King For the time that is already manifested to be at his Majesties pleasure And for the matter that is prescribed and limited by the King super praemissis tractare to consult and advise upon such things as the King nominates and prescribes And if credit may be given to Iohn Speede he tells us that the great Lawyers Judgments in King Richard II. time concerning orderly proceedings in Parliaments run thus That after the cause of such assembly is by the Kings Commandement there declared such Articles as by the King are limited for the Lords and Commons to proceed in are first to be handled But IF ANY SHOULD PROCEED VPON OTHER ARTICLES AND REFVSE TO PROCEED VPON THOSE LIMITED BY THE KING till the King had first answered their Proposals contrary to the Kings Command such doing herein contrary to the rule of the King ARE TO BE PUNISHED ASTRAITORS And he cites the Law books for what he saies Truly I am the rather induced to beleeve what Speed delivers because Sir Edward Coke gives us the reason why and how far forth the King relies upon his Parliaments The King saith he in all his weighty affairs used the advice of his Lords and Commons so great a trust and confidence he had in them Alwaies provided that both the Lords and Commons keep them within the Circle of the Law and Custom of the Parliament The reason why the King useth their advice is because he hath a great trust and confidence in them But alwaies provided that they keepe themselves within the Circle of the Law and Custome of Parliament But how if they deceive the Kings trust and abuse his confidence How if they break the Lawfull Circle and transgresse the Customs of Parliament How then What Speede hath recorded I have shewn you But what the King may do in this case I shall leave to the Masters of the Law to determine 13. Last of all the King regulates their consultations For in his breast it is whether their Bills shall become Laws or no. Observe though the advice and assent be theirs yet the power of Ordaining Establishing and Enacting is in the Soveraigne The Statute books shall be my witnesses THE KING by the advice assent and authority aforesaid HATH ORDEINED AND ESTABLISHED And again BE IT ENACTED BY THE QUEENS MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTIE with the assent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and the Commons c. Hence is it that they are called The Kings Laws And the King is called the head of the Law because from him it is derived from him the Law receives both life and force His breast is the Shrine or deske wherein all the Laws are stored up and preserved If any man make question of this present experience will satisfie him For do not the Houses at this day Petition His Majestie to make that a Law which they have voted Take their own words in that high Message sent to Holdenby house in March last We the Lords and Commons assembled in the Parliament of England c. Do humbly present unto your Majestie the humble desires and Propositions agreed upon by the Parliaments of both Kingdoms respectively Vnto which WE DO PRAY YOUR MAJESTIES ASSENT And that they and all such Bills as shall be tendered to your Majestie in pursuance of them or any of them may be ESTABLISHED AND ENACTED FOR STATUTES AND ACTS OF PARLIAMENT by your Majesties Royall assent Which words though very high do manifest that there is neither Majesty nor Supremacy nor power in this or any other Parliament to make or repeale Laws It is at the Kings pleasure to establish and enact them for Laws and Statutes or not This our neighbour Scotland sees and confesseth that Regall power and authority is chiefly IN MAKING AND ENACTING LAWS Declarat of the Kingd of Scotland p. 18. 14. From hence it appears first that there is no Supremacy in the Parliament without the King Secondly That the Supremum jus Dominii the supreme right of Dominion which is over laws to establish or disanull them is in the King alone For a Bill not established is of no force it is no Law 3ly that the King is the supreme Magistrate as you are pleased to call Him from whom all power of execution of Laws is legally derived And 4ly if the power of execution be derived from the King much more is the power to regulate For he that gives them power by his Commission to put the Laws in execution he gives them rules in the same Commission whereby they must be guided and sets them bounds which they may not passe If they transgresse either the King hath a legall power to revoke their Commissions and to dispose of them to whom and when he pleaseth Hence is it that all Courts and the Judges of those Courts are called the Kings Courts and the Kings Ministers of Justice And when we are summoned to appear in any Court of Justice the Processe runs Coram Domino Rege before our Lord the King because the Kings person and power is there represented And though His Majestie be over-born and against all Law and reason kept from his Courts of Justice yet in all Writs you are fain to abuse his Name though he be no way accessary to these lawlesse and illegall proceedings How these Courts have been regulated since His Majesties forced departure this Kingdom is very sensible and laments to consider it God amend it 15. Upon these grounds I argue thus They that are Subjects they that are suppliants they that owe obedience to an higher they that cannot lawfully convene or consult till they be called by another they that must dissolve their meeting at anothers command they that are to be regulated by another they that can onely advise perswade entreat but not enact a Law have no Supremacy But the whole Parliament sever'd from the King are Subjects are suppliants they owe obedience to an higher they cannot lawfully convene or consult till they be called by His Majestie at his command they are to dissolve their meeting by him they are to be regulated and without him they cannot enact a Law The Major is evident to every intelligent eye The Minor is demonstrated Sect. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. I must therefore upon these premises necessarily conclude that the Parliament in that sense you take it hath no Supremacy 16. That nothing may be wanting I shall give you the resolution of our Sages at Law concerning the Kings unseparable and incommunicable Supremacy that so all mouthes may be stopped Bractons resolution is this Rex habet potestatem jurisdictionem super omnes qui inregno suo sunt The King hath power and jurisdiction over all within his own Kingdom Plowden saith as much The King hath the SOLE GOVERNMENT of his Subjects Here is no man no Societie of men exempted all under the King and solely under the King Where then is the Parliaments
But though S. Paul stand upon his privileges and e magnifie his office yet f he acknowledgeth himself to be Cesars subject and that at his tribunall HE OUGHT TO BE JUDGED 7. Our Saviour himself had severall Relations he was the Son of David and the Lord of David the Son of David according to his humanitie but the Lord of David in his Deitie As Lord of all he receives tithes and sacrifices h as a Subject he payes tribute to Cesar and when an arraigned person i he acknowledgeth Judge Pilate to have power against him Besides this he is a King a Priest and a Prophet a King to command a Priest to offer sacrifice and a Prophet to foretell what he sees meet Nay there is hardly a Citizen of London but hath a treble relation to severall privileges 1. to the generall Rights as he is a free denison of this Nation 2. to others as he is Citizen of London and to a third sort as he is free of this or that Company And shall the meanest Freeman enjoy his severall Rights when the Ministers and Stewards of God are cut out of all Are we dealt with as the Dispensers of Gods high and saving mysteries Nay are we so well dealt with as the lowest members of this Nation Is not this the way to lead in Jeroboams Priests to fill the Pulpits with the scum of the people and to bring the Priesthood into utter contempt O all ye that passe by the way behold and consider if ever the like shame befell any Nationall Church that is threatened to ours at this day But thus it comes to passe when there is no King in the Israel of God 8. If this distinction between Clergie and Laity be a branch of Popery how comes it to passe that those great Reformers and zealous enemies to Popery suffered the Clergie to continue a distinct Province of themselves and that they did not with Popery quite extinguish this distinction Why doth Q. Elizabeth call them a great State of this Kingdome if they be no State at all Why did King Edward VI. that vertuous Lady Queene Elizabeth and wise King Iames summon the Bishops to convene in Convocation as a distinct society and to vote in the House of Peers as Lords spirituall plainly by title distinguished from the Lords temporall Vndoubtedly say you all priviledges of the Clergie that are or were contrariant to the Laws of the Land were abolisht in the reign of Henry the eight They were so It follows therefore undoubtedly that these priviledges which were continued through so many Princes raigns that were enemies to Popery were neither Popish nor contrariant to the Laws of the Land And yet some of those times were not over favourable to the Clergie 9. That we are a distinct society or Corporation from the people is evident by the Coronation Oath by Magna Charta by severall Acts of Parliament and by Scripture itself The Coronation Oath observes the distinction of Clergie and People and assures us that they shall be distinctly preserved Magna Charta does the like and the Acts of Parliament distinguish the Kings subjects into Clergie and Laity allotting to each their severall priviledges allowing the people to take many courses which the Clergie may not This distinction is approved by Scripture where the Lord takes the Levites from among the children of Israel S. Paul assures us that Every High Preist is TAKEN FROM AMONG MEN. And the Scholiast tels us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is there taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if the Apostle had said he is set apart from men from the Common people This exemption or distinction which you are pleased to call a branch of Popery or of Antichristian usurpation is here justified by Gods owne word And Josephus that was well skilled in Moses writings and Judaicall Antiquities testifies that Moses did seperate the tribe of Levi from the communitie of the people He might have said that God himself did it for the text saith plainly that THE LORD SEPERATED THE TRIBE OF LEVI to beare the Arke of the Covenant to stand before the Lord to administer unto him and to blesse in his name From that time forward they were not numbred amongst the rest of the people the Lords they were and the rest of the tribes were strangers to their office The very light of nature taught the heathen to distinguish between Preist and people and to allow them distinct priviledges And the light of Scripture taught Christians to do the like hence is it that not onely in the Canons of the Church but also in the Imperiall constitutions this distinction between the Clergie and Laity is most frequent and familiar Otherwise what strange confusion must necessarily have overspread the face of the Church if this distinction had not been religiously preserved What diverse would not see these times have enforced us to feele 10. And yet for all this we say not that we are exempt from secular power neither set we up two Supremacies This will prove to be your Popish or Anarchicall doctrine yours I say that would so fain cast this aspersion upon us For do not you tell us that ther 's a Supremacie in the King and a Supremacie in the Parliament Are not here two Supremacies set up by you that so you may make the Parliament Law-lesse and subject to no power We detest and have abjured the Popes Supremacie and not onely that but all other Supremacies besides the Kings within these his Majesties Dominions and Countries For we have sworne that King Charles is THE ONELY SUPREME GOVERNOR of all his Realms over all persons in all causes But you induce the peoples Supremacie Wheras we know no Coordination but a Subordination of all persons severally and jointly to his Majestie and to his Majestie onely within all his Dominions 11. We protest before God and the world sincerely and from the heart that the King is major singulis major universis greater then any and greater then all the Members of his Dominions whether in or out of Parliament and that he is homo a Deo secundus solo Deo minor second to God and lesse then God onely To this our best Lawyers bear Testimonie even that the King is Superior to all and Inferior to none And our Acts of Parliament say the same Thus much in substance we have sworne and we unfainedly beleeve that all the world cannot absolve us of this Oath As therefore we hitherto have done so shall we still by Gods grace bear faith and true Allegiance to his Majestie his heirs and successors though it be to the hazard of our liberty of our estates and lives Yea we acknowledge our selves obliged to the Laws of the Land in all those things which concern the right and peaceable administration of the State To the King we pay first fruits and
provided for Shall she not in their absence be layed open to the subtill foxes and mercilesse bores to wast and distroy her Yea by this means she is already distroyed So pious Justice Jenkins The incongruitie then is not to the Bishops calling but to the covetousnesse of bores and foxes 13. Another incongruity will follow upon this The whole Parliament is one corporate body consisting of the HEAD AND THE THREE ESTATES If one of the Estates be wanting it cannot be called a whole but an imperfect a maimed Parliament But the Bishops are one of the three Estates Suppose them to be the more feeble and lesse honourable Estate or Member yet this very Member is necessary and the body is but lame without it Take heed then that the excluding of Bishops be not incongruous to the Parliament I see not how it can be incongruous to the Prelates to suffer wrong since for this purpose they are called But it is incongruous to the Parliament to be without them since without them it is not a whole but an imperfect Parliament For I have read that Bishops were in all Parliaments and voted in them since we had any Yea that great Master of the Law justifies that every Bishop ought ex debito justiciae of due justice to be summoned by Writ to every Parliament that is holden But if they leave out the Bishops they begin with injustice and lay but an ill foundation for so great a Court of Justice And where injustice beares the sway there is little Justice to be hoped for So they are incongruous in the first stone or foundation of a Parliament 14. There is a Statute that no Act of Parliament be passed by any Soveraign of this Realm or any other authority what soever without the advice assent of the three Estates of the Kingdome viz. of the 1 Lords spirituall 2 temporall the 3 Commons of this Realme And all those are solemnly cursed by the whole Parliament that shall at any time endeavour to alter this Act or to make any Statute otherwise then by the consent of all these or the Major part of them This as the learned in the Law report is upon record in the Parliament Roles 15. And what comfort I beseech you can his Majestie have to call a Parliament without Bishops since he cannot assure himself of Gods assistance without them Cenwalch King of the West-Saxons was sensible that his Province was destitute of Gods protection while it was without a Bishop Indeed a good Bishop is with Gregory Metropolitan of Cesarea not onely the beautie of the Church and a fortresse to his flock but he is the safety of his Country It was the religious conceit of our country men heretofore that both King and Kingdome have by the Church a solid â— sure foundation for their subsistence And it was the usuall saying of King Iames No Bishop no King In Scripture the Preists are called the Charets and horsemen of Israel because by their prayers the Country prospered more then by force of armes And the Greek Fathers observe that the Bishop is therefore to pray for all because he is the Common Father of all be they good or bad 16. And as he can have little spirituall comfort without Bishops so without them he can have no temporall releife no Subsidies granted for his own supplies or for the defence of the Kingdome I am sure none have been granted him at Westminster since the expulsion of the Bishops Thus have you moulded up such a Parliament as was never known in this Realme since these great Councels of State were first assembled For though the Bishops were by his Majestie summoned according to justice yet were they afterwards turned out at the instigation of a strong tumultuous faction not suffered to vote in matters that concerned either Church or State Thus ye are become like the Princes of Judah that remove the bounds That is as the Genevians interpret ye have turned upside down all politicall order and all manner of Religion Therefore upon those that have done so the Lord will powre out his wrath like water which will surely overwhelm them as it did those desperate sinners in the deluge Thus I have manifested that it is not incongruous to the calling of Bishops to sit and vote in Parliament but to exclude them is incongruous to the being of a Parliament to the weale of the King and safety of the Kingdom 17. And yet as if what-you had delivered were ex tripode as sure as Gospel from barring their votes you deduce an argument for taking away their Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall If one be abolished why may not the other be removed As if because my cassocke is taken from me I must necessarily be stripped out of my gowne 'T is true if this be also done I must bear it patiently but my patience doth not justifie their action that do me the injurie Neither doth the former fact justifie the latter truly no more then Davids follie with Bathsheba can countenance the murder of Vriah The question is not de factâ— but de jure not what is done but whether it be justly done If the fact may justifie a right then may we maintaine robbing upon Salisbury Plain because it hath been done there more then once A wonder it is you had not framed your argument thus who knows not that the Parliament caused the Arch Bishop of Canterbury to be beheaded And then why may they not hang the rest of the Bishops if their lives prove inconvenient and prejudiciall to the Church But with Julian the Apostata ye had rather slay the Preisthood then the Preists 17. Indeed the removall of their Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction is no more against the Oath then the abolition of their Votes Both alike in respect of the Oath but if we consider the severall authorities from whence they are derived we shall find a difference because the most part of their Jurisdiction is the grant of God but their Voting among the Peers is by the favour of Princes grounded upon the right of Nature and that civill interest which every free denizon ought to have in some measure in disposing of his own and assenting to new Laws But suppose Princes may revoke their own favours can they without perill to their soules cut off that entaile which God hath settled upon his Church I beleeve no. But you will onely remove it not abolish it And removed it may be from Dorchester to Lincolne from Crediton to Exiter But the removall of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction from Bishops to Presbyters is utterly unlawfull since without sinne we may not alter the Ordinance of God who settled this Jurisdiction upon Bishops onely and not upon Presbyters as is demonstrated in the next Chapter CHAP. XIII Certaine light and scandalous passages concerning Prince and Preist tenderly touched 1. THere 's a great cry
I will not say that you are Hereticks in this and in other your new-forged doctrines invented to subvert Monarchy and Episcopacy But I shall tell you S. Austins opinion and so leave you to the opinion of the world He in my conceit is an heretick saith that Father who FOR ANY TEMPORALL COMMODITIE and chiefly FOR HIS OWN GLORY AND PREFERMENT doth either raise or follow false and new opinions And are not pelf honour and preferment the cause of all these fidings and seditions in Church and State If these times speak it not I am deceived As for your opinions it hath been sufficiently manifested that they are both false and new 9. Be your opinions what they will their immunities and rights must down or you will fail in a Dilemma The Clergie say you either hold their rights and immunities by Law or otherwise This is not to be denied But what follows upon this If by Law then the Parliament which hath power to ALTER ALL LAWS hath power to alter such Laws as give them their immunities and those Laws altered the immunitie ceaseth and so the Kings ingagement in that particular If not by Law it is but an usurpation You say it and we grant it For truth it is that we claim no rights and immunities but what the ancient and Christian Laws of this Realm have confirmed unto us by Act of Parliament 10. You say that the Parliament hath power to alter all Laws What if a man should say that this assertion is not true I conceive it were no blasphemie Indeed it is a blasphemous position to broach the contrary None but an Atheist dares justifie that the Parliament or any mortall Soveraigntie hath power to alter either the Law of God or the Law of Nature And yet these are Laws And who but an enemy to his Countrey and a friend to confusion dares affirm that the Parliament hath power to alter the Monarchicall or fundamentall Laws of this Kingdom I am sure Justice Jenkins resolves that by the Law of the Land a Parliament cannot alter any morall Law 11. Give me leave to propose your own Argument in terminis in behalf of the City of London The Citizens of London either hold their rights and immunities by law or otherwise If by law then the Parliament which hath power to alter all Laws hath power to alter such Laws as give them their immunities and those Laws altered the immunity ceaseth If their immunitie be not by Law it is an usurpation without just title which upon discovery is null How like you this my rich Masters of London Hath not Mr. Geree set you in the sleep way to ruine But ye may perchance have a confidence that the Parliament will not serve you so Be of that minde still The power it seems is in their hands how they will use it towards you I cannot say How they have used it towards us and towards our good Soveraign ye know And can ye look to fare better Remember what our Saviour saith The servant is no greater then his Master If they have persecuted me they will also persecute you As they have used your Lord and King they will use you The courtesie ye are like to find is that which Vlysses had from Polyphemus to be their last breakfast 12. Well upon the alteration of the Law the immunitie ceaseth and so the Kings ingagement in that particular An Ordinance of Parliament hath absolved many a subject from his Oath of Allegeance and now we shall have a Law to absolve the King from his Oath of protection But I am sure no Law can absolve him from a duty inherent to his Crown And such is the duty of protecting his Subjects from oppression and the Church from sacriledge You cannot therefore possibly absolve him from this ingagement Besides it was never conceived that an Ordinance was of sufficient force to alter a Law The Kings ingagement therefore stands as yet in this particular 13. But suppose there were such a Law as you-speak of could it be just I have learned from your London Ministers that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Law is so called in Greek from rendering to every person what is just meet equall In very deed as the great Lawyers speak Jus idem est quod justum aequum The Law is nothing else but that which is just and right If it be otherwise it is not jus but injuria an injurie but no right You are pleased to acknowledge our privileges to be our rights How then can they be taken from us without injuriâ—â— And it is not lawfull with the supreme Judge for any Prince or Court to deal injuriously with the meanest that are subject to them Justice it is to give to every man his own Injustice then it must needs be to spoil any man of that which is his either by the Laws of God or man Suppose us to be in equall balance with our fellow Subjects and that we have no other right to our lands and privileges but by the Laws of the Realm what reason can be given why we should not peaceably enjoy what is ours by the Law of the Land as well as the rest of our fellow Subjects We have the same right and why not the same protection CHAP. XIV Whether the Lands of the Church may be forfeited by the misdemeanour of the Clergie 1. VVE shall have reason to work us out of our rights and Law to turn us out of the Kings protection But such reason and Law as may with much ease and more equitie be returned upon your selves Your reason is this because these rights were indulged to the Clergie for the personall worth of present incumbents If therefore their successors forfeit them by their ill demeanour these rights may be taken from them This is easily resolved not so easily proved For the truth is these rights were not given to particular persons but to a succession of Bishops and Priests and other Officers for Gods service Or rather these lands and privileges were given to God and the Church for the maintenance of these offices My unworthinesse makes not the office the worse neither can my wickednesse make a forfeiture of Gods inheritance I may with Abiathar justly be deprived of my place and the benefits thereof but the place and the rights thereof fall not into a Premunire a good man even Zadok succeeds this traitor Abiathar and enjoyes not onely the office but all the profits that belonged thereto This was Solomons justice he knew how to distinguish between the faultie Priest and the faultlesse office But you are a rooter if a twig be in fault up with bâ—aiâ—h and root This is your justice But it is far from the juâ— Judge of all the world to root up the righteous with the wicked And surely we ought to endeavour to be righteous and just as our heavenly Father is just 2. Have you
Sir Edward Coke because a Lawyer and a States-man This great learned man assures us that It is a more grievous and dangerous persecution to destroy the Priesthood then the Priests For by robbing the Church and spoyling spirituall persons of their revenues in short time insues GREAT IGNORANCE OF TRUE RELIGION and of the service of God and thereby GREAT DECAY OF CHRISTIAN PROFESSION For none will apply themselves or their sons or any other they have in charge to the Study of Divinitie when after long and painfull studie they shall have nothing whereupon to live Will not our Church then come to a sweet passe And yet to this passe we are almost brought 16. All the inconvenience that Mr. Geree presseth is this that we are not subject to the Parliament to be whipped and stripped as they please If we be not subject to them I am sure they have made us so But how far forth and wherein we are subject to the Parliament and what Parliament shall speedily be taken into consideration Chap. 9. 17. You speak much of a former and a latter Oath the former to the people the latter to the Clergy As if His Majestie took two severall Oaths at two severall times Whereas in truth it is but one Oath as you acknowledge p. 1. taken at the same time and as it were in a breath Indeed there are severall priviledges proposed to the King which he first promiseth and afterwards swears to maintain As for the promise it is first made in grosse to the people of England afterwards to the severall States of this Realm but first to the Clergie by name In generall to the people of England the King promiseth to keep the Laws and Customs to them granted by his lawful and religious Predecessors Under this word People are comprehended the Nobilitie Clergie and Commons of this Kingdom Afterwards distinguishing them into severall ranks he begins with the Clergie promising that he will keep to them the Laws Customes and Franchizes granted to them by the glorious King S. Edward his Predecessâ—â— Secondly he promiseth to keep peace and GODLY AGREEMENT entirely to his power both to God the holy Church the Clergie and the People Here also you see his promise to the Church and Clergie goes before that to the People In the third branch His Majestie promiseth to his power to cause Law Justice and discretion in mercy and truth to be executed in all HIS JUDGEMENTS to all before named Next he grants to hâ—ld and keep to the Comminalty of this HIS KINGDOM the Laws and rightfull Customes which they have TO THE HONOUR OF GOD mark that so much as in him lyeth The Commonalty you see are not mentioned till we come to the fourth clause And last of all lest the Bishops though implied in Church and Clergie should seem to be omitted and an evasion left to some malignant spirits to work their ruine and yet seem to continue a Clergie the King promiseth to the Bishops in particular that he will preserve and maintain to them all Canonicall priviledges and due Law and Justice and that he will be their Protector and Defender How then can he desert them or leave them out of his protection 18. These promises made the King ariseth is led to the Communion Table where laying his hand upon the holy Evangelists he makes this solemne Oath in the sight of all the people The things that I have promised I shall perform and keep So help mâ— God and the contents of this Book Though then the promises be severall the Oath is but one and so no former no latter Oath not two but one Oath The Kings Oath to the people is not first taken but you are wholly mistaken 19. If any man desire to know who the People and Commonalty of this Kingdom are let him look into Magna Charta where he shall find them marshalled into severall estates Corporations and conditions There you shall also see the severall Laws Customes and Franchizes which the King and his religious Predecessors have from time to time promised and sworn to keep and maintain That Great Charter begins with the Church Inprimis concessimus Deo First we have granted to God and by this our present Charter have confirmed f in behalf of our selves and our Heirs for ever that the Church of England be free and that she have her Rights entire and her Liberties unmaimed Now Sir Edw Coke that Oracle of the Law tels us that this Charter for the most part is but DECLARATORY OF THE ANCIENT COMMON LAWS OF ENGLAND to the observation wherof THE KING WAS BOUND AND SWORN And not onely the King but the Nobles and Great Officers were to be SWORN to the observation of Magna Charta which is confirmed by thirtie and two Acts of Parliament 20. The Liberties of this Church as I have gleaned them from Magna Charta and Sir Edw Coke are these First that the possessions and goods of Ecclesiasticall persons be freed from all unjust exactions and oppressions Secondly that no Ecclesiasticall person be amerced or fined according to the value of his Ecclesiasticall Benefice but according to his Lay tenement and according to the quantitie of his â—ffence Thirdly that the King will neither sell nor to farm set nor take any thing from the demeans of the Church in the vacancie Fourthly that all Ecclesiasticall persons shall enjoy all their lawfull Jurisdictions and other rights wholly without any diminution or subtraction whatsoever Fiftly A Bishop is regularly the Kings IMMEDIATE OFFICER to the Kings Court of Justice in causes Ecclesiasticall Sixtly It is a Maxime of the Common Law that where the right is spirituall and the remedy therefore onely by the Ecclesiasticall Law the conusans thereof doth appertain to the Ecclesiasticall Court Seventhly Sir Edw Coke tels us from Bracton that no other but the King can demand or command the Bishop to make inquisition Eightly Every Archbishoprick and Bishoprick in England are holden of the King per Baroniam by Baronry And IN THIS RIGHT THEY THAT WERE CALLED BY WRIT TO THE PARLIAMENT WERE LORDS OF PARLIAMENT And every one of these when any Parliament is to be holden ought ex debito Justitiae by due of Justice to have a Writ of Summons And this is as much as any Temporall Lord can chalenge The conclusion of all is this that neither the King nor His Heirs or Successors will ever endeavour to infringe or weaken these Liberties And if this shall be done BY ANY OTHER nihil valeat pro nullo habeatur let it be of no force and passe for nothing Hence it is provided by Act of Parliament that if any Judgement be given CONTRARY TO ANY OF THE POINTS OF THE GREAT CHARTER by the Justices or by any other of the Kings Ministers whatsoever IT SHALL BE UNDONE AND HOLDEN FOR NOUGHT Let all true
hearted Englishmen observe this that are lovers of their Countreys liberties 21. We have seen what the King hath granted sworn as also in what order and that the Oath is but one And yet Mr. Geree goes forward as if it were certain without question that this to the Clergie were a severall Oath from that to the people Confidently therefore he presseth it that the King cannot afterwards ingage himself Whereas he ingaged himself alike to his people at the same instant that he would preserve the priviledges both of Clergie and Commonaltie because both his people Now why His Majestie should be bound to maintain the priviledges of that one estate rather then of the other I cannot conceive Especially when I consider that the priviledges of the Clergie are granted to God without whose blessing nor privilege nor people can be preserved The King then herein non câ—â—sit jure suo hath not yeelded up the Clergie or his right to any other neither can he with a safe conscience do so But since Magna Charta hath been so often confirmed even by 32. severall Acts of Parliament the Parliament in that sense you take it hath parted with that right it had by these severall Grants and Confirmations and we ought in justice to enjoy our priviledges and they to maintain them unlesse they mean to affront and subvert so many Acts of Parliament and that main Charter and honour of this Kingdom As if they onely had the judgement of infa 〈…〉 ibilitie which Scotland denies Declarat of the Kingdom of Scotland p. 19. CHAP. IX How far forth and wherein the Clergie is subject to a Parliament and to what Parliament 1. THe net is prepared the snare layed danger is at hand and yet we must not forsake or betray the truth in time of need The noose layed by our Church adversary is this The Clergie and their priviledges are subject to the Parliament or they are not To this we must say yea or nay and the man thinks he hath us sure enough But the man is mistaken one mesh is not well made up and I must tell him that we are subject to the Parliament and we are not Subject we are to the Parliament consisting of head and members but not to the members without the head not to the members alone since we are subject to the members meerly for the heads sake and in those things onely wherein he subjects us to them Set apart the head and we are fellow members fellow subjects For Iowe no temporall subjection to any or many Subjects but onely for the Kings sake Though the Parliament be a great a representative an honourable body yet it is but a body And that body with every member thereof owe obedience and service to the head not one to another I say nothing if I prove it not by Scripture Submit your selves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake Whether it be to THE KING AS SUPREME or unto Governors AS UNTO THOSE THAT ARE SENT BY HIM by the King As if he should say Submit your selves to the King for the Lords sake and to other Governors for the Kingâ— sake For Kingâ— have their Commission from God but all State Governors from the King and Iowe them no subjection beyond their Commission If then it shall please the King to give the members of Parliament power over us we must submit either by doing or suffering Either by doing what they shall command or by suffering what shall be inflicted on us 2. Subjection is not due to them as they are great or rich men but as they are the Kings Ministers This is evident because all Commissions breath and expire with the King Upon death of the King follows necessarily the dissolution of Parliament None of us that are meer Subjects have at such a time power one over another but onely by advice none of us authority but onely as this or that man hath gained esteem by his wisedome and integritie Onely the Preisthood never dyes because Christ ever lives from whom the Preist hath his Commission But all other subordinate powers expect a new Commission from the succeeding Prince This experience taught us upon the death of Queen Elizabeth 3. Though this be truth yet no truth can charge us that we claime exemption from secular power You see we acknowledge our selves subject to the King as also to those Ministers that he sets over us But as these may not exceed their Commissions given by the King neither may the King exceed his Commission granted him by God The Kings Commission is like the Preists ad aedificationem non ad destructionem for upholding the Church and service of God not for the ruining of either And the King may not grant a larger Commission to his ministers then himselfe hath received from the King of Heaven His Commission is to be a nursing father to the Church not a step-father to preserve to her all her rights and dues to see that she be provided with necessaries and to protect her against her profaine and sacrilegious enemies Surely if our Soveraigne hath intrusted the Parliament with any power over the Church and Church-men it is but with some part of that wherewith God hath enriched him and no other 4. Well if we be under Parliamentary power it cannot rationally be conceived to be the meaning of the King so to subject us to the Parliament as to forget or renounce his hath by destroying the priviledges of the Clergie which he hath swoâ—ne to preserve against or in dishonour to that power to which they are legally subject How far we are legally subject to this Parliament I know and how far we are or may be under Parliamentary power I have alreadie declared The power we are legally subject to is his Royall Majestie and it is not it cannot be the meaning of the Kings oath to preserve our priviledges against his own power or to exempt us from his Iurisdiction Let the world judge whether your or our priviledges and principles be distructive of legall power We are bound by Canon faithfully to keepe and observe and as much as in us lieth to cause to be observed and kept of others all and singular Laws and Statutes made for restoring to the Crown of this Kingdome the ancient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiasticall AGAINST ALL USVRPED and forraign POWER Marke that it is not onely against forraign but it is against usurped and all usurped power Shew me if you can one such loyall Canon or resolution from any Presbyteriall Assembly This Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall is by the Lawes and Statutes restored to the Imperiall Crown of this Realme and not upon the Parliament because it is by Gods Word settled upon the Crowne 5. This authority in causes Ecclesiasticall was in the godly Kings amongst the Jews Christian Emperors in the primitive Church and hath been exercised by the
Kings of this Realme according to an Act of Parliament in that behalfe An. 32. Henr. 8. c. 36. According to this Statute were the Bishops and the rest of the Clergie assembled bâ— King Edward VI. and Queene Elizabeth for composing the Articles of Religion which were allowed to be holden and executed within this Realme by the assent and consent of those Princes and confirmed by the subscription of the Arch-Bishops Bishops of the upper House and of the whole Clergie in the neather House in their Convocation As is to be seen in the Râ—tification of those Articles Agreeable to the same Statute the Arch-Bishops Bishops and other of the Clergie were summoned called by K. Iames to treat of Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiasticall Which were by them agreed upon An. Dom. 1603. and were by the same King of blessed memorie ratified and confirmed by his Letters Patents And I am certaine that we have subscribed and sworne That the Kings Majestie under God is THE ONELY SUPREME GOVERNOR of this Realme and of all other his Highnes Dominions and Countries as well in all Spirituall or ECCLESIASTICALL THINGS OR CAUSES AS TEMPORALL 6. The substance of your touchie argument is I hope satisfied in the eye of every moderate and discreet man The rest that follows is but a Rhetoricall flourish or reiteration of what passed before as if the Kings Oath to the Clergie could not be consistent with the priviledges of the Nation formerly by him sworn to As if without peradventure there were a former and a latter Oath which I have proved to be most false And as if we of the Clergie were none of the Nation Or as if we were bastards and not legitimate slaves and not free-born subjects And yet blessed be God diverse of our Orthodox Clergie are as well descended as any that speake against them Is this my good brother to reverence the Preists and count them holy Is this the way to invite men of worth to incorporate themselves into your Presbyteriall Hierarchie Surely we are a part of this Nation to whom this promissory Oath was made Our Rights consisted comfortably many yeers with the priviledges of the people to the honour of this Nation and to the astonishment of others With what face then can you say that the Kings Oath to the Clergie cannot be consistent with the priviledges of the Nation Whereas it is evident that in three or foure yeers this Nation is so weary of the Presbyteriall encrochments that they can no longer possibly endure them 7. But by your words it seems when and while the Clergy were a distinct corporation from the Laitie the Oath had this sense viz. that the Kings oath to the Clergie was consistent with the priviledges of the Nation That must be the sense if I know what sense is But the Clergie were and are a distinct corporation In ceasing to be Popish we are not ceased to be Preists neither is that necessary and just exemption or distinction yet abolisht If it be why are you so zealous to distinguish us and our privileges from the people and their priviledges Whereas if we be all one without distinction our priviledges must needs be the very same and so no inconsistencie at all But of this more fully Chap. 11. 8. A Popish exemption it was for the Clergie to be free from the Kings Commands But this is abolished and we readily submit to every Ordinance of man and wish that you and your Assembly brethren would learn the same Christian obedience A Popish exemption it is for the Bishops and their Churches to know no Governor but the Pope That also is disclaimed and at the Kings Coronation it is publickly acknowledged that the Bishops and their Churches are under the Kings government The Antichristian usurpation is condemned and true Christian subjection justified The King is the â—nely Supreme O vernâ—r to him we owe obedience and to others for him and under him And though all Antichristian usurpation were abolishâ—d upon the death of Queen Mary yet in all the Acts since that time to this present Parliament the Lords spirituall are distinguished from the Lords temporall the Clergy from the Laity and the Convocâ—tion from the Parliament Yea even in these times of confusion the Clergie are doomed by your great Masters to be unfit for Lay or Civill imploiment If there be no such men then was that sentence sencelesse while we are of the same Corporation with them we are as capable of any office of State as the rest of our fellow-subjects even to be Members of both Houses But this distinction is still on foot the Kings Oath therefore to us is still binding especially since our immunities may as well subsist with the priviledges of the Commons as the priviledges of Bristoll with the Franchizes of London 9. Indeed you may well twit us with the change of our condition for we have just cause with Bishop Latymer to complain that there is a plain intent to make the Clergie slavery which was far from the intention of this Oath till your faction prevailed in the change But what inconvenience will follow if we confesse that the intention of the Oath was changed with the change of our condition Not that which you aime at For therein and so far forth onely is the intention of the oath changed as our condition is changed But wherein is our condition changed A Church we are still Bishops and Preists we are still onely our condition is thus far changed before we were subject to Antichristian usurpation but now we are altogether for Christian Allegiance Before our Bishops and Preists were subject to the Pope but we submit wholly to the King And I hope we shall not fare the worse for that The Kings Oath is to protect the Church as it is not as it was not as she was popish and superstitious but as she is Catholick and Apostolike Then she was subject to the Pope and free from the King but now she is subject to the King and free from the Pope But you would faine enforce us to our old vomit for we cannot but discern that a far more intollerable tyranny is drawing on by how much the more dangerous it is to be subject to a multitude then to one to a multitude at home then to one abroad Both of them being equally destructive to the liberty of the Church and alike contrary to the Word of God 10. Besides the change of our condition is either for the better or the worse If for the worse this is to maintain Popery He that saith our condition is changed for the worse justifies that it is better for us to be subject to the Pope then to the King If for the better then must the intention of the Oath be changed for the better For are not these your words that the change of the Clergies condition must needs change the intention of the Oath Without question the intention of
the Oath was to protect all his subjects in their severall places dignities add degrees and not to suffer them to oppresse or devoure one another to see justice done for them and upon them according to the Laws established and not to yeeld to any Law that may be distructive to the rights or liberties of any of his subjects 11. The intention of the Oath is to maintain the ancient legall and just rights of the Church and to preserve unto the Bishops due law and justice We desire no more and no man may with reason deny this to be the intention of the Oath The The words are plaine Sir will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirme the Laws Customs and Franchizes granted to the Clergie by the glorious King S. Edward your Predecessor c. And again Our Lord and King we beseech you to pardon and grant and preserve unto us and to the Churches committed to your charge all Canonicall priviledges and due Law and Justice All this the King hath sworne to performe and hath acknowledged that by right he ought to do it And would you have him to be forsworne and to neglect that which by right he ought to make good Surely you would make an excellent ghostly father for the man of sin 12. Neither is this the peculiar opinion of us Church-men onely that great Oracle of the Law resolves that The King is bound to maintain and defend the rights and inheritance of the Church And he gives two reasons for it first because the Church is alwaies in her minoritie it is under age Seconly she is in Wardship to our Lord the King And then he addes Nec est juri consonum quod infra aetatem existentes PER NEGLIGENTIAM CUSTODUM SVORUM exhaeredationem patiantur seu ab actione repellantur Neither is it consonant to the Law nor yet to conscience that those who are under age should either be spoiled of their inheritance or barred from action at Law THROUGH THE NEGLIGENCE OF THEIR GUARDIANS Especially Kings being by divine Ordinance made Guardians and nursing fathers to the Church Es 49. 23. 13. You see we have divine and humane Law for what we say we claime no priviledges long since by Act of Parliament abolisht We desire not his Majestie to contradict but to ratifie bis Oath and to maintain those Laws he found in force But as for you all your endeavour is to perswade the Laity that our weale is their woe and that the upholding of the Clergie in their due and ancient state would be certain ruine to the Commons As if our Priviledges were like Pharaohs lean kine ready to devoure the fat of the Laity as if our aime were to reduce Antichristian usurpation to subvert the ancient Laws Whereas every man may readily discern that these are but pretences The true end aimed at in these invectives and incentives is that the caninus appetitus the wilde ravenous stomachs of M. Geree and his fellow Presbyterians may be satisfied But at seven yeers end they will be as lank and hungrie as Pharaohs famished kine It was so with King Henry VIII and it will be so with all that tread in his steps 14. It s apparent then to make the intention of that Oath to be false and fallacious and under pretence that it may not be against legall alteration so to wrest it that it may be to the ruine of a great body of his subjects and those not the worst that it shall be against all Law and conscience for f that Law which is unjust is no Law That it shall be to the subversion of the true Religion and service of God to the distraction of his people and to the eternall dishonor of himself and the whole Kingdome makes his Oath in your sense utterly unlawfull And if unlawfull then is it not obligatory either in foro conscienciae or in foro justitiae either before God or any good man unlesse it be to do the contrary But if this Oath in the true and literall sense be not against legall alteration but against unjust oppression sacriledge and profanenesse manifest it is that it is both lawfull and obligatory and the King may not without violation of his Oath and certain danger of the pure and undefiled Religion passe a Bill for the abolition of Episcopacy what ever His Houses of Parliament think or Petition or presse never so violently 15. But your opinion is that the King may passe a Bill for the abolition of Episcopacy And what I thinke or what the King thinks it is no matter if His Houses of Parliament think it convenient he may do it It is wonder you had not said he must do it Indeed you say that which is equivalent for are not these your words He cannot now deny consent to their abolition without sin And if the King without sin cannot deny it then must he assent unto it Thus by your words it seemes he is at their disposing not they at his Indeed if a man may beleeve you the power is in the Houses and not in the King For do not you say that the Peers and Commons in Parliament have power with the consent of the King to alter whatsoever c. And againe There 's no question of POWER IN THE PARLIAMENT to over-rule it The power it seemes is in them consent onely in the King And here The King may passe a Bill when His Houses think it convenient Well he may and he may choose he may consent or dissent Cujus enim est consentire ejus est dissentire And so long we are well enough For the Kings Negative in Parliament is a full testimony of his Supreme power Hence is it that the Houses Petition for his consent which they need not do if the power were in the Houses Besides His Houses the Kings Houses you call them and so they are This also manifests that they are at his disposing and not He at theirs They must therfore wait his pleasure til he thinks it convenient His consent they may Petition for enforce they ought not since they are his subjects enforce it they cannot since he hath power over his own will And whatever you suppose it is in his power to consent or dissent when he sees it convenient and consequently to keep or not to keep his Oath His affirmative makes it a Law his negative denys it to be a Law For The King is the onely Judge whether the Bills agreed upon and presented be for the publick good or no And to take away the Kings negative voice is contrary to your Covenant it diminisheth the Kings just power and greatnesse and cuts off all Regall power Witnesse the Declaration of the Kingdome of Scotland p. 18. CHAP. X. Whether it be lawfull for the King to abrogate the Rights of the Clergie 1. THe question proposed is concerning Episcopacy but now you are fallen to the
the Clergie besides their Orders priviledges and immunities besides their Jurisdiction and revenues And yet all all these you expose to the mercie of a Parliament But in good sooth do you think that if it be lawfull for a Parliament to alter or abolish any particular Laws of the Land that therefore it is lawfull to take away all that the Clergie have or should have Indeed this is something answerable to the proceedings of these times It would sound very harsh if it were thus resolved It is lawfull for King and Parliament to abrogate any of the Laws of the Land It is therefore lawfull for them to abolish all the Laws of the Land And yet this is your manner of arguing As if a particular included the generall as if any were equivalent to all Which is apparently false for universals are of a far larger extent then these individua vaga uncertain notions Though all comprehend any yet any comprehends not all For lawfull it is not to subvert the fundamentall Laws therefore not all This were to raze the foundation of the Kingdome Were this justified of any particular Corporation or body politick besides the Clergie it would not be indured Oh how would the Citizens of London storme if we should conclude thus It is lawfull to take away any of the Laws of the Land and therefore it is lawfull to take away all the Rights of the City of London Yet let wise men judge if this be not your argument right But the Clergie is become the asse of the times it must bear all or sink under the burden 16. But you say that this is to be done by just power in a regular way Well and good But can that be a just power which deals unjustly For Justice gives to every man his own according to Gods Command Render to every man his due The Law of God we confesse to be the Supreme Law Whatever then is done against the Law of God cannot be just Yea though it be done by a Law no Act can justifie it since a Law contrary to Gods Word is no sooner made then void I speak to Christians But with you the Law shall be valid though injurious To the injuriousnesse of this Law I shall submit because a subject but never acknowledge any validitie therein because a Christian 17. By a just power we see this cannot be done how then shall it be done in a regular way A regular way as you conceive you have set down wherein any Law of the Land may be abrogated And that is upon the motion or with the consent of the Parliament How comes this to passe Because the Parliament consists of the head and the representative body of the whole Kingdome And who are these First the King who is the head 2ly the Lords spirituall and temporall and 3ly the Commons But the Parliament is maimed of late 1. The House of Commons represents the greivances of the Countrey 2. The House of Lords advise his Majestie with their counsell and propose for the common good what they conceive meet 3. It is in the Kings power to assent to these proposals or to disassent to make them Statutes or no Statutes And that the Crown may receive no detriment the King hath the Judges of the Land his Councell and other Officers of State present to prevent such mischiefes The Lords take care of their Lands and honors that they be not damnified by any new Law The Knights and Burgesses by the severall Counties and Corporations are intrusted with such things as concern their generall or particular good And all are to take care for the good of the Church the common mother of us al. In these things every man doth or ought to provide that all things be so done for the Common good that if it be possible nothing be done to the prejudice of any 18. And reason for it for as by one Spirit we are all baptised into one body spirituall or mysticall so by the goodnesse of God we all are under one King incorporated into one body politick But the body is not one member but many Indeed if it were all one member where were the body And God hath so tempered this body together that every member hath need one of another and those which seem to be most feeble are necessary All this was done by the great wisedome of God that there might be no divisions or distractions in the body but that the members should have the same care one for another Thus God hath knit us together with the bonds of a mitie and necessity that we might love one another sincerely But Charity is so farre from doing wrong that she seeketh not her own Which is thus to be understood according to S. Austins expression Quia communia propriis non propria communibus anteponit Because Charity prefers the Common good before her own private interest and not her own private interest before the Common good Where this love is ther 's the Common-wealth But what state is that Kingdom in where they that are intrusted by the publick seeke their own and indeavour with might and maine to make that theirs which is none of theirs Where under pretence of the Common good they ingrosse all into their own clutches Is not this the crying sinne the grand Monopolie of these times 19. The regular way to abrogate any of the Rights of the Clergie or Laity is at their own motion or consent made and delivered by their representatives in Parliament or Convocation Henry VIII with Cromwell and the rest of his blessed Councel after banishment of the Popes power knew not which way to make a title to Monasteries with their lands and goods but onely by grant and surrender of the Abbots With them therefore he labours by his great and active servant Cromwell who prevailes with some by promises and large annuities with other by violence and the sword as is manifested by Master Spelman in the Preface to his ever honoured fathers book De non temerandis Ecclesiis The Statute therefore 31. Hen. VIII C. 13. tells us that These Grants Surrenders c. were made FREELY VOLUNTARILY AND WITHOUT COMPULSION to the King his Heires and Successors What ever the truth be this was the onely legall pretence they could devise And this is the onely course you can take to make a plea in Law to the Church-lands You are faine therefore at last to perswade the Clergies consent p. 5. But of that in due place 20. In the mean space thus much by the way Either we are subjects or no subjects If we are subjects then ought we to have the liberties and priviledges of subjects whereof this is one that not so much as a Subsidie or a little Ship-mony be taken from any one of us without our assent yeelded either by ourselves or by such as we put in trust And this present Parliament
forlorn man and yet in his good time he restored him to his Scepter in peace and subdued the people to him 7. And whereas you term them others privileges as if they concerned no man but the Clergie I dare boldly say they concern every man as he is a member of this Church and Realm If we have sown unto you spirituall things is it a great matter if we reap your carnall things And if we reap not your carnall things how shall we sowe unto you spirituall things This is worthy of consideration unlesse you have layed aside all care of the soul Have we some privileges that the Laity have not They are not ours alone they are every mans that enters into Orders And Orders are indifferently proposed to all of all families whatsoever so they be sufficiently qualified High and lowe noble and ignoble have reaped the benefit of these privileges I have known some of high birth in Orders and some of good rank that have taken Sanctuary under a Priests coat And we read of a young man of the tribe of Judah of the most remarkable family that was glad to turn Priest and to serve by the yeer for ten shekels of silver a double suit of apparell and his victuals If then our Calling suffer all families suffer in it and with it 8. But what if the Laws of the Land what if Magna Charta do oblige all men to stand up for the due observation of these privileges If so then must every man readily acknowledge that all good Subjects are bound to obey His Majestie when he commands that which the Law requires View we then the words of that Great and justly magnified Charter which are these Reserving to all Arch-bishops Bishops Earls Barons and all persons as well Spirituall as Temporall all their liberties and free customes which they have had in times past And all these customes and liberties aforesaid which we have granted to be holden within this our Realm as much as appertaineth to us and our Heirs we shall observe And ALL MEN of this our Realm as well SPIRITUALL AS TEMPORALL as much as in them is SHALL likewise OBSERVE THE SAME AGAINST ALL PERSONS Mark that are we not all both spirituall and temporall bound to maintain each others privileges as much as in us lies 9. I know you will return that Abbots and Priors are provided for by the same Law and yet they have since been taken away by Act of Parliament I confesse it but I shall desire you to observe in the first place how they prospered that were the contrivers and procurers of that Act. 2ly I cannot but take notice that you with your Master Beza call that dissoâ—ution detestandum sacrilegium detestable sacrilege and such as was cried out of all the Christian world over It is not therefore to be drawn into president 3ly consider I pray you that they who did so are stiled Enemies of our Soveraign Lord the King and his Realm 4ly that great Councell of Chalcedon consisting of above 600. Bishops resolves that no Monastery consecrated with the Bishops liking may be turned to a secular dwelling And those that suffer any such thing are lyable to the Canonicall censures 5ly you will I hope make a difference between our Saviours institution and mans invention Bishops are of our Saviours own institution but Abbots and Priors are titles and orders of mans invention And yet hospitalitie and alms and other works of charity for which these fraternities were erected failed much with them How those means were imployed I shall not enquire but I am certain that good and pious men have wished that the abuses had been pruned off and that the lands had been disposed of according to the Doners intentions This indeed had been pietie not sacrilege 10. How oft have the Kings of this Realm ingaged themselves to observe Magna Charta and to maintain the rights and liberties of the Church Are not these the words of the Statute We take the Prelates and Clergie with their possessions goods and chattels INTO OUR SPECIALL PROTECTION AND DEFENCE The Princes of this Land have bound themselves strictly to keep this Great Charter and have provided that if any other shall do or procure to be done any thing contrary to this Charter it is to be accounted void as soon as procured Take the words of the Charter We have granted unto them the Spirituall and Temporal persons of this Realm on the other part that neither we nor our Heirs shall procure or do any thing whereby the liberties in this Charter shall be infringed or broken But suppose they shall make any such grant through ignorance wilfulnesse or evill counsell shall it be of force The Law saith no. For it follows immediately And if any thing be procured BY ANY PERSON contrary to the premisses it shall be holden OF NO FORCE NE EFFECT You and your great contrivers what have ye laboured for all this while What have ye fought for what have ye shed so much blood for For wind nothing but wind For all the Westminster Orders and Ordinances contrary to this Charter shall be holden of no force ne effect You had best then keepe your paper for a more necessary use 11. And yet you tell his Majestie that it is not equall to ingage the lives of some to uphold the honour of others Is it equall then I beseech you to ingage the lives of some to destroy the honour and estate of others All this while you have been on the destructive part all for rooting up what the Lords right hand hath planted and for alienating the Lords inheritance And that ye might effect what ye have subtilly projected ye have ingaged the lives of many who were very unwilling to uphold the honour of some at Westminster that had overlashed ran themselves upon dreadfull rocks I would to God the Commons of this Kingdome would lay it to heart how cruell ye have been to many thousands to be indulgent to a few to uphold the honour of a few Consider how many thousands in England and Ireland have been plundered sequestred imprisoned maimed and murdered because they would not submit to the illegall unjust and irreligious decrees of the men at Westminster A compleat Mercurius Rusticus will make after ages stand amazed and their hearts bleed within them to consider that such a Nation as this so blessed with peace and plentie should be so miserably deluded as to undoe themselves willfully and sheath their swords into one anothers bowels to save a Lord and five Members from tryall by Law 12. That you may perswade us some way or other that the King ought to give up the Bishops and their lands since he hath hitherto protected them to the utmost of his power you argue by supposition Suppose say you a King put a Commander into a City and give him an Oath to maintaine the priviledges of it and