England the same are to be iudged and determyned by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes etc. fol. 39 And againe obserue good reader sayth S. Edward Cooke seeyng that the determination of heresies etc. belongeth not to the Common law how necessary it was for administration of Iustice that his Maiesties progenitors Kings of this Realme did by publike authority authorize Ecclesiasticall Courts under thē to determyne those great and important causes etc. by the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes The jurisdiction therfore Courts and lawes Ecclesiasticall in the opinion of the Kings progenitors were thought held to be their own Kingly lawes Courts and jurisdiction The same is further proved by the sayd S. Edward Cooke fol. 9 by the president of Renulphus in discharging and exempting the Monastery and Abbot of Abinden from the jurisdiction of the Bishops and granting also to the saide Abbot Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction etc by the president of William the first fol 10. 11 who made inpropriatiō of Churches with cure to Ecclesiasticall persons etc. and by divers presidents of other Kings since the conquest That which in this parte of the answer is afterward added of the necessary restitution of the right of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to the Crowne is also confuted by the same S. Edward Cooke who plainely saith that though there had been no such law of restitution made yet it was resolved by all the Iudges that the Kings and Queenes of Englād for the tyme being by the auncient prerogatiue law of England may make such a Commision etc. And therfore by the auncient lawes of this Realme this kingdome of England is and absolute Empire and Monarchy consisting of one head which is the King and of a body politike c. Also that the Kingly head of this body politike is furnished with plenary power c. to render iustice and right to every part and member of this body Thus farre S. Edward Cooke From all which it followeth that the restitution of the auncient right howsoever lawfully made as being made by the whole body of the kingdome was notwithstāding not necessarily made as though without it the King or Queene for the tyme being could not haue used their auncient right That which followeth in the 2. 3. and 4. branches of this 4 answer to the consequence of this 8 Argument doth not belong to the matter because it doth nothing justifie the proceedings of the Bishops or other Ecclesiasticall Iudges in depriving of the Ministers pleaded for in such manner and for such causes as for which they haue depriveded them The question is not whether jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall by the lawes of the land doth be long under the King unto the ordinaryes nor whether the Ordinaryes in the exercise of the Kings jurisdiction Ecclesiiasticall and Consistoriall trialls ought to proceed by vertue of Peeres etc but whether some Ordinaryes exercising the Kings Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction haue proceeded in their Ecclesiasticall Consistories against some Ministers without authority of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law therfore in that respect contrary to Magna Charta which requyreth nothing to be doone without the Kings law Further De jure Regis Ecclesi fol. 9 although we grant as S. Edw. Cooke instructeth us all lawes Ecclesiasticall derived from other which by and with a generall consent are approved and allowed here to be aptly and rightly called the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of England yet I deny that all lawes Ecclesiasticall derived by the Kings progenitors either before or since the Conquest from others are now in this age our Soveraigne Lord King Iames his Ecclesiasticall lawes and therefore howsoever many judiciall Acts of deprivation of Bishops Preists from their benefices c. according to the Ecclesiasticall law which is called ius Pontificium which was derived by the Kings Progenitors from the Bishops of Rome either before or since the Conquest unto Magna Charta and since that to the 25 of King Henry the eyght were never all held to be contrary but were ever all held to be agreable to the lawes of this kingdome yet notwithstanding I affirme that all Iudiciall Acts and sentences 25. Hen. 8 cap. 17 how many soever of deprivation of Ministers from their benefices had made and given by the Ecclesiasticall Iudges since the 25. of King Henry the 8. onely according or onely by force and vertue of the sayd ius Pontificium or Bishop of Rome his law the sentences given in the time of Queene Mary excepted are and ought to be holden not to be had made given by the lawes of this kingdome or by the Kings Ecclesiasticall law And why Even because the whole ius Pontificium or Bishop of Romes law was altogether excepting the tyme of Queene Mary abrogated adnulled and made voyd by an Act of Parlament and consequently is but a meere Alien Forraine and straunge law and no municipall law of England and therefore not the Kings Ecclesiasticall law Wherefore our Soveraigne Lord King Iames by this graunt of Magna Charta made by his progenitors beyng obliged to suffer no Free man of the Realme to be taken or imprisoned or disseissed of his Frrehold or liberties c. Nor to passe upon him nor condemne him but by lawfull judgment of his Peeres or by the law of the land We agayne assume from this statute of the great Charter that sundry sentences of deprivation of Ministers from their benefices for causes before specified are unlawfull because such Ministers haue been condemned and judgment hath been passed upon them without lawfull judgment of their Peeres or law Ecclesiasticall of the land For heere we must giue the answerer to witt by these words or law of the land that all the Kings lawes of what nature or quality soever whether Ecclesiasticall or temporall and not only the lawes temporall as he insinuateth are included As therefore no temporall Free man of the Realme may be condemned passed upon or disseissed of his liberty and freehold c. in a temporall cause and in a temporall Court without lawfull judgment of his Peeres or temporall law of the land Even so likewise no Ecclesiasticall person beyng a freeman of the Realme may be condemned passed upon or disseissed of his liberty or frehold but by lawfull Ecclesiasticall judgement according to the law Ecclesiasticall of the land And heereupon we graunt if the King haue any law Ecclesiasticall of the lād for the deprivation of a Minister from his liberty and frehold for not subscription perjurie contempt of Canonical so called obedience omission of Rites and Ceremonyes not precise observation of the booke of Common prayer c. Then we graunt that the Ordinaryes being the Kings Iudges Ecclesiasticall may rightly depriue a Minister from his benefice for these offences And yet still we deny and shall be able to mainteyne that sundry sentences of deprivation made and given by sundry Ordinaries against svndry Ministers be either unjust or unlawfull or no sentences at
Prelats against the said Ministers for not subscribyng observing the booke conformity etc to be with out law and a gainst law This one reason is from the late Bill of the Bishops presented to the Parliament for the establishing both of the booke of Common prayer and also of their Canons For if the said booke and Canons were already good in law what needed any new statute to establish them If they say that abundans cautela non nocet plentifull caution is not hurtfull they must also remember that they haue likewise learned frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora It is in vayne to doe that by many thinges which may be done by fewe Now to the Canons repugnant to the law We decree and appoynt saith the Synod that no iudge ad quem shall admitt or allow any his or their appeales speaking as they call them of obstinate and factious appellants unlesse he haue first seene the originall appeale But the King say I is a iudge ad quem Ergo the King saith this Synod may not admitt or allow any appeale etc. The liberty and franchise then of the Kings will and grace after this unwonted manner by a Synodall decree onely beyng thus blemished impeched and restrayned what dignity preheminence superiority or prerogatiue hath the Kings grace when the King himselfe is chardged not to grant any inhibition out of his Court of Chauncery but conditionally and upon an unlesse etc. And if by this Canon the Kings will and grace receiue let hinderance and prejudice what should we thinke but that this Canon also tendeth to the weakenyng of the Kings arme and power For how can his power be strōg and his arme able to help when his grace is bound and his will unable to will And then agayne if these two mayne pillars of his Majesties prerogatiue Royall namely his grace and his power be thus shaken by this Canon must it not necessarily follow that the Lords and Commons in Parliament are prejudiced therby For the rights prerogatiues of the Kings Crowne by the lawes of the Realme be not invested and appropried unto the Kings person onely in regard of his Majesties owne Royall estate but also for the good condition and preservation of his body Politicke which is the Common wealth Which body also for the just and necessary defence both of the head which is the King and of it selfe hath such a proper clayme and interest in and to the grace and power of the head as the lest jote of the power and grace of the head may not be blemished to the prejudice of the body without consent of the body viz of the Lords Commons in Parliament who are the very image and true representiue body of the Realme yea and thus much in effect haue the Kings progenitors and the Auncestors of our Nobles and Cōmons agreed upon in Parliament when by their authority and consent it was forbidden that any thing should be attempted which should tend to the blemishyng of the Kings prerogatiue or to the prejudice of his Lords Commons And when also by common consent Acts Monuments 4 Ed. 3 pag 422. 424 it was enacted in effect that neither King Iohn nor any other King could bring his Realme and people in thraledome and subjection but by consent in Parliament Furthermore appeales beyng de iure naturali and introduced into judgement seats tam ob defensionem et presidiū innocentiae quam ad deprimendam iniquitatem et corrigendam imperitiam iudicis as well for the defence and savegard of innocency as for the depressing of the iniquity and correcting the unskilfulnes of a Iudge as they haue been evermore allowed by the lawes custōes of the Realme so haue they been suffered as freely to be prosecuted as interposed For otherwise how should either innocency be protected or the injustice of a judge reformed in case an appeale being interposed might not be prosecuted frustra saith S. Edward Cooke expectatur eventus de jure Reg Eccles cuius effectus nullus sequitur And according unto this naturall equity hath it been specially provided by a Statute of the realme that the Kings subjects being greived should not only haue libertie to make but also to take haue use and prosecute all manner of appeales after such manner forme and condition as is limited for appeales to be had and prosecuted And for lacke of Iustice many Courts of the Archbishops of this Realme it is lawfull for the partie greived to appeale to the Kinges Majestie in his Court of Chauncery And upon every such appeale a Commission saith the Statute shal be directed under the great Seale to such persons as shal be named by the Kings Highnes to heare and definitivly determine such appeales with the causes and all circumstances It is therefore apparant that this Canon is contrary or repugnant to this Statute For this Canon and this statute thus repugnantly providing and working divers repugnant effects the statute simply admitting the use and prosecution of all manner of appeales the Canon not admittyng but conditionally the use and prosecution of some appeales can not stand together Agayne some inferiour Ordinaryes having libertie to take the bridle in their owne teeth to lay the reynes loose on their owne neckes may in tyme beyng proudly pampred wax wanton in their judgement seates when they shall stand in no awe of having the nullitie or injquity of their process and sentences weyed in the ballance of any superiour Iudge By reason whereof this Canon can not but proue exceeding onerovs to the subject For let a man or woman dwelling at Michaels Mount be but once judicially though perhaps wrongfully cited by the name of a factious or obstinat person cōtemner of ceremonyes and from such wrongfull citations let his or her appeale made to the Kings Majestie in his Court of Chauncery if it be frō the Archbishop or unto the Archbishop if it be from the Diocesan be never so just equal thereis no remedy in this case before his or hirs appeale be admitted or allowed but the same man or woman by the letter of this Canon must personally appeare in the Archbishops Consistory if the appeale be by the Archbishop and if the appeale be to the King in the Kings Court of Chauncery though the same should be at Barwicke Yea and though the party appellant be never so poore aged weake and impotent Nay not only personall appearāce but personall subscription also by this Canon is requyred to the Kings Supremacie to the Articles of Religion to the booke of Homilies to the booke of Common prayer and to the booke of Consecrating Bishops be the party appellant never so simple a laborer or never so silly a spīster The 37. Canon disauthoriseth every Minister by what authority so ever he be admitted to preach or to read a Lecture in any place within the Realme unlesse he be licenced either by the Archbishop
or by the Bishop of the Diocess or by one of the two Universities under their hands and seale Let the King then under his broad seale graunt licence to any of his Chapleines to preach within his owne chapple this licenc by this Canon is of no value then the which what can be more derogatory to the Soveraigne dignity of the King in causes Ecclesiasticall Unto the mould of this Canon agreeth the 47. Canon before mētiōed which cōcludeth that no Minister not licēsed a Preacher under the hand seale of the Bishop of the Diocess or Archbishop of the Province or under the seale of one of the Vniversities shall take upon him to expound in his owne cure any scripture or matter of doctrine but shall onely study to read playnely and aptly without glosing or addyng the Homilies already set forth or heerafter to be published by lawfull authority The King then by this Canon may not licence a Minister to preach or to expound any scripture no not in his own cure no though the ministers Cure be the Kings owne houshold or the houshould of the Prince or any other of the Kings children Nay by these two Canons and the Canon of subscription it is evident that the Prelats intended that every Scotish Minister havyng renounced the Hierachie and embraced the single forme of Goverment in Scotland should be barred from preaching at any time before the King in England unless he should subscribe to the Hierarchy of England For with out a licence may none preach and without subscription may none be licenced And not onely is this 47. Canon derogatorie to the Kings prerogatiue but it is also repugnant to other the Kings lawes and statuts For whereby that statute made against Lolardy and Heresie it was enacted that none should presume to Preach openly or privily without the licence of the Diocesan first requyred obtayned yet by the same Act Curats in their owne Churches and Parsons priviledged were excepted and by the Provinciall Constitutions confirmed and ratified by Parliament it is provided thus We establish that no secular or regular not authorised by written law or protected by speciall priviledg to preach the word of God may take upon him the preaching or exercise of the same word within any Church or without any Church unless first he present and submit himselfe to the examination of the Diocesan etc But concernyng aperpetuall Curate we understand such a one by law and right to be sent to the place and people of his Cure And that we may understand whom the Canon meaneth to be a perpetuall Curate the gloss sheweth us that a Bishop in his Diocess a Parson and Vicar in his Parish and every other Person intituled to any benefice whereunto apper teyneth cure of soules is to be understood to be a perpetuall Curate and that he may preach in his owne Cure without the Bishops licence Moreover by the booke of ordering Bishops Ministers and Deacons every one made a Minister promiseth that he will giue all faithfull diligence alwayes to minister the doctrine etc as the Lord hath commanded etc so that he will teach the people committed to his cure and chardg withall dilligence to keepe and obserue the same But how can a Minister instruct and teach the people committed to his chardge according to his publicke vowe if as it is sayd in this Canon he shall not take upon him to expound in his owne Cure any scripture or matter of doctrine at all but shall onely study to read plainely and aptly without glosing or adding the Homilies etc Lastly the wordes of the Bishops institution are these Teque rectorem eiusdem ac de et ineadem instituimus canonice et investimus cum suis iuribus et pertinentiis universis curamque et regimen animarum prochianorum ibidem in Domino cōmittimus per-presentes And we speaking of a Clarke to be instituted into a benefice Canonically institute thee rector of the same Church and of Cure goverment by law ought to go together in a minister and in the same doe invest thee withall her rights appertinances and by these presents we in the Lord commit unto thee both the cure and goverment of the soules of the Parishioners in that place The Clearke then instituted into a benefice by these wordes of the Bishops institution by the booke of ordering of Bishops Ministers and Deacons and by the Provinciall Constitutions having not a private but a publicke office of cure and regiment of soules committed unto him how can it seeme reasonable that he should be countermanded by reason of a Provinciall decree not cōfirmed by Act of Parliament not to excercise the same his publicke office without a Bishops licence For what if the Bishops refuse to grant him a licence Or what if the Bishops and his officers see for graunting writing sealyng his licence be greater then the poore Minister is able to disburst is it reason that his chardg by this meāes should be left uninstructed Nay is it not as if a Sergiant at law called to the barr of the Common pleas by the Kings writ solemly created a Sergiant and publickly admitted to the same barr should afterward be forbidden by the cheife Iustice of that Court to pleade at that barr without licence otteyned under his hand and seale Or is it not as if a Doctor of Phisicke solemnely created in the Vniversity and publickly admited to practise artem medica should notwithstanding without a new faculty from the Doctor of the Chayre be inhibited to minister any Pill or Portion to any pacient The 53. Canon before also mentioned viz. against publicke opposition between preachers is not only repugnāt to the doctrine of (a) levit 5.1 2 Tim. 4.2 holy Scripture cōtrary to the practis of the (b) 2. Chron. 18.7 Ierem. 27.9 28 7 Acts 13.10 Galat. 2 11 Prophets Apostles but also crosseth the Ministers vow solemly made at his ordination Whos 's promise is that he wil be ready with all faithfull diligence to banish driue away all erroneous and strang doctrin contrary to Gods word and to use both publicke and private motions and exhortations as well to the sicke as to the whole within his cure But upon occasion given by any false Prophet publickly broaching false doctrine in a Ministers chardg how shall the Minister with all faithfull dilligence drive away the same false doctrine and publickely teach the truth if he may not teach admonish or exhort his people without a licence first obtayned from the Bishop of the Diocess For what if the Bishop be upon an embassadg in Denmarke Or what if the Bishop himself be of the same judgment with the false teacher The 91. Canon entituled Parish Clearks to be chosen by the Ministers is contrary and regugnant to the customes of the Realme in many Parishes of the Realme And in this regard this Canon hath been blowen to peeces at the barr of the Common
not but that the King and whole kingdome yea our greatest adversaryes doe dayly fare the better by them And this I feare would too soone appeare if they should or could suspend us from praying as they haue doone from preaching The 13 Argument We must pray the Lord of the harvest Math 9 23 38 to thrust forth laborers into the harvest God will not haue men onely to pray but also to use other meanes Ergo The High Court of Parliament must be the more carefull to provide what they may that godly and paynfull Ministers whose labours God hath already blessed may not by head and sholders be thrust out of the Church as they are There is but one marginall note upon this Argument which hath been often answered So also hath all his other answer to the said Argument touching the sowyng of the tares of sedition schisme faction and disturbing of the peace All which doe rather be long to them that teach that a true justifiyng faith may be lost that there is no certeinty of Salvation that plead for ignorance and an ignorant Ministery the mother of rebellion and treason and all other sinnes against God man and other such like things THE 14. ARGVMENT Luc 9 26 In the time of persecution men ought not to be ashamed of the word of Christ but to confesse and speake for the same Ergo. They ought much more so to doe in the tyme of peace in a kingdome and to a King and State professing the gospell Marginall notes G. Powel a As if that Disciplinarian giddines were Gods word Reply Though you take your pleasure of us yet take heed take heed you blaspheme not the ordinances of Christ Such certainly are litle better thē mad men who impute giddines to the Discipline of Christ commaunded to be kept without spot and unrebukeable untill his appearing 1 Tim 6 13 It is no newe thing for them that stands for Gods truth to be accounted mad men 2 King 9 11 Acts 26.24 Luc 15 17 or besides themselues and in these dayes Protestants scared out of their wits But let them that now offend this way and especially that account Gods ordinances to be giddines let them I say repent and come to themselues lest the Lord strike them with a farre worse spirit of giddines then yet they haue which will not be cast out by any meanes no not by prayer and fasting G. Powel b Here againe the Supplicants confesse that we professe Christ and his word Why doe they exclame then If you so call it we do exclame as we doe Reply that we may professe Christ and his word more sincerely without any traditions of men in Gods worship The Churches of Ephesus Pergamus and Thyatira professed Christ and his word and had many excellent things in them yet our Saviour himselfe exclameth and calleth them to reformation of the few thinges amisse with them So did Paule to the Churches of Corinth and Galatia G. Powel c Feare and weaknes forsooth because they will not partake with Schismatikes Let scoffers and mockers take heede Reply Psal 2.4 prov 1 26 that he that dwelleth in the heaven laugh not yea that the Lord haue them not in derision yea least he laugh at their destruction and mocke when their feare commeth etc. Further answer to the 14. Argument G. Powel The argument followeth not for refractary Ministers are neither Christ nor his word as hath been declared before It hath indeed been sayd before but by whom when Reply or where hath it been declared and proved Which of us hath ever sayde that we are Christ or his word As the Church is called Christ 1. Cor. 12.12 so both the Ministers all true beleevers are the Ministers of Christ Lastly they that striue against humane Ceremonyes in Gods worship and for the ordinances onely of Christ Iesus doe striue also for Christ and his word THE 15. ARGVMENT As the Parliament hath had a godly care of severity for the better converting of the Papists so likewise there ought to be the like godly care for their good instruction by such able Ministers as against whom they may haue no iust exception Ergo. In this respect the Parliament ought to doe the more for the liberty of the Ministers suspended etc. I defferr the reply to all the marginall notes to the further answer following G. Powel As if there were not able Ministers inough in both Vniversities in other partes of the kingdome if competent mayntenance might be procured for them for every Congregation without the small hand full of schismaticall Ministers Reply Part of this hath been answered before yet to help the answerers memory if it be weake I tell him agayne that if we had tentymes as many more as there are either in the universities or else where there would be use of them all The Lords harvest is great the day is farr spent the laborers that are are some so weake some such loyterers and some so unskilfull that they make no cleane worke but leaue as much behind them as they gather and carry before them Besides is it a small matter for the Minister to be acquainted with the people and the people with the Minister As likewise for the Minister to affect the people and the people the Minister Agayne are all fit to teach to governe the people that are learned and good schollers in the Vniversity It hath been justly blamed by learned wryters of our side that some Papists haue blasphemously called the scriptures a nose of waxe a shipmans hose But now would God it were not so made in open pulpit by some great schollers that are accounted great divines Yea it is lamētable that in some great places if not in the greatest men preach of the scriptures and yet never interpret the scripture wherof they preach yea that indeed so hammer the scripture as though it were a peece of mettall the which they might worke or cast into what forme themselues best liked who also make the Pulpite a place rather to sheew their owne witt wherby to win credit and prayse to themselues perhaps also to get a Bishopprike in the end then faithfully to deliver the message of God wherby to glorifie God and either to winne soules unto him or to confirme and further in godlines those that are already wonne Lastly who rather playe with the scripture as if it were some gue gawe then wisely handle the same As for competent maintenance I remember what one that hath now turned his coate and every where almost chafeth at vs like a Cooke I remember I say what he once answered a Bishop being asked where he would haue sufficient maintenance for preachers in every Congregation A good thong quoth he might be cut out of your hyde As also what Iohn Baptist sayd unto the people Luc 3 11 He that hath two coates let him part with him that hath