Power in particular granted or belonging to the King and united and annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm doth arise we will at our next meeting consider and when I will likewise shew you that the Prerogative royal is a part of the Lex terrae The End of the Second PART 1370. Ex Rot. Parl. in turr Lâ—…nd in 45. Ed. tertii Iustifiables in the French originals Quaere Whether not able todo justice or not to be juststify'd in their Employment as improper for it
THE OBLIGATION Resulting from the OATH of SUPREMACY To Assist and Defend the Pre-eminence or Prerogative OF THE Dispensative Power BELONGING To the KING his Heirs and Successors In the asserting of that Power various Historical Passages occurring in the Usurpation after the Year 1641. are occasionally mentioned And an Account is given at large of the Progress of the Power of Dispensing as to Acts of Parliament about Religion since the Reformation and of divers Judgments of Parliaments declaring their Approbation of the Exercise of such Power and particularly in what concerns the Punishment of Disability or Incapacity Princes are Supreme over Persons not over Things This is the Supreme Power of Princes which we teach that they be Gods Ministers in their own Dominions bearing the Sword and freely to permit and publickly to Defend that which God commandeth in Faith and good Manners c. Princes may Command the Bodies of all their Subjects in time both of War and Peace c. Out of all Question where Princes may by God's Law Command all Men must obey them c. The Prince may discharge the Servant but no Man can discharge the Subject The Word of God teacheth you to obey Princes the words of men cannot loose you BISHOP BILSON of the SUPREMACY LONDON Printed for Thomas Dring at the Harrow at Chancery-Lane End in Fleetstreet William Crook at the Green Dragon without Temple-Bar and William Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street 1687. To the Right Honorable JOHN Earl of MELFORT Viscount of Forth Lord Drummond of Rickartone c. His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Kingdom of Scotland and one of His Majesty's most Honorable Privy Council in both Kingdoms of England and Scotland c. MY LORD AS the Historian hath told us of Ireland that long ago while the Arts and Sciences were generally banish'd from the Christian World they were enthroned in Ireland and that Men were sent thither from other Parts of Christendom to be improved in Learning so I have elsewhere observ'd that in some late Conjunctures and particularly during the turbid Interval of the Exclusion men might well be sent to Scotland to learn Loyalty And I having taken occasion in the first Part of this Discourse to shew my self a just honourer of that Country and as I may say somewhat like a Benefactor to it by sending thither the notices of some pass'd great Transactions that might possibly there give more light and life to the Moral Offices of Natural Allegiance or Obedience did hold my self obliged in Common Justice to address this Part of my Work to your Lordship For as your Station here qualifies you beyond other Subjects to receive what Tribute is offer'd to your Country so your handing it thither will necessarily make it there the more acceptable And when I consider with what an incomparable Tenderness for the Monarchy and its Rights so many of the Statutes of Scotland since the Year 1660. have been adorn'd I am apt to think that any matter of Presidents or Records by me recover'd out of the Sea of time where they lay so long useless and neglected and now happening to be serviceable to those Moral Offices before-mention'd would by the so many in that Kingdom devoted to consummate Obedience and Loyalty be more valued then if I could have imported into that Realm another such Treasure as that which lay so long buried in the Ocean near the Bahama Islands and that whoever Contributed to your Loyal Country any Substantial Notions that might enrich it in the discharge of the Duties of the born and sworn Allegiance would be esteem'd there as some way sharing in the honour of Arauna in giving like a King to a King. Long may your great Master live happy in the Enjoyment of the faithful Services of so vigilant a Minister as your Lordship who by the universality of your Knowledge accompany'd with universal Charity for all Mankind have appear'd to be born as I may say for the time of his most glorious Reign the time chosen by Heaven for Mercies Triumph on Earth Nothing vulgar was to be expected from a Person of your Lordship's extraordinary intellectual and moral Endowments and in whom the Loyalty and other Virtues of your many noble Ancestors have as it were lived extraduce And the World would be unjust to you if it acknowledged not its great Expectation answer'd by your greater Performances and particularly by your having been so eminently Ministerial in the Easing both the Cares of your Prince and of all his Subjects too by the Figure you have made in promoting the Ease of his People's Consciences and in further ennobling and endearing the Name of DRUMMOND by your Lordship's Prosecuting that by the Bravery of Action which the HISTORIAN of that your Name did by Words when he transmitted to Posterity the most Christian and Statesman-like Speech of Liberty of Conscience I know extant and as spoke by a Roman-Catholick Councellor in Scotland to King Iames the Fifth I most humbly kiss your Lordship's Hands and am My Lord Your Lordships most Obedient Servant P. P. THE OBLIGATION Resulting from the Oath of Supremacy To Assist and Defend the Pre-eminence or Prerogative OF THE Dispensative Power Belonging to the KING his Heirs and Successors c. PART I A. IN this Kingdom of England so naturally of old addicted to Religion and vehemence in it as to give a Bishop of Rome cause to complain he had more trouble given him by Applications from England about it then from all the World beside and afterward to make Geneva wonder at the Sabbatarians here exceeding the Iewish strictness and to cause Barclay in his Euphoâ—…mio to say of the English Nec quicqúam in numinis cultu modicum possunt and that our several Sects thought unos se Coelestium rerum participes exortes coeteros omnes esse did you ever observe hear or read of the style of Tenderness of Conscience so much used as in the year 41. and sometime afterward B. I have not From the Date of King Charles the First 's Declaration to all His loving Subjects about that time wherein he speaks of his Care for Exemption of Tender Consciences till the Date of King Charles the Second's Declaration from Breda wherein the Liberty of Tender Consciences is Provided for the clause of easing Tender Consciences ran through the Messages Addresses and Answers that passed between King and Parliament almost as much as the Clause of proponentibus legatis did run through the Councel of Trent A. But were not their Consciences extremely erroneous who thought themselves bound then to advance Religion by War B. Aâ—… and by a Civil War as you might have added against a Prince of the tenderest Conscience imaginable for that Character he had from an Arch-bishop in his Speech in the Parliament of 40 who said Our Sovereign is I will not say above other Princes but above all Christian men that ever I knew
or heard of a man of most upright dainty and scrupulous Conscience and afraid to look upon some Actions which other Princes abroad do usually swallow and he might have added a Prince the real Tenderness of whoâ—…e Conscience had so often favour'd the nominal tenderness of others who instead of being Tender-hearted Christians were Stiff-necked Iews and who might justly apprehend that it was only duritia cordis instead of Tenderness of Conscience he dispens'd with and as when God dispens'd with the Iews in Polygamy For since Tenderness of Conscience doth necessarily render a man abstemious from things lawful and to be of a gentle submissive temper not only to his Equals but Inferiors and to be merciful even to brute Creatures and not only averse from suing any one about Penal Lawes but ready to remit somewhat of his Right rather then to go to Law with a Stranger and much less with ones Father the Pater Patrioe seeing any men outraging the Lawes and the quiet of the whole Realm by that wilde brutish thing call'd War for ferinum quiddam bellum est might well judge them utterly devoid of all Tenderness of Conscience I shall therefore frankly tell you that no doubt but their Consciences were extremely erroneous or rather seaâ—…ed Our great Writer of Conscience Bishop Sanderson in his Sermon on Rom. 14. 13. discussing the Causes from which mens doubtfulness of mind may spring and saying that sometimes it proceeds from Tenderness of Conscience which yet is indeed a very blessed and a gracious thing doth very well add but yet as tender things may sooner miscarry very obnoxious through Satan's diligence and subtlety to be wrought upon to dangerous inconveniences And if we Consider that a Civil War cannot be lawful on both Sides however a foreign one may we may well account that any deluded melancholy People who were tempted to raise a Civil War out of a blind Zeal for Religion and to assault the Thirteenth of the Romans out of the Apocalypse had hard Spleens instead of tender Consciences and that they have soft Heads instead of tender Hearts who try to make Religion a gainer by War. But indeed the Project of planting Religion and Propagating the Church by War that is described to be Status humanoe Societatis dissolutoe and that so presently opens to all mens view the horrid Scene of Contempta Religio Rapta profana Sacra profanata is so vain that the old Proverbial Impiety of such who did castra sequi how victorious soever hath naturally help'd to make Conquering Nations embrace the very Religion of the Conquered a thing exemplify'd in the Conquests of the Danes and Saâ—…ns in England of the Gothes in Italy and France and Spain and of the Moors in Spain and in the Turks having overcome the Saracens embracing the Saracens Religion And the Vanity of Reforming the World by War that Profound and Conscientious Statesman Cardinal D'Ossat in his Third Book 86th Letter and to Villeroy A. 1597. hath well taught us and where he mentions how he urged to the Pope the reasonableness of Harry the 4th's so religiously observing the great Edict of Pacification and that the many Wars made again and again by Hereticks serv'd for nothing but in many places to abolish the Catholick Religion and in a manner all Ecclesiastical Discipline Iustice and Order and to introduce Atheism with the Sequel of all sorts of Sacrileges Parricides Rapes Treasons and Cruelties and other sorts of wickedness c. and afterward that on the making War all the Malecontents all People indebted and neâ—…ssitous all Debauchees and Vagabonds all Thieves and other Criminals whose Lives were become forfeited to the Law of what Religion or Opinion soever they were were wont to joyn with the Hugonots and did more harm to the Church and Religion and good manners in one day of War then they could in a hundred days of Peace Thus â—…e who â—…its in the Heavens had them here in derision while they in effect thus presumed to transprose Scripture and to say Glory to God in the highest and on Earth War and ill will towards men and while according to that Saying in Arch-bishop Lâ—…d's famous Star-Chamber-Speech viz. No Nation hath ever appear'd more jealous of Religion then the People of England have ever been they were under such Transports of misguided Zeal as to adore that their jealousie and to offer Sacrifices to it with as much Contempt of Heaven and Cruelty to Mankind as ever were offer'd to the image of Iealousie referr'd to by Ezekiel and to which the tenderest of their Relations were not thought too costly Victims and to which their truly Tender-Conscienced King who like Moses with Tenderness carried them in his Bosome as a Nursing-Father beareth the sucking Child and who sometimes out of Tenderness to several of his Complaining Children Sacrificed the rigour of his Penal Lawes and to whom they should have been subject for that Tender thing Conscience sake was himself at last Sacrificed How did that Pious Prince sometimes in relation to his Heterodox Protestant Subjects imitate the Father of the Prodigal who when his Son was yet afar off ran to meet him fell on his neck and kiss'd him a thing acknowledg'd by an Eminent learned Divine Mr. Iohn Ley in his Book call'd Defensive Doubts Hopes and Reasons Printed in the year 1641. and where in p. 123. urging the Bishops to procure the Revocation of a late Canon of the Church and having said wherein if they appear and prevail they need not fear any disparagement to their Prudence by withdrawing that they have decreed since the wisest Statesmen and greatest Governors have used many times to comply so far with popular Dispositions as to vary their own Acts with relation to their liking as the Pilot doth his Soils to comply with the wind he addeth And you cannot have a more authentic Example both to induce you to this and to defend you in it from all Imputations then that of our Sacred Sovereign who rather then he would give any Colour of Complaint for aggrievances to his People was pleas'd to DISPENSE with the five Articles of PERTH's Assembly and to discharge all Persons from urging the Practice thereof upon any either Laick or Ecclesiastical Person whatsoever and to free all his Subjects from all Censures and Pains whether Ecclesiastical or Secular for not urging practising and obeying any of them tho they were esâ—…ablish'd both by a General Assembly and by Act of Parliament King Charles his large Declaration of the â—…umults in Scotland p 370. p. 389. And for his OWN Acts for these Articles of Perth were propounded and ratify'd in the Reign of his Royal Father he imposed the Service Book the Book of Canons and high Commission upon his Subjects in Scotland and upon their humble Supplication was content graciously to grant a Discharge from them passing his Princely Promise that he would neither then nor afterwards press the Practice of them nor any
publickly or privately 〈◊〉 he should be lawfully restored and releas'd of his said Suspension But shortly after the beginning of the Reign of the Royal Martyr he was again restored and was afterward again silenced and so continued till August 2. A. 1631. and then he was again restored And Mr. Dod's Life represents his Case as parallel with this before-mention'd He was in King Iames his time suspended and restored and again by the King 's particular Command disabled from Preaching and was by King Charles the First re-ennabled or restored Thus as fortis fortem amat one tender Conscienced man too loves another such and the Executive Power of the Law in re-ennabling after temporary Disability was tenderly administred by these our Princes to these Conscientious Men with respect to their real Capacity of Favour to be shew'd them A. You have here given me a taste en passant of part of the Dispensative Power as exercised in the three Realms during some Conjunctures in the Reign of King Charles the First and for which I thank you and particularly for what you told me of the Act of Parliament dispens'd with in Scotland of which I never heard before and am apt to suppose a thing of that Nature was never done before in that Realm B. I can assure you to those who know the Publick Transactions of that Kingdom the thing will not in the least seem new I can tell you that on the 26th of November A. 1593. King Iames the 6th of Scotland made an Act of State in favour of three Roman-Catholick Earls Huntly Arroll and Angus by which Act he allow'd them several Priviledges contrary to Acts of Parliament made against Roman-Catholicks And His Majesty in his Act of State expresly dispenseth with those Acts of Parliament and which Dispensation tho Queen Elizabeth importuned him to revoke and for that purpose sent the Lord Zouch as her Embassador to him he still adhered to the Act of State he had made and continued his Dispensation A. Have you this Matter of Fact out of any of the Records in England or Scotland B. I have it out of the Original Papers under the hand of Queen Elizabeth and her great Minister Burghly and the Original Instructions of the Lord Zouch when sent by her to expostulate with the King about it that were lately in my Custody and by me sent to our gracious Sovereign and I shall some other time give you a more particular account of that Dispensation A. But I beseech you did not the Protestant Divines of the Church of Scotland then cry out of the unlawfulness or inexpedience of that Dispensation B. I have read it in a learned Book of Dr. Maxwell a Scotch-man Printed A. 1644. and who was then Bishop of Killally in Ireland and had formerly been Bishop of Rosse that Mr. Robert Bruce one of the Ministers of Edenburgh and who had a great sway in the Church of Scotland was pleas'd with the King 's extending his Favour to Angus and Arroll but out of a factious Complyance with the Earl of Arguile was displeas'd at its being shewn to Huntly But that Loyal Bishop there acquiesceth in the reason of State that inclined the King to Pardon the three Earls and his thereby hindering the growth of Faction in Scotland and providing for his more easie and secure access to the Throne of England on the Death of Queen Elizabeth And so you may easily guess what sort of men in Scotland look'd with an evil eye on that Act of the Royal goodness and who did not The Bishop there had applauded the great depth of the King's Wisdom and his transcendent Goodness in the Pardoning the three Earls and mention'd that there was nothing of Religion in the Case of Bruce's Aversion against the Pardon of Huntly for that Angus and Arroll were as bigot Papists if not more then Huntly I can likewise direct you to my Lord Primate Bramhal's celebrated Book call'd A Fair warning to take heed of the Scotish Discipline where in Chap. 6. thus entituled viz. That it robs the Magistrate of his Dispensative Power he saith by way of instance When the Popish Earls of Angus Huntly and Arroll were excommunicated by the Church and forfeited for Treasonable Practices against the King it is admirable to read with what Wisdom Charity and Sweetness his Majesty did seek from time to time to reclaim them from their Errors c. and on the other side to see with what bitterness and radicated Malice they were prosecuted by the Presbyteries and their Commissioners c. sometimes threatning that they were resolv'd to pursue them to the uttermost tho it should be with the loss of all their Lives in one day c. sometimes pressing to have their Estates confiscated c. He refers there in his Margin to Ass. Edinb 1594. But any one who shall consult D'Ossat's Letters and there in the Second Book carefully read over the 37th Letter that was writ to Villeroy in the year 1596 and three years after the Date of King Iames his Act of State and observe what that great Sagacious Cardinal there refers to concerning the Circumstances of those three Earls and how all the Prudence that could be shewn by man was but little enough for the Conduct of that King in that Conjuncture in order to his removing what Impediments either from Rome or Spain or his Native Country might obstruct his Succession to the Crown of England will not wonder at his having dispens'd and continued his Dispensation as aforesaid A. I have not yet ask'd you whether the Divines of the Church of England did not lift up their voices like a Trumpet against the Dispensative Power thus exercised by their Prince as you have mention'd B. They discharged their Duties in Preaching occasionally against all growing Errors but they wanted none to mind them of the Saying Impium esse qui Regi dixerit Inique agis The Pious and Learned Author of Certain Considerations tending to Peace c. mentions how the Bishop of St. Davids in King Iames's Reign A. 1604. did in a set Speech in Convocation shew that Ministers were not in the late Archbishop's time disabled from their Ministry on the Account of Non-conformity to the Ceremonies by Law enjoyn'd and concluded his Speech with the motion of Petitioning the King That if the removal of some of the Ceremonies enjoyn'd could not be obtain'd nor yet a Coleration for them of more stay'd and temperate Carriage yet at least there might be procured a mitigation of the Penalty c. And as the Suspension or Disabling of Hildersham and Dod from their Ministerial Functions so the Restoring of them to the same without all such things done by them as the strictness of the Lawes required was in both those Princes Reigns executed by the Bishops Nor do I remember to have read of any Divine of the Church of England to have in the least look'd with an evil eye on the goodness of the
ever was who setting his feet on two of Gods Kingdoms the one upon the Sea the other upon the Earth lifting up his hand to Heaven as you are to do this day and so Swearing Rev. 10. c. and consider how he there makes this Oath to be the most effectual means for the ruining Popery and Prelacy and leaves it to be consider'd whether seeing the preservation of Popery hath been by Leagues and Covenants God may not make a League and Covenant to be its Destruction after he had before-mention'd the Associations of the Religious Orders and Fraternities and the Combination by the la Sainte Ligue for the muniting of Popery as incentives to this League and how he doth again go to the Magazine of the Apocalypse for some Weapons for this Covenant and hath other artillery for it from the Iewish State citing the words of the Prophet Let us joyn our selves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten how according to the ratio nominis of Superstition viz. of mens over-importunate Prayers that their Children might out-live them he concludes with a devout Prayer that this Covenant may out-live their Childrens Children and let any one behold in Mr. Henderson's Speech the like flame of Enthusiastick Zeal or of the Superstition quam vulgo bonam intentionem vocant against Superstition and Idolatry in Worship c. and concluding it with his belief that the weight of that Covenant would cast the balance in our English Wars I say let any one consider all this and tell me if ever he saw a more pompous Scene of Superstition and more magnificent Procession bestow'd on it and contrived as Bishop Sanderson's words are in his Lecture De bonâ intentione and having his eye on that Covenant viz. Obtentu gloriae Dei reformandae Religionis propagandi Evangelii extirpandae superstitionis exaltandi regni Domini nostri Iesu Christi and if ever he saw what the Bishop in that Lecture calls The Iesuites Theology viz. Omnia metiri ex Commodo Sanctae matris Ecclesiae more strongly asserted then in the Contexture and Imposition of that Covenant But those two Divines lived to recover their Allegiance and a due sense of their Oaths for it and to see that foetus of their Brain that at its solemn Christning they wish'd immortality to renounced publickly as a spurious Birth and to the Scandal of that Age a race of other Oaths in England as infamously born intercept its inheritance Nay let me tell you that in the Nation of Scotland Loyalty hath been a growing Plant of Renown since the year 1660. and the Idol of their former Covenanted Presbytery been by the Loyal Nobility and Gentry and Populace there generally abhorr'd And tho Sir George Wharton in his Gesta Britannorum relates it as a strange thing that on the 21st of August A. 1663. the Parliament of Scotland Passâ—…d an Act for a National Synod the first that ever was in that Kingdom under the Government of Bishops yet I can tell you of an Act of Parliament that pass'd there afterward that declared the right of the Crown to dispense in the external Government of the Church I shall entertain you with it out of the Scotch Statutes viz. In the first Session of the Second Parliament of King Charles the Second there pass'd an Act asserting His Majesty s Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical Edenburgh November 16 th 1669. THe Estates of Parliament having seriously considered how necessary it is for the Good and Peace of the Church and State That His Majesty's Power and Authority in relation to Matters and Persons Ecclesiastical be more clearly asserted by an Act of Parliament Have therefore thought fit it be Enacted Asserted and Declared Like as his Majesty with Advice and Consent of his Estates of Parliament doth hereby Enact Assert and Declare That his Majesty hath the Supreme Authority and Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical within this his Kingdom and that by virtue thereof the Ordering and Disposal of the External Government and Policy of the Church doth properly belong to his Majesty and his Successors as an inherent Right to the Crown And that his Majesty and his Successors may Setle Enact and Emit such Constitutions Acts and Orders concerning the Administration of the External Government of the Church and the Persons employed in the same and concerning all Ecclesiastical Meetings and Matters to be proposed and determined therein as they in their Royal Wisdom shall think fit Which Acts Orders and Constitutions being recorded in the Books of Councel and duly published are to be observed and obeyed by all his Majesty's Subjects any Law Act or Custom to the contrary notwithstanding Like as his Majesty with Advice and Consent aforesaid doth Rescind and Annul all Laws Acts and Clauses thereof and all Customs and Constitutions Civil or Ecclesiastick which are contrary to or inconsistent with his Majesty's Supremacy as it is hereby asserted and declares the same void and null in all time coming A. You told me before how the King dispens'd with the five Articles of Perth setled by Act of Parliament but this Act yields so great a territory to the Dispensative Power that my thoughts cannot suddenly travel through it It acknowledgeth in the Crown a more sublime Power then of dispensing with Presbyterians or Independents or of suspending the Penal Laws against them namely of abolishing Episcopacy and of making Presbytery or Independency the National Church-Government Car tel est notre plaisir now for the external Form of Church-Government is allow'd to make the Pattern in the Mount. And 〈◊〉 accordingly as Mr. Baxter in his Book call'd a Search for the Schismaticks represents Archbishop Bramhal's new way of asserting the Church of England in his Book against him 1. To abhor Popery 2. That we all come under a foreign spiritual Iurisdiction obeying the Pope as the Western Patriarch and also as the Principium Unitatis to the Universal Church governing by the Canons c. may not the King by this Act make the external Government of the Church of Scotland Patriarchal and the Pope Patriarch B. The Act needs no Comment and if you will tell me that the Scots shew'd themselves Erastians or Latitudinarians when they made it I shall acquaint you that that Archbishop in his Schism guarded p. 319. asserts That a Sovereign Prince hath Power within his own Dominions for the Publick good to change any thing in the external Regiment of the Church which is not of divâ—…ne Institution and that he had in p. 4. of that Book allow'd the Pope his Principium unitatis and his Preheminence among Patriarchs as S. Peter had among the Apostles and that in p. 78. of his Iust Vindication of the Church of England he takes notice that by the Statute of Carlisle made in the days of Edward the First it was declared That the Holy Church of England was founded in the
materialiter Si quis verum dicit putans esse falsum mentitur formaliter And he having before in l. 4 c. 4 viz Of Heresy made pertinacy a requisite to a man's being formally an Heretick and said that Pertinax est qui non est paratus Captivare intellectum rationem suam omnem Sacrae Scripturae adds Haereticus igitur potest esse quis materialiter dum assensum praebet erroâ—…i pernicioso vel ex simplici facilitate out temeritate haereticis or dendi qui sub honestâ aliquâ specie fallunt vel ex ignorantiâ qui â—…ormaliter non est haereticus cum pertinacia obstinatio animi deest atque adeo pro simpliciter haereticâ—… non est babendus Concordant with these measures of Ames have I observ'd those of some ingenuous Roman-Catholick Writers who have declared that they will not pronounce all Protestants to be Hereticks formaliter And it is therefore no wonder that such their Judgment of Charity hath been retaliated by some of the most Renowned Divines of the Church of England viz. the Lord Primate Bramhal Bishop Taylor Dr. Hammond and others who have deny'd to pronounce the worshipping the Host to be formal Idolatry that is to say to be not so at all in reality since we know that according to the trite Rule forma dat esse And thus that Primate in his Schism Guarded saith very well for that purpose p. 57. Every one who is involved materially in a Schism is not a formal Schismatick more then she that Marries after long expectation believing and having reason to believe that hâ—…r former Husband was dead is a formal Adulteress or then he who is drawn to give Divine Worship to a Creature by some misapprehension yet addressing his Devotions to the true God is a formal Idolater And having there cited S. Austin of Heresy He who did not run into his error out of his own over-weening Presumption nor defends it pertinaciously but receiv'd it from his seduced Parents and is careful to search out the truth and ready to be Corrected if he find it cut he is not to be reputed among Hereticks he saith it is much more true of Schism that he who is involv'd in Schism through the error of his Parents or Predecessors who carefully seeketh after truth and is prepared in his mind to embrace it whensoever he finds it he is not to be reputed a Schismatick I know Azorius de Iuramento gives his Judgment well in thesi That when a Law is changed to which a man is bound by Oath tho he is thereby materially discharged yet formally he is bound in respect of his will for if ever he actually assents to the alteration he is really perjured And so leaving it to such who were Men of great Knowledge and Consideration and had took the Oaths and were ready to promo'e a new Law for altering the hereditary Monarchy to think of the danger they incurred of the formal guilt of that Crime I have more Charity then to conclude all the rash and the incogitant and the weak and the seduced by the fantastick Interpretation of the Oath to have been perjured But as about the year 1164. Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury was at a Council held at Northampton accused by the King of Perjury and Condemned as guilty of it because he had not observ'd those English Customs that he was sworn to as I find Francisc. Long. de Concil p. 806. Col. 1. cited for it so if you have taken the Oath of Supremacy and Sworn to defend all the Privileges and Preheminences granted or belonging to the King his Heirs and Successors and united to the Imperial Crown of this Realm and are of opinion that one of the Privileges of those Heirs and Successors is to succéed to that Crown as it comes to their turn according to Proximity of Blood and by their inherent Birth-right and as the Hereditary Succession juâ—…e Coronae is setled by the Common Law of England I shall tell you that the Pious and profoundâ—…ly Learned Divine Dr. Hicks who hath study'd this Point as much as any man hath in his Writings told you that having taken this Oath you could not honestly consent to a Bill of Exclusion which would have deprived the next Heir and in him virtually the whole royal Family of the chief Privilege and Preheminence that belong'd to him by the Common Law of this Realm c. Your Curiosity I believe hath led you to read over his learned Iovian and to observe what he there saith in his Preface that some Men did pervert the meaning of the word Heirs in the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy from its common and usual acceptation to another more special on purpose to elude the force and Obligation which otherwise they must have had on the Consciences of the Excluders themselves But it is not only the Authority of this single great Divine that I can lay before your thoughts for the rendring the Attempt of the Exclusion contrary to our Oath but I can direct you to the censure of the three Estates of a Loyal Nation and of His late Majâ—…sty in the case For the Oaths in Scotland binding the takers both to the King and his Heirs and Successors as ours do here I can tell you that in the Third Parliament of King Charles the Second Aug. 13. 1681. you will find the Act in these words viz. The Estates of Parliament considering that the Kings of this Realm deriving their Royal Power from God Almighty alone do succeed lineally thereto according to the known degrees of Proximity in Blood which cannot be interrupted suspended or diverted by any Act or Statute whatsoever and that none can attempt to alter or divert the said Succession without involving the Subjects of this Kingdom in Perjury and Rebellion c. I know that during the late turbid interval of the Nation some Loyal men of the Church of England were so much misguided as to think that because de facto Parliaments have heretofore directed and limited the succession of the Crown in other manner then in course it would otherwise have gone as the words in the Printed Exclusion-Bill were they might therefore of right do so again notwithstanding they knew that after the Parliament of King Iames to prevent the Right of Succession from fluctuating any more had justly recognized and declared That the Imperial Crown of this Realm and Rights belonging to the same did by inherent Birth-right and lawful and undoubted Succession descend and come to him as being lineally justly and lawfully next and sole Heir of the Blood Royal of this Realm it did afterward by a New Oath of Obedience or Allegiance oblige mens Consciences both to the Crown and the hereditary lineal Succession and notwithstanding they knew that that Parliament had took care of continuing the Obligation of the Oath of Supremacy for the bearing Faith and true Allegiance to the King his Heirs and lawful Successors and to assist
and defend all Privileges and Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the King his Heirs and Successors c. But I doubt not but the Consciences of the Considerate Loyal now expostulating with them in the cool of the day whether they did then well in being angry with the Imposers sense of their Oaths and in not penetrating into the Obligations thereby incurred and particularly in not weighing whether such who had taken those Oaths and yet by Projects and Expedients would have banish'd the Heir even after he should come to be Actual Successor from the effects of their Sworn Allegiance and of their Sworn Assistance and Defence of all Privileges and Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging c. had not visibly out-ran their Oaths they will recollect the late dreadful want of tenderness for the observance of the same It will be hard for many men on a serious Self-examination to reflect otherwise on themselves after that Sir W. I. himself as the Printed Speeches in the Oxford-Parliament have it call'd an Expedient of that kind Iesuite's Powder and mentioned that on the Heirs coming to the title of King the learned Lawyers say that by 1. H. 7. all Incapacity is taken away by the Possession of the Crown and after that another learned Lawyer had there said I owe the Duke Obedience if he be King but if he be King and have no Power to Govern he is the King and no King and had before said That an Act of Parliament against Common sense is void To make a man King and not suffer him to exercise Kingly Power is a Contradiction And I am sure 't is a Contradiction to nothing more then our Oaths I desire not by referring to the breach of those Oaths to touch the tenderness of any man's sore place or to reproach him as to what he hath done for the time past but to promote the tenderness of his Conscience and that his Conscience may not reproach him for the time to come for not assisting and defending all Privileges and Preheminences belonging to the Crown When I consider the noble and vigorous Loyalty that your self and others who were mistaken in the Point of the Exclusion have since shewn in the Service of His gracious Majesty and the great Care that you and they in the Post where you were took in the Settlement of his Revenue and of avoiding the Character of those of Israel who brought their newly anointed King no Presents and your readâ—…ness at his call to venture your life for the support of his Crown and do observe in you and them a fix'd Preparation of mind for the defence of every Privilege that is made to appear to you as belonging to the Crown and that your Loyalty like a bone well sett is the firmer for having been broken I account that the Si non eâ—…rasset fecerat ille minùs may be apply'd to you and that after His Majesty's Pardon and the Series of your Heroical Actions of Loyalty in his Service you ought by all equal Judges according to the Instance I mention'd before to be absolv'd as who in all things have approved your selves to be clear in this Matter And I believe you being one of the Church of England the Adherents to which do now as generally call themselves The Loyal as the Independents did once vocifeâ—…ate themselves to be The Saints and the Principles of which Church do enjoyn Remorse and Penitence and rending of the heart and as much tenderness to any who have disrobed the Crown of any of its Rights and Privileges as was in David when his heart smote him because he had cut off the skirt of Saul ' s Garment and whose Divines do not only Preach the Doctrine of Non-resistance but whose Oaths bind to it and that of Supremacy binding to a positive Assistance of all Privileges c. your â—…nlighten'd Conscience will be your constant Remembrancer against any relapse A. I thank you for thus gently leading me by the hand to such a height of Noble thoughts relating to that Oath as from whence I am able to look back with grief on my past aberrations through inadvertence from what my Oath obliged me to in relation to the Support of the hereditary Monarchy and concerning which Obligation the Casuistical Discussion you sent me did sufficiently illuminate me and to take a prospect into my duty that lies before me to assist and defend to my Power all Iurisdictions Privileges c. granted or belonging to the King's Highness c. or united and annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm I am sensible that as some vain Swearers in common Discourse will upon their being occasionally reproved for it be apt to swear that they did not swear and that as there are Fools that say in their Souls that there is no God and that there is no Soul so there is a sort of careless men who having taken this great Promissory Oath will yet by their Actions deny their having sworn to assist and defend some of those Privileges and likewise be apt to say in their hearts they have not invoked God as Witness and Revenger in the case of that Oath and that they are not absolutely bound by it or but only by their reserved sense or as if a man representing his Country he were only to take a kind of formal Oath in animam Domini and not to venture his own Soul. But for my part I account it as vile to be perjured in a solemn Promissory Oath as in a judicial Assertory one and shall hereafter think my self as much bound to use all exactness and tenderness in the recollection oâ—… my thoughts after a Promissory Oath as every Man of Honour doth before an assertory Oath when he is a witness in a Court of Law. And I think that it is only the multitudo peccantium about solemn promissroy Oaths as for example about the promised assistance and defence of the Privileges of the Crown in the Oath of Supremacy that diminisheth the Shame and â—…gnominy of mens being either through corrupt affections or incogitancy and the crassa negligentia which the Law makes to be dolus malus Vacillant or Contradictory in the Series of their actings promised or through lachesse or subdolcus pretences withholding their performance of part of what they obliged themselves to do and that keeps the populace from a nauseous looking on them as falsarii and as much as on Witnesses produced in Courts who in the things asserted by their Testimony are for want of precaution of thought varii vacillantes and contradictory to themselves and minglers of Falshood with truth and who conceal part of the whole truth they were to depose B. There is another thing that makes the Moral offices required in an Oath Promissory call for some kind of Consideration that an Oath Assertory doth not for we are not to depose oâ—… Matter of Law but only of Fact but in the Promissory parts
of the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance our thoughts are obliged to have regard to Matters of Right and Law. We are to our Power to assist and defend all Privileges and Preheminences GRANTED or BELONGING to the King c. and which ARE united to the Imperial Crown of this Realm A. But by this means while you would have men keep up the ease of their Consciences by such assistance and defence will not they be put to it to make their lives uneasy by buying Law-Books and being Students of the Crown-Law and of the extent of the Regal rights a thing never intended by the Makers of the Laws for those Oaths and whereby such who are to assist and defend and Rights of the Crown by Action in Land or Sea-Service would be hinder'd therein by Speculation B. No man need amuse himself about any such matter Nor are our Princes who by their Coronation Oaths oblige themselves to defend all our rightful Laws and Customs bound thereby to study the Report-Books of the Law concerning the Rights and Properties of their Subjects and whereby the time of Princes would be taken up from defending them And I shall tell you that tho all men are morally bound to frame the best Conceptions and make the truest representations of the Divine Nature they can and which by the measures of the Scripture â—…s comprehended under our Duty of glorifying God yet not to study the Controversies between the Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants about the absoluteness of the Divine Decrees and Dominion or whether God according to his absolute Dominion can torment an innocent Creature And thus tho we are bound to honour God's Vice gerents and to assist and defend their Rights Privileges and Preheminences we are not to consume our whole lives in the investigation of Truth in the Moot-Points about the same But as to this thing that great Casuist of the Age Bishop Sanderson may help to set us right in his Third Lecture of Oaths Sect. 17 where putting the Case when Subjects are required to take an Oath for Preservation and Defence of Laws and Liberties Privileges Prerogatives and Preheminences of some Superior Power as of a King a Common-wealth or Lord Paramount such as are among us the Oaths of Hâ—…mage of Royal Supremacy c. he saith No man denies these Oaths to be lawful or obligatory but in respect of the frequent incertainty of the Laws whereunto they relate it may very well be doâ—…bted how far they oblige Doubtless the Subject to his Power is obliged to defend all Rights which appear either by Law or Custom Legitimate whether defined by the written Law or in force through long use of time or prescription that is so far as they are known or may morally be known But he is not equally obliged to the observation of all those which are Controverted or doubtful especially since Powerful men are accustomed to stretch their tedders and leap over the Land-marks of their Neighbours not contenting themselves within the bounds of their own Right Nevertheless a Subject ought always to be prepared in Mind so soon as the justness of those things which are doubtful shall appear to a knowledge and defend them It may be hence rationally deduced that such who are call'd to the Helm of State or are Members of Parliament if any Matters relating to any Iurisdictions Privileges and Authorities granted or belonging to the Crown shall come in question before them are by virtue of the Oath of Supremacy bound to endeavour to know whether those Jurisdictions Privileges and Authorities are granted or do belong to the Crown that is so far as they are known or may morally be known before they refuse to defend and assist them and much more before they shall do any act of offending or resisting the same and before they shall entertain any hard thoughts of their Prince for claiming this or that Privilege And where the right of any Iurisdictions Privileges granted or belonging to the Crown is not Controverted or doubtful that Oath binds them immediately to assist and defend the same and not so much as to move any thing against them except in some such case as I shall presently mention A. Did ever any Parliament presume to destroy or offend or usurp upon any Privilege or Preheminence or Authority of which the Right as belonging to the Crown was not controverted B. Yes the long Parliament of 40 did so The Power of the Militia was acknowledg'd by the Parliaments Petition at Windsor to be a flower of the Crown And therefore the Royal Martyr's dying Breath might one would think be Thunder to their Consciences when in his Speech on the Scaffold he said I never intended to intrench upon their Privileges They began upon me It is the Militia they began upon They confess'd that the Militia was mine but they thought fit to have it from me No doubt such men intended to entrench on the King's Privileges and Preheminences and they intended to violate their Oath of Supremacy A. Did they offend any other Uncontroverted Rights of the Crown B. Many more then I have now time to name but cannot forget the fatal Consequences of their outraging one of those uncontroverted Rights which was at the King's Pleasure to Prorogue or Dissolve Parliaments by putting such incessant hardships on that Pious King to engage him to pass the Act that that Parliament should continue till both the Houses did consent to the dissolution of it and of which Mr. Hobbs in his Behemoth saith that it amounted to a total Extinction of the King 's Right in case that such a grant were valid which I think it is not unless the Sovereignty it self be in plain terms renounced which it was not And he having said That the King signed that Bill the same day he signed the Warrant for the Execution of the Earl of Strafford and having rais'd the Question Whether the King could not have saved him by a Pardon and said that he would have done it if that could have preserv'd him against the Tumults rais'd and countenanced by the Parliament it self doth mind me of the horror of those days when they who were Sworn to assist and defend the King's Privilege and Preheminence in Pardoning any one tho he knew him justly Condemned to dye did endeavour by Tumults to oppose his Pardoning one whom he thought not to have deserv'd Death That Royal Privilege was in like manner by that Parliament trampled on in the Case of the Pardon of Archbishop Laud. A. I shall here by the way ask you if you did not once tell me that the most profound Observers of the Affairs in Ireland had agreed in it as their firm Judgment that the Irish Rebellion had never happen'd if the Parliament of 40 here had not meddled in the Case of the Earl of Strafford and occasion'd his removal from being chief Governour of Ireland B. I shall by the way answer you that I did tell you so and that
they judged that the Character of that Earl's great Wisdom and Courage and Activity and of universality in his Correspondencies had gain'd such an Ascendant over the Genius of the Irish that if he had continued Lord Lieutenant of that Kingdom in his former Power they would not have ventured to rebel A. You have instanced in Uncontroverted Privileges of the Crown that that Parliament did offend and resist by their putting such incessant hardships on their King as your words are and it was folly as well as breach of their Oath for them thus to strike at the Pardoning Power of the Crown that is the Privilege both of King and People Yet let me ask you whether you account that he who in any case shall endeavour that by the Legislative Power any uncontroverted Iurisdiction Privilege Preheminence or Authority granted or belonging to the Crown may be alter'd or restrain'd in its exercise breaks his Oath Did that Parliament do so who made the famous Act for barring the known Privilege of Nullum tempus Occurrit Regi I mean that glorious Act of 21 o of King Iames the First C. 2. of which the Title is Conceald Lands shall not be Recover'd unless it may be proved that the King had title to them within 60 years i. e. 60 years before the 19th of February in the 21st year of King Iames the First which was the day of the beginning of that Parliament and on which Statute my Lord Coke hath an excellent Comment in Instit. 3. C. 87. against Concealors turbidum genus hominum and all pretences of Concealments whatsoever and on occasion of which Act it is yet acknowledg'd in the Book call'd The Court and Character of King James written by Sir A. W. and Printed A. 1650. that that King loved good Laws and had many made in his time and in his lâ—…st Parliament for the good of his Subjects and suppress'd Promoters and Progging Fellows gave way to the Nullum tempus c. to be confined to Sixty years which was more beneficial to the Subjects in respect of their quiets then all that Parliaments had given him during his whole Reign Or did the late Kings Loyal long Parliament do so in their obtaining the Act for the Habeas Corpus and others that might be named B. Having premised it to you that those words in the Oath of assisting and defending ALL Iurisdictions ALL Privileges c. are operative words and of strict Interpretation and whereby we stake our Eternities to assist the King 's Temporal Rights and invoke God so to help or assist us as we shall assist all those Privileges and that the Prince and the Church being look'd on as Minors the breach of an Oath to defend the Privileges of the King must appear to common sense as odious as if any Guardian of a Minor did break an Oath to defend his Person and Interest or did take part with any to destroy the Minor's Rights I shall yet be so fair as to tell you that I do not so account it provided that he who shall do so shall have a moral certainty that the Prince being sensible that the alteration or restraint of such Privilege will be very beneficial to the Subjects both in the present and future times and necessary to the enabling them the better to support the Crown hath signified his desire of the same and doth so desire it or if he knoweth not his Princes so desiring it believes that the Cogency of the Reasons he hath humbly to offer for such alteration being made is such as may Incline others to supplicate the Prince to consent to it and the Prince so to do Yet in this latter case if afterward the Sovereign notifies his desire of the continuance of such known Privilege I am then by my Oath to assist and defend the same and am not to the Cogency of my Reasons to add that of Importunity For there is a par or proportion between importunity and force whence we see that according to the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws in case of a former will a latter gain'd by importunoe preces in the time of the Testator's Sickness is often adjudged void And as I am not by importunity when my Princes Affairs are in a Sickly state or that the Die of War hath ran against him abroad to press and tire him then into a parting with his known Privileges so neither with a Salvo to my Oath which binds me to assist and defend them can I if I find his Judgment or Mind sickly lay Temptations before him to buy him as it were out of a Privilege that is just and adviseable for him to keep I am neither to starve nor pamper my Prince out of such a Privilege Nay more if my Prince did by any Error part with any such Privilege as not knowing the same to be inherent in the Crown as in the Case of an Answer of the Royal Martyr drawn by one of his Ministers not deeply vers'd in the Law to some of the Parliaments Propositions by which Answer he is acknowledg'd to be one of the three Estates I who know that the Privilege and Preheminence inherent in his Crown is to be above them all and have in the Oath of Supremacy Sworn that the King is the only Supream Governour and so none Co-ordinate or equal to him I am to take no advantage of that error but am still to assist and defend such his Preheminence And if ever a Prince did by fear part with such Privilege or Preheminence there being a par between fear and force according to that Law of the Proetor in the Digests Quod vi aut metu factum est ratum non habebo and in which Law as Baldus saith the Proetor was inspired by the Spirit of God I am not only not to take any advantage of such act of the Prince done by fear or force or to upbraid him therewith but am still to assist and defend such Privilege so derelinquish'd by him and am to account the same belonging to him as the word is in my Promissory Oath and to account him still in Law possess'd of the same according to the rule of Possessio etiam animo retinetur and which is justly apply'd in the Case of any one who in a Storm at Sea throws his Goods over-board to lighten the Ship. His late Majesty therefore did but right to himself when in his Declaration of the 25th of October 1660. Concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs he took notice how some had caused to be Printed and Publish'd in England a Declaration before Printed in his Name when he was in Scotland i. e. referring to the Declaration Printed at Edenburgh 1650. and saith thus of it vizâ—… Of which we shall say no more then that the Circumstances by which we were enforced to sign that Declaration are enough known to the World And that the worthiest and greatest part of that Nation did even then detest and abhor the ill usage of us
in that particular when the same tyranny was exercised there by the Power of a few ill men which at that time had spread it self over this Kingdom and therefore we had no reason to expect that we should at this season when we are doing all we can to wipe cut the memor of all that hath been done amiss by other men and we thank God have wiped it out of our own Remembrance have been our self assaulted with those rep oaches which we will likewise forget And it was goodness worthy the great Soul of a King to forget the Outrages of such who did strip their Political Father of his Power and then reproach him with his nakedness I may here likewise tell you and not mal a propos how much the patience and long-suffering of the same Prince was exercised in a late Conjuncture that so much eclipsed his Prerogative in the Case of the Earl of Danby's Pardon and when the Commons did set up against it somewhat in his Father's Answer to the 19 Propositions before mention'd that nothing but the tempest of the Age in the Parliament of 40 could have occasion'd viz. Since therefore the Power legally placed in both Houses of Parliament is more then sufficient to restrain the Power of Tyranny c. But because a Parliament so perpetuated as that was did prove more then sufficient to restrain pretended Tyranny and real just Government will a considerate man say any such thing now when the breath of Prerogative can dissolve them in a moment and in that moment all their thoughts perish and all the high-flying thoughts that would soare above Imperial Power be found dead in the Nest And I may here tell you that in the Answer of some Nonconformists to Dr. Stillingfleet's Sermon an Answer Printed in London in the year 1680. during the ferment about the Plot and wherein they desire Indulgence I think their attacquing the Service on the Gun-Powder Treason Plot in thanking God for Preserving the King and the Three Estates of the Realm assembled by saying That the late King made no scruple in his Answer to the 19 Propositions to reckon himself one of the three Estates was a thing that on recollection they will judge ought not to have been done But I am here further to tell you that though it may be consistent with our Oath in some such case as was mention'd to endeavour the altering by the Legislative Power some uncontroverted Privileges of the Crown and in such a way as I have mention'd I likewise wish you in your thoughts to make a distinction of those Privileges or Preheminences belonging to the Crown that are absolutely Essential to its Preservation and to that of the whole Realm and which are by God and the Law put as a Depositum into the hands of Kings and the removing of one of which would have the effect of taking a Stone out of an Arched Building and such as no Sovereign Princes can be without and such as our Princes have in their flourishing Reigns to the great content and happiness of their People always exercised and Rights as the late Earl of Shaftsbury said of that of the Flagg that our Princes cannot part with and Privileges that are not such and two of which former sort of Privileges and which are parts of the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom I account we are expresly in the Promissory Clause of that Oath Sworn to defend and assist namely of the lineal Succession to the Crown and of the King's Prerogative and of which Prerogative we have this Description in Blount's Law-Dictionary That the Prerogative of the King is generally that Power Preheminence or PRIVILEGE which the King hath over and above other Persons and above the ordinary Course of the Law in the Right of his Crown And then adds Potest Rex ei lege suae dignitatis condonare si velit etiam mortem promeritam LL. Edw. Confess cap. 18. and then saith that Spelman calls it the Lâ—…x Regiae dignitatis The Author of the Law-Dictionary had there his eye on the Law of Edward the Confessor where under the title of Misericordia Regis Pardonatio it is declared that si quispiam forisfactus which the Margin interprets rei Capitalis Reus poposcerit Regiam misericordiam pro forisfacto suo timidus mortis vel membrorum perdendorum potest Rex ei lege suae dignitatis condonare si velit etiam mortem promeritam ipse tamen malefactor rectum faciat in â—…quantumcunque poterit quibus forisfecit tradat fidejussores de pace legalitate tenenda si vero fidejussores defecerint exula bitur à Patria And I remember there is a famous Act relating to the old Privileges and Prerogatives of the Crown and to their resumption by the Crown viz. The Act of 27. H. 8. c. 24. call'd The Recontinuing of certain Liberties taken from the Crown and it begins with saying that whereas divers of the most ancient Prerogatives and Authorities of Iustice appertaining to the Imperial Crown of this Realm have been severed and taken from the same by sundry Gifts of the King 's most Noble Progenitors to the great diminution and detriment of the Royal Estate of the same and to the hinderance and great delay of Iustice and thereupon saith for Reformation whereof be it Enacted by Authority of this present Parliament that no Person or Persons c. shall have any Power or Authority to pardon or remit any Treasons Murders Man-slaughters or any kinds of Felonies nor any Accessaries to any Treasons Murders c. or any Out-laries for any such Offences aforesaid committed perpetrated done or hereafter to be committed done or divulged by or against any Person in any part of this Realm c. but that the King's Highness his Heirs and Successors shall have the whole and sole Power and Authority thereof united and knit to the Imperial Crown of this Realm as of good RIGHT and Equity it appertaineth c. and then orders all Writs in a County Palatine to be made in the King's Name c. That Statute doth give you a Prospect of great variety and use in order to the Settlement of your thoughts about some things in your Oath You there see the Natural recourse of the Royal Rivers of Prerogative to the Ocean from whence they came and when you there find that the Crown could communicate to Subjects the exercise of the Prerogative of Pardoning Murder however restrain'd by ACT of Parliament and all the dreadful Disabilities incurr'd by Out-laries for Felony and Treason you are not to wonder at any ones telling you that the King himself hath the Privilege of Pardoning a Disability incurr'd by Law for Heterodoxy in Religion and especially when you shall see the whole and sole Power of Pardoning the same united and knit to the Imperial Crown of this Realm as of GOOD RIGHT and EQUITT appertaineth And according to those words in your Oath about your defending all the
of the Oath of Supremacy which I never knew before that may seem to perplex the Conscience of any one who would take it and to expose it to such a kind of Ordeale-Purgation per ferrum candens that may make the passage through it dangerous to Ones Conscience B. Look you to that who have taken the Oath and do you consider how far you are by the Interpretations that I have referr'd you to obliged to take your measures in the Matter that lies now before you as to your assisting and defending the Prerogative of the Dispensative Power and I likewise recommend it to you to observe how much to the satisfaction and ease of the minds of the generality His Majesty's Lay-Subjects he by Connivence hath dispens'd with their not troubling themselves to study the Duty Bond or Allegianâ—…e that was acknowledged to be due to Henry the 8th or Edward the 6th or the Prerogative given by God to Godly Princes in the Scripture or the Christian Emperors in the Primitive times for however our Divines are by the 39 Articles and the Canons of King Iames and King Charles the First particularly obliged to study these Points and that the knowledge of the same may oblige Men of learning and leisure among the Layety to Conduct their Consciences thereby in their observance of this Oath yet His Majesty 's not reviving among all his Subjects by any Proclamation or Ecclesiastical Injunction or otherwise the notices of these forgotten things cannot but be acceptable to the generality of them as a Dispensation by Connivence And therefore in Complaisance with and gratitude to him they are by the Law of Nature bound to give him what is plainly his Due according to the plain Oath tender'd to and taken by them and to take care that they do not exercise an Illegal Power of dispensing by way of Interpretation of that Oath to the Subversion of the sense of the Assertory and Promissory parts of it both which are the Supporters of the Royal Dispensative Power But reserving for some other time my thoughts relating to the Dispensative Power exercised by the Godly Princes in Holy Scripture and by the Christian Emperors I shall desire you now to look on your Oath in the plain natural sense of it and as much as if no authoritative one had ever been given of it Consider that when you declare the King is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm or Governor of all Persons in it no Humane Laws can bind our Consciences by any disability Penal incurr'd from serving him When Kings say there is a Necessity for our Service St. Paul hath said we must needs be subject to them and which as Grotius hath well observ'd implies Obedience to their Commands as well as Submission to their Coercion As Dr. Donne in his Pseudo-Martyr observ'd well concerning the Oath of Allegiance All the Substance of the Oath is virtually contain'd in the first Proposition That King James IS lawful King of all these Dominions the rest are but Declarations and Branches naturally and necessarily proceeding from that root the same as to the Point we are upon may be verify'd of the Oath of Supremacy The King's Highness IS the only Supream Governor of this Realm not shall be by virtue of this Act IS SO notwithstanding any thing that hath been done or is a doing and whereby any former Princes supposed de facto consenting to tye up his hands from Governing all his Subjects and ranging them in their Stations in his Service is out of the Case of your Oath who have sworn thus that King Iames the Second IS the only Supreme Governor c. Since therefore you have in your Oath acknowledged that the King is the only Supream Governor and that according to the 37th Article of the Church of England He HATH the rule of all Estates and Degrees committed to his charge BY GOD whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil I will ask you if any Humane Law can disable any Persons from being govern'd by him more then it can Children from honouring their Parents According to those words in Malachi If then I be a Father where is my honour and if I be a Master where is my fear c. may it not be said to every Subject while the King IS your King while he is your only Supreme Governor and while he is your Political Father will you not be Govern'd by him Or in effect will you Govern him by thinking to oblige him not to employ this or the other Subject and in effect endeavour both to dishonour and disable him who is the Head of the Community as it were by loss of Member Will you dishonour him who bears the Sword by imposing on him your belief that such a Member of the Body Politick is a gangrened one and necessary to be cut off from serving the State when he tells you he knoweth the contrary Or will you dishonour his Religion by saying that Papists are disabled by their Religion from being sound Members of the State when he knoweth they are not so disabled by it and accordingly as Sir William Temple hath in his Excellent Observations on the Low Countries made it appear that the Papists there are a sound part of the State Remember that the words only Supreme as apply'd to your King in the Assertory part of your Oath are not Otiosa Epitheta You will find that our great Casuist Bishop Sanderson in his Seventh Lecture of the Obligation of Conscience lays so much stress on those words in your Oath Only Supreme Governour as to judge him PERIUR'D who having taken the Oath shall assert the Figment as he calls it of Co-ordinate Power Quid enim PERIURIUM dici mereatur si hoc non sit manifestissimum PERIURIUM quem solum esse Supremum in suo regno Moderatorem Conceptis verbis juraveris ei parem etiam in suo regno potestatem constituere agnoscere If you did but often enough consider your Prince as asserted in your Oath to be Governor of the Realm you would find in your thoughts no difficulty of allowing him the Power of Commanding all Persons in it without exception to serve him Bishop Bilson in his Book of Supremacy p. 238. saith Though Bishops may be call'd Governors in respect of the Soul yet only Princes are Governors of Realms Pastors have Flocks and Bishops have Diocesses Realms and Dominions none have but Princes c. and so the style of Governor of this Realm belongs only to the Prince and not to the Priest and imports a Publick and Princely regiment And here I shall take occasion to tell you that as the Common Law subjecting the Inhabitants of this Realm to the Government of Bishops hath not kept our Princes from exempting particular Persons and Bodies Corporate from their Iurisdiction but could not exempt them from being subject to their Prince and from obeying him that much less could any Statute Law do it It is upon the weight of
reason that lyes in this Assertory part of the Oath that so many Writers of the Common Law have founded their Assertion of the King's Power oâ—… Commanding the Service of all his Subjects as essential to the keeping up the Monarchy or the Rule of all Estates committed to him by God that I lately spoke of and inseparable from it noâ—… alienable by any Humane Laws It is the Supreme Power of our Princes as Governors of the Realm that hath always entitled them to Press men for the Service of the Crown by Land or Sea and to recall both Soldiers and Mariners from the Service of Foreign Princes upon emergent Occasions to serve their natural Liege Lord. And the Book writ by a Learned Common Lawyer against the Exclusion call'd A Letter from a Gentleman of Quality in the Country c. and Printed A. 1679. and so deservedly extoll'd by the Iudicious loyal tells you in p. 7. and 8. that If it should be enacted by Parliament that No man should honour the King or love his Parents or Children c. such an Act would be ipso facto void because contrary to the express Divine Command c. The Statute of 23 H. 6. c. 8. and several other Statutes Enact that no Man shall be Sheriff of any County above one year and that any Patent of the King to any Person for a longer term tho with an express Clause of Non-obstante shall be void and of none Effect and the Patentee perpetually disabled to bear the Office. And yet notwithstanding it is Resolv'd by all the Iudges of England that these Acts of Parliament are void and that the King may by Non-obstante Constitute a Sheriff for Years Life or Inheritance And what is the Reason which the Iudges give of this Resolution Why because say they in express words this Act of Parliament cannot bar the King of the Service of his Subject which the immutable Law of Nature doth give to him For Obedience and Ligeance of the Subject add they is due to the Soveraign by the Law of Nature See 2 Hen. 7. 6. v. Calvin's Case 14. a. in Coke's 7th Rep. We know that by the Statute of 4 o. H. 4. c. 5. 't is ordain'd That every Sheriff of England shall abide in proper Person within his Bailywick for the time that he shall be such Officer But this Act hath never been construed to hinder the King as Supreme Governor and Ruler of all Persons in the Realm from Commanding any Sheriffs to serve him elsewhere during their Shrievalties nor on such case to oblige the Sheriffs in Conscience to observe the Statute by such Personal residence Baker in the reign of King Charles the first tells us of an Information A. 1629. in the Star-chamber against Mr. Long for that he being high Sheriff of the County of Wilts had the Charge and Custody thereof committed to him and had taken his Oath according to the Law to abide within his Bailys-wick all the time of his Sheriff-wick and his Trust and Employment requiring his personal attendance therein did contrary thereto suffer himself to be chosen a Citizen for the City of Bath to serve in the last Parliament and did attend at Westminster in Parliament WITHOUT HIS MAIESTIES LICENCE he being Sheriff at that time and that for the foremention'd Offences and Breach of his Oath and neglect of his Trust and Contempt of his Majesty the Decree was That he should be Committed to the Tower during his Majesties Pleasure and pay a Fine of 2000 Marks to the King. Hereby you see that his Majesties LICENCE or Dispensing with that Statute had indemnify'd him from it in the Court of Law and that the potestas Superioris being necessarily imply'd in a promissory Oath the King as supreme Governour of all Persons in his Realms commanding or allowing such Officers service to the publick elsewhere had secured him in either forum The known Custom of the Speaker of the House of Commons DISABLING himself when presented to the King but of entring on his Charge on the King's approbation and pleasure signify'd according to that saying of Cuâ—… me posse negem quod tu posse putes may pass for some representation to our thoughts of Disability to serve the publick then evaporating when the King as Governor of the Realm doth give the Subject a Call so to do You may find this practice of the Speaker's disabling himself set down in Coke 4. Inst. c. 1. And I shall here by the way take notice that he there likewise mentions it that one of the Principal ends of Calling of Parliaments is for the redress of the Mischiefs and Grievances that dayly happen And he had there before said Now forasmuch as divers Laws and Statutes have been enacted and provided for these ends aforesaid and that divers Mischiefs in particular and divers Grievances in general concerning the Honour and Safety of the King the State and Defence of the Kingdom and of the Church of England might be prevented an excellent Law was made Anno 36. E. 3. which being applied to the said Writs of Parliament doth in few and effectual words set down the true subject of a Parliament in these words For the maintenance of the said Articles and Statutes and redress of divers Mischiefs and Grievances which daily happen a Parliament shall be holden every year as another time was Ordain'd by a Statute Before the Conquest Parliaments were to be holden twice every year c. But accordingly as my Lord Coke there takes notice of the style of the Statute of 36. E. 3. viz. to the Honour of God and of holy Church and quietness of the People and according to the style of the Statute of 10. E. 3. Because our Sovereign Lord the King Edw. 3. which Soverainly desireth the maintenance of the Peace and Safeguard of his People c. hath Ordain'd c. for the Quietness and Peace of his People c. and suitably to the style of the Statute of 14 o E. 3. 1. To the honour of God c. The King for Peace and Quietness of his People as well great as small doth Grant and Establish the things under-written c. and to that of 20. E. 3. and for this Cause desiring as much for the Pleasure of God and Ease and Quietness of our Subjects and according to that style in the Register Nos oppressiones duritias damna excessus praedicta gravamina volentes relinquere impunita volentesque salvationi QUIETI populi nostri in hac parte prospicere ut tenemut c. and according to the Trust committed to Princes by God to endeavour that their Subjects may under them lead QUIET and Peaceable lives in all Godliness and Honesty and which is the great Fundamental reason of the Moral Obligation of Princes to relax the Summum jus of their Laws by sometimes DISPENSING therein since we may easily imagine by our thinking of a late Conjuncture how possible it was that the
Peace and Quietness of the People might be disturb'd by the Annual Calling of Parliaments according to the tenour of those Laws our Princes as Supreme Governors of the Realm did often dispense with their observance The Author of the Book call'd The Long Parliament Dissolv'd Printed in the year 1676. refers to the Laws of 4 o E. 3. c. 10. and 36. E. 3. c. 14. 5. E. 3. N o. 141. 5. E. 2. N o. 1. R. 2. N o. 95. as positively appointing the Meeting of a Parliament once within a year And the People saith he have silently waited and born the Omission of our Princes in not so Calling Parliaments And he further mentions how Queen Elizabeth Prorogued a Parliament for three days more then a year and he presumes to complain of His late Majesty's Proroguing his long Parliament to above a years time as illegal and he argues for that Parliaments being disabled from Sitting and acting afterward as a Parliament by reason of such Prorogation as contrary to the aforesaid Laws and which he saith were declared to be in force when the triennial Act was made in 16. Caroli 1 mi. and so likewise in the Statute for repealing that triennial Act in 16. Car. 2 o. in these words And because by the Ancient Laws and Statutes of this Realm made in the Reign of King Edward the Third Parliaments are to be held very often c. And how the Iudgment of the House of Lords was assertive of the legality of that Parliaments not being disabled from sitting after such His late Majesty's Prorogation is fresh in memory But to return from whence I digress'd I may here take notice to you how our Princes as Supreme Governors of the Realm and as having the Rule of all Persons committed to them by God and to whom they stand accountable for the same have held themselves obliged further to dispense with disability incurr'd by Acts of Parliament upon a Religionary account and which they have done to the general satisfaction of their Subjects of all Religions A What do you here intend to refer to B. I do here intend to refer to the Statute of 3 o Iacobi c. 5. by one Clause in which Act Convict Recusants are DISABLED from practising Physick or bearing any Office or Charge Military and by which Clause every Person offending is to forfeit for every such Offence 100 l. and the one Moyety thereof to be to the King and the other Moyety to him that will sue for the same c. But notwithstanding the Zeal of that Prince against Popery he out of a tender regard to the Bodies and Healths of his People and the ennabling many learned Roman-Catholick Physicians to preserve them did by Connivence sufficientâ—…y dispense with that Law insomuch that it may be said that that severe disabling Law came on the Stage but as Cato into the Theatre only to go off again And I have elsewhere mention'd it that a Book afterward Printed in his Reign call'd The Foot out of the Snare sets down the Names of about Twenty five famous Roman-Catholick Physicians then Practising in London and the places of their abodes and whom yet I believe no Informer ever molested And notwithstanding the disability incurr'd by that Act of Parliament I account that an eminent Roman-Catholick Physician not long since dead was not by any among our various Sects of Protestants in the Plot-times envy'd the liberty of being in our Metropolis the greatest Practicioner of that noble Science By the same Clause Roman-Catholick Lawyers are likewise disabled from Practice and under the same Penalty but who likewise enjoy'd the same Dispensation by Connivence with those of the other Profession accordingly as Mr. Nye in his Book call'd Beams of former Light observes p. 146. viz. The Law Physick Merchandize c. may be practised by a Turk or Iew or Papist here among us c. How severe the Laws in being are against Roman-Catholicks of the other great Profession namely of Theology and of the Clerical orâ—…er officiating here you know But you likewise know my opinion I discours'd to you of in the Conjuncture of the Plot and Panick fears namely that by virtue of the Contents of the Assertory part of the Oath we are upon even our Protestant Kings as Supreme Governors of the Realm both in Matters Ecclesiastical and Civil and as having the Rule of all Persons committed to them by God were morally bound to see our Roman-Catholick Countreymen while living among us here provided with a Competent Priesthood as Physicians for their Souls and to administer the Sacraments to them A. Yes I remember you Discourse of that matter then and how you mention'd it that if any Turks or Iews or any Heterodox Religionaries desired to live here without a Priesthood the Prince as Guardian of both Tables was obliged by his Coercive Power to make them put their own Principles in practice by their having a Competent Priesthood and which all the Sects of the Mahumetan Pagaâ—… Iewish and Christian Religion own it as their Principle to have and that as Religion was necessary to the State to make men good Subjects and ready to serve their Prince and just Dealers a Priesthood was necessary to Religion B. You are not therefore to wonder at the Dispensation by Connivence so many Roman-Catholick Priests enjoy'd here in the Reigâ—…s of former Princes And I shall some other time tell you how our Laws that DISABLE Papists from bearing Arms were in the time of the Rebellion after A. 1640. necessarily dispens'd with by the Royal Martyr as Supreme Governor of the Realm and that none of the Church of England did look with an evil eye in the least on such disability being then dispens'd with by Prerogative A. I suppose you may have heard it objected that by the Statute of 25. C. 2. which has lately employ'd your thoughts the Prerogative of the King is not touch'd for that the King may grant the Offices to any of his Subjects and that the Act is only a Direction to the Subject to qualifie himself accordingly for the King's Service and that if he be uncapable to serve the King 't is through his own default and he is punishable for the same as happen'd in the Case of one who was made Sheriff and neglected to take the Oaths and that there was an Opinion given in the Case that no Subject could put himself out of a Capacity to serve the King but for so doing he is punishable B. But the more you think of this Matter you will find the unreasonableness of the Objection recurring upon your thoughts with greater force For it is not in mens Power to qualifie themselves to serve the King by believing what doctrinal Propositions they will and tho you have heard of a Faith that will remove Mountains yet you may consider that 't is as easie to remove them as your Faith it self about Matters of reveal'd truth and that considering the Circumstances
Disability of a whole third estate as to bearing secular Offices did not stand in the way of Prerogative I have read it in Fuller's Church-History that in the year 1350. the Lords and Commons in Parliament did find themselves aggrieved that the Clergy-men engrossed all secular Offices and thereupon presented the ensuing Petition to the King according to this effect insisting only in the substance thereof viz. And because that in this present Parliament it was declared to our Lord the King by all the Earls Barons and Commons of England that the Government of the Kingdâ—…m hath been performed a long time by the Men of Holy Church which are not justifyable in all Cases whereby great mischiefs and damages have happen'd in times past and more may happen in time to come in disheriting of the Crown and great prejudice of the Kingdom c. that it will please our said Lord the King that the Lay-men of the said Kingdom which are sufficient and able of Estates may be chosen for these and that no other Person be hereafter made Chancellor Treasurer Clark of the Privy-Seal Barons of the Exchequer Chamberlain of the Exchequer Comptroller and all other great Officers and Governors of the said Kingdom and that these things be now in such manner establish'd in form aforesaid that by no way it may be defeated or any thing done to the contrary in any time to come saving to our Lord the King the Election and removing of such Officers but that always they be Lay-men such as is abovesaid To this Petition the King return'd that he would ordain upon this point as it should best seem to him by the advice of his good Council In fine you see that tho the Clergy-men were thus disabled by the general Customs and Usage of the Realm and by lawful Canons and provincial Constitutions accounted by that Iudge beforemention'd to be tanta-mount to Acts of Parliament yet you â—…ee our Kings did frequently dispense with these Customs lawful Canons and Constitutions And tho the Office of Bishops renders them guardians of the Canons yet you see how tender they have been of the Regal power of Dispensing therein And as that saying of Wicliffe however censured in the Council of Constance may perhaps with a little help be reduced to Orthodoxy viz. That â—…ne should be Excommunicated by any Prelate unless he know him Excommunicated by God so with parity of reason it may be said that none should be totally disabled by any Prince from serving him unless he knew him really disabled by God and especially when he knew the contrary and that the Services of the great men of the Clergy had so often been successfully employ'd at the Helm of State and when for the honour of Clergy-mens Councel some of the most profound pieces of State-Policy our English Story hath in it are to be attributed to Clergy-mens officiating in their Princes Councels and as for Example when by the figure that Bishop Morton made at the Helm he did make up the dismal breach and united the two Houses of York and Lancaster in the Happy Marriage between Henry the 7th and the Lady Elizabeth aâ—… when Bishop Fox who was Lord Privy Seal did by his Advice lay the Foundation of a more happy Union between the Kingdoms of England and Scotland by the eldest Daughter of Henâ—…y marrying Iames of Scotland and the younger matching into France that so on their ever coming to inherit Scotland might be annex'd to the Imperial Crown of England and England not be annex'd as a Province to France and for the Consequences of which Advice both Englishmen and English and French Protestants have so much cause to say We Praise thee O God c. And I am here minded of what Fuller tells us on A. 14. H. 4. viz. It was moved in Parliament that no Weishman Bishop or other shall be Iustice Chamberlain Chancellor Treasurer Sheriff Constable of a a Castle or Keeper of Records or Lieutenant in the said Office in any part of Wales or of Councel to any English Lord notwithstanding any Patent made to the contrary Cum clausulâ non obstante licet Wallicus natus and that it was answered that the King willeth it except the Bishops and for them and others which he hath found good loyal Lieges toward him out said Lord the King will be advised by the Advice of his Councel Ex Rot. Parliamentariis in turri Lond. in hoc Anno which Citation Fuller professeth to be taken out of the Authentick Records in the Tower. There passed an Act of Parliament in the 4th year of Henry the 4th by which it is Enacted That no Welshman shall be Iustice Chamberlain Sheriff Coroner nor other Officer in any part of Wales notwithstanding any Patent to the contrary with the Clause of Non-obstante and yet without Question saith my Lord Coke 12th Rep. the King might dispense with this Statute but you see how on the Parliaments resenting the Dispensations the Act had met with and particularly in Bishops having contrary to the tenor of the Act served the Crown in Secular Employments the King particularly adhered to the exercise of his Dispensative Power in their Case It was upon the ground of this Assertion viz. Of the Crown 's being entitled to Command the Services of all Subjects that some Papists were employ'd by Queen Elizabeth in Affairs of the State notwithstanding any disability incurr'd by not taking the Oath of Supremacy And Viscount Montacute tho a Roman Catholick was as Cambden tells you sent by her as her Embassadour to the King of Spain and employ'd too about the Business of the Scots and to do right to the Protestant Religion Sir Edward Carne likewise a Roman Catholick was sent by her as her Embassador to the Pope And as to the sense of many of that Queen's most renowned Ministers of State about the Deprivation of the Nonconformist Divines disabled eo Nomine from their Ministry being Penal to the People the Author of certain Considerations tending to promote peace and good will among Protestants hath mention'd it that Eight of that Queens Privy Councellors writ a Letter in their favour to the Bishops of Canterbury and London in the close whereof 't is said viz. Now therefore we for the Discharge of our Duties being by our Vocation under her Majesty bound to be careful that the Universal Realm may be well govern'd according to the Honor and Glory of God and to the discharge of her Majesty being the Principal GOVERNOR of ALL her SUBIECTS under Almighty God do most earnestly desire your Lordships to take some charitable Considerations of these Causes that the PEOPLE of THIS Realm may not be DEPRIVED of their Pastors being Diligent Learned and Zealous tho in some Points Ceremonial they may seem doubtful only of Conscience and not of wilfulness c. Tour Lordships loving Friends William Burghly George Shrewsbury A. â—…rwick R. Leicâ—…ster C. Howard J. Crofts Chr. Hatton
while or since that Statute of the 25th of his Reign committed the exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to Lay-men did or might give occasion to some Evil-dispos'd persons to think and little regard the Proceedings and Censures Ecclesiastical made by his HIGHNESSE and his Uice-gerent Officials Commissaries Iudges and Uisitors being also Lay and Married men to be of little or none effect whereby the people gathereth heart and presumption to do evil and not to have such reverence to your most Godly Injunctions and Proceedings as becometh them c. So I leave it to you to consider how the disabling of any subjects by reason of Religionary Heterodoxy to serve their Prince did or might give occasion to some evil-disposed Persons to attempt the disabling of their Prince on the same account as I bâ—…fore hinted it to you and as the popular incogitancy of the Power given by God extending to all such Persons as should be employâ—…d under the King producing the irreverence of their surmises of the incapacity of the Officials and Visitors employ'd by the Vicegerent and consequently of the incapacity of the Vicegerent himself did naturally terminate in their gathering heart and presumption to do evil and to surmise the King 's being disabled to exercise all manner of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and to do that which was directly repugnant to his Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church and to his Prerogative Royal his Grace being a Lay-man how you ought still to preserve a tenderness in your thoughts for that Prerogative Royal given him by God's Word of Commanding the Services of all his Subjects by what Laws or Constitutions soever de facto incapacitated And by the gradual Proceedings I have now mention'd you ought with horror to think of the incapacitating any one Subject to serve his Prince as of the first step from a Precipice A. You have provided variety of Entertainment for my Consideration and have my thanks for it But suppose I should be so Curious and Inquisitive as to ask where in God's Word that Power is given to Princes to employ such Persons as they shall think fit in their service according to the purport of that Statute B. You may likewise suppose that you would then find my Genius so inquisitive as to ask you where you have been at Church of late years For you could then go to no Church in England Scotland or Ireland without hearing St. Paul's Omnis anima spoken of Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers whether he be Apostle or Evangelist Prophet Priest Clergy or Layety whether he be of the People diffusive or representative and the like And as the well-drawn Effigies of a man seems to look on every one in the Room so hath the Picture of the Regal Power drawn by the Divines of the Church of England appear'd to cast its Eye on every one and been made as it were Vocal and saying to every one For he is the Minister of God to thee for good And the good old Book call'd God and the King that you have read over and over hath told you that the Bond of the King's Subjects Obedience to his Majesty is inviolable and cannot be dissolv'd And indeed the thing being so plain by the Law of Nature which being written in man's heart is the very same so far forth as it is yet undefaced with the Law of God reveal'd in the Word it is not tanti to raise Moot-Points about this relating to Scripture I doubt not but you remember it in my Lord Herbert's Harry the 8th that there being a Rebellion of many of the Commonalty A. 1536. and the Rebels sending the King their Grievances and one whereof was That his Grace had ill Councellors and of mean Birth among which Cromwel was not forgotten and the King sending an Answer penn'd by himself as to their Grievances he did therein upbraid them for medling in the choice of his Counsellors and command their acquiescence therein on the grounds of Nature and of his being their Natural Liege-lord A. Well Sir Let it for the present pass as a datum or concessum as you will have it that the Obedience of Subjects in serving their Prince is founded on the grounds both of Nature and Scripture And I shall moreover allow it to you that if you had an Enthusiast to deal with and such who as you said do outrage the 13th of the Romans out of the Apocalypse you might out of Brightman's Revelation of the Apocalypse shew him out of that part of Holy Scripture sufficient Authority for the King 's particularly making Cromwel his Vicegerent For he there on the 14th Chapter and the 17th and following Verses saith This Angel is Thomas Cromwel who lived in the days of Harry the 8th that most mighty King and was a man of great renown and place in our Kingdoms being the Earl of Essex and Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal who came out of the Temple and being a sincere favourer of pure Religion He had a Sickle in his hand being made the King's Deputy in all Ecclesiastical Matters and it was a sharp one as with which he sets stoutly and deliberately to his work and yet he had no Crown or Diadem to grace his head withal being a Minister rather to put another Man's Power in Ure then any that wrought by his own Power and Authority And he on Verse the 18th makes the other Angel to be a Martyr viz. Tho. Cranmer and refers the meaning of the words He cryed with a great voice to him that had the Sickle to Cranmer because saith he in the days of Harry the 8th he inflamed the mind of Tho. Cromwel by his words with a desire to make a Vintage B. I thank you for diverting me with that passage of Brightman but I can refer you to another Writer of our Church whose Authority will go further with us then Brightman's and who hath recorded it that the great figure that Cromwel made both in the Church and State and his and Cranmer's acting together in concert and by joynt Councels both in Church and at the Helm of State was so highly fortunate to the Reformation You may find this observed by Archbishop Parker in his De Antiquitate Ecclesiâ—… Britannicoe p. 530. where he saith Namque profligato Papa susceptâ Ecclesioe Anglicanoe defensione curâ tutelâ Rex excelsiâ—…ing â—…ii multarum rerum usu peritum Thomam Cromwellum Vicarium suum in spiritualibus generalem designavit Hic cum Thoma Cranmero Archiepiscopo tanquam in puppi sedit clavumque Ecclesioe Anglicanoe tenuit proramque à papali littore avertit in Christianum portum reduxit A. Was Vicar-general to the King in Spirituals Cromwel's style for his Office as the Archbishop there termed it B. I am apt to think it was not I never saw any Copy of his Patent or Commission for it The Acts of Parliament in H. the 8â—…h's time style him The King's Vicegerent c. And
Case or to the quite contrary in More 542. Armiger's Case I shall most consult the ease of your thoughts by directing them to what interpretation my Lord Coke in Cawdrys Case gives as to the words of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. and where he saith that that Act doth not annex any Iurisdiction to the Crown but what was of right or ought to be by the Ancient Laws of this Realm parcel of the King's Iurisdiction c. and which lawfully had been or might be exercised within the Realm The end of which Iurisdiction and of all the Proceedings thereupon that all things might be done in Causes Ecclesiastical to the Pleasure of Almighty God encrease of Vertue and the Conservation of the Peace and Unity of the Realm as by divers places of the Act appears And therefore by this Act no pretended Iurisdiction exercised within this Realm being ungodly or repugnant to the ancient Law of the Crown was or could be restored to the Crown according to the ancient Right and Law of the same And here I may tell you that as the Pope did often dispense with incapacity incurr'd by his Positive Laws and that even in the use of the Power of the Keys as by his delegating the Power of Excommunication to Lay-men and to Abbesses as aforesaid so our Kings d d anciently by their Letters Patents and Charters grant Power to those who were no Bishops Ordinaries or Ecclesiastical Iudges or Officers to inflict Ecclesiastical Censures of the greater Excommunication on Offenders and that for Causes not merely Spiritual or Ecclesiastical with Power to Certify them into Chancery and thereupon to obtain Writs de Excommunicato Capiendo as Mr. Prynne tells us in his Animadversions on the Fourth part of the Institutes and there cites the President of Edward the Third thus empow'ring the Chancellor of the University of Oxford tho a Lay-man so to do and so to Punish Breakers of the Peace Offenders against the Statutes Privileges and Customs of the University and all Forestallers and Regraters and Sellers of corrupt Meat and Wine and to Excommunicate such who refused to cleanse the Streets from filth and to Pave them before their Doors and this he saith was confirm'd by sundry succeeding Statutes of our Princes In what particulars it is by this Statute of the 25. of H. the 8th warranted that the King his Heirs and Successors may dispense with Persons and in Causes that the Papacy was never accustomed to dispense in I shall not trouble you or my self to enquire but shall tell you that Mr. Nye in his Book call'd Two Acts of Parliament and wherein are contain'd his Observations on the Oath of Supremacy doth in p. 164. cite this Statute of 25. H. 8. c. 21. and thereupon say the King's Majesty may dispense with any of those Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws meaning the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws indulge the Omission of what is enjoyn'd by them make void the Crime and remove the Penalty incurred by breach of them yea and give faculty to do and practice otherwise any Synodal Establishment or long usage to the Contrary notwithstanding in what offends not the Holy Scripture and Laws of GOD. And therefore when our Soveraign in the course of his Ecclesiastical Supremacy doth only dispense with incapacity we are sure he goes not to the height of the Dispensative Power justify'd in him by that Statute nothing having been more customary to the Papacy then rehabilitation It was upon the Revival of this Statute of Harry the 8th by that first of Queen Eliz. c. 1. that she according to the Papal custom of dispensing with the Commutation of Penance did in her Articles in the Synod began at London A. D. 1548. establish one De moderandâ solennis Poenitentioe Commutatione whereby she orders that such Commutation shall be but seldom and for weighty Causes and when it shall appear to the Bishop that that way is the safer to reform the guilty Person and that the Commutation-Money be employ'd to Pious uses And then follows the Title De Moderandis quibusdam Indulgentus pro Celebratione Matrimonii absque trinundinâ denunciatione quam bannos vocant Matrimoniales where you will find she makes Faculties and Indulgences all one And as I have shew'd you how she thought it necessary for the safety of her Subjects Consciences to exercise her Dispensative Power of interpreting and of relaxing disabilities occasion'd by the very first Statute of her Reign and how soon she put the Dispensative Power of those kinds in practice which by that Statute were restored and united to her Imperial Crown so I may observe to you that shortly after the making of the Second Statute in her Reign viz. That for Uniformity of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments which punisheth with Premunire Sequestration and Deprivation and Excommunication which while it is depending is so variously inclusive of disability the not using the Book of Common-Prayer as Publish'd in English she by her Letters Patents dated the 6th of April in the Second year of her Reign and A. 1560. alloweth the use of Latine Prayers to the Colleges of both Universities and to Eaton and Winchester Colleges with a particular Non-obstante to that Statute a Copy of which Letters Patents may be seen in Bishop Sparrow's Collection of Articles c. And I have before acquainted you in general how in her Letters Patents for the Consecrating new Bishops she expresly dispens'd with incapacity But what may perhaps seem to you as a new Indication of her being the better able to dispense with it is an Instance I shall give you of her making incapacity by her Supreme Ecclesiastical Power The instance of her thus making incapacity is a thing that Mr. Nye in his Beams of former Light reflects on as strange for he there in p. 201. referring to Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions A. 1559. Injunct 29. viz. It is thought very necessary that no manner of Priest or Deacon shall hereafter take to his Wife any manner of Woman without the Advice and Allowance first had by the Bishop of the Diocese and two Iustices of the Peace next to the place of her abode c. and if any shall do otherwise they shall not be permitted to Preach the Word or give Sacraments nor be Capable of any Ecclesiastical Benefice saith then Doth this seem strange now It seem'd very necessary in the judgment of our Governors then A. I must acknowledge that you have spoke that which is very much for my Satisfaction concerning the Dispensative Power and the Oath thus supporting one another But I wonder that I have not in any of our celebrated Writers of the Church of England read that the Contents of the Assertory and Promissory parts of this Oath and our abjuring foreign Iurisdictions Powers Superiorities and Authorities in the Oath i. e. those of the Papacy were intended in order to the statuminating our Prince's Dispensative Power pursuant to the Statutes of 25. H. 8th and 1
request them to consider that a Private Interpretation of a Publick Act can give no satisfaction unless it be either expresly or virtually allow'd by the highest Authority that doth impose it and then it is made Publick c. But the Authority of Interpretation of any doubt in such a Publick Act belongs properly not to private but publick Persons c. For private Men tho Learn'd if they take upon them the Interpretation of publick Dictates may be more like to light on mutual Contradictions of each other then on the true and proper Construction of the Text they interpret So did Vega and Soto Soto and Catherinus who wrote against each other contrary Comments on the Council of Trent In which respect it was a wise advice given to the Pope by the Bishop of Bestice viz. to appoint a Congregation for the expounding of the Councel and well follow'd by him when he forbade all sorts of Persons Clerks or Laicks being private Men to make any Commentaries Glosses Annotations or any Interpretation whatsoever on the Decrees of that Councel Dr. Burgesse indeed made an Interpretation of his own Subscription but there had been no validity in it as we conceive unless it had been allow'd by the Superior Powers And so it was for as he saith It was accepted by King James and the Archbishop of Canterbury affirm'd it to be the true sense and meaning of the Church of England He refers there to Dr. Burgesse in his Answer to a much applauded Pamphlet Praefat. p. 26. A. Your mentioning that of Dr. Burgesse his Interpretation of his Subscription minds me of what I have read at the end of his Book call'd No Sacrilege nor Sin to alienate or purchase Cathedral Lands viz. in his Postscript to Dr. Pearson and his No Necessity of Reformation of the Publick Doctrine of the Church of England Printed A. 1660. where he saith As touching the Regal Supremacy we own and will assert it as far as you do or dare Only we had reason to take notice of the improper Expression in the 37th Article that the Queen's Majesty hath the Supreme Power For if the Declaration father'd on the late King and prefix'd to the Articles had so much Power with his Printer that he durst not alter the word Queen into King even in the year 1642 and those Articles must be read Verbatim without Alteration or Explanation then we say again there is a Necessity of Reforming that Article in the expression of it and not to talk at random what was indeed the meaning unless we may have leave when we read it Regiâ declaratione non-obstante to declare the sense which the Declaration alloweth us not to do But the truth is that exception of the Doctor to the Articles may well pass for a Scruple or rather a Cavil and at this rate we should be put to it to say O King interpret for ever B. You say right Dr. Pierson in that Judicious Book of his call'd No Necessity of Reforming the Doctrine of the Church of England well observes that the 37th Article hath express reference to the Queen's Injunctions set forth in the year 1559. and those Injunctions take particular care that no other Duty Allegiance or Bond should be required to the Queen then was acknowledged to be due to the most noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the 8th her Majesty's Father or King Edward the 6th her Majesty's Brother The words of the Article declare that the Doctrine contained in it concerneth all the Kings as Kings The title in General is of the Civil Magistrates and the words run thus where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief Government we give not to our Princes c. shewing that what they gave to her they gave to all the Kings of England Which will appear more plainly out of the first Latine Copy Printed in the time of Queen Eliz. in the year 1563. read and approved by the Queen the words whereâ—…f are these Cum Regiae Majestati summam gubernationem tribuimus quibus titulis intelligimus animos quorundam Calumniatorum offendi non damus Regibus nostris aut verbi Dei aut Sacramentorum administrationem c. Being therefore the Article expresly mentioneth and concerneth the Kings of England as they are the Kings of England the mention of the Queen's Majesty in the Article can make the Doctrine no more doubtful then it doth our Allegiance in that Oath which was made 1 o Eliz. where the Heirs and Successors of the Queen are to appoint who shall accept the Oath the words of which are that the Queen's Highness is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm But I hope the Heirs and Successors of Queen Elizabeth did never appoint that Oath to be taken in the Name of the Queen's Highness but in their own It may be supposed that some such like Cavilling or Scrupling humour possess'd the fancies of some in the beginning of the Reign of King Iames the First and that some occasion was thereby given to that Prince in those his Canons expresly therein maintaining the 39 Articles and the Subscription thereunto and particularly in the 36th Canon there to enjoyn a Subscription to three Articles in such manner and sort as is there appointed and of which the first is That the King's Majesty under God is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other his Highness Dominions c. and that no foreign Prince Person Prelate HAUE or OUGHT to have any Iurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual c. and in which the words have or OUGHT to have might possibly be inserted out of a Royal Complaisance with the Desires of some Scruplers in whose behalf the Famous Dr. Rainolds moved the King at the Hampton-Court Conference that to the Position in the 37th Article viz. The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm of England might be added nor OUGHT to have but which motion the King then rejected as a thing superfluous and saying Habemus quod jure habemus You may find an Account of this twoâ—…old Subscription in Coke 4. Inst. c. 74. and where he saith Subscription required by the Clergy is twofold One by force both of an Act of Parliament CONFIRMING and Establishing the 39 Articles of Religion agreed upon at a Convocation of the Church of England and ratify'd by Queen Eliz. 13. Eliz. c. 12. Another by Canens made at a Convocation of the Church of England and ratify'd by King James A. I had thought you told me that the 39 Articles owed no Confirmation nor Authority to that Act of the 13th of Eliz. B. I did tell you so and do think that when my Lord Coke used the word Confirming he spake cum vulgo or as the word is taken minus propriè and as it is taken in declarative Acts of Parliament sometime to mean declared and as I and others may in Discourse sometimes use the word But speaking properly to
kind B. Why then I can tell you if you will at any time turn to your Collection of Proclamations in the time of King Iames the First you will find that in his Proclamation of March the 5th the first year of his Reign he intimates that with the Consent of the Bishops present in the Hampton-Court Conference he thought meet that some small things might rather be explain'd then changed in the Book of Common Prayer and for that end gave forth his Commission under the Great Seal of England according to the Form which the Laws of this Realm in like Case prescribed to be used to make the said Explanation and to cause the whole Book of Common Prayer with the same Explanation to be newly Printed which being done and establish'd anew after so serious a Deliberation c. we have thought it necessary to make known by Proclamation our authorizing of the same and to require and enjoyn all men as well Ecclesiastical as Temporal to Conform themselves to it as the only publick Form of serving God establish'd and allow'd to be in this Realm And the rather for that all the Learned Men who were there present as well of the Bishops as others promised their Conformity in the practice of it only making sute to us that some few might be born with for a time Wherefore we require all Archbishops Bishops and all other publick Ministers as well Ecclesiastical as Civil to do their Duties in causing the same to be obey'd and in punishing the Offenders according to the Laws of the Realm heretofore establish'd for the Authorizing the said Book of Common Prayer You see there that all the Bishops and the great Parade of the literati present at that famous Conference did implore the King for the exercise of his Dispensative Power for a while to some few But what is more considerable is that the King here doth make a general relaxation of the Bond of Queen Elizabeth's Act of Uniformity in some things and instead of inserting an express Clause of discharging from the Penalties of that Act all that use the Common Prayer Book with the King's Alterations or Explanations as Queen Elizabeth's Admonition did in relation to those who took the Oath of Supremacy in the sense of her Interpretation a thing indeed not necessary for either of them to have done when they had loosen'd the bond of the Observance of the Law he enjoyns the uniform usage of the Book of Common Prayer as by him interpreted or explain'd the title of the Proclamation being A Proclamation for the authorizing an Uniformity of the Book of Common Prayer to be used throughout the Realm under the disabling Punishments of Queen Elizabeth's Act of Uniformity the Bishops all this while being ministerial to the King in his Power of thus interpreting and explaining an Act of Parliament and the loosening of its Obligation both as to themselves and others I am to tell you that in that Proclamation of March the fifth the King refers to a Proclamation he had before Publish'd on the 24th of October then last past wherein he gave the Puritan Divines an intimation of the Conference he intended to have and in which he reflects on the heat of their Spirits as tending rather to Combustion then Reformation which saith he if there be Cause to make is more in our hearts then theirs c. and afterwards saith we are not ignorant that time may have brought in some Corruptions which may deserve a review and amendment which if by the Assembly intended by us we shall find to be so indeed we will therein procéed according to the Laws and Customs of this Realm by Advice of our Councel or in our High Court of Parliament or by Convocation of our Clergy as we shall find reason to lead us not doubting but that in such an orderly proceeding we shall have the Prelates others of our Clergy no less willing and far more able to afford us their Duty and Service then any other whose zeal doth go so fast before their discretion And the Proclamation in March following shew'd you how the King's reason lead him in his Proceeding in the Affair according to the Laws and Customs of this Realm and how loyally his Bishops and Clergy acquiesced therein A. I remember I have read both these Proclamations and I doubt not but that Hampton-Court Conference made a great ferment in the Body of the People tho none in the Orthodox Clergy But I should be glad to know whether it made any fermentation in the Body of the People Representative and what was the Result of it Did the Parliament acquiesce in what the King had done as aforesaid For if so they had done as Queen Elizabeth's Parliament in publickly approving what she by her own Ecclesiastical Supremacy did in discharging the disabling Penalties in her first Act of Parliament and in relaxing by her interpretation the vinculum for its observance in that sense that many had before put on it B. King Iames his Parliament did in effect the very self-same thing And I shall give you the account of it out of his Proclamation of the 16th of Iuly A. 1604. in the Second year of his Reign for there having spoke of that Conference and of his having Publish'd by Proclamation what was the issue of it and his hoping that when the same should be made known all reasonable Men would have rested satisfy'd with that which had been done and not have moved further trouble of Speech of Matters whereof so solemn and advised deliberation had been made His Majesty's following words are Notwithstanding at the late Assembly of our Parliament there wanted not many who renew'd with no little earnestness the Questions before determin'd and many more as well about the Book of Common Prayer as other Matters of Church Government and importuned us for our assent to many Alterations therein but yet with such Success as when they heard both our own Speeches made to them at sundry times shewing the Reasons of our former Proceedings in those Matters and likewise had had Conference with some Bishops and other Lords of the Upper House about the same they desisted from further Prosecution thereof finding that of all things that might any way tend to the furtherance of Religion and of Establishment of a Ministry fit for the same we had before with the Advice of our Councel had such Consideration as the present state of things would bear and taken order how the same should be prosecuted by such means as might be used without any publick disturbance or innovation And in how vigorous a State the Dispensative Power as to the Nonconformists afterward continued in the Reign of that Prince appears by what I have before cited of an Application made to him by the House of Commons for the exercise of the same to the Non-conformists in the 10th year of his Reign Moreover how by Tacit Dispensation he dispens'd with the Disabilities that
say right The King may thus according to his Lordship's Opinion suspend all Penal Disabilities as well as other Penalties incurr'd by Acts of Parliament and particularly by the Test-Act of 25 o Car. 2. and hereby to the Great figure he made in the framing of that Act any who are displeas'd with the Act may apply the Una eademque manus c. A. But I suppose his Lordship there has nothing that may favour the repealing of the Test or any of the Penal Laws against the Papists B. None would expect from him anything to be moved for the repealing of the Test however he allow'd Prerogative to suspend it But at that time that all People of narrow Souls and ignoble Thoughts were with so much clamour hunting down all Roman-Catholicks without distinction and when the most devout among them by being as it were ad bestias damnati and devoured by Informers appear'd as a spectacle of delight to many inhumane Protestants his Lordship's humanity was so great as to incline him in p. 6. there to give them somewhat like a Quietus from all Pecuniary Laws And the truth is when I consider how little Wool the fleecing of Roman Catholicks and Quakers or any Heterodox Religionaries at home or abroad hath brought to the Exchequer of any Prince or State and only to Informers and that the Consciences of peaceable Men have been burden'd by Men of no Conscience and by the turba gravis paci who are indeed burthens of the Earth I tremble to think what occasion may have been taken by Male-contents to say in their Hearts as to any such Prince or State according to those words of the Psalmist Thou sellest thy People for nought and dost not encrease thy Wealth by their Price or and takest no Money for them I shall at some other time of our meeting give you some account cut of the Records of the Exchequer of the inconsiderable Sums of Money that have for several years been brought to it by the severe Prosecutions of Roman-Catholicks and Quakers But there is another thing very well worth your reading in that Book and which is the more proper for our Consideration as suiting some great Points we have been discoursing that concern our Oath and that is this Hâ—…s â—…ate Majesty's Ministers in that year 1675. having brought in a Bill in Parliament for a TEST extending to Protestants and which as the Book saith was call'd by one of His Majesty's Ministers A moderate Security to the Church and Crown you will there in p. 15. see it mentioned how as to the Assertory Parts of the Oath in that Test It was worthy the Consideration of the Bishops whether Assertory Oaths which were properly appointed to give Testimony of a Matter of Fact wâ—…ereof a man is capable to be fully assured by the evidence of his Senses be lawfully to be made use of to confirm or invalidate Docâ—…inal Propositions and whether that Legislative Power which imposeth such an Oath doth not necessarily assume to it seif an Infallibility And as for promissory Oaths it was desired that those learned Prelates would consider the Opinion of Grotius De Jure Belli Pacis l. 2. c. 13. who seems to make it plain that those kind of Oaths are forbidden by our Saviour Christ Matth. 5. 34 37. and whether it would not become the Fathers of the Church when they have well weiâ—…h'd that and other places of the New Testament to be more tender in multiplying Oaths then hitherto the great Men of the Church have been It is there toward the end of the page mentioned how some of the Lords dâ—…sired that it might be clearly known whether it were meant all for an Oath or some of it a Declaration and some an Oath If the latter then it was desired it might be distinctly parted and that the declaratory part should be subscribed by it self and not sworn There was no small pains taken by the Lord Keeper and the Bishops to prove that it was brought in the two first Parts were only a Declaration and not an Oath and tho it was reply'd that to declare upon ones Oath or to abhor upon ones Oath is the same thing with I do Swear yet there was some difficulty to obtain the dividing of them and that the declaratory part should be only Subscribed and the reâ—…t sworn to A. But have you mention'd these things as if you would incline me to concur in opinion with that Lord as to the King's Power of suspending the Penalties incurr'd by Acts of Parliament and to agree with the Measures of some other Lords then about Oaths assertory and promissory as referr'd to B. If I were of the same opinion about the King's Power in that Matter as that Lord and Sir William Ellis were I would however forbear troubling you with it at this time while we are considering the Obligation of our Oath of Supremacy in order to our assistance and defence of the Preheminence of the Dispensative Power And therefore I shall not in the least endeavour to incline you now to imbibe the perswasion of any nice Controverted point of Law or Theology and wherein there seems probab lis causa litigandi And if when we are parted you on your recollection of our Discourse at this or our first meeting should have the least trouble by calling to mind any thing I have occasionally mention'd that is matter of Controversie you may with all my heart put it off with a temporary transeat from your thoughts But one of my aims in referring to that Opinion of his Lordship was That knowing you to be much concern'd for the ease and quiet of your Prince and Country I might Console you with an Instance of a great ferment about the Regal Power suddenly going off and as that Book too shew'd you that another did in the Government that was occasion'd by the new Test-Bill then introduced And I must tell you that another of my aims in my pointing you to his Lordship's Observation of the Suspensions of the Penal Statutes in the late Reigns was occasionally to direct you to a tenderness for the Regal Rights in general and for the undoubted Right of the Dispensative Power in Particular The same thing likewise hath been my aim in the several Presidents I have given you of the Ecclesiastical Power by Queen Elizabeth King Iames and King Charles the First exercised in suspending Penal Laws The expression of tenderness for the Rights of our Princes hath been much used by the loyal Patriot'y Writers in the late Reigns And here I shall à propos apply it as the Resuscitatio Part. 1. p. 37. mentions it as used by my Lord Bacon in a Speech in the House of Commons in the Reign of King Iames the First to the Question now before us in the Reign of King Iames the Second His Lordships words are Since therefore we have a Prince of so excellent Wisdom and Moderation of whose Authority we ought to
the Commissioners be COMPETENT that is if they be spiritual men they may proceed to Sentence of Excommunication which may right well be Certify'd as well as Excommunication before Commissioners Delegates both of these Authorities being under the Great Seal c. And Excommunication certify'd ly Commissioners Del gates hath been allowed as it appeareth in 23. Eliz. Dyer 371. And in many Cases Acts of Parliament have adjudged men Excommunicate ipso facto But if they be meer Lay-men the fault is not in the Statute or in the Law but in the Nomination and upon Certificate made of the Excommunication according to Law a Significavit or Cap. Excom shall be awarded out of the Chancery for the taking and imprisoning the Bodies of such Excommunicate Persons But had his Lordship as I said in the Case of the other Author consider'd how by the Statute of 37. H. 8. it was declared that by Holy Scripture all Authority and Power is given to His Majesty and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Uice and Sin whatsoever he would not I believe have thought Lay-men incompetent or incapable Persons so to have acted in the high Commission or Delegacy or have said there was any fault in the Nomination of Lay-men And yet you see my Lord Coke shews you how the Government then acquiesced in such Nomination and assisted the execution of the Sentences given by such as he thought incompetent Nor are we therefore to wonder at what Mr. Bagshaw mentions of the Civilians in the House of Commons not objecting that the King had done contrary to an Act of Parliament in taking from Bishops Chancellors and Officials the Power of exercising Church Censures given them by the Act and which by the Power declared in that Act to be given him by Holy Scriptures he might have either continued to them or abridged or taken away the exercise thereof from them if he had pleas'd And considering that the Lex Scandali doth equally oblige Kings as well as Subjects in Point of Conscience it is not to be wonder'd that that Tender-conscienced King did in that Conjuncture think himself obliged so equitably to make his Interpretation of that Statute as in complaisance with some of his Subjects who had took offence at Lay-Chancellors Power of Excommunicating to disable them to it I told you before how that Pious Prince did in complaisance with the Fathers of our Church think himself obliged to exercise his Regal Power of interpreting or declaring and when in A. 1637. he issued out his Proclamation Declaring that the Bishops holding their Courts and issuing Process in their own Names were not against the Laws of the Realm and that the Iudges resolutions were notify'd therein to that purpose and that the ferment about that Point was setled and the Bishops issuing out their Processes was setled too the which Proclamation too you will find Mr. Bagshaw mentions in his second Argument where p. 40. he tells you of the Bishop's having procured a Proclamation A. 1637. declaring the Opinions of the Iudges that the Statute of 1 o Edw. 6. c. 2. is repeal'd and of no force at this day and that Bishops may keep Courts in their own Names And I shall now tell you that as in the year 1637. the Bishops were in so full and peaceable possession of their Privilege of issuing out of their Processes in their own names by means of what His Majesty had declared pursuant to the Resolutions unanimously given by all the Iudges and the Barons of the Exchequer and of which Sir E. Coke saith Inst. 2. that they are for Matters of Law of highest Authority next to the Court of Parliament so by Iudgment of Parliament the settlement of that Controversie by virtue of His Majesty's Declarative Power so exercised was afterward approved A. That is a thing I would gladly hear of for one would think that the exercise of the Regal Power of Declaring or Interpreting what relates to an Act of Parliament might occasionally heighten a ferment in stead of abating it B. You will find little or no cause if you consult our ancient English Story and there see how the mutual Confidence between King and People hath in several Ages supported the Government to fancy that Declaratory Proclamations relating to Acts of Parliament did make any ferment The Interpretation of the Statutes hath in all Causes between Party and Party and wherein meum and tuum and Property are concern'd been by ancient usage under our Kings still left to the Iudges and the Proclamations of our Princes on great emergent occasions in the State declaring or interpreting their Laws pursuant to the Supreme Power committed to them by God for the good of their People hath still been observ'd to tend both to the good of the People and the Laws too If you will look on all the Declaratory Proclamations in the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King Iames of which you have a Collection you will I believe find none but what were acceptable among all their Loyal Subjects But as to this Declaratory Proclamation of King Charles the First before-mention'd you will find it as I told you approved in Parliament And if you will please to consult in your Statute-Book the Act of 13 o Car. 2. c. 12. of which the title is Explanation of a Clause contain'd in an Act of Parliament made in the 17th year of the late King Charles Entituled an Act for repeal of a branch of a Statute 1 o Elizabethae Concerning Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical you will there find that this Act of the late King 's loyal long Parliament viz. 13 o Car. 2. hath in it three Proviso's The first is concerning the High Commission-Court the second Proviso is concerning the taking away the Oath ex officio And the third Proviso is to limit and confine the Power of Ecclesiastical Judges in all their Proceedings to what WAS and by Law might be used before the year 1639 which plainly includes allows and approves King Charles the First 's Proclamation in the year 1637. In the time of a former disloyal long Parliament the Regal Power of Interpreting or declaring was by them represented as a Gravamen and while yet they usurp'd that Power themselves If you will look on the Declaration of the Lords and Commons in Husband's Collections p. 686. you will there find they say It is high time for the whole Kingdom now to understand that His Majesty's Authority is more in his Courts without his Person then in his Person without his Courts when the Power of DECLARING Law shall be deny'd to the whole Court of Parliament in particular Causes before them for we have claim'd it we have exercised it no otherwise to be obligatory as a judicial Declaration of the Law and shall be attributed to His Majesty to do it in general by his Proclamation without relation to a particular Case and
own Municipal ones who hath ex Professo and argumentatively writ of the Prince's Prerogative of dispensing with a Penal disability in particular Cases and deny'd it A. I did not as to our Lex terrae account it tanti to set up the Judgment of any one particular man when you have entertain'd me with Iudgment of Parliament in the Case But I am sure you cannot but know how that great Man in that great Case we have referr'd to I mean my Lord Chief Justice Vaughan in Thomas and Sorrel's Case seems to be of opinion that the King cannot dispense in the Case of Incapacity He saith the reason why the King cannot dispense in the Cases of buying Offices and Simoniacal Presentations is because the Persons were made incapable to hold them And a Person incapable is as a dead Person and no Person at all as to that wherein he is incapable c. B. Tho that great Man hath not therein as in other Passages in his Argument discuss'd the Point argumentatively I shall yet pay so much respect to his opinion as to give decent Burial to his dead Man. But you see that after he had said The Reason why the King cannot dispense c. is because the Persons were made incapable to hold them he only gives it as a reason of their being uncapable and of the King 's not being able to dispense in their Case viz. that they are dead Men that a Person uncapable is as a dead Person and whereby he giveth us a Magisterial gratis dictum or a Petitio Principii instead of what might deserve the name of a Reason or what might prove that the King could not dispense in the Case of one Politically dead or one dead in Law. I have formerly told you of the Saying used by Magerus and other Civil Law-writers that Mors civilis naturali non aequiparatur nisi in casibus in jure expressis And there are Cases enow express'd there that shew how the Prince who is according to the style of Seneca viz. Animus Reipublicae illa Corpus suum and ille spiritus vitalis quem haec tot millia trahunt and who in the Scripture Phrase is the breath of our Nostrils can according to the Law of the Land as I told you in the Case of Sir Walter Raleigh animate a Person dead in Law. And none need question why King Iames the Second cannot thus raise the dead as Queen Elizabeth did and King Iames the First or our following Princes and I may say as well as any who went before him Infames dicuntur civiliter mortui is a common Saying but you see that Fas est cuivis Principi maculosas notas vitiatae opinionis abstergere is as common Thus too Magerus tells us that Banniti pro mortuis reputantur and we know that the Excommunicate may in some respect by reason of their temporary disability be termed so too And if you will look on the Book call'd Reformatio legum Ecclesiasticarum under the title De excommunicatione you will there in the Chapter of the Denunciation of the Excommunicate find the Minister enjoin'd to tell the People that they must all abstain from the Excommunicate Person tanquam à Putri Projecto membro c. that an Excommunicate Person is to be thrown out of the Church as a dead Carcass but you will there find in the Formula reconciliationis excommunicatorum with what tenderness it is said reum hunc charissimum fratrem membrum assumamus agnoscamus Communis in Christo nostri corporis intimus ut noster affectus in hoc corporis nostri recuperato membro testatior sit c. and that the Pastor in the Absolution of that returning Prodigal who was dead and is alive again must in the administration of the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws say tibi rursus pristinum in Ecclesiâ tuâ locum plenum jus restitue Thus too at the end of the Canons A. 1571. you will find the same style of tenderness in Vogue in Queen Elizabeth's time that was in Edward the 6th's as likewise of the powerfulness in raising the dead You see there a Form of the Sentence of Excommunication viz. Fratres quoniam quicunque profitemur nomen Christi sumus omnes membrum ejusdem corporis par est ut unum membrum alterius membri sensu dolore afficiatur c. And it being afterward mention'd that the Person having been accused of such a Crime and having been contumaciously absent it followeth the Bishop in God's Name and by his Authority hath Excommunicated such a one from the Society of Christ's Church tanquam membrum emortuum amputasse à Christi corpore c. that you may shun his Company tamen ut Christiana charitas nos monet let us pray for him to God who is a merciful God and who can lapsos etiam à morte revocare And you may take notice of what is said in Croke 2d and Coke 8th Report Trollop's Case about the King's Pardon raising the Excommunicate from this civil death and that a man need not be Absolved by the Church if the King Pardons And thus Hobart Serle's Case p. 294. shews you that after the discharge of a Clerk Convict he shall never be question'd in the Ecclesiastical Court for deprivation You may likewise see it in Coke Inst. 3. Chapter Of Pardons The King may Pardon one Convict of Heresie or of any other offence Punishable by the Ecclesiastical Law. You may too in that Chapter observe his tenderness for Prerogative where having mention'd that by the 13th of R. 2. it is provided that no Charter of Pardon for Murther c. shall be allow'd c. if they be not specify'd in the same Charter and that before that Statute by the Pardon of all Felonies Treason was Pardon'd and so was Murder and at this day by the pardon of all Felonies the death of a Man is not pardon'd he thus goeth on these are excellent Laws for direction and for the Peace of the Realm But it hath been conceiv'd which we will not question that the King may DISPENSE with these Laws by a Non-obstante be it general or special albeit we find not any such Clauses of Non-obstante but of late times These Statutes are excellent Instructions for a Religious and Prudent King to follow but he doth not make them obligatory to him My Lord Coke then saith This is to be added that the intention of the said Act 13. R. 2. was not that the King should grant a Pardon of Murther by express Name in the Charter but because the whole Parliament conceiv'd that he would never Pardon Murther by special Name for the Causes aforesaid therefore was that Provision made which was grounded on the Law of God Quicunque effuderit humanum Sanguinem fundetur Sanguis illius c. Nec aliter expiari potest nisi per ejus Sanguinem qui alterius Sanguinem effuderit His Margin there cites Genes 9. 6.
Interpretation as good as Queen Elizabeth's so you may account that in the Canons of King Charles the First as good as that in those of King Iames for that tho it is said by some that the Canons of King Charles the First were damned by the Act of 13 o Car. 2. c. 12. yet the truth is that that Act leaves them in statu quo and the last Proviso in it doth only express those Canons not being confirm'd by it Nor in my judgment did they need any Confirmation from it for that according to my Lord Chief Justice Vaughan's Opinion that I have cited to you a lawful Canon is the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament and the Consideration of this may shew you that as Queen Elizabeth's Interpretation in The Admonition was perpetuated by the Ensuing Parliamentary Approbation thereof so the interpretations of those Princes in those their Canons confirm'd for them their Heirs and Successors are now binding to you and I pray God to incline you to keep this your Solemn Oath according to these interpretations of it A. I thank you for this your serious and Christian wish and do give you my hearty thanks for what you have discours'd to me of the many Interpretations relating to the Oath and the rendring them so consistent with it and by means whereof I am sensible that the Oath hath become more then res unius oetatis and that without them it would not have been so much and by which both the credit of the Oath and the quiet of the Consciences of the Takers of it have been preserv'd And I am glad that the task of enumerating them all hath happen'd thus to fall into your hands and that therein you have not as they say of young Conjurers raising Spirits that they cannot lay occasion'd any doubts in me about the Oath but what you have fairly â—… and fully satisfy'd And indeed you have laid some doubts that the Two Roman-Catholick Writers raising them happen'd not to lay Throwing therefore by any Thoughts and Expressions of mine of that nature which you censured as airy and as to which I submit to your reproof I shall prepare my mind with a decent temper both of delight and Pious dread to contemplate my Oath as now set before me and as containing in it that clearness and that Majesty that may excite both those Passions in me and the real view of which I may some way compare to that in vision Ezekiel's terrible crystal B. Long may you live in this temper I remember I have somewhere read it that the Oath by which the Cardinals are bound to the maintenance of the Church-Privileges is drawn in such clear and powerful words that Baronius calls it terribile Iuramentum and saith that the only remembring of it inflicts a horror upon his Mind and a trembling upon 〈◊〉 Body And I doubt not but when I shall at our next meeting discourse with you about our obligation from the Promissory part of the Oath that relates to the assistance and defence of the Regal Rights and Privileges you will think that every Taker of it ought to have some such sense of his remembring it as Baronius had about his terrible Oath A. But to go on according to the freedom you gave me I remember you told me that you would not trouble me with any Notions or Moot Points about the Power of Interpreting Acts of Parliament and about which you cited Sir Christopher Hatton's Book Of Acts of Parliament and their Exposition but I remember you have Sparsim variously spoke of it and you mention'd to me what King Charles the First told both Houses shortly after the granting the Petition of Right that to the Iudges only under him the Interpretation of the Laws belong'd and that none of the Houses of Parliament joint or separate either could make or declare a Law without his Consent I suppose you intend here to lodge no Snake in the grass of this Regal Power of interpretation whereby we may be interpreted out of our Magna Charta and the Petition of Right and out of our Religion or Property B. Your Supposal doth but right to my intentions I have referr'd you only to Facts and leave you to make a due use of them and shall when we meet again shew you further why I have thus referr'd you to these Facts of the Regal interpretation And in the mean time you may take notice that as to what I have mentioned as a Notion out of the Lord Chancellor Hatton of which the intent and substance was That if all the Parliament were voluntarily assembled again and not by Writ Eorum non esset interpretari dubium Statutum as the words are in the Table of his Book Chap. 4 and with which the Chapter agrees I told you I would not trouble you with it and you may give it its transeat as a kind of curious impossible Case Nor need you amuse your self about any Consequences by me meant in what I told you of King Charles the First telling the three Estates as they were feasting themselves with the noble Concessions of the Petition of Right I know nothing asserted by my Lord Coke in Inst. 4 Chap. 1. Of the High and Honourable Court of Parliament but wherein I own my agreeing with him and particularly as to what he speaks of Iudicature And I doubt not but every one accounts that what he said Inst. 3. c. 73. was very Orthodox viz. NOTE Proclamations are of great force which are grounded upon the Laws of the Realm Nor considering the exuberance of that great thing call'd bona fides that is to be expected from Princes need any man fear that there will be an Exposition of abrogamus for statuimus in any of the Declaratory Proclamations that ours shall make But because you have named Magna Charta and the Petition of Right I shall take occasion to cite to you a very popular Authority to shew you that any Proclamations our English Monarchs shall make for the Dispensing with Penal Religionary Laws will be but Declaratory of Magna Charta and of the Petition of Right You know we have often spoke of the Arguments in the Parliament of 40. made by Mr. Bagshaw who was Pars magna of the Faction then regnant and by which those Arguments of his were much celebrated You may find some account of his Character in Heylin's History of Archbishop Laud who mentions his being chosen Reader for the Lent Vacation by the Middle-Temple in the year 1639. And he in his First Argument viz. Concerning the Canons p. 11. saith Liberty of Religion and Conscience are as I take it within the words of MAGNA CHARTA granted to me as mine Inheritance Cap. 29. Nullus liber homo imprisonetur â—…ut disseisetur de libertatibus vel liberis Consuetudinibus suis. And Liberty of Conscience is the gâ—…test Liberty It is by a necessary Consequence and deduction within the words imprisonetur
Thomas and Sorrell tell you that by one of the great Councel who argued in it it was asserted with great Learning That the Non-obstante in that Case remain'd good after the King's death That tho Acts the King doth in his Natural Capacity determine by his death as making of Iudges c. for those referr to his Natural Will yet things done in his Royal Capacity as King do not determine by his death as a License to alien in Mortmâ—…in in one King's time serves in anothers and the Reason is when the Subject is once exempt out of the Restraint of the Act he is ever exempt unless the Exemption be limited Coke 1. Inst. 52. 6. If the Lessor licence his Lessee that is restrain'd by Condition not to Alien tho the Lessor die the licence shall serve the Lessee to alien and is not determin'd by the Lessor's death And in this Point he cited Trin. 2. Jac. C. B. Rot. 2835. Wright versùs Radcliffe and Trin. 2. Jac. Norris v. Mason C. B. as Cases adjudged in this point And I shall then shew you how the same thing was then by others asserted but you may now for this purpose remember how the instances I have given you of Queen Elizabeth's Parliaments approving and declaring to be good what she did of this kind and the instances of what others of our Princes did by their own Authority and out of Parliament being valid and being afterward approved in Parliament have supported the extent of the Regal Authority of this kind as to point of time But because according to the Rule of Unumquodque dissolvitur eo modo quo colligatur many Indulgences and Injunctions and Dispensations being revocable by Kings themselves and by their Successors and because declaratory Acts of Parliament cannot be repeal'd but by other Acts common Prudence doth suggest it to all to endeavour the perpetuating to themselves by the Legislative Power what they account beneficial And if you will you may use the term of having it confirm'd by that Power that is if you will allow it to have been firm before you may call it confirm'd by the Prince and the three Estates afterward enacting it and making its firmness perpetual And this is the thing I aim'd at in what you might take for a Criticism when I said that the 39 Articles owed no Confirmation nor Authority to the Act of the 13th of Eliz. A. I know the reason of your cautious speaking here about a tender Point You accounting even every Declaratory Judgment of Parliament for our Religion to be a Treasure and having often said that you would allow some Roman-Catholicks to mock on in calling our Religion a Parliamentary Religion did I judge design to do honour to our Religion as well as to our Prince's in shewing that it was here orderly establish'd by God's Vicegerents before it was by the Deputies of the People or the Magnates Regni B. You guess right at my meaning in this way to salve Phaenomena And if you will look on a Book Printed in Oxford A. 1645. entituled Parliaments Power in Laws for Religion or an Answer to that old and groundless Calumny of the Papists nick-naming the Religion of the Church of England by the name of a Parliamentary Religion c. you will find the Fact in this Point clearly deduced through the course of our Laws and Constitutions in a long series temporum from the Reign of Harry the 8th downward and for the honour of our Kings and of the Church and the Reformation and the measures I have taken in our discourse have been suitable to those of the judicious and learned Author of that Book A. Well Sir we have had a great deal of frank Discourse and I will now take the freedom to put one Question more to you You have entertain'd me with the several Interpretations of our Oath and have shew'd me how the obligatoriness of them all hath been perpetuated and you have likewise salved the Phaenomena in the Iustice of the Government as to the Laws in terrorem But you know the Story of one who being Lord of a place did leave a Pit long open too near the High-way and who at Night erected Lights about it to prevent its being mischievous and he afterward hearing that sometimes poor Blind men who were Travellers fell into it and that at other times by various accidents the Lights were not helpful to other Passengers as being took away or going out too soon and he therefore at last very fairly removed both his Nuisance and Lights together And now may it hot be wish'd that the Prince and the three Estates would remove the Laws about our Oaths and the Interpretations too and so likewise all the Laws in terrorem among which I suppose you reckon the Test-Acts at which so many have taken offence B. You may easily guess that till we have both of us at another meeting discours'd of the Obligation resulting from the Promissory part of the Oath I will not engage your thoughts in any matter of Controverfie that may in the least perplex them But as soon as we have fully discours'd that I shall frankly give you my thoughts at large relating to the question about Repealing of the Test-Acts in a Parliamentary manner but do at present wholly forbear to mention what I think thereof And I have before told you my judgment of the likelihood of the continuance of our great Oath as a great luminary that may perhaps enlighten our English World in the measures of Loyalty to the end of time and as I have told you the Oath giveth no offence to the Considerate so I will hope none will be taken at it But I must here tell you that I have a greater veneration for the Oath because I look on the serious Consideration of the assertory part of it as likely to be very Instrumental in allaying the ferment we have been speaking of A. God grant it may be so B. You remember what I hinted to you about the Clause whereby you testify'd and declared that the King is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal and from whence it follow'd by way of natural Consequence that no foreign Prince c. hath any Iurisdiction within this Realm being the Corner-stone on which the great And therefore I mean your forsaking foreign Iurisdiction was built And I assure you that the same first Declaration doth bind you to the like AND THEREFORE to renounce the belief of any Power on Earth being able to dissolve your King 's right of Commanding your Obedience and your Obligation to obey him And indeed if I had produced to you no Iudgment of Parliament for the purpose I have done but that which is contain'd in the assertory part of the Oath and which is unanimously interpreted by Divines and Lawyers as expressive of the King 's right jure naturae to Command the Obedience of
Harry the 8th's Oath or Queen Elizabeth's in the words of no foreign Prelates having here any Iurisdiction c. any Power the Pope could justly claim as a Successor to the Apostles was impeachâ—…d And no doubt but Harry the 8th being by that Statute declared to be but a Lay-man no men of sense construed that Statute to give him the exercise of any Iurisdiction or Power of the Keys in foro interno as a Successor of the Apostles The old Distinction of Bracton l. 1. c. 8. that King's cannot Excommunicate ministerialiter because they are Lay-men but may do it authoritativè by appointing others to do it gave Satisfaction in Harry the 8th's time and might had it been thought of in Queen Elizabeth's Reign have sav'd the labour of the Interpretation in the Admonition in removing the ferment that the Oath occasion'd among Protestant Scruplers But tho the Preamble of the Admonition referrs to some Protestant Clergy-men as the Scruplers yet the following words viz. That her Majesty would that all her loving Subjects should understand that nothing was is or shall be meant or intended by the same Oath c. shew her Pious design of Complaisance as to the Consciences of her Catholick as well as Protestant Subjects and whose freedom from Imposition of ambiguous or otherwise unlawful Oaths she knew was purchased for both of them alike by the Blood of Christ. And you know I referr'd you to Sir Iohn Winter's Observations on the Oath of Supremacy as representing the Oath by the help of Queen Elizabeth's Interpretation in the Admonition and of the Enacting of that Interpretation in Parliament and of the Interpretation in the 37th Article as lawful to be taken tho possibly inexpedient on the account of Scandal and likewise to another Roman-Catholick Writer who on the account of those Interpretations thought it might both lawfully and without Scandal be taken And you and others who think that Oath of importance for the securing the Peace of the Government may thank the Prerogative of Regal Interpretation for supplying the Lamp of it with the Oil that hath made it last so long and which otherwise would soon have gone out in a snuff as I shew'd you by the offence that was taken at it at home and abroad when it was first set up and which now may perhaps help to illuminate the English World in the measures of Loyalty so long as the Sun and Moon endure that is if you suppose that the use of Oaths would endure so long But Dii meliora And it here coming into my mind that you in your somewhat airy way of discoursing of the Oath resembled it to a tender-sided Ship girdled with so many interpretations I shall take occasion further to impress it on your thoughts that it is still THE SAME OATH tho partaking of all those Interpretations and as we say of eadem navis toties refecta and the several interpretations are not by you to be resembled to girdlings but to its main inward beams and timbers that are become parts oâ—… it Moreover you know that a girdled Ship by reason of the incompactness of its adventitious parts with the other cannot last the fourth part of the time that another will. But you see how long this Oath hath continued and riding triumphantly in the Sea of time hath too carried out all its Guns in Stormy weather and made the Usurp'd Power of the Court of Rome strike Sail to our Princes Yet I shall here take occasion from my having just now minded you of the Interpretations of the Oath inclining Sir Iohn Winter and the other Roman-Catholick to judge of it as they did to tell you that I have often wish'd that in the times of the three last Reigns the Power of Interpretation had further exerted it self in the further clearing of any thing in that Oath and in the Oath of Allegiance at which offence was by so many taken however by the Oaths not given and that such Interpretations had been approved in Parliament and particularly that the Interpretation of the word HERETICAL in the Oath of Allegiance as being meant of Contrary to the Word of God had brought all our Roman-Catholick Brethren to the taking of that Oath as I told you that F. Cressy thought it would have done and who said that he believed that that was the sense intended by King Iames in the word heretical And I shall be glad if those Interpretations relating to the Oath of Supremacy which succeeded those that Sir Iohn Winter and the other Roman-Catholick took notice of may in the event Conduce to render it more acceptable to others of them and the rather for that it is apparent that all the Interpretations are Consistent with the Oath and with one another as from what I have spoken you may Collect. But by so many other Pious and Learned Roman-Catholicks appearing not to be of the opinion that the Interpretations of the Oath mention'd by those two Writers may legitimate the taking of it I have long wish'd to the Oath all the additional clearness that Law could give it and that they would wish given who were required to take it And as one Doctor 's opinion for the justness of a Litigants Cause hath on his being cast in it been allow'd to save him from being as a Calumnious and rash litigator condemned in Expences thus so great a Master in our Israel and Vindicator of our Church from Schism as Archbishop Bramhal having given his Opinion about the Oath as I told you namely as to what related to the King's Power in Spirituals and to no foreign Prelate having any Spiritual Iurisdiction here viz. This might have been express'd in words less liable to Exception I shall censure no man as a Caâ—…umniator of the Oath who shall wish that any lawful Interpretation may make those words less liable to Exception Sir Iohn Winter as I told you having mention'd the Explanations not being known to all and their intricacy and the constant tendring of the Oath for â—…o many years without the aforesaid Explanation as likely to give just cause of Scandal c. I must tell you I like not his words of the GIVING just cause of Scandal but what I have shew'd you of many passages about the Explanations which were not observ'd by him and particularly of the 37th Article affording only to the Clergy a more favourable interpretation and which was enacted as to them in 13 o Eliz and of the Canons of King Iames first extending the benefit of that Interpretation to the Layety and of the Canons of King Charles the First further explaining the 37th Article may justly incline you to wish that the sense of the Oath did Primâ facie appear as liquid to all as it now doth to us two And I shall here take occasion for the propping up the interpretation relating to the Oath made by those two Princes in their Canons to tell you that as you accounted King Iames his