inrollment of that Charter until 2 Ric. 2. will not admit of so great Antiquity thereof And the same Sir Edw. Cook there alledgeth the Red Book of Hen. 1. De general Placitis Comitatuum Cap. 8. extant in the Office of the Kings Rememb in the Exchequer wherein in the Sheriffs Tourne Court is said Ibi agantur primo debita verè Christianitatis jura Secundo Regis placita postremo causae singulorum dignis satisfactionibus expleantur There let be handled first all due Laws of Christianity or Court-Christian Secondly Pleas of the King Lastly Causes of particular persons c. Whereupon they that is others conclude that Ecclesiastical causes were handled in the Tourn in H. 1. long after the said supposed Charter Then he addeth And certain it is the Bishops Consistories were erected and causes Ecclesiastical removed from the Tourn to the Consistory after the making of the said Red Book But let the Antiquity thereof be what it will it is most certain that however the Popes and their Agents did often intrude and usurp Authority within this Realm yet the King and Parliament ever held the Bishops and Clergy of England within the verge of the Laws of the Land never permitting them either by colour of Magna Charta or otherwise to exercise any Authority but with submission to the Municipal Laws So that whoever shall endeavour to put them into any further power in case they have a mind to restore them to former Jurisdictions doth put to his hand to make them so many Popes which this Realm even in times of Popish Religion here would never endure And whereas some are pleased to affirm that by the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. cap. 19. there was a stricter restraint laid upon the Bishops and Clergy than in the times before when they sate in Convocation viz. No Canons should be made and put in exercise that were contrariant or repugnant to the Laws of the Land it is manifest that the same limitation was long before set upon them For Sir Edw. Cook ibid cap. 74. pag. 323. saith That the King did often appoint Commissioners by Writ to sit with them at the Convecation and to have cognizance of such things as they meant to establish that nothing should be done in prejudice c. and for this he citeth 51. Ed. 3. nu 42.46 Edw. 3. prem 8.21 Ed. 4.45 Rot. Parl. 1 Ric. 2. nu 114. from which he concludeth that the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 is but Declaratory of the old Common Law And so strict were the Kings anciently over Bishops and Archbishops too that when the Clergy petitioned in Parliament 51. Edw. 3. 4 Instit ca. 74. of Archdeacons p. 339. num 83. that of every Consultation conditional the Ordinary may of himself take upon him the true understanding thereof and therein proceed accordingly that is without appeal to the King whereupon Delegates by Commission under the Great Seal might hear and determine the same The Kings answer was that the King cannot depart with his right but to yeeld to his Subjects according to Law To which Sir Edw. Cook subjoyns an Item to all his Readers Nota hoc stude bene Nay this is not all For so far did the Kings of England engage in the over-ruling of Bishops that they did not onely limit their Jurisdiction but allowed them not liberty to make a Will without licence from the King till they made composition with him as the same Author telleth us saying Ibid. p. 338 It appears by many Records in the reigns of H. 3. Edw. 1. as taking some one or two examples for many that by the Law and custome of England no Bishop could make his Will of his Goods or Chattels coming of his Bishoprick c. without the Kings licence The Bishops that they might freely make their Wills yeelded to give to the King after their deceases respectively for ever six things 1. Their best Horse or Palfrrce with Bridle and Saddle 2. A Cloke with a Cape 3. One Cup with a Cover 4. One Bason and Ewre 5. One Ring of Gold 6. His Kennel of Hounds For these a Writ issueth out of the Exchequer after the decease of every Bishop Whether this be still in use we meddle not but mention it onely to shew what a strict eye our Kings have ever had upon Bishops so as the Law allows them not power so much as of their own personal Estates much less of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction without the King What power they had in the High Commission Court is needless to mention the Court being happily laid aside by the Statute of 17 Car. 1. cap. 11. But whereas they insisted upon sole Jurisdiction and now begin to exercise it or at least to renew their claim thereunto it is very well known that by the Statute of 1. Edw. 6.2 they could hold no Courts but in the Kings name nor that without Commission under the Great Seal which power was indeed revived and re-established by the Act of 1. Eliz. after it had been repealed 1. Mar. 2. Howbeit all that power is again repealed and made void for ever by the same Act of 17. Car. 1. and now no Commissions to be granted them any more To make this out we shall rehearse the words of both those Acts of Parliament which run thus 1. The Act of 1. Eliz. cap. 1. having first united and annexed all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom it after addeth what power shall be given by Commission under the Great Seal to exercise the same in this following Clause onely viz. And that your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings or Queens of this Realm shall have full Power and Authority by vertue of this Act by Letters patents under the Great Seal of England to assigne name and authorize when and as often as your Highness your Heirs or Successors shall think meet and convenient and for such and so long time as shall please your Highness your Heirs or Successors such person or persons being natural born Subjects to your Highness your Heirs or Successors as your Majesty your Heirs or Successors shall think meet to exercise and use occupy and execute under your Highness your Heirs and Successors all manner of Jurisdictions Priviledges and Preheminencies in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within these your Realms of England and Ireland or any other your Highnesses Dominions and Countries And to visit reform redress order correct and amend all such Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever which by any manner Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power Authority or Jurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of Vertue and the Conservation of the Peace and Vnity of this Realm And that such person or persons so to be named assigned authorized and appointed by your Highness your Heirs or Successours after
the said Letters Patents to him or them made and delivered as is aforesaid shall have full power and authority by vertue of this Act and of the said Letters Patents under your Highness your Heirs or Successours to exercise use and execute all the premises according to the tenour and effect of the said Letters Patents any matter or cause to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This is one entire Clause of that Act nor is there any Branch or Clause in that whole Act that gives more or other Jurisdiction to Bishops or any other Ecclesiastical persons whatsoever 2. Now the Act of 17. Car. 1.11 having repeted this Clause at large addeth Be it Enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty and the Lords and Commons in this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same That the aforesaid Branch Clause Article or Sentence contained in the said Act and every word matter and thing contained in that Branch Clause Article or Sentence shall from henceforth be repealed annulled revoked annihilated and utterly made void for ever any thing in the said Act to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This as we humbly conceive puts a period to all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of Bishops Deans and Chapters and Archdeacons whatsoever And even before that Act of 17. Car. 1. that Government which they exercised was without yea contrary to Law For whereas by the Statute of 1. Edw. 6.2 it was Enacted that all Summons and Citations or other process Ecclesiastical in all Suits and Causes c. should from the first day of July thence next following be made in the name and with the stile of the King as it is in Writs Original or Judicial at the Common Law And that the Teste thereof be in the name of the Archbishop or Bishop or other having Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction who hath the Commission and grant of the Ecclesiastical Authority immediately from the Kings Highness And that his Commissary Official or Substitute exercising jurisdiction under him shall put his name in the Citation or Process after the Teste And that they in all Seals of their Office shall have the Kings Highness Arms decently set with certain Characters under the Arms for the knowledge of the Diocess and shall use no other Seal of Jurisdiction c. upon pain of his Majesties displeasure and imprisonment during his Majesties pleasure * So also it is Enacted 1. Edw. 6.12 that they should make their Process and Writings in the Ks. name and not under their own names and that their Seals should be the Kings Arms. In which Act nevertheless they were allowed to use their own Seals in admission and ordering all their own Officers in all Certificates in all Collations Presentations Institutions and Inductions of Benefices Letters of Orders or Dimissories as formerly was accustomed But under colour of this last Toleration they have used their own Names and Seals onely in all Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions for many years last past without taking the least notice of King or Queen or taking any special Commission from them for ought hath appeared in any of their pretendedly juridical proceedings which are therefore apprehended to be all void in Law albeit they had obtained in secret Letters Patents so to act as they have done For that Statute being repealed in 1. Mar. 2. was again in general terms revived and re-established in 1. Eliz. 1. and never since made void And whereas our Bishops and Archbishops in England and Wales are in all but twenty six in number which being far too few to be able to execute the Office of Bishops as by the Word of God they are bound to do there was in the 26th year of Hen. 8. cap. 14. an Act of Parliament made for adding six and twenty Suffragan Bishops more unto them which that Statute saith hath been accustomed to be had in this Realm It was Enacted that Thâ—tford Ipswich Colchester Dover Gilford Southhampton Taunton Shaftsbury Molton Marleborough Bedford Leicester Glocester Shrewsbury Bristol Penreth Bridgwater Notingham Grantham Hull Huntington Cambridge and the Town of Pereth and Barwick St. Germans in Cornwal and the Isle of Wight shall be taken and accepted for Sees of Bishops Suffragans to be made in this Realm These to be chosen thus Every Archbishop and Bishop that would have Suffragans must for each place nominate two persons to the King whereof the King to chuse one and to give him the name title and dignity of Bishop of such of the Sees aforesaid as he should be nominated unto and he to be called Bishop Suffragan of that See And the King by his Letters Patents is to present him to the Archbishop of the Province where this Suffragan is to be requiring the Archbishop with two Bishops or Suffragans more to be procured by the Bishop that names him to Consecrate the said person to the same name title stile and dignity of Bishop as to the Office of a Bâ—shop Suffragan appertaineth and then to execute such power and authority as by the Archbishop or Bishop within whose Diocess he is to be he shall be Commissionated to do but no other under pain of a Premunire but not to partake any of the Profits of the Bishoprick of the Diocess But our Bishops like none of this although heretofore used which Act being repealed by Queen Mary was revived in 1. Eliz. 1. by name and is still in force Therefore in stead of twenty six Bishops to desire fifty two is no Puritanical request but a legal and just demand For there are so many allowed by Law already Yea if two hundred Bishops should be setled in England they would be too few to execute all the duties which by the Word are incumbent on a Bishop And verily we are perswaded in Conscience that this must be done if there be any due care of Souls by such as have power to do it if Episcopacy be again set up in England And we speak thus because we apprehend that by Act of Parliament all their power and jurisdiction is absolutely taken away and therefore by consequent the Office it self although the Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament of October 9. 1646. had never been For when their power of Jurisdiction is gone for ever what of the Office of a Bishop as such remaineth This was the sense of both Houses of Parliament as appears by that Ordinance which makes all their Grants since 17. Car. 1. to be null and void because their Office then expired If it shall be thought fit to set up Episcopacy again We most humbly pray that it may be no other but that Primitive Episcopacy agreeable to the Apostles rules in that form method and power mentioned in the Book of Reduction of Episcopacy composed and published in the year 1641. by Dr. James Vsher late Archbishop of Armagh always provided that there be such a competent number of Bishops set up as may be able faithfully and profitably to discharge the Office of
be used but onely at the celebration of the Lords Supper the setting up of Tapers of wax Candlesticks Basons and Ewres upon the high Altar and ducking to them every time a man comes into the Church or goes out or stirs while he is in it Whereas Cups Pots and Basons for Alms were never since 5. Edw. 6. to be set there but at the Communion nor then to be bowed unto though the Bread and Wine were on the Table The wearing of Hoods of degrees and many other such like devices all which were laid aside in 5.6 Edw. 6. as appears by the Rubricks and the Act for Uniformity in 1. Eliz. 2. compared together which allows nothing but what was in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. save onely the alterations mentioned in the said Act as hath been before shewed And however the Rubrick before the Book printed in 1. Eliz. directeth to use such Ornaments as were in use in 2. Edw. 6. yet that is no part of the Book established because the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. hath no such Rubrick and the Act enjoyns all to be done according to that Book and none other or otherwise However afterwards another Statute of Q. Eliz. did so appoint Now the same Preface before the Common-prayer touching Ceremonies giveth all men to understand that the most weighty cause of the abolishing of certain Ceremonies was that they were so far abused partly by the Superstitious blindness of the rude and unlearned and partly by the unsatiable avarice of such as sought more their own luere then the glory of God that the abuses could not well be taken away the thing remaining still Upon which grounds there was a removal of them in 5.6 Edw. 6. For then was that Preface of Ceremonies first prefixed to the Book of Common-prayer But so great is the itch of mans corrupt nature after Humane inventions in Divine Worship and so natural are Popish Gue-gaws and outward pompous toyes that please the senses that many of these who had been laid aside as abovesaid in 5.6 Edw. 6. and that at the Conference at Hampton-court it was desired that those Ceremonies and Rites of the Cross in Baptism kneeling at the Communion the Surplice c. might be put away yet such was the violence of the prevailing party at that time that having obtained License under the Great Seal they in Convocation An. 1603. recalled sundry of those rejected Ceremonies again and enjoyned all Students in Colleges to wear Surplices in time of Divine service Can. 17. Copes by him that Ministreth the Sacrament Epistolers and Gospelers according to 7. Eliz. there being no such Statute nor Parliament in 7. Eliz. and sundry other things under colour whereof by degrees most of those things before cast out viz. bowing to the East and to the Altar with the rest before named were retroduced and now devoutly or rather superstitiously observed without any shew or colour of warrant but ancient custom which being duly examined will appear to all to be first used in the Popish Churches as too palpably appeareth by the Preface touching Ceremonies before alledged Yea those very men who are so much for these and not onely urge the 18th Canon of 1603. but the Queens Injunctions * 52 Injunct for bowing at the Name of Jesus which no Common-prayer-book or Statute hath enjoyned yet in other things regard not those Injunctions nor the Book of Homilies no nor the Act for Vniformity it self touching such Ceremonies as they have a mind to recal and advance witness their setting up Candles in Candlesticks on the High Altar as they call it and such like superstitions which the third Injunction of Eliz. reckons among those things which tend to Idolatry and Superstition which of all other offences God doth most detest and abhor They must have their Antiphonies Responds c. which the Preface to the Common-prayer-book tells us are laid aside c. Not content with this they must have all except Candles lighted that are upon the Popish Altars where Mass is used upon their high Altars yea piping on divers Instruments singing so as none can understand the matter but onely be tickled with the musick playing upon Organs c. all which were laid aside in Edw. 6. and even by the 2 Hom. of the Place and time of Prayer which is by vertue of Art 35. subscribed unto by every Minister in England that ever was admitted to any Ecclesiastical Promotion according to the Act of 13. Eliz. 12. are censured and declared openly to all to be displeasing unto God and sore and filthily to defile his holy House and Place of Prayer All which are here mentioned to shew how far they deviate and whither they are tending and posting amain who under colour of upholding and practising of the laudable Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England do recal and retroduce many Popish Rites cast out of this Church and despise all Laws and Constitutions made against them and are thereby lyable to Inditements every time they use them upon the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. We shall forbear to insist longer upon this but leave it to others to judge what sad and dangerous effects these things if they be suffered and countenanced are likely to produce That which we chiefly aim at is to shew a necessity of reforming those Rites and Ceremonies contained in the Book of Common-Prayer or enjoyned by the Canons of 1603. Such are the Surplice Copes c. enjoyned to be used by Ministers the Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Communion Marriage with the Ring Bowing at the Name of Jesus and such like imposed upon all as established by Law But such Establishment we do and must deny until we see a Record produced by which that Book now in use or printed in 1 Eliz. is by Act of Parliament ratified and confirmed For if either there be no Record of that to which an Act referreth or that there be more alterations in the Book said to be established than the Act mentioneth can that Book be properly said to be established by Law and not rather made void thereby In all other things nothing is admitted for Law or as being of force by Law but what is expresly contained in verbis in the Act it self especially if the Act refer to any thing to be confirmed by it of which no Record can be produced and which differs from ought else that is said to be ratified by it And this is the case of the present Liturgy which neither is Recorded nor agreeth with but hath sundry alterations from and additions to that of 5.6 Edw. 6. besides those hinted in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. And if any Deed or Bond be rased or altered after sealing or if rased or altered before sealing and that not witnessed will such a Deed or Bond be admitted as good evidence at Law or in Equity if produced and pleaded We therefore cannot understand how the present Service-Book can be established by
elected there can be legally and regularly no succession of Bishops There is no necessity of such a Consequence nor of making more Archbishops or Deans and Chapters or continuing of any such if it shall please the King and Parliament by any Act or Statute to appoint any other way and course of Election and Consecration of Bishops Which is as easie to be done as any thing else Enacted in Parliament there being no Divine Right so much as pretended unto for such Election or Consecration as of late was used in England 2. Whereas it is of late much insisted upon that Episcopacy is not only an Office of Precedency and Presidency above other Presbyters and Ministers given to them by the free Election of the rest to regulate order and act things agreed upon by the Presbytery joyned with them as the Commander in chief in an Army as the Capital Justice in a Court or as the Speaker in either House of Parliament but that it is a distinct and specifical Order by Divine Right Superiour to all other Presbyters which Order onely is Authorized to exercise such things as none else may medle with We say that this in England was never at all arrogated by any Bishops till of very late times 2. The things they make peculiar to Bishops ratione Ordinis are sole Ordination and sole Jurisdiction as if none had power in either of these but themselves neither of which even they who pretend to derive their Episcopacy from the Apostles ever undertook to make good by any solid Antiquity Yea 3. those very Antiquities which they allege are either spurious or else speak nothing either of sole Ordination or of sole Jurisdiction but rather the contrary as might easily be made out But we tye our selves to speak to these particulars only as said to be made out by Law 3. This was never yielded by any Law of England nor by the Book of Ordination For however that Book established in 5.6 Edw. 6. and after repeal by Queen Mary confirmed in 8. Eliz. cap. 1. Yet when it speaks of the making of Bishops it calls that a Consecration and not an Ordination as it doth when it speaks of making Deacons and Presbyters which it calleth Priests calling one The form and manner of Ordering Deacons the other The form of Ordering Priests But when it speaks of the other it changeth this Word Ordering and calls it The form of Consecrating an Archbishop or Bishop Which shews plainly that the Book of Ordination never meant to make Bishops or as Dr. Gauden calls it Legal Episcopacy to be not only in Degree and Office of Prolocutor but in a distinct Order of Christ's and his Apostles institution Superiour to a Presbyter It is indeed an easie matter for a bold man to contradict this and to say that the antient Writers call the Solemn form of consecrating a Bishop by no other name then that of Ordinatio Episcopi but it seems it is not so easie to prove what he saith For he produceth no such proof at all so that this confident saying touching such Ordination of Bishops affirmed by his Adversary to be a Novel Popish Position that this is Not Novel he is sure is but a meer shift and a put off no confutation at all And where he is pleased afterwards to urge the Preface to the Book of Ordination Dr Heylin Certam Epistol p. 143. which mentioneth three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons and one passage in one of the Prayers at the Consecration of an Archbishop or Bishop to prove that Episcopacy is a distinct Order from and Superiour to that of Presbyters he must be intreated to take notice 1. That the Preface alleged saith not as he speaks these THREE Orders but onely these Orders of Ministers c. But even there by way of explanation the Preface calls them Offices which Offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation c. now we deny them not to be distinct Offices only we cannot admit in his sense the Office of a Bishop to be a distinct Order above Presbytery For even in that very Preface it speaks of Consecrating not of Ordaining a Bishop as the Book all along doth of Ordering that is Ordaining of Deacons and Priests but never of other then of Consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops that is of setting them over the rest in degree to be the mouth and hand of the rest in executing what by the rest is agreed upon And 2. touching that Prayer he mentions wherein Episcopacy is called in that Part of the Book it self which concerneth Bishops an Order This is but a wyre-drawing of the Words and a meer wresting of them The Words of the Prayer are these Almighty God giver of all good things which by thy holy Spirit hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy Servant now called to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop c. Now how do these words prove a Bishop to be a distinct Order when speaking of the person then to be made Bishop it is not said he is called to the Order but to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop And seeing he onely talks of antient Writers but produceth none we shall make bold to mind him what is the sense of the Canon-Law which he pleads to be still in force in England if Lindwood that great English Canonist be of any value with him who saith expresly Episcopatus non est Ordo Yea the very Book of Ordination in ordering of Priests appointing 1 Tim. 3. to be then read If any desire the Office of a Bishop he desireth an honest work A Bishop must be blameless c. doth more then tacitly admit a Bishop and a Presbyter not to differ in Order To which we shall add the judgement of an antient Archbishop of Canterbury even Anselmus himself an high man for the Pope and a great Contestor with the King for Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction even beyond the bounds of the Laws of this Land who in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians where Paul cap. 1. saluteth but two Orders Bishops and Deacons on the word Episcopis saith thus Episcopis id est Presbyteris Episcopos namque pro Presbyteris more suo posuit Non enim plures Episcopi in una civitate erant neque Presbyteros intermitteret ut ad Diaconos descenderet Sed dignitatem excellentiam Presbyterorum declarat dum eosdem qui Presbyteri sunt Episcopos esse manifestat Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur in Schismatis remedio facium est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Evangelium rumperet Nam est Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos qui sederunt in Centuria 3. Presbyterum unum de se elecium in Excelsiori loco Gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si Exercitus Imperatorem faciat aut Diaconi elegant
REASONS SHEWING the Necessity of Reformation of the Publick 1. Doctrine 2. Worship 3. Rites and Ceremonies 4. Church-Government and Discipline Reputed to be but indeed not Established by LAW Humbly offered to the Serious Consideration of this present PARLIAMENT By divers Ministers of sundry Counties in ENGLAND 2 COR. 13.8 For we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth LONDON Printed by JA COTTREL MDCLX TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE THE Lords and Commons ASSEMBLED in PARLIAMENT IT is far from our thoughts to oppose or disparage Orthodox Doctrine a well-composed Liturgy Rites for decency and order Ordination of Ministers Apostolical Episcopacie or due Rules of Discipline We are for all these with Truth and against rigid Impositions which may debar a Christian of any liberty allowed him by Christ. Nor do we offer any Polemical Discourse or Theological Debates proper for a Divinity-School or Synod but onely what we humbly conceive more suitable to a Parliament Our work chiefly is out of those Laws which we as Ministers are bound to take special notice of and out of those Books said to be by those Laws settled to make out these two things First that so far as we can apprehend neither the Articles of Religion the Books of Com. Prayer or Ordination the Jurisdiction of Bishops claimed before 17 Car. 1. nor so much as their Being as Bishops sithence nor those Canons so much contended for are indeed established by Law Secondly that none of these as they now stand ought to be confirmed and setled But all with submission And this we trust shall not be censured as Eccentrick For albeit we acknowledge the learned in the Law to be far more able in matter of Law touching these things yet seeing every Subject is to inform himself of all such Laws as more especially concern his own calling we hope it will not be judged an extravagancie or presumption in us to produce those Laws which more nearly concern all of our Function Of this we apprehend some necessity 1. Because it is already too obvious that too many notwithstanding all pretences of Moderation do already fly higher than ever some in asserting Arminianisme to be the Doctrine of the Church of England thinking thereby to force all to imbrace it some in stickling for the Liturgy commonly used some still holding up sole Ordination by and sole Jurisdiction of Bishops and all Canons not onely made in England but in Rome it self if not repugnant to our Laws labouring to possess the people that all these are settled by Law and therefore to be continued and imposed without alteration and that all who seek a Reformation of them do oppose and violate the established Laws 2. Because if men go on in such ways and prevail therein it is to be feared that in short time every Minister of different judgement how able godly and useful soever will be put not onely out of his present place but out of the Ministry also as it hath already too often happened And indeed it can hardly be found in any age since the Conquest that where Kings have not curbed the violence of Bishops they have ever sharply persecuted all that threw off Popery which Persecutions usually produced Confusions in the Common-wealth For prevention whereof we humbly beseech all Noble Spirits and faithful prudent Patriots to look back upon the Mutinies Insurrections Rebellions in Edw. 6. his time occasioned by fomenting and not moderating the furious Zeal even of those that were most countenanced by that pious King which notwithstanding the Act of 1. Edw. 6.1 made many to flee so high as exasperated the other side so far as that it put several parts of the Kingdom into Combustion Nor will those rivers of blood shed in Q. Maries days by recalling the Bishops and others formerly deprived and giving way to their wonted tyranny in the height thereof be forgotten while ought of Protestant Religion remaineth Nor will it be unseasonable to reflect upon the throwing out of many worthy Ministers in Q. Elizabeths reign and of many moe under K. James For that Noble King immediately after his coming to the Crown was so plyed by Bishops that notwithstanding the Conference at Hampton Court the Prelatical Party prevailed so far that the Liturgy then much complained of remained in greatest part and in the most material points unreformed to which they all were compelled to subscribe which had never been required before and many Illegal Canons were made and inforced so far that within the space of two years as was credibly reported 70 Ministers were deprived 113 not suffered to preach and about 94 more were under Canonical Admonition the next door to Deprivation The carrying on of all which together with the countenancing of Arminianism formerly declared against by that Learned King James witness his promoting of the Synod of Dort did so much and so generally offend and exasperate that after many thousands were compelled to leave their native Countries to dwell in Mesech and to take up their habitations in the tents of Kedar others were drawn on to engage so deeply in the publick differences which as to matters of Religion were occasioned by the continuing of the former corruptions and by those Canons of 1639. as produced all those horrid and bloody effects which we abhor to mention and tremble to remember May it therefore please your Wisdoms Piety and Goodness to procure a review of all these things after the example of the Parliament in 3.4 Edw. 6. and to call some of the most moderate and able persons of every different party to assist therein and thereupon to settle all the things of God in a solid and moderate way that all Ordinances of Christ may be restored to their pristine Purity all Christians reduced to the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and in the mean time nothing to be imposed which may grieve or offend those who shall be careful not to disturb the Publick Peace In order to which ends we humbly recommend to your Noble and Pious thoughts that of the Apostle Let your moderation be known to all men the LORD is at hand For this and for your Honours Your humble Servants shall ever pray REASONS SHEWING The Necessity of Reformation c. I. Of DOCTRINE THe Publick Doctrine of the Church of England as it is commonly received and insisted upon is said to be contained in the 39 Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562. Those Articles are taken to be ratified and confirmed by Act of Parliament in 13 Eliz. cap. 12. Which Act provideth That no person shall be admitted to any Benefice with Cure except he shall first have subscribed the said Articles in presence of the Ordinary and publickly read the same in the Parish Church of that Benefice whereof he shall have Cure with declaration of his unfeigned assent thereunto
Day lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin Most men are convinced of the necessity of repenting but such is the deceitfulness of their hearts that too many defer it and that upon that very ground expressed in these words which have no ground or warrant from the Word of God At what time soever a sinner repenteth c. as if he could repent when he list which carries many to Hell It is true this is seemingly put off by a great Doctor thus D. P. de Disciâ— Eccl. 2. â— Sect. 3. Dixit Dominus quoad sensum licet non verbatim The Book speaks the sense although not the very words of the Text. But this is too frigid an answer to satisfie the Objection For 1. It is said to be a sentence of Scripture not an Exhortation according to the sense onely It is one thing to give the sense another to repeat the words 2. This agrees not with the sense but is contrary thereunto as was but now demonstrated Therefore it is untrue and injurious to charge the Apostles with the like in alledging the Old Testament in the New 2. That expression in the general Confession of sins viz. There is no health in us although well meant is incongruous and improper because most of the common sort understand not the true meaning of it yet patter it over out of custom without being through their ignorance duly sensible of what is indeed intended by it Howbeit the Minister may not alter the Phrase 3. After the first Lesson at Morn Prayer Te Deum or Benedicite both of them being Apochrypals are to be read before the second Lesson and so they interrupt the continued reading of the holy Scripture which the Preface to that Book would bear us in hand is provided against As for Te Deum or We praise thee O God c. it is a piece taken out of the Mass-Book and in Popish Churches usually sung at times of great Victories Deliverances and other Triumphs From thence some Bishops little to their credit have introduced it upon like occasions into Protestant Churches that being no where enjoyned nor warranted by any Law in force This shews what able men such Bishops are to govern that know not how to express their thanksgiving to God for any extraordinary mercy so well as in a superstitious formal dress usually sung in Popish Churches And as for Benedicite viz. O all ye works of the Lord c. it is a piece of the Mass-Book also and taken out of the Apocryphal song of the three Children And it is bungled too not set forth as it is in the Song it self as by comparing them may appear And whereas that Song is said in the Title of it in the Apocrypha to be the song of the three holy Children which followeth in the third of Daniel after this place And they walked in the midst of the fire praising God and blessing the Lord this is an abusing and belying of the Canonical Text in Daniel 3. in which there is no hint of any such thing Yet must this come in and be kept in in our Liturgy though cast out of the Scotch Book to give another lye to the Preface of our Book of Common-Prayer of which more by and by 4. The many Antiphonies Responds except the peoples saying Amen have no pattern or warrant in the Word Yet above an hundred of these Antiphonies and Responsals or Answerings between Minister Clerk and people are enjoyned to be used beside the accompanying of him in the Confession of sins Creed reading every other verse of the Psalms c. How can such things having no warrant in the Word be done in Faith in the Publique Worship of God and not rather be accounted Will-Worship This is the rather to be excepted against not onely because it is so frequent in the Mass-Books but no where else but because also the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer saith That the reading of the holy Scripture is therein so set forth that all things shall be done in order without breaking one piece thereof from another and for this cause be cut off Antiphonies Responds Invitatories and such like things as did break the continual course of the reading of the Scripture How then do so many Responds and Answers of Clerk and People while the Minister is reading as likewise those Anthems before-mentioned which interpose between the first and second Lesson all which are still continued in the Book agree with that Preface still printed with the Book 5. If the Letany must be read which contains petitions for more particulars then all the Book besides and being put into one continued prayer without so many interpositions and interruptions might be of far better use then now it is why must the praying part be so much performed by the People and not by the Minister whose proper Office it is in publique to pray for the people as their mouth and not they to be his mouth There is no ground for this in Scripture yet we must be made to believe that there is nothing in the Leiturgy but what is evidently grounded upon the Word And wherefore must that clause in the Let any from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities be still left out was there no fear of his return to tyrannize over this Land again Had he ever more Instruments at Work in this Kingdom since the Reformation then now If it be said The Act for Vniformity gives notice of an alteration in the Letany yet that Act doth not tell us what that is in particular Therefore till that alteration be named that clause needeth not yea ought not to be omitted so long as the Letany is used 6. In the Book printed in 1 Eliz. there be added after the Letany two Prayers one for the then Queen another for Bishops both which were prayed for before in the Letany and also in the Prayer at the Communion for the whole estate of Christs Church which are not in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. And in 1 Jac. these were continued with one other Prayer for Queen Anne the Prince c. Now albeit the Prayers for the King Queen and Royal Family be useful and necessary yet when the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. admits of no alterations from or additions to that Book in 5.6 Ed. 6. save only in proper Lessons for Sundays one in the Letany and two more in the Communion and none other or otherwise how can those Prayers be used without making them that use them liable to the Law if rigorously urged till they be confirmed by Act of Parliament Or rather till that Act of 1. Eliz. 2. be repealed and taken away 7. Albeit the Preface to the Book saith that therein many things be left out whereof some be untrue some uncertain some vain and superstitious and nothing is ordained to be read but the very pure Word of God the holy Scriptures or
a Bishop according to the mind of Christ expressed in his Word If the late Episcopal Party shall pretend and plead that unless Bishops be restored to all their power and pomp they arrogated before 17. Car. they shall not be able to do his Majesty that service which otherwise they might if so restored To this it is answered 1. That if they mean thereby that they cannot do his Majesty service in Parliament unless they be restored to their Lordships again and re-admitted to the House of Peers we cannot think but that there be Noble Lords enow left in that Honourable House who are far more able to do his Majesty service then the Bishops can do there 2. Whereas the Bishops and Clergy obtained a Command and Charter from William 1. to exclude the Sheriff and the rest of the Laity from medling with matters Ecclesiastical in their Courts as was before shewed we see no reason why Bishops excluded in 17. Car. 1. his reign should be again admitted to intermeddle in the Supreme Court and Judicatory of the Realm in Civil Affairs 3. If they be confined to the Apostolique Constitution and more Bishops made they will be in a capacity of doing God and his Majesty more and better service in a more diligent and circumspect Government of the Church then ever yet they have done or were able to do By all which it appeareth that if they labour to recover their former power the pretence of doing his Majesty better service is but to make way to their own Greatness and to render them less able to serve God or the King as in that Office they ought Nor will his Majesties interest in the Clergy be diminished by making more Bishops without an election by a Dean and Chapter but much increased if by Act of Parliament the same Course be taken for the election of all Bishops which by the Statute of 26. H. 8.14 is appointed for the constituting of Bishops Suffragan and their power of Jurisdiction set out unto them by the King and Parliament as it was in 1. Eliz. at what time the Articles to be ministred in all their Visâ—tations were set forth by the Queen c. are yet extant with her Injunctions Hereby also his Majesty would be sure to have a far greater influence into all the Clergy of note by how much the more the number of Bishops is increased and more learned men made capable of such preferments which a quarter of them cannot be if Episcopacy be confined to twenty six Bishops III. Of DISCIPLINE HAving spoken of the Subject or Persons in whom the Power of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction by the Laws of the Realm resided we proceed to offer somewhat touching the Rules or Laws for execution thereof under this Head of Discipline which containeth the Canons or Rules to wit the Kings Ecclesiastical Laws by which alone all persons trusted with Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction have been enabled to exercise that Government How that Discipline is bounded appeareth in and by the Acts of Parliament still in force in 25. H. 8.19 and 1. Eliz. 1. which bounds a great Sciolist is pleased to call sad restrictions and limitations * D. Heylin Certam Epistol pag. 89. which sheweth how they like the Laws and how far they would go in making Laws if they durst The bounds in the former Act are these 1. That none of the Clergy should from thence forth presume to attempt alledge claim or put in ure any Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodals or any other Canons Nor shall enact promulge or execute any such Canons Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial by whatsoever name or names they may be called in their Convocations in time coming which always shall be assembled by Authority of the Kings Writ unless the same Clergy may have the Kings most Royal Assent and License to make promulge and execute such Canons Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial or Synodal upon pain of every one of the said Clergy doing contrary to this Act and being thereof convict to suffer imprisonment and make Fine at the Kings Will. It is true that at the suit of the then Clergy divers Constitutions Ordinances and Canons Provincial or Synodal which heretofore had been Enacted and then thought to be not only much prejudicial to the Kings Prerogative royal and repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm but also over-much onerous to his Highness Subjects by that Act the King was to chuse thirty two Persons to review approve or reject the same which being begun but not perfected by the time limited so as to get the Royal Assent thereunto 3.4 Edw. 6. cap. 11. that Act revived in 3.4 Edw. 6. authorizing him to chuse thirty two Persons to perfect that work The persons were chosen they did the work compiled a Book intituled Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum yet extant but for lack of the Royal Assent thereunto within the time prefixed that Act expired and their Book of Reformation with it which was never since renewed In the Act of 25. H. 8.19 it is provided that such Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals Provincial being already made 1 El. 1. which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the Laws Statutes and Customes of this Realm nor to the damage or hurt of the Kings Prerogative-Royal shall now still be used and executed as they were before the making of this Act till such time as they be viewed searched or otherwise ordered determined by the said thirty two persons or the more part of them according to the tenor form and effect of this present Act. By occasion hereof Dr. Heylin * Ubi supra affirmeth that so much of the Popes Canon-Law first intended for the Church in general as is not contrary to the Laws Customs c. of the Land is still in force in our Courts Ecclesiastical as the Civil or Imperial Laws are in our Courts of Admiralty and Prerogative for probate of Wills But we humbly conceive this cannot be so because however the Civil Law is still in use in maritine and Testamentary Affairs in regard that Forrainers as well as Natives are or may be therein concerned and so those Civil Laws are permitted not in relation to the Emperour but as the Law of Nations which never was by any Act of Parliament in those eases prohibited in England The Popes Canon-Law on the contrary is ever since disabled by the Statute of 24. H. 8.12 and by that Act before-mentioned is wholly abrogated and null For if his power be renounced can his Laws which are the chief part of a Law-givers power be still in force especially where no Canons but such as have the Royal Assent may be used in England And if that might be admitted yet that very Proviso in the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 puts a period to it after the time the thirty two persons or major part of them did view and search them and drew up a Body of Ecclesiastical Laws to be used
here which the same Doctor confesseth they did although the want of the Kings Assent made it not valid in Law For the Proviso doth not say the old Canons shall be used till the King Assent but onely till such time as they be viewed searched or otherwise ordered and determined by them or the more part of them Nor doth that Act in any Clause mention any other Canons or Constitutions but such as are Provincial or called by other names always presumed and mentioned to be made in Convocations in England not in the Popes Conclave And to the end it may yet further appear that he who so confidently taketh upon him to improve his knowledge to whom he wrote that Epistle hath mis-informed him and wrested the Laws also take notice that the Canon-Laws of England are onely such as are or have been made in England These are of two sorts legatine or Provincial The Legatine were 77 Canons and Constitutions whereof 26 were made by Otho the Popes Legate President of a Synod here in England the other 51. in another Synod after holden under Othobone Legate of the Pope in 32. Hen. 3. An. 1248. The Provincial Constitutions were such as in several places of England were made under the Archbishops of Canterbury in all 212. whereof the first 48. were made under Stephen Langhton in the reign of King John and the last three were made under Henry Chichley in the reign of Hen. 5. These Provincial Constitutions about the year 1422. were digested into a Body by William Lindwood who also wrote a Commentary upon them the other by Johannes de Aton Canon of Lincoln who likewise Commented upon them all which are yet extant Now we must understand the Act of 25. H. 8.19 speaks onely of Canons Constitutions Ordinances Provincial or other or by whatsoever name they be called in their CONVOCATION These and no other were to be reviewed and out of these such as by the thirty two persons chosen by Hen. 8. or Edw. 6. should be viewed ordered and determined to stand were onely to be in force as is evident to every impartial eye that shall consult the Statute And these having been in 4. Edw. 6. viewed and thereupon by Gualter Haddon under Archbishop Cranmer and four Classes into which the said thirty two persons were divided that Book called Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum saith the Preface thereunto were compiled And these being so composed and published that all might object what they could if they had ought against them before Confirmation the King died before his Royal Assent was given and so they never were confirmed But yet the very viewing ordering and determining of those old Constitutions be they what they could were by the closing Proviso forementioned in 25. H. 8. all void and of none effect And albeit divers Canons or Constitutions were made in Q. Elizabeths reign beside those Injunctions and Articles for Visitations in her first year yet none of them being for ought we know confirmed by the Royal Assent under the Great Seal are now by any reputed Obligatory It be then onely the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical treated upon by the Bishop of London President of the Convocation for the Province of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops and Clergy of the said Province and agreed upon with the Kings Majesties licence in that Synod begun at London An. Dom. 1603. in the first year of King James his reign over England and after published by his said Majesties Authority under the Great Seal of England which can now be so much as pretended to be of any force And here we shall not dispute their validity after that Kings death ' they being not after re-established by King Charles the first but we shall onely speak to the Legality of them as they were once ratified and as they are any of them contrariant and repugnant to the Laws or Customes of the Land As for Customes which the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 referreth to as well as to the Laws we shall say little because this is more proper for Lawyers upon Prohibitions granted out of his Majesties Civil Courts to confider and debate We therefore consider of the Canons or such of them onely as are repugnant to any of the Laws in force This is a large Field Those Canons being no less than 141. in number which are more then heretofore were ever made in any three Synods by whomsoever held in England We shall therefore keep onely to such as we find most contrariant to those Laws which we are in duty bound chiefly to take notice of As for instance Of those twelve Canons under the first Head or Title viz. Of the Church of England there be eleven of them the breach of any of which is to be punished with Excommunication ipso facto not to be revoked till such as breake them after repent and publickly revoke their wicked errours The persons to be excommunicated are I. Impugners of the Kings Supremacy Can. 2. II. All that affirm the Church of England is not a true and Apostolical Church teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles Can. 3. where it is not defined what the Church of England is III. Impugners of the publick Worship of God established Can. 4. which few know to be established IV. Impugners of the Articles of Religion agreed upon 1562. Can. 5. the establishment whereof is doubtful V. Impugners of the Rites and Ceremonies established Can. 6. of which there is no certainty VI. Impugners of the Government of the Church of England by Archbishops Bishops c. Can. 7. there being none such VII Impugners of the form of consecrating and ordering Archbishops Bishops c. or that any thing in it is repugnant to the Word of God Can. 8. there being in the form no such Words as ordering of Archbishops and Bishops and it having been made out that there be contradictions in it one of which is repugnant to the Word VIII Authors of Schism Can. 9. IX Maintainers of such as the Canons call Schismaticks that is who affirm such Ministers as refuse to subscribe to the Book of Common-prayer c. Can. 10. which is hard to prove X. Maintainers of Conventicles Can. 11. that is of such as maintain that there are in England other Meetings Assemblies or Congregations of the Kings born Subjects then such as by the Laws are allowed which may rightly claim the name of true and lawful Churches XI Maintainers of Constitutions made in Conventicles without the Kings Authority and submit to them Can. 12. So all the Rules confirmed by Parliament for Church-Government make the Parliament lyable to Excommunication and the Assemby too and all the Presbyterians in England Besides these there is Can. 59. for excommunicating Ministers refusing to Catechise every Sunday after a third offence herein complained of So Can. 68. decreeth Ministers refusing to Christen or Bury to be excommunicated Majori Excommunicatione And Canon 72. ordaineth that if a Minister without