very next degree unto God the voice of the Church of God wherein we live And they whose wits are too glorious to fall to so low an ebb they that have risen and swollen so high that the banks of ordinary Rivers are unable to keep them in they whose wanton contentions in the causes whereof we have spoken do make all where they go a Sea even they at their highest float may be constrained both to see and grant that what their fancy will not yield to like their judgments cannot with reason condemn Thus he Which is not spoken to put the spirit of bondage and blind belief but the spirit of Sonship and Adoption into mens breasts in order to the Church the spirit of filial and child-like not of slavish obedience This for the Church Then touching the Laws of our Nation 2. The Laws of this Nation it is to be observed that there is so great a sacredness upon them that the Apostles both Intermination and Prediction hath ever been verified Rom. 13.2 that from the crown of the head to the sole of the foot as the Prophet speaks the violation and resisting of them and the legitimate Governors by them hath proved a resistance of the Ordinance of God and they that have so done have received unto themselves judgment from the Lord for neglecting of his good and wholesome Laws In the Act for uniformity of Common-Prayer As the Parliament phraseth it Neither is this spoken in treachery to civil liberties or to make men slaves but subjects The Laws of these Kingdoms by an admirable temperament give very much to subjects liberty and happiness and yet reserve enough to the Majesty and Prerogative of any King who owns his people as subjects Eikon Basil M dit 27. not as slaves Says his late Majesty As implying that the reverence of the Laws preserves both the People from Rebellion and the Prince from Tyranny and both from ruine Memorable to this purpose is the counsel of that pious and peaceable man Dr. Sibs in a book of his which a * Mâ— H. Ward The first he counted A Treatise on Rom. 8. intituled Christ opened c. Dr. Sibs Souls Const ct Edit 1st viz. 1635. pag. 364. great wit counted the second next the Scripture as to the argument it treats on he might perhaps have said the first The Doctors words are The Laws under which we live are particular determinations of the Law of God and therefore ought to be a rule unto us so far as they reach Law being the joynt reason and consent of many men for publick good hath an use for the guidance of all actions that fall under the same Where it dashes not against Gods Law what is agreeable to Law is agreeable to conscience Thus he Which passage as it seems was not a present truth or not a truth for the present times and therefore some did evirate geld alter and enervate into this in the following Editions unless mended in the later viz. The Laws under which we live are particular determinations of the Laws of God in some things of the second Table That which he laid down generally they put a double restriction upon First to the second Table Again to some things onely therein Then they add an instance which though it illustrates the Text yet is it not in the first Edition viz. For example says the following Editions The Law of God says Exact no more than what is thy due but what in particular is thy due and what another mans the Laws of men determine Thus far the Addition Now this wound being received by the Doctor in the house of his friends A wound received by Dr. Sibs in the house of his friend Zech. 13.6 for so I understand and when scarce cold in his grave and his books being in the hands of all men what may we think Authors more antient in the hands of enemies and re-published have met withal Wherein we are the more to observe the providence of God who hath made the Jews and Turks Capsarios nostros Aug. Enarrat Psal 40. as St. Austin speaks the faithful keepers of our Libraries 7. 7. Cause Not weighing Causes so much as Persons and Appendixes But the more immediate spring of this irregular motion was the reflecting on persons on both sides and some appendant and concomitant things as was noted above rather then unpartial weighing the causes themselves as denuded of all Patrons Concomitants and Appendixes viz. What ground of the war what plea for Independency The fallacy was by arguing à non causa ad causam and not applying solid Logick to sound Divinity St. Austins offer to his adversary is good advice Cont. Maximin Aâ—ian lib. 3. cap. 14. Scripturarum authoritatibus non quorumvis propriis sed utrisque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causa ratio cum ratione concertet Let matter saith he contend with matter cause with cause reason with reason by authority of Scripture which may not be proper to one side but common unto both I am clear One cause of the miscarriage in the late differences Jam. 2.1 that this hath imposed on many on both sides and in both causes viz. that men have had the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ in respect of persons or at the least of consequences and have eyeâ— more the persons engaged or whâ—t might be the issue of things than the matters themselves Rom. 3.8 But the Apostle prohibits a disproportion between the means and the end We ' must not do evil that good may come thereof Fiat justitia ruat coelum Plutarch in vita Aristid n. 609. We must do what is right though heaven and earth go together The Athenians though Heathen yet in a certain case they rejected the counsel of Themistocles though useful to the Common-wealth because it was not honest It was the occasion of the first sin in the world Respect of person for it was in gratiam uxoris Gen. 3. for the pleasing of his wife in all likelihood But our esteem of persons is best directed by the original rule And there prima secundae the first commandment with promise is that we honor our father and mother but which especiallv the Father of our c untry and the Mother of our Christianity The King and the Church And for effects and consequences Matth. 7.16 our Saviours and the Apoâ—â—les Philosophy and Logick for * Contr. Crescon lib. 1. cap. 14 cap. 17. Austin proves them to have used both would have directed us to make that a vine and not a thorn whereof we expect grapes Gal. 6.7 If we sow to the flesh and act on earthly grounds we shall from it reap corruption I conclude this with that of the wise-man Prov. 23.26 My son give me thy heart that 's the end And let thine eyes observe my ways there 's the means chap. 4.27 Let thine
lost the Revenues of a good part of a Bishoprick as 't is said which he had purchased And it may be others of these Brethren are ejected as they had ejected others For these times are like those Ruffin Hist eccl l. 1. c. 21. Ea tempestate foeda facies ecclesiae admodum turpis erat non enim sicut prius ab externis sed à propriis vastabatur Fugabat alius alius fugabatur uterque de ecclesia erat praevaricatio erat lapsus ruina multorum Similis poena sed impar victoria similiter cruciabantur sed non similiter gloriabantur quia dolebat ecclesia etiam illius casum qui impellebat ad lapsum At that time the face of the Church was foul and uncomely indeed for not now as formerly the Church was destroyed by enemies but by her own One is driven the other drives him away and both of them of the Church Offences and falls and ruines there were of many All were like sufferers but not all like conquerors All were tortured alike but all could not glory alike for the Church did lament even his fall that forced another to miscarrry saith the Historian But to leave the men and to come unto the matter 3. Their matter The premises are not established they say because there is Addition Detraction and Alterations made in them since the Originals and first establishment For Answer Object 1 Addit Substract Alterat Answ we may note here a twofold distinction 1. Of persons private or publick 2. Of things lighter or more material to apply these If the Alterations Additions or Detractions alledged be done by private hands and in things of lesser moment Misprisions in lesser things by private hands the main continuing unviolate It would be better thought on whether such a misprision be it casu or consilio unwittingly or willingly ought to invalid a publick act For then perhaps neither the Brethren have an authentick Bible nor any Lawyer a true Statute-Book because there are many faults do happen by the pen and by the press which may have happened in the things we speak of But secondly if such alterations In more material ones and by publick persons c. be made by publick persons or in things material it must be considered what powers the Laws do give unto them in these affairs now it is certain and the Brethren acknowledge it that until 17 Carol. 11. The King had freedome by Law to appoint under his Broad Seal Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical Reasons for Reform p. 51. to amend whatsoever might be reformable in the Church And in the Act for uniformity of Common-Prayer Act for uniformity of Com. Prayer at the end of it it is granted unto the Queen that if there shall happen any irreverence in the service of God by the mis-using the orders appointed in the Common-Prayer-Book she may by her Commissioners or by the advice of the Metropolitan ordain further rites or ceremonies for the advancement of the glory of God c. Several Acts in K. Hen. 8. Edw. 6. Q Eliz particulaâ—ly that of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. Necessit of Reform p. 50. Now by this and other particular Acts that restored all Ecclesiastical power from the Pope unto the Crown And particularly by the Act of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. wherein having first united and annexed all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction to the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom they are the words of the Brethren it addeth what power shall be given by commission under the Great Seal to exercise the same in this following clause 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 assign name and authorise when and as often as your Highness your Heirs and 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 Highness Dominions and Countries And to visit reform redress order correct and amend all such errors heresies schismes 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 peace and unity of this Realm Now howsoever the Brethren would make this Act void after the Act of 17 Car. 1. of which anon yet the things we speak of being transacted before remain in force by vertue of that Act. And certain it is that not only the Kings themselves but the Parliaments also the Judges the Ministry have always thought that by the King some alterations might be made by vertue of these Acts without violation of Law provided nothing were done contrary to any thing in the Book contained Preface to the Com. Prayeâ— Book especially when the King shall be supplicated by his people thereunto Hence the King in his Proclamation for the Authorizing of the Book of Common-Prayer by occasion of the Conference at Hampton Court which having reflected on saith Kings Proclamat for establishing the Book of Com. Prayer And for that purpose namely to satisfie the scruples of some tender consciences gave forth Our Commission under Our Great Seal of England to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and others according to the form which the LAWS of this Realm in like case prescribe to be used to make the said EXPLANATION c. And it is also certain that the same not only Kings successively but also Parliaments and Judges with all the other Magistracy have taken all the premises viz. The Doctrine or Articles of Religion the Worship or Common-Prayer-Book The Discipline and Government to be established by Law Or else how will the Brethren or how can any other free the Kings from Arbitrary Government the Parliaments from betraying the publick liberties the Judges from perjury and perverting Law and other Magistrates from oppressing of the people if men have been punished for disobedience to these if not established by Law But surely we may more safely confide in the judgment of so many Acts of Parliament and Laws of so many Princes By divers Ministers of sundry Counties so in the title K. Ja. Instructions to Preachers 1622. Artic. 4. Parliaments Judges Magistrates then in the conjectures of certain Country or County Ministers what is Law The rather because this being a Prerogative Ecclesiastical
Object whereof one contradicts himself is not a sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a firm footing to stand upon to shake not the earth onely but heaven also Bracton writing in Henry the third his time fol. 34. A. when the Barâ—ns had raised a Militia against the King saith indeed Rex habet superiorem Deum scilicet item legem per quà m factus est Rex item curiam suam viz. Comites Barones c. That the King hath a Superior namely God also the Law whereby he was made King also his Court to wit the Earls and Barons The like sentence verbatim almost is cited out of * lib. 1. c. 17. de justitiariis substituendis Declar. L. L. Com. Nov. 2. 1642. pag. 22. Fleta that the King had in populâ— regendo superiores legem per quam f ctus est curiam suam viz. Comites Barones c. But the former place in Bracton and so in Fleta is not meant of the Court of Parliament for there 's no mention of the Commons but it follows in the same place debent ei fraenum imponere they ought to bridle him Dr. Fearns's Conscience satisfied sect 4. pag. 17. 1248. It is likely he spake this in favour of the Militia raised against Henry the third for then he wrote and might call that Assembly of Earls and Barons then combined against the King Curiam the higher Court or Counsel But he contradicts this else-where not onely in that sentence Rex in regno parem habere non debet cum par in parem non habeat potestatem multò fortiùs non habeat superiorem That the King in his Kingdom ought to have no equal because one equal can have no power over another much less should he have any superior But also by other sentences quoted out of him above Somewhat perhaps like Cicero sometime with Pompey sometime for Cesar as not a few have been in our time Another also is cited who saith 2. Fortescue fol. 25. â— By the fuller answer to Dr. Fearn pag. 3. Ad hanc potestatem a pâ—pulo effluxam ipse habet quo non licet ei potestate aliâ populo suo dominari That the King by having this power flowing from the people is obliged so that it is not lawful for him to rule over them by any other authority Answ 1 But this assertion being back'd with no antient record or custom nor with any judged case or Act of Parliament yea contrary to the known process and practise of the Law and Acts of Parliament and general sentences of Lawyers cannot satisfie especially if we consider that if such power had flowen from the people yet as the King observes it doth not follow that it must therefore return unto them 2. Answer to the Remonstr of May 26. 1642. pag. 10. at least when and in what manner they will As in the case of the power of the Husband which first did flow unto him from the Wife but may not be resumed without breach of wedlock 3. 24 H. 8. c. 12. and that also adjudged lawfully The Law is otherwise which teacheth us That this Realm of England hath been accepted for an Empire governed by one supream Head unto whom a body politick compact of all sorts and degrees of people of the Spiritualty and Temporalty are bound to bear next unto God a natural obedience And that by the Law of nature and of the Land we owe Allegiance as we saw above Now this is not answered Reply to Dr. Ferm's answer sect 3. pag. 18. by saying ' By the preamble of the Statute it appears so to be made to prevent appeals to Rome and that by the supreme Head is meant such a one as is able to do all needful acts of justice which the King in his natural capacity cannot do and therefore must be understood in his politick capacity which takes in Law and Parliament For the whole body politick whether Parliament or People are governed and made subâ—ect to this Supreme Head and do owe unto him natural obedience And accordingly in His not in the Houses of Parliament's name though sitting do all judgments and executions of Law proceed The authority then of the two Houses of Parliament is the authority of the Body not of the Head by which even it also must be governed and against which it may not oppose it self 1 Tim. 2. For as he said I permit not a woman to usurp authority over the man but to live in subjection holds betwixt the political Spouse and Husband also I have done with the third 4. Case of Necessity To the fourth Motive the case of Necessity We must here note Thesin Hypothesin the general and the particular state of the Question 1. In Thesi and in general 'T is true Pleaders for Regal power do acknowledge that there may indeed fall out some cases wherein such designments may be warrantable As first Abbot de Anti-Ch cap. 7. n. 5. 6. in general when per patrias leges licere judicarunt Hîc verò politica res agitur Quid principi juris in subditos per leges cujusque reipublicae fundatrices permissum sit c. When they might judge that it was lawful by the Laws of their Country Now here the Question is civil and political namely What power is given to the Prince over his subjects by the fundamental Laws of each Common-wealth c. saith the Bishop of Salisbury Here Law is made the bottom in general but that Law must be produced that may be known In particular two or three cases are alleadg'd wherein onely it is found allowable Non alias igitur populo in eum potestas est Gull Barcla contr Monarchom lib. 3. prope sin quà m si id committat propter quod ipso jure Rex esse desinat Tunc enim quia se ipse principatu exuit atque in privatis constituit liber hoc modo populus superior efficitur reverso ad illum scilicet jure illo quod ante regem inauguratum in interregno habuit duo tantum commissa invenio duos inquam casus Horum unus est si regnum Rempublicam evertere conetur hoc est Aurel. Victor de Caesarib Sueton. cap. 49. cap. 30. si id ei propositum eaque intentio fuerit ut regnum disperdat quemadmodum de Nerone fertur de Caligula Talia cum Rex aliquis meditatur molitur serio omnem regnandi curam animum illico abjicit ac proinde imperium in subditos amittit ut * l. 1. ult D. pro. derelict dominus servi pro derelicto habiti dominium Alter casus est si Rex in alicujus clientelam se contulerit ac regnum quòd liberum à majoribus populo traditum accepit alienae ditioni mancipaverit c. And instanceth in Baliol King of Scots that subjected his Crown and Kingdom to Edward the first of England then
they were the judgment of the Kingdom He replyed Shew me such a body of people in the Nation as the Army is that have not forfeited their liberties and so implying that they might assume unto themselves the judgment of the Kingdom though in that case the Kingdom it self could not judge as was shewed above out of Mr. St. Johns speech because the Royal Person is exempt from vindicative justice So here in this speech all Government being as he said dissolved the Army were a considerable part of the Nation Nay by what follows that there was left nothing to keep things in order but the sword he might have said as before That they were the onely judgment of the Nation But this by the way though not out of it Again in the former speech The Judges saith he thinking pag. 21. that there was a dissolution of the Government did declare one to another Note The Judges that they could not administer justice to the satisfaction of their consciences untill they had received Commissions from me pag. 33. The Parliam And as touching the Parliament and the Militia the great Helena of our Trojan War The Militia whether to be in Parliament whether it should remain in the King or the Parliament have power of it he saith Whether the Parliament have not liberty to alter the form of Government to Aristocracy to Democracy to Anarchy to any thing if this THE MILITIA be fully in them Note yea unto all CONFVSION and that without remedy Lastly The Kings Negative voice pag. 34. as touching the Supreme Magistrate whose Person then he had usurped he saith I shall be willing to be bound more then I am in any thing that I may be CONVINCED of may be for the good of the people which point was like the Armour of Hector betwixt Ajax and Vlysses at the beginning of the War Corollaries from the former speech Now from these expressions we may observe 1. That the ends of the War Religion and Law were not attained but perverted 2. That the government of the Nation was dissolved in their judgment and not setled 3. Note That we were under an absolute arbitrary power 4. That in his judgment the Parliament ought not to have the Militia in them 5. And lastly That the Supreme Magistrate must be convinced in his own judgment before he yield to alter what by right he is possessed of in reference unto all which the War was undertaken But to close this point 4. Testimony of the Parl. grounds of the war declar Aug. 3. 1642. of the grounds of the war and to leave it with some further authentick demonstration and evidence The two Houses of Parliament in their Declaration setting forth the grounds of their takiâ—g up Arms published August 3. 1642. do represent onely three sorts of them viz. 1. either some former miscarriages of the Kings Government or 2. some preparations on his part to War with the incidents thereunto or lastly his refusal to grant their petitions especially that of July 16. 1642. containing their desire of the Militia the leaving Delinquents to their tryal the Kings return and concurrence with the Houses Together with the result of all these the danger to the Kingdom in Laws Liberty and Religion Now for the first of these the King had not onely acknowledged some of them as the dissolution of the Parliament before of the unhappy dissolution of the last Former errors in Government saith the King by the uninformation and advice of some persons looked upon now under another character Where they should remember that some miscarriages in government is incident unto all Princes yea all Governors whereof Dioclesian maketh a very serious complaint Vopiscus in vitâ Aurelian cit à Bucholc Chronol ad Anx. d. 304. Nihil est inquit difficilius quà m benè imperare Nam quatuor vel quinque viri se colligunt atque unum consilium c piunt ad Imperatorem decipiendum dicunt quod probandum sit Imperator qui domi clausus est vera non novit Cogitur hoc tantum scire quod illi loquuntur Facit judices quos fieri non oportebat amovet à Republicâ quos retinere debebat Quid multa Bonus cautus optimus venditur imperator There is nothing more difficult saith he than to rule well Four or five men associate themselves and take counsel together to delude the King they advise what is to be done A Note for Princes The Prince who is shut up at home knows nothing of the certainty of things but is constrained to know onely that which they acquaint him with He makes hereupon those Judges whom he ought not and removes those from government that he should not To be short a good provident and excellent Prince is bought and sold Thus he And the Parliament themselves were not a little abused by their informers Again the King acknowledges his failing in coming in person to the house of Commons to seize the five Members Kings answer to the Declation of May 19. 1642. p. 10. Edit Cambr. and saith As if by that single casual mistake of ours in form onely we had forfeited all duty credit and allegiance from our people We must without endeavouring to excuse that which in truth was an error our going to the House of Commons But besides these acknowledgments the King made real both amends and security for the future not onely by solemn promise but by passing such Acts of Parliament that did not onely remove the former grievances but also secure the subject for the time to come as we saw above both by the acknowledgment of the Commons in the Remonstrance of the state of the Kingdom among other things these The Monopolies are all supprest That which is more beneficial than all this is pag. 22 23 24. that the root of those evils is taken away which was the arbitrary power pretended to be in his Majesty of taxing the subject or charging their estates without consent in Parliament which is now declared to be against Law by the judgment of both Houses and likewise by an Act of Parliament now the Kings consent was there The evil Counsellors so quelled the Star-chamber the High-commission the Coâ—rts of the President and Council in the North are all taken away The immoderate power of the Council-Table is ordered and restrained we may well hope that no such things will appear in future times but onely stories Note to give us and our posterity more occasion to praise God for his Majesties goodness and the faithful endeavours of this Parliament The Canons and power of Canon-making are blasted by the vote of both Houses the exorbitant power of Bishops and their Courts are much abated the Authors or many Innovations in Doctrine and Ceremonies terrified the Forrests are by a good Law reduced to their right bounds the oppressions of the Stannary Courts the extortions of
jurisdiction belonging to Soveraign Princes is expresly forbidden Ministers to meddle with further then they are presidented in the Homily of Obedience and in the rest of the Homilies and Articles of Religion And besides that the declaring of Law in general is proper to the Judges for to you saith our * Kings Speech at the Dissolution of the Parl. after his assents unto the Petition of Rights late Soveraign speaking to the Judges in Parliament only under me belongs the interpretation of Law But Thirdly should we grant that according to the punctilio's and formalities of Law they should not be established by that of the Land yet the Church hath its Law also that whatsoever is imposed by the Governors thereof for edification Note agreeable or not repugnant to the Scriptures especially if God and experience have set their seal thereunto as the premises have had and that custome and tract of time have given them prescription which the Apostle after all reasoning flies unto if such things should be excepted against by others 1 Cor. 11.16 yet doubtless very improperly by those 1 Cor. 9.1 2. whose seed of generation and milk of infancy and strong meat of riper age they have been in the Lord. Yea I add and who by their profession and subscripsion have been particularly obliged to them But oftentimes it cometh to pass that the watchmen themselves who were appointed for the Safeguarding of the Church Serm. before the Hâ— Com. Feb. 18. 1620. prove in this kind to be the smiters and wounders of her saith the Primate of Ireland And no marvel for veteres scrutans historias invenire non possum scidisse ecclesiam de domo Dei populos seduxisse praeter eos qui Sacerdotes à Deo positi fuerant prophetae id est speculatores Searching the antient Records Hier. in Hos 9.8 Tom. 6. I cannot find that any other have rent the Church and have seduced the people from the house of God but they who have been appointed Priests by God and Prophets thar is Watchmen saith St. Jerome I have done with the first Exception against the premises viz. their non-establishment in general Subsect 1. Articles not established COme we now to the particular proofs of their non-establishment with replies unto them And first 2. Partic. Except against the establishment of the premises the Doctrine or the Articles of Religion they are not say the Brethren established because neither doth the Act 13 Eliz. name them in particular nor so much as their number but only the title page nor is it known where the original is enrolled Answ Omitting what several others may have more pertinently answered in their replies to the Brethren none of which I have read my conceptions are First Necessity of Reform p. 1 2 That this reflects gross negligence upon the then Parliament if they laid that foundation weak upon which the whole fabrick of Religion in this Church was to be raised But Secondly Do the Brethren imagine that the Parliament intended to establish titulum sine re the title and leave the matter uncertain Surely not only that Parliament but all since The Princes also and Judges ever since have taken the Articles as now they are to be confirmed then K. Declarat bâ—fore the Articles 4 Car. 3.1 and to contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England who surely had good assurance that they did accord with the original Thirdly Again if all Acts of State be void whereof the originals are not extant although confirmed by Act of Parliament what the inference may be I leave to the Learned in the Laws to judge for my self I take it to be a suggestion of a very dangerous consequence This for the Articles Subsect II. Common-Prayer-Book NExt for the Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book That they say is not established First because it is not the same that was established by the Parliament 1 Eliz. 2. And secondly because if it were yet it is not established by Law because that of 1 Eliz. 2. it self doth not appear to be established neither because it is not agreeable to the Act nor annexed to it nor the original to be found 1. Com. Prayer Book of Q. Eliz. To begin with the Book of Queen Elizabeth and then to come to that now in use Touching the former the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. touching uniformity of Common-Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments enjoyneth the use of that Book with the allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used every Sunday in the year Except And the form of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences only added in the delivery of the Sacraments to the Communicants and none other or otherwise from the Common-Prayer Book confirmed by Parliament in the fifth and sixth years of Edw. 6. Now because the Book of Q. Elizabeth referreth to that and that the alterations mentioned in that of Q. Eliz. from that of Edw. 6. are not particularly named in the Act for conformity of Common-Prayer And because the original Book of Edw. 6. is lost and this of Q. Eliz. printed differs from that of Edw. 6. the Brethren infer that the Book of Q. Eliz. is not established or not evident that Answ 1 it is established by the Act. I might answer That these being niceties of Law and the alterations insisted on either in Q. Eliz. Book or in the present one from that Answ 2 not being many or much material And being generally Answ 3 received as established the matter being godly Answ 4 and presence of God in the comfort and edification of Answ 5 his people thereby evidently approving of it I might as I said answer viderint alii let men of skill in Law look to that point But seeing I take their objections from Law to be easily answerable go to let us try their strength The Parliament of the 1 Eliz. 2. Q. Eliz. Liturgy established did know that the former Book of 5 6 Edw. 6. was abolished by an Act 1 Mar. 2. and mention it in the Act. And that the Original was taken off the Parliament Roll and so lost They did not think it necessary notwithstanding this either to name particularly the alterations made or to annex the Book unto their Act. Now the Q. and Parl. did judge that they had done enough to establish the Book the Brethren affirm not Wherein if they were right in their matter yet not in their modesty But they are amiss there also For the Parl. knowing the Book of Edw. 6. to have been in all Churches and in every mans hand and themselves allowing not the original which was lost but the printed ones with the alterations they mention it was most easie for any man to find by comparing the Books printed by this Act with those of Edw. 6. which were the alterations the Parl. having named where they were and concerning what But because by this it appears according
House of Peers carried for them by far the major part of Lords Yet after five repulses contrary to all order and custom it was by tumultuary instigation obtruded again and by a few carried when most of the Peers were forced to absent themselves In like manner was the Bill against root and branch brought on by tumultuary clamours and schismatical terrors Bill against Episcopacy which could never pass till both Houses were sufficiently thinned and over-awed To which partiality while in all reason justice and religion my conscience forbids me by consenting to make up their Votes to Acts of Parliament I must now be urged with an Army and constrained either to hazard my own A cause of the War defence of Episcopacy and my Kingdoms ruine by my defence or prostrate my conscience to the blind obedience of those men whose zealous superstition thinks or pretends they cannot do God and the Church a greater service than utterly to destroy that Primitive Apostolical and antiently Vniversal government of the Church by Bishops And the King hath the like complaint * Kings declaration to all his loving subjects Aug. 12. 1642. p. 8. print Cambr. else-where So that we see what was the mind and affection the scope and intent of the King and the two Houses as then when that Act passed touching Episcopacy Whence it will follow that as they had no intention nor ever consented to the Bill for it to destroy the office so neither did the Commons think that it was so by that Act of taking away their votes or by recalling of the former clause of 1 Eliz. 1. touching Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for then they would not have prepared another Act for it which never passed the Houses whilst full nor the Kings assent afterward and so is no Law It remaineth therefore that the intention of the Parliament in the repealing of that clause was onely in reference unto the High-commission Court or other excentrical from the legal jurisdiction of Bishops and raised onely by the Kings prerogative yet of use whilst established but removed not for its unprofitableness as to prevent some greater inconvenience It was their jurisdiction in those cases and upon such special commission from the King that there ceased not their ordinary legal and per se Episcopal power of government in this Church * By Act of this present Parliament for restoring Episcopal jurisdiction As hath been of late more authentically evidenced Answ 4 even before this was printed As for the Ordinance that especially at that time as it could at no time cannot countervene a setled Law Neither have the Houses power to declare any thing against Law as we heard above Lord Cant. speech ubi suprà For close therefore I repeat that suit of his and do humbly in the Churches name desire of his Majesty that it may be resolved not onely by all the Reverend Judges of England A supplication to his Majesty and the two Houses of Parliament but by his Majejesty and both Houses of Parliament and then published by them that the Doctrine and Articles of Religion the Liturgy and Worship the Discipline and Government are not against or besides the Laws of this Realm That so the Church-Governors may go on cheerfully in their duty and the peoples minds be quieted by this assurance that neither the Laws nor their Liberties are infringed as Subjects thereby SECT VII Of the Obligation of the League and Covenant AGain it is objected that there is an engagement for the Reformation of the Doctrine Worship Assemblies Discipline and Government in the solemn League and Covenant therefore they are not to be adhered unto Subsect 1. That the Covenant obligeth not OMitting the elaborate and excellent pains of the University of Oxford in this argument Reasons of the University of Oxford concerning the Covenant 1647. Duplies of the professors of Aberdeen to the Brethr. concerning the Covenant 1638. Dr. Lesly Bish of Down in his Visitation speech Lond. 1638. 1. Argument Because it is opposite to after other Oaths c. Gal. 3.14 18. as also that of the Professors of Aberdeen in Scotland And of the Bishop of Down in Ireland the testimony of the three Kingdoms against it I shall propound only four Arguments to evince first the nullity of its obligation and then from thence collect what it binds yet unto The Arguments touching the former are First from the nature and order of this Oath The second from the power imposing of it The third from the matter of the oath it self The last from the scope and end of its framing and imposing First from the nature and order of this Oath When there are two oaths touching the same things and they contradictory one to another if the former be lawful and obliging the latter cannot be so too but void and null ipso facto Hence it is that our Apostle proveth the invalidity of the Ceremonial Law and Covenant being different from and in some sort opposite to the Covenant of Grace because it was made four hundred years after and so could not make the other void So this Oath and Covenant whereof we now speak being contradictory as shall be seen and is evident of it self to former lawful Oaths and Engagements confirmed by the Laws of the Kingdome as the Oath of Allegiance Supremacy Canonical Obedience Subscriptions to the three Articles and Protestations cannot make those former of none effect and is therefore void being taken as it was unlawful to take it unless the Obligation of the former Oaths and Engagements had been by the same or superiour power relaxed As was done by Hermannus Archbishop of Cullen to his subjects Sleid. Com. l. 18 Ad Ann. 1547. when he was no longer able to protect them Which was not our case Our former Oaths and Engagements were agreeable to Law and Equity both in their matter and authority injoyning them This contradictory to them and by an inferiour power yea by such a power as had not authority to do it which brings me to the second Argument 2. Arg. Because it was in posed by unsufficient power in opposition to the lawful authority namely taken from the power or rather the impotency of the imposers as to this act It is proved above that in the Government the King is Supreme by the Laws But if he were but equal yet in a coordinate power if when one desires to do his duty and is well able thereunto the other shall exclude him and act in opposition not only to him but also to the Laws established by all and impose upon the Subjects who are not obliged but as it proceeds from all to submit and to accept of such impositions if voluntarily is a threefold iniquity and injustice First Unto the person excluded against his will and right Secondly Against the liberty of the Subject who is not liable to injunctions proceeding from some but all Thirdly Against the priviledge
their general exception The next is against the Ceremonies of this Church and of the Common-prayer Book in particular Of the Ceremonies in partic Against which they except these things First that they are not established by Law Secondly that they are superstitious Thirdly that they are scandalous Fourthly that they have been occasions of persecution Fifthly they are burdensom for their number And lastly even by the consequence of the Article 34. of the 2. Homilie of the time and place of Prayer by the very Preface of the Common-prayer Book it self and also the practice of the Bishops they ought to be removed Touching the first that they are not established they endeavour to prove first generally in that the Common-prayer Book is not established secondly particularly because of the Book of 2. and 5 6 Ed. 6. and the Act of Uniformity of Common-prayer Touching the first that they are not established In the Answ to the sixth gen Except because the Common-prayer Book is not established hath been answered above Touching the particular proof here the Brethren do prevaricate not unpalpably and very undutifully traduce Qu. Eliz. and the Parliament that established the Book of Common Prayer P. 34. For first they say that However the Rubrick before the Book of Common-prayer printed in 1 Eliz. directeth to use such Ornaments as were in use in 2 Edw. 6. Ornaments of service yet that is no part of the Book of Common-prayer which the Parliament of 1 Eliz. established because the Book of 5. 6 Edw. 6. hath no such Rubrick or direction and that Act of 1 Eliz. for Uniformity of Common-prayer injoyns all things to be done according to the Book of 5 6 Edw. 6. and none other nor otherwise therefore nothing according to the Book of 2 Edw. 6. which yet * P. 39. afterward they say is good Law So that they make that Parliament very weak and inconsiderate men Answ and indeed meer C. Combs if that word might be used in reference to so awfull an Assembly that what they appointed in the very entrance of the Book by Rubr. they would establish they did by the Act immediately overthrow They appoint such Ornaments in the Book unto the Minister in Divine Service as was in use by Act of Parliament in the second year of Ed. 6. And in the Act they conform the Prayer-book unto that of 5 6. Ed. 6. and none other or otherwise As if the former were not an Exception and a Provâ—so also in the Act it self Act for Uniformity prope sinem Provided alwayes sayes the Act and be it enacted that such Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof shall be received and be in use as were in the Church of England by the Authority of Parliament in the second year of the Reign of King Edw. 6. untill other order shall be therein taken note by the Authority of the Queens Majesty Note with the advice of her Commissioners appointed and authorised under the Great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical or of the Metropolitane of this Realm Which latter clause of the Act yields a farther Answer to the Breth viz. that if those Ornaments were not otherwise established either by the Act or by the Liturgie yet by this Act Other Ceremonies if they be established by the Queen and her Commissioners and so by the following Princes Q. hath power to ordain Ceremon Rites and Orders Ecclesiastical it is sufficient The like may be said for Ceremonies Rites and Orders appointed by the Book That Act immediately after the former words subjoyning And also that if there shall happen any contempt or irreverence to be used in the Ceremonies or Rites of the Church by the misusing of the Orders appointed in this Book the Queens Majesty may by the like advice of the said Commissioners or Metropolitane ordain and publish such further Ceremonies or Rites as may be most for the advancement of Gods glory the edifying of his Church and the due reverence of Christs holy Mysteries and Sacraments So that here is establishment enough Next they would prove that the Ceremonies in the Common-prayer Book for of those they are speaking are not established by Law Pag. 38. because the Common-prayer Book of 2 Edw. 6. is in some things referred to And particularly as to Ornaments and Rites both by the Rubrick before Common-prayer in the present Liturgy and by the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. So that as to this point vâ—z of Ornaments and Rites which they named and as to Ceremonies for of those they are speaking and instance in them presently so much of that Book is still in force by Law But that Book hath expresly given a liberty in some of the things here desired to be no further imposed where in the last page thereof called Certain Notes for the more plain Explication and decent Ministration of things contained therein it saith As touching kneeling crossing holding up of hands knocking upon the breast and other gestures they may be used or left as every mans devotion serveth without blame This say the Brethren is still good Law c. wherein they do as well falsifie as prevaricate for neither the Rubrick before the Common-prayer nor the Act for Uniformity do name Ornaments and Rites as the Brethren recite the words but Ornaments only Now the word Rites comprehends the Ceremonies also which are not referred to in this Act but bounded in the Book it self and further liberty given to the Queen about them as we saw above out of the Act. Again they prevaricate for they know it was far from the meaning of that Rubrick they quote in 2 Ed. 6. when it names kneeling crossing and other gestures as things indifferent to be done or left according to every mans devotion Far it was from them to intend the Crosse in Baptism or the kneeling at the Communion or other gesturâ—s establisht in that very Book and by Act of Parliament and the latter whereof they explain by Rubrick in the Book of 5 6. Edw. 6. But the Brethren know they meant these words of such other Crossings and Kneelings and gestures which were many in those times not appointed by the Book So much for the â—stablishment The next is they are superstitious Superstitious Thirdly scandalous Both which have been replyed to above to which I referre for brevities sake only because this Tract is growen farre beyond what I intended The fourth is they have been occasions of persecution to manâ— able and godly peaceable Miniâ—teâ—s and sober Christians With reference to what hath been said above I add Pâ—â—â—â—â—ble Ministâ—â—s first Touching the Ministers that peacâ—â—ble they are not if like the Brethren Who first endâ—avour to enflame the people as well as Parliament and then to cast questions of difference between the King and Parliament â—ag â—â—â— â—â—â—r â— about Prerogative â— as they not obscurely do by quarrellâ—ng the validity of the
the Kingdom Dec. 15. 1642. was the fountain of all the following mischiefs The very first line is Your Majesties most humble and loyal subjects the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled Next the Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy do declare That the Kings Majesty is the onely Supream Governor of this Realm over all persons and in all causes 2. Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance 3 Eliz. cap. 1. Kings Answer to the Remonstrance of May 26. 1642. Remonstr of Lords and Commons Nov. 2. 1642. Ecclesiastical and Temporal and of all other his Dominions and Countries Yea and every Parliament-man before he can sit is bound by Law to swear them Now this is not answered in my judgment by a saying out of a Private * Fleta lib. 1. cap. 17. de justitiariis substituendis Lawyer that Rex habet in populo regendo superiores legem per quam factus est curiam suam videlicet Comites Barones And by that other that Rex est major singulis but minor universis For the former Author hath that sentence and words out of Bracton who hath several times also the quite contrary as shall appear Again It is against the tenor and current of Law and Lawyers and the known practise of the Nation Thirdly It may bear an other interpretation namely understanding the Law either of God who makes Kings Prov. 8. or of men made with the Kings consent whereunto he hath voluntarily obliged himself from which at first he might be free And by the superiority of his Court their legal jurisdiction conferred on them by his approbation for decision of ordinary controversies that may fall betwixt himself and his Subjects but not simply his superiors first because he calls it His Court now the owner is greater than the thing owned as such Again else the Earls and Barons were the superior power to the King Fourthly This refers not at all to the House of Commons whereof neither Fleta nor his Author Bracton in this sentence make any mention Again secondly the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance and the style the Parliament speak in of his Majesties loyal and humble subjects the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament Remonstr Nov. 2. 1642. are not answered by saying that this of supream head and governor over all persons Object in all causes is meant of singular persons rather than of Courts or of the collective Body of the whole Kingdom And that it is meant in Curia not in Camera in his Courts not in his private Capacity and properly onely in his high Court of Parliament wherein and wherewith his Majesty hath supream Power For first Answ 1 The Oathes speak comprehensively both of Persons and Causes over all and in all So again the style of humble and obedient subjects is spoken as from them as the two Houses of Parliament for so they say assembled in Parliament Now if Subjects then and there sure Soveraigns or associates in Soveraignty they cannot be the terms in the same respect are contradictory Thirdly If the King be acknowledged to be the fountain of justice as the Law and Lawyers say he is of which anon then both Laws and Courts flow from him and thence are called his Laws his Courts and so ordine naturae dignitatis both in nature and dignity must be before and above both His splendor is in his Courts but his Supremacy not onely there but in his person also from whence it was derived to his Courts For there must be a First in nature either the King or his Courts and if they be His Courts then he made them and therefore in esse naturae before them Neither doth it hence follow as is there inferred Object That then the King may over-rule all his Courts Ibid. even the Parliament it self and so the goodly frame of Government should soon be dissolved and Arbitrary power brought in Answ For the King having both consented and sworn to the Laws and to the maintaining the jurisdiction of his Courts acting according to those Laws is not now in that respect sui juris and arbitrary in Government but obliged both to God and man to act by Laws and to preserve his Courts unviolate But if any Court shall assume a greater power than the King and Law hath given them or act in opposition to that power from whom they had their being whilst he doth not openly reject all Laws and Government much less when he doth rationally together with as many or more both of Lords and Commons though excluded the formality of being in such a place judge that he acts according to Law in the main of his proceedings In such case and in such actings they are not such a Court nor are not authorised with power from above but act excentrically and as private persons unto whom the Declaration grants the King to be superior As the Army having received Commission from the two Houses of Parliament afterward turned their Arms against them which they could not do by their Commission as also a great fautor of their proceedings since then spake in my hearing God thereby perhaps representing to the Houses by the Army their own failings toward their Superior And the Armies reasoning was on the like principles viz. That they were entrusted with power for the Kingdoms preservation and that the Parliament degenerating they must not see the Kingdom perish Object 3 Neither may it be received that if the Parliament may take account of what is done by his Majesty in his inferiour Courts Ibid. much more of what is done by him without the authority of any Court For to speak properly the Parliament takes account not of the Kings actions or authority in his Courts but of his Officers and of their administration of that authority and this also by the Kings consent established by Law whereby they are enabled so to do Or to speak yet more properly The Parliament that is the King Lords and Commons for the Parliament is not without the King as being the Head of it but without and in opposition unto him and the Laws they do not take such cognizance Again for that saying That they might much more take account of the Kings actions that are done without the authority of any Court meaning the great administration of Justice and the raising of Arms Seeing no Court is superior to its Author the King therefore no Court can give authority to him but he to them nor can they call him to account for then they were his superiors and had the Regal Power and himself should be no King as is expresly affirm'd in Mr. St. John's speech against Ship-mony of which afterward Humbly represent to him they may his miscarriages and punish his Ministers so it may be done without sedition and assuming the Sword which is inseparable from the Supreme Power Lastly How can this be assented unto that because when the Title is dubious Ibid. pag. ult he is
due by nature to him being uttered as Law and in Parliament and cited by those that in the late contest appeared against him are authentick And the the things being so as they came farther into my knowledge and consideration the same sense of the Laws and my allegiance as that before of Religion did concuss and shake me from the one and setle me on the other side And this to the first Motive 2. The Integrity of the persons and their ability To the second the integrity and ability of many of the persons inviting to this contest might be very great yet all of them were not for it as shall be seen anon Besides Answ it is the doctrine of our Church that a Council may Artic. 21. Paphnut Socrates H. lib. 1. cap. 8. 3. Authority of the two Houses and have erred even in things pertaining to God And in the first and great Council of the Primitive Church in a very material point they all erred but one and suffered themselves by him to be corrected To the third the Authority of the two Houses I did not then so throughly consider though I had some doubts as was noted above that they were the Child the King Answ 1 the Parent that they were the Spouse the King the Husband 1. Their Relation that they were the Body the King the Head as we heard above out of Mr. Pym. Now these relations doubtless could not regularly act without much less in opposition to the chief relatum unless in cases of infancy alienation of mind voluntary absence abdication of the Government 2. Their Style and such like of which more anon Besides we heard even now themselves in Parliament style themselves His Majesties most humble and loyal subjects the Lords and Commons in Parliament in that Declaration wherein they did not onely pare the nails but even also pierce the quick 3. Their Title and Power whereon founded and in what consisting Moreover what power and authority they have it must be by Law Power publick and authoritative I suppose consists especially in three points first in making Laws secondly in declaring Law lastly in executing Law Touching the first Although the King being the fountain of Law it must primarily flow from him though into his Courts yet it is condescended unto and a share is granted them in making Laws and protecting Liberties Kings answer to the 19 propâ—sit 1642. pag. 12. what that is his late Majesty you will say hath fully opened In this Kingdom saith he the Laws are joyntly made by a King by a House of Peers and by a House of Commons chosen by the People all having free votes and particular privileges The Government according to those Laws is trusted to the King 1 power of Treaties of war and peace 1. Kings prerogative 2 of making Peers 3 of choosing Officers and Counsellors for State 4 Judges for Law 5 Commanders for Forts and Castles 6 giving Commissions for raising men to make war abroad or to prevent or provide against invasions or insurrections at home 7 benefit of confiscations 8 power of pardoning and some more of the like kind are placed in the King 2. House of Commons Next for the House of Commons he saith Again That the Prince may not make use of this high and perpetual power to the hurt of those for whose good he hath it and make use of the name of publick necessity for the gain of his private favourites and followers to the detriment of his people The House of Commons an excellent conserver of liberty but never intended for any share in government for they do not administer an Oath or the choosing of them that should govern is solely intrusted with the first Propositions concerning the levies of monies which is the sinews as well of peace as of war and the impeachment of those who for their own ends though countenanced by any surreptitiously gotten command of the King have violated that Law which he is bound when he knows it to protect and to the protection of which they were bound to advise him at least not to serve him in the contrary This for the Commons Next for the House of Lords he proceedeth And the Lords 3. House of Lords being trusted with a judicatory power are an excellent skreen and bank between the Prince and People to assist each against any encroachment of the other and by just judgment to preserve that Law which ought to be the rule of every one of the three Whence he adds Since therefore the power legally placed in both Houses is more than sufficient to prevent and restrain the power of tyranny c. Thus far the King A share then they have in their several degrees in the Legislative power though neither supreme nor co-ordinate but subalternate and by descent from the high unto the lower 2. Declaring Law In his speech after his assent to the Petition of Right Kings Answer to the Remonstrance of the 19 of May 1642. pag. 21. Touching the next the power of declaring Law though the King do avow That the power of declaring Law be not in either or both Houses of Parliament without his consent and that the Judges are the interpreters of Law under himself Yet he saith We deny not but that they the Lords and Commons in Parliament may have a power to declare in a particular doubtful case regularly brought before them what Law is but to make a general declaration whereby the known rule of the Law may be crossed or altered they have no power nor can exercise any without bringing the life and liberty of the subject to a lawless and arbitrary subjection Lastly as to the execution of Law or judging by it This is not in any other 3. Execution of Laws but either in the House of Peers in Parliament with the Kings consent who must sign all their capital sentences or in the Judges and other Officers by Commission from the King in whose name they all proceed So then the power of government original and final and of execution of the Laws is in the King so far as is made known by the constant practice of the Nation A power therefore of resistance publickly and by Arms how should they have in opposition to the King who have no power of judging or execution of the Law but by authority from him and his consent formally expressed 4. Their silence in point of particular Law Lastly There was though spoken of and they urged to produce it never any Law shewn nor the Charter or Custom or Act named that did either formally or virtually imply a power of Government and much less of Arms without and in opposition to the King which might settle and satisfie the conscience The Barons Wars For some presidents in tumultuous times of some great men will not be a fit example for a Parliament And some very few sentences of one or two Lawyers
adds Ejurationem spontalem excipio de qua nulla inter mortales dubitatio which I need not English Bilson of Subj Rebel part 3. edit Lond. 1586. pag. 276 280. because for substance the same is delivered before him by our own Bishop of Winchester I must confess saith he that except the Laws of those Realms do permit the people to stand on their right if the Prince would offer that wrong I dare not allow their arms Cases may fall out even in Christian Kingdoms where the people may plead their right against the Prince and not be charged with rebellion Phil. As when for example Theop. If the Prince should go about to subject his Kingdom to a forreign Realm or change the form of the Common-wealth from Empery to Tyranny or neglect the Laws established by common consent of Prince and People to execute his own pleasure In these and other cases which might be named if the Nobles and Commons joyn together to defend their antient and accustomed Liberty Regiment and Laws they may not well be counted Rebels I never denyed that the people might preserve the foundation But part 3. pag. 144. he saith It is the Popes Divinity that Princes have their power from the people which he saith they have from God freedom and form of their Common-wealth which they fore-prised when they first consented to have a King I never said That Kingdoms and Common-wealths might not proportion their States as they thought best by their publick Laws which afterward the Princes themselves may not violate In Kingdoms where Princes bear rule by the sword Princes will we do not mean the Princes private will against his Laws but his Precept derived from his Laws and agreeing with his Laws which though it be wicked yet may not be resisted of any subject with armed violence Mary when Princes offer their subjects not justice but force and despise all Laws to practise their lusts Not every nor any private man may take the sword to redress the Prince But if the LAWS of the land appoint the nobles as next to the King to assert him in doing right and with-hold him from doing wrong Note If the Laws appoint THEN be they licensed by mans LAW and so not prohibited by Gods to interpose themselves for safeguard of equity and innocency and by all lawful and needful means to procure the Prince to be reformed but in no case deprived Note Not disinherit where the Scepter is inherited But he explains himself further in the very next page viz. That he meant still according unto Law The rest of the Nobles saith he that did assist them the King of Navarre and the Prince of Conde against the King of France if it were the Kings act that did oppress them and not the Guises Note except the LAWS of the land do permit them means to save the State from open tyranny I wiâ—l not excuse And * part 3. pag. 144. elsewhere I will not saith he examine the Popes Divinity Zachary in his answer to the German Legates Aventin lib. p. 299. wherein he saith the people create their King and the people may when the cause so requireth forsake their King 't is you see the Popes Doctrine I will not saith he examine the Popes Divinity in that he saith Princes have their powers of the people which the Scripture saith they have of God And before part 2. p. m. 328. This is the Supremacy which we attribute to Princes that all men within their territories should obey their Laws or abide their pleasure and that no man on earth hath authority to take their Swords from them by Judicial sentence or Martial violence Howsoever as I said ☜ those things before may be so in Thesi and the matter absolutely considered yet being excited by the fruits to view all the roots again I cannot satisfie my conscience that in Hypothesi and in particular hîc and nunc Note Mr. Pyms speech at the charge of the Earl of Strasford pag. m. 5. Protection and Alleg. 1. Parliament Testimony Remonstr of the state of the Kingdom Novemb. 15. 1641. pag. 26. 1. Bills pâ—ss'd by the King the case was such with us at the beginning of the war And if there had been any urgency to any of those cases yet Mr. Pym whom all men know was no passionate Royallist saith If you take away the protection of the King the vigour and cheerfulness of Allegiance will be taken away though the OBLIGATION remain Protection then and Allegiance are not such correlatives as that they do se mutuò ponere tollere as some would have But to return That the case was not so with us and that this may appear to have been no groundless conceit of my own I produce the two Houses of Lords and Commons We acknowledge say they with much thankfulness that his Majesty hath passed more good Bills to the advantage of the subjects than have been in MANY AGES This for the matter of concessions pag. 23. 2. Security to the Subject Next for the Security hear them again The discontinuance of Parliaments is prevented by a Bill for Trìiennial Parliaments and the abrupt dissolution of this Parliament by another Bill by which it is provided it shall not be dissolved or adjourn without the consent of both Houses Which two Laws well considered may be thought more advantagious than ALL the former because they SECURE a full operation of the present remedy and afford a PERPETVAL spring of remedies for the future Thus the Parliament Sir Benjamin Rudyard his testimony Now secondly That these considerations did then woâ—k strongly upon the hearts of some of their own Members against engaging in the War may be seen by a speech printed of Sr. Benjamin Rudyards In hâ—s Epâ—stâ—e Dedicatâ—ry to him of one of his Trâ—ctates among the rest of Mr. Rous's works to whose worth and piety Mr. Francis Rous a member also gives upon his own long and intimate knowledge a very high elogy He in that speech in the House of Commons July the 9. Anno 1642. page 2. saith Mr. Speaker I am touched I am pierced with an apprehension of the honor of the House and success of Parliament The best way to give a stop to these desperate immenent mischiefs Sir B njamin Rudyard his speech in Parliament is to make a fair way for the KING 's REâ—VRN hither it will likewise give best satisfaction to the people and will be our best justification And again page 3. Note If any man could have credibly told us 1 that within three years you shall have a Parliament 2 that Ship-mony shall be taken away by an Act of Parliament 1. Acts passed the reasons and grounds of it so rooted out as that neither it nor any thing like it can ever grow up again 3 That Monopolies 4 the High-commission Court 5 the Star-chamber 6 the Bishops Votes shall be taken
the Clerk of the Market the compulsion of subjects to receive Knighthood are by other beneficial Laws reformed Many excellent Laws and provisions are in preparation which they there enumerate Then a little before they say The discontinuance of Parliament is prevented by a Bill for a Triennial Parliament and the abrupt dissolution of this by another Bill Whence they truly collect and profess pag. 26. We acknowledge with much thankfulness that hâ—s Majesty hath passed more good Bills to the advantage of the subject than have been in MANY ages Thus they Now were not the former failings of Government sufficiently remedied and the fear of future is acknowledged here to be secured and prevented No ground then of the War for what was passed Come we to the second Kâ—ngs preparation for war The Kings preparations for War he saith they were first they the contrary if it be hard to determine perhaps it is not greatly material seeing they were very near one the other and that argued both jealousie I say a jealousie of intentions to destroy each the other and actings to prevent it Now take it at the worst that the King prepared first which yet doth not appear yet considering that he having granted all the former Acts acknowledged to amend the past and secure the future and they not satisfying but high demandings and declarations still and actings in his conscience no doubt he did as in reason he might apprehend intentions in some to destroy the Government as it hath since come to pass and the Laws of the Nation he might be induced thereunto by a consideration of his duty and doubtless was seeing no other way though often tryed would prevail The motions of the Houses and specially of the Commons did give occasion to him to think of securing the Liberties from such intrenchings 3. Not yielding the Militia c. Touching the last His not granting that Petition and giving way to the Militia and rendring up those who adhered to him and returning to London and concurring with the Houses and disbanding his forces and recalling his Commissions of Array and others Military The rendring of the Militia had been to depose himself of Soveraignty whose especial ensign and security is the power of the Sword His giving up those who adhered to him 1 Sam. 11. had in appearance been to send Uriah for his faithful service to his enemies To return to London was to object him to those temptations which he could not nor perhaps any Prince ought to hazard himself unto unless more effectual order had been taken to prevent both contumely and danger which is a truth howsoever flighted To concur with the Houses at this time had been to have given up at once both his safety and conscience The recalling his Commissions and disbanding his Forces unless both themselves had done so too and also had declared their repentance for their provocations of him had been to strip both himself and Kingdom of necessary defence against those whom he had cause to think would invade both as it proved afterward So that by high and extraordinary actings to provoke the King to like undertakings and then to raise Arms because he would not desert them without security is as if one should by assault provoke a man to draw his sword and then fight him because he will not put it up again and stand to mercy 4. No Law alleadged for the war in particular But a fundamental error it was in that declaration that held out the grounds of the war That no particular Law was alledg'd to enable them to that way of securing the Nation For granting all to be as was suggested yet onely id possumus quod jure possumus Rom. 3. We may not do evil as all actings above our sphere is that good may come of it This should have been the chief ground for conscience to rest upon Kings Proclamation from York Jun. 18. 1642. forbidding levying of Soldiers Whereas on the contrary the King alledges divers particular Laws for his bearing of the Sword as also examples of men that have upon necessity some real some pretended taken the Sword and though they have done service to the King and Common-wealth by it have been forc'd to obtain their pardon There is no need here to name particulars the constant practise in the Nation justifying the Kings sole bearing of the sword Now to come to an issue The issue of the Quest The King as much fears the ruine of the Laws and himself as the two Houses do the Liberties and themselves and their grounds we will suppose though not grant are equal The King is in possession and by Law entrusted with the Sword to protect both The two Houses produce none Then sure as this should have prevented resistance then so especially taking in what hath followed ought it to provoke repentance now And thus much in answer to the fourth Motive SECT III. Answer to the fifth Motive Examples I Come now to the last viz. The Examples in Scripture and in latter times together with the approbation of such Examples by our Princes and Bishops above alledg'd To all which I answer first in general Isa 10 That we must apply our selves first unto the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this rule there is no light in them to guide us by And that in Examples the greatest of all is the Captain of our Salvation Matth. 22. who ever did precept and practice to give unto Cesar the things that were Cesars yea Matth. 17. ult for peace-sake to give him that which was not his from some All other examples we must so follow 1 Cor. 11.1 as they follow him Matth. 26.52 now he forbad to resist for they that take the sword shall perish by the sword namely if such to whom the sword is not committed The Sword which must needs be the supreme Magistrate the sword being the Ensign of supreme power Rom. 13. Hence that of the Apostle The higher powers bear not the sword for nought they then are they who bear the sword This in general 2. David But in particular 1. David's retaining a few men to guard himself being design'd King from the violence of private men and from the sudden and passionate assaults of Saul's distemper and malice fleeing and not fighting such as was the Prophet Elisha his holding the Kings messenger at the door 2 Reg. 6.32 who saw the King coming to change his sentence 1 Sam. 14.45 Also the peoples rescuing of Jonathan not by any set contest or battel but by a friendly kind of violence And the Priests thrusting Vzziah being leprous 2 Chron. 26.20 out of the Temple but not resisting any of his Regal precepts or such forcible impressions All these and such like are ridiculous-parallels to the raising of an Army and managing of a War For though these examples shew that
Majesties last Message concerning the Militia p. 10. upon any pretence whatsoever without our consent saith he to raise any part of the Militia of this Kingdom Nor hath the like been ever commanded by either or both Houses since the first foundation of the Laws of this Land And though he produce * Proclamation of Jun. 18. 1642. Acts of Parliament for his power as 7 Edw. 1. and divers others together with the known practise of the Nation SECT VI. No means of Preservation SIxthly they object If no resistance be permitted to a State Senate or inferior Magistracy then is there no means left of preservation oftentimes which is against the Law of Nature when force is offered for that teaches and allows vim vi repellere to resist force by force But this rule is applicable to particular Answ 1 persons and so indeed admitted by these Authors and to private men self-preservation from violence is as much granted by the Law of nature to them of right as to a State Senate or Inferior Magistrates And what a gap is this to all disorder if the bellua multorum capitum should find this to be its strength 2. Again Id possumus quod jure possumus if God and Answ 2 the Laws deny us help Naz. Orat. 1. we have onely Nazianzen's way of victory left 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. I have one medicine against all maladies one way to obtain victory viz. to die for Christ Duâ—lies of the profess of Aberdeen to the Br. Answ dupl 2. n. 12. Matth. 26. which he spake when in the time of Julian's persecution the Christians were more in number and stronger of hand than the Heathens Our Saviour could have prayed for twelve Legions of Angels but he had no means to save himself from ruine Neither had the ten Tribes when Jeroboam and others oppressed them for the means of resistance which they used proved at all no remedy nor had the Kingdom of Juda 2 King 16. when mancipated and made subject by Ahaz unto the King of Assyria which it seems God owned for afterward when his Successor and the posterity of that generation rebelled under Hezekiah 2 King 18. they smarted for it and confess'd it though afterward upon a barbarous demand they had a just cause of defence against him All conveniences have their inconveniencies In a free Monarchy there is more safety but there is danger of some oppressions Matth. 19. If the case be so with the husband and wife Object it is not good to marry and better in a free state Resp First capiat qui capere potest those who are free may do so but we are obliged even by natural bâ—rth-right to this subjection 24 H. 8. c. 12. as the Act of Parliament saith and to the Laws of a free Monarchy But secondly Hom. Iâ— B. Arist Eth. l. 8. c. 12. Plat. de Regno Plutarch de unius in Rep. Domin Tom. 2. I say with Homer Aristotle Plato Plutarch and other Antients and Modern yea and with God himself who never govern'd his people any other way not by Aristocracy or a popular State but by some One either temporary as the Judges were or permanent who according to the Laws exercised sole government even Samuel himself that 't is both the greatest safety as well as the greatest Honor not onely to a Church but also to a Common-wealth Isa 49. that Kings should be its nursing fathers and Queens its nursing mothers Quod enim praestabilius est Plin. Panegyr Trajan dâ—ct à principio aut pulchrius munus deorum quà m castus sanctus diis simillimus princeps For what saith mine author can be a more profitable or honourable gift from heaven than a moderate religious and God-like Prince c. But of this else-where But to be sure Note after God did establish a setled government among his people it was that of a Monarchy and that a free one too as * Ut humana gubernatio divinae quà m simillima sit Ficin Arg. in Plat. de Regno 3. coming nearest to the image of his own government Lastly It is very rare if at all truly to be exemplified except perhaps in Caligula or Nero that a Prince will endeavour the ruine of the Common-wealth of the Government indeed he may but not of the Common-wealth for then over what shall he reign and whom shall he govern King John King John would have subjected the Kingdom to the Pope as Ahaz did his unto the King of Assyria but both of them thought they did it to preserve 2 King 16. not onely their own interest but also their Kingdoms which they conceived would be in peril to be ruined else This for their sixth mistake SECT VII This will tempt Princes to become Tyrants I Come now to the last viz. That if Kings do know their subjects are so principled as not to dare in conscience to resist no nor the State or Parliament it will open a wide gap to Tyranny and all oppression But first it is certain that God set up this Government Answ 1 as best among his own people to whom he gave no power of resistance and the Princes knew the people so to be principled surely the Loâ—d foresaw a greater mischief in any other government than this hazard Again The Answ 2 Roman Emperors did know that the Christians were principled not to resist both by the Scriptures Justin Mart. Apol. 2. Tertul. Apologetic and their profession and practise insomuch that Julian jeers them for it and says they must turn the other ear Yet Christ who gave this precept and the Apostles who also exemplified it did foresee what ill use might be made of it but not so bad as of the contrary viz. the permission of resistance Thirdly Some Princes that knew their absoluteness and professed it in reference to accomptableness Answ 3 unto their subjects yet have professed and generally practised the obligation of themselves unto the the Laws King James for example Law of Free Monarchies Edit Lond. 1616. pag. 200 201. Their obedience the subjects I say saith he ought to be to him their lawful King as to Gods Lieutenant in earth acknowledging him a Judge set by God over them having power to judge them but to be judged onely by God whom to onely he must give count of his judgment following and obeying his lawful commands eschewing and flying his fury in his unlawful without resistance but by sobs and tears to God c. But yet in the same work he saith Law of Free Monâ—rch Albeit I have at length proved that the King is above the Law as both the Author and giver of strength thereunto yet a good King will not onely delight to rule his subjects by the Law but even will conform himself in his own actions thereunto c. So this Prince And why should we think that the Author of such power putting
and for some of our selves likewise if whilst we had such principles we had been silenc'd and asleep also To the last vâ—z That conscientious men are 3. Conscientientious men troubled for their unconformity unto these things molested and troubled I answer And well they may both for their own good and others whom by their example or perswasion they might mislead For if God may justly plague his people for neglecting his good and wholsome Law Act for the uniformity of Common-prayer in these cases provided as the Queen and Parliament imply he will It is as good service done to men by penalties to compel them to their duty in theâ—e particulars as to scourge a child to keep him from the fire St. Austin being once of the mind that Schismaticks and Hereticks should not be punished on better advice acquaintance with the Scripture and by experience Epist 48. and 50. was brought to be of another mind and wrote two large and elaborate Epistles to defend the lawfulness of the use of Laws to that purpose SECT III. Humane Inventions THe third general Exception is against the things we treat of that they are inventions humane and from man onely Answ several of them First The light of natural understanding wit and reason is from God he it is which thereby doth illuminate every man entring into the world Rich. Hook Eccles pol. lib. 3. sect 9. If there proceed from us any thing afterward corrupt and naught the mother therof is our own darkness neither doth it proceed from any such cause whereof God is the Author He is the Author of all that we think or do by vertue of that light which himself hath given And therefore the Laws which the very Heathens did gather to direct their actions by so far forth as they proceeded from the light of nature God himself doth acknowledge to have proceeded even from himself and that he was the writer of them in the table of their hearts In the second place How much more then is he the Author of those Laws which have been made by his Saints c. saith that praise worthy Author When the Disciples would have had our Saviour to put the man to silence who cast out devils in his name Mar. 9.38 and followed him not with them our Saviour rebuking of them gives us this useful Maxim in religious matters viz. That he that is not against us is on our part Things not opposing of the Scripture and intended for and tending to the furtherance of Religion they are not humane notions but the inventions of men directed by Scripture in the general touching such things viz. 1 Cor. 14. That all things be done to decency and edification and guided by the Spirit of God in such particulars Observance whereof rather then opposition thereto would represent a Christs Disciple The Feast of Dedication of the Temple was no injunction from the Lord 1 Maccab. 4.59 Joh. 10.22 But so useful an invention of man that our Lord himself observed it Remarkable also to this purpose is the profession of the Learned Zanchy touching things of this nature viz. Zanch. Observ in confess suam cap. 25. Aph. 10 11. ab initio Credo ea quae â piis patribus in nomine domini Congregatis communi omnium consensu citra ullam sacrarum literarum contradictionem definita recepta fuerunt ea etium quanquam haud ejusdem cum sacris literis authoritatis A SPIRITV SANCTO ESSE Those things saith he which have been concluded and received by the holy Fathers gathered together in the name of God Canons of the Church of what authority agreed on by common consent and without any contradiction to the Scripture although they are not of the same authority with the holy Scriptures yet I believe even those things to be from the HOLY GHOST Thus he Joh. 14. cap. 15. cap. 16. And it is not in vain that Christ hath promised his Spirit to his people to guide them into all truth SECT IV. Of the Apocrypha TO the fourth that many things in the premises are but Apocryphal and so not Scriptural nor obliging Now Touching the Apocrypha and its injunction to be read in some parts in the Church although all the Scripture be not read First which Books in case my self did think as some others do safer and better to be left publickly unread R. Hook Eccles pol. l. 5. sect 20. nevertheless as in other things of like nature even so in this my private judgment I should be loth to oppose against the force of their reverend authority who rather considering the divine excellency of some things in all and of all things in certain of those Apocrypha which we publickly read have thought it better to let them stand as a list or marginal border unto the Old Testament And though with divine yet as humane compositions to grant at the least unto certain of them publick audience in the Church of God And if in them there happen any speech that soundeth towards error should the mixture of a little dross constrain the Church to deprive her self of so much gold rather than learn how by art and judgment to make separation To this effect very fitly from the counsel that St. Jerom giveth unto Laeta of taking heed how she read the Apocrypha as also by the help of other learned mens judgment we may take direction And let me add that without such directions Confer Hamp Court pag. 61. King James said well he would not have all the Canonical Scripture read But because some there are who seem better to relish forreign judgments than those of their own Church Expositio de sacr libr. dignitate praefix ante Biblia Tigurin sive Leon Judae I shall recite first Bullingers opinion of those Books and the publick reading of them one of the Professors of the Church of Tigur his words are Ego verò arbitror salvo aliorum judicio istos libros Apocryphos rectissimè Hagiographa dici posse nimirum a sanctis viris de rebus Scriptos sacris quos quanquam non fint in Canone Hebraeo Ecclesia tamen quia sancta tradunt Canonicis non contradicunt recipit ac in sanctorum coetibus legit I do think saith he saving other mens judgments that these Apocryphal Books may very justly be called holy writings as being written by holy men touching holy things which though they are not in the Hebrew Canon yet because they treat of religious matters and do not contradict the holy Scriptures the Church doth receive them and reads them in the Assemblies of the Saints Then he produceth the judgment and relation of Cyprian Cyprian expos symb or Russinus for the work is ascribed to both in his Exposition of the Creed to the same purpose Where it is by the way to be noted out of the Text of Cyprian or Ruffinus first that he reckons the Books
certain words there is offered up a real sacrifice expiatory for the sins of the living and the dead Non solum pro sidelium vivorum peccatis poenis satisfactionibus aliis necessitatibus sed pro defunctis in Christo nondum ad plenum purgatis ritè offertur And again Can. 1. Si quis dixerit in Missa non offerri Deo verum proprium sacrificum Anathema sit That is In the Mass is offered rightly not only for the sins punishments satisfactions and other necessities of the living but for the dead in Christ also And if any man shall say that in the Mass there is not a true and proper sacrifice let him be accursed Contrary to this idolatry blasphemy and superstition In the publick form of Administring the Sacrament in the Prayer Consecratory in our Liturgy whereby the Bread and Wine is set apart for that holy use Prayer before the distribution of the Sacrament The entrance is this Almighty God our Heavenly Father which of thy tender mercy didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ to suffer death upon the Cross for our Redemption who made THERE BY HIS ONE OBLATION OF HIMSELF ONCE FOR ALL a full perfect and sufficient sacrifice oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world and did institute and in his holy Gospel command us to continue a perpetual MEMORY of that his precious death until his coming again Transsubstantiation Artolatria Communion in one kind Concil Constant Sess 13. What should I speak of Transsubstantiation and of the worshipping of the Host whereas the Prayer-Book teacheth us to believe it is Bread and Wine still and to lift up our hearts to worship Christ in the Heavens The defrauding of the people of one half of the Sacrament the Cup licèt Christus post coenam instituerit suis discipulis administraverit sub utraque specie panis vini hoc venerabile sacramentum tamen hoc non obstante c. that is though Christ instituted this after Supper and administred it unto his Disciples under both kinds of Bread and Wine yet this notwithstanding They forbid the Priest to give it so under the penalty of Excommunication 7. Sacram. Corruption of Bapt. c. 5. Prayer for the dead Concil Trid. Sess 9. sub p. 4. Decret 1. The multiplying of the Sacraments the vitiating of Baptisme by superstitious ceremonies of exorcising with Cream Spittle c. All which foul Spirits are cast out by the Liturgy from our worship with multitude of others I shall but name one more that you may tell them on your fingers And that is prayer for the dead Whereas the Church of Rome it self doth teach that there is no use of Prayer for the damned because Purgatorium pro eis tantum esse qui cum venialibus culpis moriuntur Bell. de purgat lib. 2. cap. 1. ad fin A wise distinctâ—on rursum pro illis qui discedunt cum reatu poenae culpis jam remissis Purgatory is for those only that dye in smaller sins or in guilt of punishment the offence being pardoned Now our Church excludeth the use of Prayer for any deceased For those who dye excommunicate they have no solemn Burial And for others who dye in the Faith and Fellowship of the Church it prayeth not Form of Burial whilst the earth is cast upon the body but first professeth its Faith of their happy Resurrection Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God to take unto himself the soul of our dear Brother here departed we therefore commit his body to the ground in sure and certain hope of resurrection to eternal life c. Then professing against Purgatory it saith Almighty God The Thanksgiving before the last Collect at Burial with whom do live the spirits of them that depart hence in the Lord and in whom the souls of them that be elected after they be delivered from the burden of the flesh be in joy and felicity Lastly it giveth therefore thanks We give thee hearty thanks for that it hath pleased thee to deliver this our Brother out of the miseries of this sinful world c. Where by the way let it not offend that this form is applyed to all Why the same form is applyed to all that are buried For first it useth the word hope not knowledge Secondly it is applyed only to those who dye visible members of the Church and not excommunicated So that charity doth not interpose its private judgment where the Church hath not pronounced hers To conclude the Br. must consider that the Liturgy was directed on purpose to oppose Popery as was noted above His Majesty remembring with what doctrine the Church of England in her first and most happy reformation did drive out the one and keep out the other namely Popery and Separation saith his Grace of Cant. And thus much in answer to the fifth general Exception viz. Popery Superstition and the Mass-Book SECT VI. Of the Non-establishment of the premises by law COme we to the sixt viz. That the doctrine the worship the discipline and government are not established by law in this Church and Nation This I shall reply unto in reference unto them all in general first and then descend unto the severals 1. The Authors of the Book intituled Reasons shewing the necessity of Reformation c. And here before I come to the matter it self I must take leave to speak a word unto these objectors And it shall be in their own Language namely that they are like to give a sad account unto God or in a more Authentick one that they must look unto it for this their writing As they will answer before God for such evils and plagues wherewith Almighty God may justly punish his people for neglecting this good and wholesome Law Act for uniformity of Common-Prayer vîz the Act 1 Eliz. 1. establishing the form of Gods worship The obedience unto which and other tending to the setling of Religion among us hath been so much shaken by the form and appearance of truth and godliness which their Treatise hath without the power thereof seemed to have This to their persons 2. Their scope Next for their scope they express it not to be a reformation of the things they except at but a plain abolition of them Zâ—nch Epist ad Cardin. Letharing ib. 2. whereas our Lord Christ saith the Cardinal approved by a chief man of our own did not destroy the Temple but only purge it Christus non destruxit Templum sed repurgavit ita ecclesiae in quas irrepserunt aliquot errores abusus superstitiones non sunt convellendae sed repurgandae So the Churches saith he into which some errors abuses and superstitions are crept are not to be plucked up but purged But it seems ubi dolor ibi digitus the Kitchin of the chief supposed Author of that Treatise is like to be cooler for the late restitution having
But all this so as that no Article of the Confession no point of Doctrine no part of Worship is altered And yet the Brethren have raised such a hue and cry as if the later Bishops yea and Princes not excepting Queen Elizabeth had a design to corrupt the Articles to poison the Worship to impose unestablished things upon the conscience and liberty of the Subject and to punish men for disobedience thereunto As if all Religion were pessundated and Omnia in pejus ruere retro subâ—apsa referri All goes to ruine Thames to Tyber flows Th' Assembly to a Convocation grows As if as Pauls by the Brethrens fautors so the whole Church were like to be an Augaean Stable Well spake Tertullian of their fathers Prescript adv Heres non longè ab initio Scripturas obtendunt hac suâ audacia statim quosdam movent in ipso verò congressu firmos quidem fatigant infirmos capiunt medios cum scrupulo dimittunt They pretend Scripture saith he and by this their confidence they presently move some In disputation they trouble those that are strong they take the weak and send away the middle sort with doubting I conclude that notwithstanding the exceptions of the Brethren the Common-prayer-book as well as the Articles Act for uniformity of Com. prayer is established by Act of Parliament And that therefore If any manner of Parson Vicar or other whatsoever Minister shall preach declare or speak any thing in the derogation or depraving of the said faid Book or any thing therein contained or any part thereof and shall be thereof lawfully convicted shall forfeit c. I have done with the second Head of Objections viz. The establishing of the Liturgy and Worship Subsect 3. Discipline established Object I Come to that against the third the Discipline which they say is not established neither The discipline not establish'd They instance in the Episcopal Courts and Canons the first whereof is Jurisdiction Now the Bishops are of age Answ let them speak for themselves One of them Arch-bishop Whitgift against T. Cartwright Bishops Courts Lord Cant. speech at the censure of Dr. Bastwick c. in the Preface and the greatest in his time doth acknowledge That they exercise their jurisdiction in their Courts by vertue of the Laws and Commissions Royal onely The next in the same rank goes farther and upon occasion of such calumny makes it his suit unto the King and I do humbly in the Churches name desire your Majesty that it may be resolved by all the reverend Judges of England and then published by your Majesty that our keeping Courts and issuing Process in our own names and the like exceptions * Namely by T. Cartwright and others formerly taken and now renewed are not against the Laws of this Realm as 't is most certain they are not Thus far he What can indifferent men desire more then an appeal to all the legal Interpreters the Judges of that Law which they are said to violate and to the supreme Judge and spring-head thereof the King This for their Courts The Canons of the Church K. James As for the Canons Because the King-craft of that Prince which did confirm them as himself calls it is herein question'd as if he understood not what did touch his own prerogative and the Laws for he by his Authority under the Broad Seal confirmed those Canons I shall not take upon me the vindicatâ—on of so great a Person seeing he hath a Grandson and Successor our present Soveraign to do it for him at whose feet and the Laws I shall let that lie the rather because that point is like very shortly to be determined by publick authority So much for Discipline Subsect 4. Of Government Episcopal THe last is Government Episcopal namely and here 25 Edw. 3. Ann. 1350. Necessity of Reform p. 40. illis adhaeret aqua Themselves acknowledge and cite the Act saying That whereas the holy Church of England was FOVNDED in the estate of PRELACY within the said Realm of England by the said Grandfather Edw. 1. and his Progenitors and the Earls and other Nobles of his said Realm and their Ancestors to inform them and the people in the Law of God c. This then is granted to be according to the constitutions of this Nation Legal which is moreover known to all by this That all Acts of Parliament since that foundation have given the precedency of Baronship unto the Bishops the form usually being The Kings Majesty with the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal Object doth enact c. Nay but though Episcopacy was established by Law 17 Car. cap. 1. Office of Episcopacy ceased yet it is not so now For the Act of 17 Car. 1.11 repeating the clause of the Act of 1 Eliz. 1. which instals the Queen and her Successors with power of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction the onely ground of the Bishops authority and jurisdiction Reasons for necessity of Reform p. 51 52 53. and repealing that clause did besides the taking away their Votes in Parliament take also away their power authority and jurisdiction and so the very office it self of Episcopacy whereupon the Ordinance of Lords and Commons makes all their grants void since 17 Car. 1. because then their Office expired Answ 1 For answer first in general That it was neither in the purpose nor to speak as the thing is in the power with due observance be it uttered of either Parliament or Prince to take away the powers which are essential and unseparable from the Crown and Office of a King which we see of right to have belonged and with praise to have been executed not onely in the Scripture both by Jewish and Heathenish Princes as by Nebuchadnezzar by Cyrus Dan. 3.29 Ezr. 6. Jon. 2. by Darius by the King of Ninive c. as well as by David Jehosophat Hezekiah and Josiah but also in the primitive Church by Constantine and Answ 2 others after him Besides we may not conceive the Parliament intended to countervene an express Article of the Confession of this Church Artic. 37. of the Civil Magistrate which having named the Queens Majesty saith Unto whom the chief government of all estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all causes doth appertain That prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself And in particular that it was not the Answ 3 purpose of the King or the two Houses as then they were to take away the office and ordinary jurisdiction of Episcopacy appears evidently in that the King he asserts it to be a main cause of the war Ei kâ—â— Basilic Med. 9. and of his own calamity for that he would not consent thereunto How oft saith the King was the business of the Bishops injoying their antient places Bishops Votes in Parliam and undoubted privileges in the
of the other Ubi videbat cruentum facinus Idem ibid. cap. 1. ibi rursum timebat reatum perjurii Ne Deum offenderet peâ—erando Deum offendit saeviendo Where he saw a bloody villany there he feared the guilt of perjury and lest he should offend God by forswearing there he offended God by cruel murdering saith the same Author Subsect 2. What the Covenant obligeth to THus far hath been shewen that the Covenant in reference to the performance of the contents of it bindeth not Yet doth it bind and oblige very strongly For Ecce sanctus David non quidem juratus sanguinem hominis fudit sed eum falsum jurasse negare quis poterit de duobus peccatis elegit miâ—us sed minus fuit illud in conparatione majoris Nam per seipsum appensum magnum malum est falsa juratio Behold holy David Aug. ubi supra cap. 3. he would not shed a mans blood though he had sworn it But who can deny but that he was forsworn of two evils he chose the least It was indeed the least in comparison of the greater but else of it self false swearing is a great sin Saith the same St. Austin Now great sins do bind and oblige unto deep repentance As Paul in another case 2 Cor. x2 ult I must bewail saith he those that committed these lasciviousnesses and have not repented Job 42. We must as Job did after he had spoken words that he understood not to God even abhor our selves and repent in dust and ashes And with the blessed Apostle we must be humbled as oft as we reflect upon it and think the worse of of our selves as long as we live as he did for his sin though not committed in light as ours was 1 Cor. 15. I am not worthy saith he to be called an Apostle because I persecuted the Church of God So every one of us I am not worthy to be called a Christian a subject of the Kings or a son of the Church because I entred into this Covenant But yet with his comfort and some kind of recompence where he had cone the wrong viz. Yet by the grace of God I am what I am that is a penitent and a convert and as a token of it I laboured more abundantly then they all that had not so offended As 't is also prophesied in this cause some should do Eicon Basilic Medit. 27. Prov. 24.21 22. And let us for the future fear God and the King and not meddle with them that are given to change the government of Church and State for their destruction hath come suddenly and who foreknew the ruine of them both i. e. those that have both deserted God in his Church and the King in the State and Common-wealth Prov. 1.10 And if hereafter sinners in that kind entice thee consent thou not no though they should say Come we will have all one purse For they lay wait for their own blood as we have seen And let us not deceive our selves one horn of this dilemma will wound us Either the Covenant is to be literally kept or else repented of Remember palliations expositions and evasions here will do no good Prov. 28.13 Psal 32. Numb 32.23 For he that covereth this sin shall not prosper And whilst we hold our peace our bones will consume through Gods heavy hand upon us And our sin will find us out For there is no darkness nor shadow of death Job 34.22 where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves saith Elihu And thus far of the general exceptions against the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England viz. That they are unnecessary inconvenient humane inventions Apocryphal Popish not established by Law And an Engagement and Covenant for the removing or reforming of them CHAP. III. Grounds of Separation and Exceptions particular against the Matter of the Premises SECT I. Against the Articles or Doctrine 2. Exceptions particular against the matter of the premises Independents excepts not Apologet. narrat pag. 29. PRoceed we now unto the Exceptions particular namely against the matter of the Doctrine Worship Assemblies Discipline and Government And first of those against the Articles or Doctrine The Independent or dissenting Brethren acknowledge That in the review and examination of the Articles of our Church so are their words our judgments say they have still concurred with the greatest part of our Brethren neither do we know wherein we have dissented Some Presbyters now do But certain of the Presbyterian Brethren do dissent and object against them first doubtfulness secondly error thirdly tyranny in the act requiring subscription Necessity of Reform pag. 1. c. 1. Doubtfulness and fourthly defectiveness and imperfection First doubtfulness because in the book of Articles now printed and ever since 10 Carol. 1. there is a declaration of his late Majesty to the Articles to this effect 1. That those Articles contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods Word 2. That the Clergy upon just occasion may have liberty from the King Kings deelar before the Articles under the Broad Seal to deliberate on such things as make for the establishment of the same doctrine yet so that no varying in the least degree should be endured 3. That no man should put his own sense upon them but take the Articles in the literal and grammatical sense pag. 2. whence the Brethren infer that by this Declaration no Minister shall have liberty to interpret any one of these Articles And therefore they will remain doubtful But first Answ 1 this doubtfulness is not per se and in the Articles themselves but per accidens and in reference to this declaration Again though they are prohâ—bited to put any Answ 2 new sense as the King speaks or their own sense as the Judge in Smiths case Necessity of Reform p. 5. yet are they not forbidden to explain the literal and grammatical sense The Scripture in the fundamentals of salvation also the Laws and Acts of Parliament are so to be taken and yet Divines there and Judges here have ever been allowed to open those senses or else the one must not preach nor the other declare Law Thirdly when unto that liberty Answ 3 granted to the Clergy there is this restraint expresly put upon it viz. That from the Doctrine established the least varying shall not be endured and that nothing shall be concluded contrary to the Laws and Customs of the Land is there not a fair assurance that the present doctrine shall remain fixed and that if any heterodox sense shall be put upon them it shall be lawful to oppose the literal and grammatical sense whether in the Article or Explication Fourthly when the Declaration Answ 4 saith We will that all further curious search be laid aside and these disputes shut up in Gods promises as they be generally set forth unto us in the holy
Scripture This refers especially to the seventh Article touching Predestination c. whose words in the latter part they are Lastly Ministers are not prohibited absolutely from searching but from that which is curious Answ 5 and beyond sobriety This for the doubtfulness of the Articles The second exception is their erroneousness 2. Error for on this the Brethren insist though under the other covered head of doubtfulness First because it is said Not every deadly sin committed willingly after Baptism Artic. 16. is a sin against the holy Ghost they infer that the Church holds the distinction of venial and deadly sin which is Popish What if the Article speak in the then received language and according to such distinction not owning of it therefore in the sense held by the adversary but using it for the purpose they had in hand viz. that though all sins be deadly of themselves yet seeing some are greater than other grant the worst which they call deadly sin as we usually express a great evil by that word that it is a deadly one as a deadly grief a deadly mischief yet is not every such a sin against the holy Ghost especially when the Church hath in other places so plainly declared her self to the people as in the Homilies Catechism and Common-prayer-book in the last whereof it prescribeth confession of sins to be made twice every day by all the Congregation Now it is not to be thought that every one is guilty of deadly sin every day in the sense expressed so that the people are in no great danger by that expression And the Articles declaring Artic. 11. Artic. 22. that we are accounted righteous before God onely for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ And that there is none other satisfaction for sin but that offering of Christ alone and damning of all Purgatory Pardons worshipping of Images and Reliques and invocation of Saints do declare they count no sin in it self venial but by the blood of Christ Again Artic. 20. where because 't is said The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith Because the Kings declaration and the Act before that say That the Articles must be taken in the literal and grammatical sense they infer ' That if a Convocation declare any thing in the premises they must assent and subscribe in the literal sense or be deprived But I it is not forbidden either by that Act or the Kings Declaration to enquire the literal sense and so to examine them nor 2 are they required by that declaration to subscribe to what a Synod shall conclude in the literal and grammatical sense of such conclusions or Canons but onely to the literal and grammatical sense of the Articles This therefore is a captious inference upon the Declaration and the Act. And so much more are their exceptions against the 34 Article That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant unto the Word of God and be ordained by common authority c. But are there not three or four Cautions in it that should defend it from all calumny 1. That these Traditions and Rites must not be repugnant to the Word of God 2. That they be established by common Authority 3. That a man do transgress of his own private judgment And 4. willingly purposely Yea and 5. openly This exception taketh away the obedience to all church-Church-Laws yea to all Civill Laws they may as well except against subscribing if any such Act were to the sense of this Article applyed to the Laws of the Kingdom As suppose they should be enjoyned to subscribe That whosoever shall through his private judgment willingly and purposely openly break the Laws of the Land which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority and to take these words of the Act in the literal and grammatical sense without putting their own private or new sense upon it c. Would not such persons be thought unworthy to have any place in any Common-wealth that should refuse And why then in the Church surely they must be both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men without yoke and without use and that per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is pernitious unto all Societies and men of Belial 3. Artic. 35. Their third exception is against Artic. 35. wherein is required the subscribing to the Book of Homilies as a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times Against this they object that there are false doctrines or assertions in them First in general subscription to the Homilies is intended by the Church The Homilies how to be understood in Subscription not in so punctual and verbal a degree as is required unto the Articles as appears because the Articles are to be distinctly and severally read and the expressions in them every one assented to the Homilies not so but onely as they agree with the Articles which are the superior rule unto them Not therefore to every expression or sentence no nor doctrine nor assertion if any were contrary to the definitive doctrine of the Articles All men know that there is a greater latitude of expression allowed to popular Sermons as the Homilies are than to Articles And the Brethren would have their Sermons to contain necessary and wholesome doctrine yet perhaps will not be so hardy as to affirm that they may not have uttered some sentences not so true or congruous if exactly scanned or that nullnm unquam verbum emisit eorum quisque quod revocare vellet as he said above And lest there should any inconvenience arise to the people though now the danger is little the Homilies being so much if not too much laid aside the Common-prayer and reading of the Scripture publickly together with preaching according to the Articles are provided as a remedy Yea which is more if one Homily speak less warily in any material point it is corrected in another as in the Homily of Alms-deeds seeming in one passage or so to ascribe some kind of merit unto them though it doth not taking the word properly yet it explaineth it before-hand in another namely in the Homily of Salvation or Justification wherein that doctrine is excellently set forth as also in the Homily of Faith So when in the Homily of Alms Tobith is cited as Scripture not onely the Article doth regulate that expression but every ones Bible also Instructions to Preachers Artic. 1. Ann. 1622. Besides every exhortatory expression must not be called a doctrine or an assertion but that which as a point is purposely insisted on to be maintained of which sort I believe verily the Brethren will never be able to instance in any one out of the Homilies And indeed had they observed the instructions of King James above mentioned viz. That no preacher
likeness-sake So are these also called Scripture and holy Scripture yea and sometimes Canonical some of them De doctr Christ lib. 2. cap. 8. by St. Austin But so that aliter Hieronymus accipit vocabulum hoc Canonicus aliter eam vocem Augustinus Innocentius Patres Carthaginuenses interpretanter Otherwise doth Jerom take the word Canonical and otherwise Austin Innocent and the Fathers at the Councel of Carthage saith our Whitaker Contr. 1. Q. 1. c. 4. And so I say otherwise do the Articles of our Church take the word Canonical and otherwise sometimes the Prayer-book and the Homilies But of this more largely above In the answer to the fourth general Exception Secondly These are brought in here not as an interrupting of the reading any more than the singing of a Psalm which though not express Scripture might be sung betwixt the Lessons or reading an Exhortation or Prayer for they are brought in by way of Hymn onely and are sung also in some Churches But in particular they except first against Te Deum Te Deum We praise thee O God c. that it is a piece taken out of the Mass-book and in Popish Churches usually sung Thence brought in by Bishops into Protestant Churches but no where enjoyned or warranted by any Law in force That it shews the Bishops are not able to give thanks themselves for extraordinary mercies That it is a superstitious formal dress c. Answ To the antiquity of Te Deum beyond the Mass-book its reference unto St. Ambrose might be testimony But it s being used there or taken thence doth no more derogate from the matter of it than it doth from the Psalmes Epistles and Gospels or then it doth from the Doctrine of Free-mercy against Merits which is yet there and in the very office of the Mass as we saw above In answer to the fifth general exception It is recorded as a reputation to the old Romans that they disdained not nec ab hoste doceri To learn even of an enemy for we In what is good all friends and fellows be That the Bishops brought it in does not argue want of ability to give thanks themselves but their want of self-conceit and singularity They prudently and modestly choosing to receive and close with what is good and of general reception That they might declare their communion with all Christians in what they might and fulfilling the Apostles prayer Rom. 15. With one mind and one mouth glorifie God with the rest of his Church That it is no where enjoyned and warranted by any Law in force Not established is more than they have charged the Book hitherto with Answ having not nor indeed being not able to do it alledged any one thing added to the body of the Liturgy established by Law pag. 28. n. 6. but an Appendix as themselves reckon of three prayers one for the Queen or King another for the Bishops a third for Queen Anne and the Royal Progeny 2. Act uniform com pr. Besides it is also untrue for themselves acknowledge as it is in the Act for the Uniformity of Common-prayer that the Books of 5 6 Edw. 6. shall be established without alteration except one sentence in the Letany and the addition of two in the Lords Supper c. Now it is evident that TE DEUM is in King Edwards Books and in the Book of Queen Elizabeth established by Parliament as we now receive it with all the Kings Parliaments and Judges since and comprehended by Bucer in that Elogy of his before named viz. That all generally till the Communion was agreeable to Gods Word and the use of the primitive Church Which form of Communion then hath been since reformed in part as he directed So that Te Deum is as well established by Law as any other part of the Book This gross reeling of the Brethren doth not it argue now they were etcaetera To the last which touches the matter of it viz. That it is a superstitious formal dress Seeing this is a high charge not on it but on the Common-prayer-book also yea and on the Church of England it should have in particular been shewed by the Brethren wherein it is so for dolosus versatur in universalibus This is the fruit perhaps of their Law-studies they have learned the course of Chancery to charge heavy crimes and prove nothing But shall I open this mystery of iniquity to be suspected in the breasts of these Brethren they seem to be Socinians and enemies to the Godhead of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the Doctrine of the Trinity both which are there splendidly acknowledged and professed in the Hymn of Te Deum Mr. Cartwright as it seems before Dr Reynolds and the rest at Hampton-Court were ashamed to except against it though they spared not where they thought exception might with any modesty be taken But as I said here is not onely a profession of the doctrine of the Trinity and a kind of repetition of the common Creed by way of Hymn The special use of the hymn TE DEUM but a particular application of prayer unto our Lord Jesus Christ which is done in no other part of the Book so expresly except the Letany Communion This is the superstition it may be feared that the Brethren aim at for other there is none We may now understand them when they call it and other parts of the Book Popish superstitious and Antichristian namely in his sense who writing against the doctrine of the Trinity and the Godhead of the Lord Jesus entituled his book Antithesis doctrinae Christi Antichristi de uno vero Deo An opposition of the doctrine of Christ and of Antichrist concerning the one true God To which the learned Zanchy making answer shews that for strengthning our faith in the doctrine of the Godhead of Christ Zanch. epistol dedic ad Sturm ante Resp suam ad Arrianum Tom. 8. p. 6. Ad hanc fidem in cordibus nostris servandam fovendam augendam quà m necessaria est crebra ad Christum in coelo residentem pro nobis interpellantem mentis elevatio EJUSQUE ac patris invocatio à verâ porrò seriâ contemplatione personae Christi ab assiâ—ua beneficiorum ejus commemoratione denique ab ardenti nominis ejus invocatione quibus fovetur fidos nostra separari non potest studium perpetuum resipiscentiae c. sunt autem haec meditatio invocatio resipiscentia tria praecipua verae fidei effecta c. For the nourishing this our faith saith he in the Godhead of Christ namely in our hearts and for the encreasing and preserving of it Prayer to Christ necessary for the strengthning of faith in him how necessary is the often lifting up our minds to Christ sitting in heaven and interceding for us and as necessary is prayer to him and to the Father Now from the true and serious consideration of the
the sap and spirit of the body and Vine unto us First one recent Calvine namely who defining Baptism Instit l. 4. c. 15. § 1. saith Baptismus signum est initiationis quo in ecclesiae cooptamur societatem ut Christo insiti inter filios Dei censeamur Baptism is the sign of our entrance vvhereby vve are received into the society of the Church that being grafted into Christ we might be accounted among the children of God And elsevvhere Salutis symbolum ac pignus dedit Deus in Baptismo In Tit. 3.5 nos in suam Ecclesiam cooptans inferens in corpus filii sui Quare Baptismus congruenter verè savacrum regenerationis dicitur And that therefore Bapt. is properly and truly called the laver of Regeneration Thus he Now although he make the first particular benefit in Baptism to be remission of sins and afterward the grace of the holy Ghost Jnst l. 4. c. 15. §. 5. Yet seeing he makes our new birth to be effected in Baptism and that it is properly therefore truly called the Laver of Regeneration and that therein we are first ingraffed into Christs Body and made the children of God it follows thence that we receive remission of sins by spiritual regeneration Aug. contra Jnlion l. 2. c. 3. The other is Antient to wit Austin who doth in terminis express the same which the Church hath done in that Prayer Lex quippe ista peccati quae in membris est corporis mortis hujus remissa est regeneratione spiritali manet in carne mortali Remissa scilicet quia reatus solutus est in Sacramento quo renascuntur sideles For this law of sin saith he which is in the members of this body of death both is remitted by spiritual regeneration and also remains in the flesh that is mortal It is remitted because the guilt of it is discharged in the Sacrament whereby the faithfull are regenerated And afterward Cap. 8. Justificatio porro in hac vitâ nobis secundum tria ista confertur Priùs lavacro regenerationis quo remittuntur cuncta peccata deinde congressione cum vitiis à quorum reatis absoluti sumus tertio dum nostra exauditur oratio qua dicimus dimitte nobis debita nostrae Justification how conferr'd Our justification in this life saith he is conferred upon us by these three things First by the laver of Regeneration whereby are all our sins forgiven Next by our conflicting with sins he takes the word Justification here largely as comprehending the work of Grace also from the guilt of which we are absolved Thirdly When our Prayer is heard wherein we ask ' Forgive us our debts c. The Church therefore in that Prayer hath spoken both according unto truth and to Antiquity I dismiss that point Come we to the next which is their Exception against the Catechism touching the Sacraments Except 11 which was contrary say they to the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. added in King James time Page 30. Touching Additions hath been answered above But further that act did not prohibite the King from adding any thing for explanation which another Act as we saw gives power to do so it be not contrary to any thing in the Book established But this might perhaps be a caution to his present Majesty The Brethren caution the King lest his indulgence in remitting of that Law by his late Gracious Declaration be as well interpreted a violation of it for there is no act for that whereas for his Grandfathers explaining there was one Next in this Paragraph is an Exception against the Answer to the Question in the Catechism Except touching the Sacrament How many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in his Church Answ Two onely as generally necessary to salvation For it may say they without racking be interpreted as a tacite admission of more as Marriage holy Orders Answ c. The Apostle giving rules of speech unto Titus Tit. 2.8 warns him that it be sound and such as cannot be condemned by the contrary part This rule therefore was here observed by the Composers of this Answer For they knew that the word Sacrament in a large sense was applicable to many sacred things not onely instituted in Scripture but also in the practice of the Church Accordingly Austin in one of the places above cited saith Noveris diem natalem domini Januar. Epist 119 cap 1. non in Sacramento celebrari Agimus pascha ad Sacramenti significationem Thou must know that the day of Christs birth is not celebrated as a Sacrament But we celebrate Easter under a sacramental signification Where he takes the word Sacrament to signifie the mystical things wrought and pointed at in Christs resurrection Therefore to avoid contention with froward spirits the expression in the Catechism is so uttered that there is no occasion given and yet the Doctrine secured forasmuch as all Sacraments properly so called are generally necessary to salvation Their next Exception is That whereas in the same Catechism it is demanded why children are baptized when by reason of their tender age they cannot perform the Conditions required in Baptism viz. Repentance and Faith It is answered Yes they do perform them by their Sureties who promise and vow them both in their names which when they come to age themselves are bound to perform This the Brethren say is a meer tale Except 2 We must not be offended Jer. 13. if the Leopard cannot change his spots nor the Brethren their Black-more language They add for proof That it was never read nor heard of in Scripture that one man either repented or believed in the room and name of another whereby that other did receive all or any of the spiritual benefits exhibited and sealed in either of the Sacraments And 't is not a vowing by one that another shall repent and believe when he is not at present able to do either that can truly be said to be a performing of them Thus the Brethren Wherein there is a double mistake first of the meaning of the Answer in the Catechism and then in Answ 1 the matter of their Reply Touching the first The distinction in the Catechism viz. that there is an outward and visible sign which comprehends both the Element and the Form and Action of baptizing and an inward and spiritual Grace Or there is Sacramentum as the Schools speak the outward and visible part and there is res Sacrâ—menti that which is inward and spiritual this helps us to an Answer for accordingly it may be said of Repentance and Faith required to this Sacrament There is the inward Repentance and Faith or the res ipsa and there is the outward repentance and Faith that is the profession of them Now as to the partaking of the inward grace viz. Christ and his benefits there is required the inward graces of repentance and faith so for the outward part of it the visible
with his Presbytery But the Bishops themselves were judged by the Synod Moreover when the world began to be filled with Churches and the Metropolitanes themselves stood in need of particular Government over themselves for although they grew in number Patriarches yet all were not according to their places either prudent or vigilant for in all orders of men Note those of worth are but few the Fathers did commend the care of whole Provinces together unto certain Bishops of the chief Cities which persons they afterward called Patriarchs Thus far Bucer there And after noting the abuse of these powers and the usurpation of them by the Bishops of Rome whom hee calleth Antichrist which I note to evidence that a man may be full for Episcopacy yea and Archiepiscopacy and yet be as full against Popery which some should mark hee subjoyns what is very considerable in these times viz. At quia omnino necesse est ut singuli Clerici suos habeant proprios Custodes Curatores instaurenda est ut Episcoporum ita et Archidiaconorum aliorumque omnium quibuscunque censeantur nominibus quibus portio aliqua commissa est custodiendi gubernandique Cleri authoritas potestas sed vigilantia animadversio ne quis omnino sit in hoc ordine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But because saith hee it is altogether necessary that every Minister and Clergy man should have their proper Guardians and Governours both the Authority of Bishops Bishops and of Archdeacons Archdeacons and of all * As Metropolitanes c. other officers by what names soever they be called unto whom any part of the power of guarding and governing the Ministry is committed ought to be restored As also watchfulness and observation least any man whatsoever of this profession be without government and not under rule Thus far hee With whose testimony not onely for his learning and piety both which were eminent in him but also for his reference to this Church as having been one of the reformers of it I close these Allegations and Witnesses Vide Bucer Script Anglican Onely adding this That had the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas observed this counsel of these their own learned men they had not given that advantage to the adversary by making a Schism in Government from the whole Universal Church scandalizing it also Nor had they given occasion to those who out of true or pretended imitation of them have brought Scotland and by it England the glory and refuge of the Reformed Churches and by both Ireland into those horrid confusions which have fallen upon them upon that quarrel as is noted by (a) Icon. Basilic Medit. 17. one who well knew and is not denyed by (b) Ministeâ—s Reasons for Reformation 1660. in the Preface others who had no small activity in blowing those fires some coals whereof they have still retained and by them attempted to kindle new flames as is noted by (c) Kings Declaration Oct. 5. 1660. pag. 7. another Authentique Author And for those our Brethren who had destroyed this Government among us it is to be feared it may be in many of them upon the like ground that the Rabbin saith the Jew the body of them D. Kimchi in Isa 53.9 for so hee expoundeth that Prophecy which the Chaldee Version applies to the Messiah as wee do was slaughtered in the captivity whilst hee explains those word with the rich in his death Hee saith it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Which sentence because it is in Rhyme wee may thus render The Wether had no fault but that His fleece was good and hee was fat Mark 12.7 According to this Come let us kill him and the Inheritance shall bee ours As it hath appeared since SECT III. Exceptions against the Government and Discipline THe Brethren the Authors of the former Tract Reasons of the necessity of Reformation p. 40. except also against the Government and Jurisdiction of the Bishops First That it is not by Divine Right in this Nation but that the Church of England is founded in the estate of Prelacy within the Realm of England by Law and authority of Parliament onely Where first we accept of their Concession Prelacy Episcopacy established by Law in England 25. Edw. 3. Anno 1350. then our Church Government by Episcopacy is established by Law in this Nation Now if they have this office by Law they must also have a power for the Execution of it as a Prelacy that is a superiour order of men to govern in Ecclesiastical Affairs which is their jurisdiction and power to exercise Discipline But the Brethren reply Object that this is taken away by the Act of 17th Carol. I. 11. wherein their sitting in Parliament is removed and the power of the King to authorize Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical which was granted by an Act 1. Eliz. cap. 1. Reas neces ref Pag. 51. And that there is not any branch or clause in that whole Act that gives more or other jurisdiction to Bishops or any other Ecclesiastical persons whatsoever But Answer unto this is given elsewhere in this Treatise therefore I leave it here and come to that which is more material viz. The Divine Right at least by consequent of that function Which having evidenced so plentifully before out of both Ancient and Modern Testimonies and those of some the greater Lights of the Reformed Churches And replyed to the Objections on the contrary And particularly because the Brethren do not here oppose it I shall need to say the less Onely take a verdict from one whom some of the Brethrens opinion cite as a witness which is St. Cyprian Which will at once carry with it both the Divine Right and also the inseparable adjunct of it though not a sole yet a superiour jurisdiction For that of sole jurisdiction seems a needless quarrel seeing the Bishop doth neither exercise any part of it alone but with others assistance and without which assistance hee cannot orderly administer it And the Church declares her self whilst shee appointeth in the ordering of Priests and consecrating of Bishops one of the greatest Acts pertaining to Government that there shall be other also assistant to the Bishop in Imposition of hands Though in that lesser point of Confirmation of Children and ordering of Deacons it is not so appointed though not excluding it But as I said Cyprian hath these words Neque enim aliunde haereses abortae sunt Cypr. lib. 1. Ep. 3. Vide in eand sentent ips lib. 3. Ep. 1. aut nata sunt Schismata quà m inde quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur Nec Unus in Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus Judex vice Christi cogitatur Cui si secundum Magisteria divina obtemperaret fraternitas Universa nemo adversum Sacerdotum Collegium quicquam moveret Let not the Reader nauseate this once or twice