scandalous to the Church can we believe that Titus was not as well bound to correct them afterwards as to examine them before And what was this Power of Ordination and Iurisdiction but the very same which the Bishops have exercised ever since the Apostles Times But they who go about to Unbishop Timothy and Titus may as well Unscripture the Epistles that were written to them and make them only some particular and occasional Writings as they make Timothy and Titus to have been only some particular and occasional Officers But the Christian Church preserving these Epistles as of constant and perpetual use did thereby suppose the same kind of Office to continue for the sake whereof those excellent Epistles were written And we have no greater Assurance that these Epistles were written by St. Paul than we have that there were Bishops to succeed the Apostles in the Care and Government of Churches Having said thus much to clear the Authority we act by I now proceed to consider the Rules by which we are to govern our selves Every Bishop of this Church in the time of his Consecration makes a solemn Profession among other things That he will not only maintain and set forward as much as lies in him quietness love and peace among all Men but that he will correct and punish such as be unquiet disobedient and criminous within his Diocese according to such Authority as he hath by God's Word and to him shall be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm So that we have two Rules to proceed by viz. The Word of God and the Ecclesiastical Law of this Realm 1 By the Word of God and that requires from us Diligence and Care and Faithfulness and Impartiality remembring the Account we must give that we may do it with Ioy and not with Grief And we are not meerly required to correct and punish but to warn and instruct and exhort the Persons under our Care to do those things which tend most to the Honour of our holy Religion and the Church whereof we are Members And for these Ends there are some things I shall more particularly recommend to you 1. That you would often consider the Solemn Charge that was given you and the Profession you made of your Resolution to do your Duty at your Ordination I find by the Provincial Constitution of this Church that the Bishops were to have their solemn Profession read over to them twice in the year to put them in mind of their Duty And in the Legatine Constitutions of Otho 22 H 3. the same Constitution is renewed not meerly by a Legatine Power but by Consent of the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces wherein i◠is declared That Bishops ought to visi◠their Diocesses at fit times Correcting and Reforming what was amiss and sowing the Word of Life in the Lords Field and to put them the more in mind of it they were twice in the year to have their solemn Profession read to them It seems then that Profession contained these things in it or else the reading that could not sti◠them up to do these things What the Profession was which Presbyters then made at their Ordination we have not so clear an Account but in the same Council at Oxford 8 H. 3. i◠is strictly enjoined That all Rector◠and Vicars should instruct the People committed to their Charge and Fee◠them Pabulo Verbi Dei with the Food of God's Word and it is introduced with that Expression that they might excite the Parochial Clergy to be more diligent in what was most proper for those times And if they do it not they are there called Canes muti and Lyndwood bestows many other hard Terms upon them which I shall not mention but he saith afterward those who do it not are but like Idols which bear the similitude of a Man but do not the Offices proper to Men. Nay he goes so far as to say That the Spiritual Food of God's Word is as necessary to the Health of the Soul as Corporal Food is to the Health of the Body Which Words are taken out of a Preface to a Canon in the Decretals de Officio Iud. Ordinarii inter caetera But they serve very well to shew how much even in the dark times of Popery they were then convinced of the Necessity and Usefulness of Preaching These Constitutions were slighted so much that in 9 Edw. 1. the Office of Preaching was sunk so low that in a Provincial Constitution at that time great Complaint is made of the Ignorance and Stupidity of the Parochial Clergy that they rather made the People worse than better But at that time the Preaching Friars had got that Work into their Hands by particular Priviledges where it is well observed That they did not go to Places which most needed their help but to Cities and Corporations where they found most Incouragement But what Remedy was found by this Provincial Council Truly every Parochial Priest four times a year was bound to read an Explication of the Creed Ten Commandments the Two Precepts of Charity the Seven Works of Mercy the Seven deadly Sins the Seven principal Vertues and the Seven Sacraments This was renewed in the Province of York which had distinct Provincial Constitutions in the time of Edw. 4. And here was all they were bound to by these Constitutions But when Wickliff and his Followers had awakened the People so far that there was no satisfying them without Preaching then a new Provincial Constitution was made under Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury and the former Constitution was restrained to Parochial Priests who officiated as Curates but several others were Authorized to Preach as 1. The Mendicant Friars were said to be Authorized Iure communi or rather Privilegio speciali but therefore Lyndwood saith it is said to be Iure communi because that Privilege is recorded in the Text of the Canon Law these were not only allowed to preach in their own Churches but in Plateis publicis saith Lyndwood out of the Canon Law wherein those words were expressed and at any hour unless it were the time of preaching in other Churches but other Orders as Augustinians and Carmelites had no such general License Those preaching Friars were a sort of Licensed Preachers at that time who had no Cures of Souls but they were then accounted a kind of Pastors For Io. de Athon distinguisheth two sorts of Pastors Those who had Ecclesiastical Offices and those who had none but were such only Verbo Exemplo but they gave very great disturbance to the Clergy as the Pope himself confesses in the Canon Law 2. Legal Incumbents authorized to preach in their own Parishes Iure scripto All Persons who had Cures of Souls and Legal Titles were said to be missi à Iure ad locum populum curae suae and therefore might preach to their own People without a special
nothing else but the common Custom of the Realm My Lord Chief Justice Hales saith That the common Usage Custom and Practice of the Kingdom is one of the main Constituents of our Law Coke quotes Bracton ' s Authority to prove That Custom obtains among us the Force of a Law where it is received and approved by long Use. And of every Custom he saith there be two Essential Parts Time and Usage Time out of Mind and continual and peaceable Usage without Interruption But in Case of Prescription or Custom he saith That an Interruption of Ten or Twenty Years hinders not the Title but an Interruption in the Right the other is only an actual Suspension for a time It may be asked How Time and Usage come to make Laws since Time hath no Operation in Law saith Grotius Not of it self as Grotius there saith but with the Concurrence of other Circumstances it may Bracton saith longa possessio parit jus possidendi and by a long and peaceable Possession Dominion is transferred without either Title or Delivery which he founds on this good Reason That all Claims of Right ought to have a certain Limitation of Time and length of Time takes away any Proof to the contrary Littleton saith That Time out of Memory of Man is said to give Right because no Proof can be brought beyond it And this he calls Prescription at Common Law as it is distinguished from Prescription by the several Statutes of Limitations But whence is it then that an immemorial Possession gives Right Is it from the meer Silence of the Parties concerned to claim it No Silence gives no Consent where Ignorance or Fear may be the Cause of it And is it a Punishment upon the Neglect of the Party concerned So Bracton saith Time doth it per patientiam negligentiam veri Domini But meer Neglect doth not overthrow Right unless there be an antecedent Law to make that Neglect a Forfeiture Is it from a Presumptive Dereliction But that supposes not bare Continuance of Time but some kind of voluntary Act which implies a sort of Consent which doth not appear in this Case And it is a great Mistake in those who think there is no Presumptive Dereliction where there is not a full Consent for it may be where there is the Consent of a mixt Will i.e. partly voluntary and partly involuntary when the Circumstances are such as the Person rather chuses to leave his Right than submit to the lawful Conditions of enjoying it As if a Man would rather quit his Fee than perform the Service which belongs to it Is it from the common Interest of Mankind that some Bounds be fixed to all Claims of Right Because otherwise that Men will be liable to perpetual Disturbance if the Right be permitted to be claimed beyond any possibility of Proof Or is it lastly that in such Nations where immemorial Custom obtains the Force of a Law it seems agreeable to the Foundations of Law that a long continued Possession should carry Right along with it And this was the Case here in England as not only appears by what Bracton hath said but Glanvil makes a great part of our Law to consist of reasonable Customs of long Continuance And St. Germain affirms Ancient general Customs to be one of the principal Foundations of our Law and that they have the Force of Laws and that the King is bound by his Oath to perform them And it is worth our while to observe what general Customs he doth instance in as the Courts of Equity and Law the Hundred Court the Sheriffs Turn the Court Baron c. which depend not upon Acts of Parliament but the Ancient Custom of England which he calls the Common Law And among these Ancient Customs he reckons up Rights of Descent Escheats the different sorts of Tenures Freeholds and the Laws of Property as they are received among us We are now to enquire how far any of our Ecclesiastical Constitutions can be said to be built upon this Foundation and upon immemorial Custom generally received 1. I place 1. the Distribution of this National Church into two Provinces in each whereof there is an Archbishop with Metropolitical Power which lies chiefly in these things 1. The Right of Consecration of his Suffragans 2. The Right of Visitation of every Diocess in such Way and Manner as Custom hath settled it 3. The Right of receiving Appeals from Inferiour Courts of Judicature in Ecclesiastical Matters 4. The Right of presiding in Provincial Councils of the Suffragans of his Province which by the most Ancient Constitutions of this Church were to be held once a Year so it was decreed in the Council under Theodore A. D. 673. but by the Difficulties of the times they were discontinued and so the Authority of examining things through the Province came by a kind of Devolution to the Archbishop and his Courts 5. The Custody of vacant Sees by the Custom of England falls to the Metropolitan if there hath been no Custom or Composition to the contrary And so it hath been upon solemn Debates resolved in our Courts of Common Law Coke thinks that of common Right it belongs to the Dean and Chapter but by Custom to the Archbishop But Panormitan saith There was no Pretence of common Right for them till the time of Boniface VIII 2. The ordinary Jurisdiction of every Bishop over the Clergy of his own Diocess This is as ancient as Christianity among us For no sooner were Churches planted but there were Bishops set over them who had from the Beginning so much Authority that none of the Clergy could either receive or quit his Benefice without their Consent and Approbation and they were all bound to give an Account of their Behaviour at their Visitations and in case of Contempt or other Misdemeamours they were to proceed against them according to the Canons of the Church I do not say the Diocesses were at first all modelled alike or with the same Bounds which they now have which was unreasonable to suppose considering the gradual Conversion of the Nation For at first there was but one Bishop in every one of the Saxon Kingdoms except Kent where was but one Suffragan to the Metropolitan for some time till the Kingdoms came to be united or the Kings consented to an Increase of several Diocesses and uniting them under one Metropolitan which was a Work of Time But in all the Saxon Councils we find no mention of any Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction but what was in the Bishops themselves Concil Cloveshoo Can. 1 4 5. Concil Cealchyth Can. 1. Egbert Canon c. 45 62. The first who began to seek for Exemptions were the Abbots who were under the Bishop's Jurisdiction who was too near them and therefore they endeavoured to get under the Pope's immediate Jurisdiction by Charters of Exemption which the great Abbies either procured or made
their Consciences fly in their Faces and they condemn themselves for their evil Actions And then these very Instances are an Argument against Infidelity for we may justly presume that they would shake off their Fears of another World if they could But why should some Instances of this Nature signifie more against Religion than the many Remarkable Examples of a Godly Righteous and Sober Life among the Clergy to a stronger Confirmation of it For they have had greater Occasion of searching into all the Considerable Difficulties about Religion than others can pretend to and I do not know any that have imployed most Time and Pains about it but have had greater Satisfaction as to the Truth and Excellency of it Thus I have endeavoured to remove the most common Prejudices of our Times against our Profession It would now be proper for me to give some particular Directions to you but that is so much the business of the following Discourses that I shall refer you to them and commend you to the Grace and Blessing of Almighty God that you may so carefully discharge your Duties in this World that it may advance your Happiness in another I am Your Affectionate Friend and Brother EDW. WIGORN Hartlebury C. Apr. 23. 1698. ERRATA PReface pag. viii lin 7. read Birinus p. xii l. 7. r. Kington P. 26. l. 21. after fraudes add p. 126. l. 11. r. Birinus p. 129. l. 9. r. Wulstan p. 142. l. 7. r. Flocks they go to p. 157. l. 17. after but insert to perswade you p. 226. l. 5. for more r. meer p. 236. l. 9. for Titles r. Tithes p. 241. l. 9. r. Aâ—bâ—rdus p. 254. l. 17. r. Guthrun p. 256. l. 17. for than r. as THE CONTENTS CASE I. THE Bishop of Worcester's Charge to the Clergy of his Diocess in his Primary Visitation c. p. 1. II. Of the Nature of the Trust committed to the Parochial Clergy c. p. 103. III. Of the particular Duties of the Parochial Clergy c. p. 175. IV. Of the Maintenance of the Parochial Clergy by Law p. 229. V. Of the Obligation to observe the Ecclesiastical Canons and Constitutions c. p. 325. To which is annexed a Discourse concerning Bonds of Resignation c. A Catalogue of Books published by the Right Reverend Father in God Edward Lord Bishop of Worcester and sold by Henry Mortlock at the Phoenix in St. Paul's Church-Yard A Rational Account of the Grounds of the Protestant Religion being a Vindication of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury's Relation of a Conference c. from the pretended Answer of T. C. The second Edition Folio Origines Britannicae or the Antiquities of the British Churches with a Preface concerning some pretended Antiquities relating to Britain in Vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph Folio Irenicum A Weapon-Salve for the Churches Wounds Quarto Origines Sacrae or a Rational Account of the Grounds of Christian Faith as to the Truth and Divine Authority of the Scriptures and the Matters therein contained The Fifth Edition corrected and amended Quarto The Unreasonableness of Separation or an impartial Account of the History Nature and Pleas of the present Separation from the Communion of the Church of England Quarto A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome and the hazard of Salvation in the Communion of it in Answer to some Papers of a revolted Protestant wherein a particular Account is given of the Fanaticism and Divisions of that Church Octavo An Answer to several late Treatises occasioned by a Book entitled A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised of the Church of Rome and the hazard of Salvation in the Communion of it Part I. Octavo A Second Discourse in Vindication of the Protestant Grounds of Faith against the Pretence of Infallibility in the Church of Rome in answer to the Guide in Controversie by R. H. Protestancy without Principles and Reason and Religion or the certain Rule of Faith by E. W. With a particular Enquiry into the Miracles of the Roman Church Octavo An Answer to Mr. Cressy's Epistle Apologetical to a Person of Honour touching his Vindication of Dr. Stillingfleet Octavo A Defence of the Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome in Answer to a Book entitled Catholicks no Idolaters Octavo Several Conferences between a Romish Priest a Fanatick Chaplain and a Divine of the Church of England being a full Answer to the late Dialogues of T. G. Octavo The Council of Trent Examin'd and Disprov'd by Catholick Tradition in the main Points in Controversie between Us and the Church of Rome with a particular Account of the Times and Occasions of Introducing them A Discourse concerning the Doctrine of Christ's Satisfaction or the true Reasons of his Sufferings with an Answer to the Socinian Objections and a Preface concerning the true State of the Controversie about Christ's Satisfaction Octavo Second Edition A Discourse in Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity with an Answer to the late Socinian Objections against it from Scripture Antiquity and Reason And a Preface concerning the different Explication of the Trinity and the Tendency of the present Socinian Controversie Octavo Second Edition The Bishop of Worcester's Answer to Mr. Locke's Letter concerning some Passages relating to his Essay of Humane Understanding mention'd in the late Discourse in Vindication of the Trinity Octavo The Bishop of Worcester's Answer to Mr. Locke's Second Letter wherein his Notion of Idea's is proved to be inconsistent with it self and with the Articles of the Christian Faith Octavo Sermons preached upon several Occasions in three Volumes in Octavo The Effigies of the Right Reverend Father in God Edward Lord Bishop of Worcester Engraven on a Copper-Plate Price 6 d. THE BISHOP OF WORCESTER'S CHARGE TO THE CLERGY of his DIOCESE In his Primary Visitation begun at Worcester September 11 th 1690. My Brethren THIS being my Primary Visitation I thought it fitting to acquaint my self with the Ancient as well as Modern Practice of Episcopal Visitations and as near as I could to observe the Rules prescribed therein with respect to the Clergy who are now summoned to appear And I find there were two principal Parts in them a Charge and an Enquiry The Charge was given by the Bishop himself and was called Admonitio Episcopi or Allocutio wherein he informed them of their Duty and exhorted them to perform it The Enquiry was made according to certain Articles drawn out of the Canons which were generally the same according to which the Iuratores Synodi as the ancient Canonists call them or Testes Synodales were to give in their Answers upon Oath which was therefore called Iuramentum Synodale for the Bishop's Visitation was accounted an Episcopal Synod The former of these is my present business and I shall take leave to speak my Mind freely to you this first time concerning several things which I think most useful and fit to be
considered and practised by the Clergy of this Diocese For since it hath pleased God by his wise and over-ruling Providence without my seeking to bring me into this Station in his Church I shall esteem it the best Circumstance of my present Condition if he please to make me an Instrument of doing good among you To this end I thought it necessary in the first place most humbly to implore his Divine Assistance that I might both rightly understand and conscientiously perform that great Duty which is incumbent upon me for without his help all our Thoughts are vain and our best Purposes will be ineffectual But God is not wanting to those who sincerely endeavour to know and to do their Duty and therefore in the next place I set my self as far as my Health and other Occasions would permit to consider the Nature and Extent of my Duty with a Resolution not to be discouraged altho I met with Difficulties in the Performance of it For such is the State and Condition of the World That no Man can design to to do good in it but when that crosses the particular Interests and Inclinations of others he must expect to meet with as much Trouble as their unquiet Passions can give him If we therefore consulted nothing but our own Ease the only way were to let People follow their Humours and Inclinations and to be as little concerned as might be at what they either say or do For if we go about to rowze and awaken them and much more to reprove and reform them we shall soon find them uneasie and impatient for few love to hear of their Faults and fewer to amend them But it is the peculiar Honour of the Christian Religion to have an Order of Men set apart not meerly as Priests to offer Sacrifices for that all Religions have had but as Preachers of Righteousness to set Good and Evil before the People committed to their Charge to inform them of their Duties to reprove them for their Miscarriages and that not in order to their Shame but their Reformation Which requires not only Zeal but Discretion and a great Mixture of Courage and Prudence that we may neither fail in doing our Duty nor in the best means of attaining the end of it If we could reasonably suppose that all those who are bound to tell others their Duties would certainly do their own there would be less need of any such Office in the Church as that of Bishops who are to inspect and govern and visit and reform those who are to watch over others But since there may be too great failings even in these too great neglect in some and disorder in others too great proneness to Faction and Schism and impatience of Contradiction from mere Equals therefore St. Ierom himself grants That to avoid these Mischiefs there was a necessity of a Superiour Order to Presbyters in the Church of God ad quem omnis Ecclesiae cura pertineret Schismatum semina tollerentur as he speaks even where he seems most to lessen the Authority of Bishops But whatever some Expressions of his may be when the Bishop of Ierusalem and the Roman Deacons came into his head his Reasons are very much for the Advantage of Episcopal Government For can any Man say more in point of Reason for it than that nothing but Faction and Disorder followed the Government of Presbyters and therefore the whole Christian Church agreed in the necessity of a higher Order and that the Peace and Safety of the Church depends upon it that if it be taken away nothing but Schisms and Confusions will follow I wish those who magnifie S. Ierom's Authority in this matter would submit to his Reason and Authority both as to the Necessity and Usefulness of the Order of Bishops in the Church But beyond this in several places he makes the Bishops to be Successors of the Apostles as well as the rest of the most Eminent Fathers of the Church have done If the Apostolical Office as far as it concerns the Care and Government of Churches were not to continue after their Decease how came the best the most learned the nearest to the Apostolical Times to be so wonderfully deceiv'd For if the Bishops did not succeed by the Apostles own Appointment they must be Intruders and Usurpers of the Apostolical Function and can we imagine the Church of God would have so universally consented to it Besides the Apostles did not die all at once but there were Successors in several of the Apostolical Churches while some of the Apostles were living Can we again imagine those would not have vindicated the Right of their own Order and declared to the Church That this Office was peculiar to themselves The Change of the Name from Apostles to Bishops would not have been sufficient Excuse for them for the Presumption had been as great in the Exercise of the Power without the Name So that I can see no Medium but that either the Primitive Bishops did succeed the Apostles by their own Appointment and Approbation which Irenaeus expresly affirms Qui ab Apostolis ipsis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis or else those who governed the Apostolical Churches after them out-went Diotrephes himself for he only rejected those whom the Apostles sent but these assumed to themselves the Exercise of an Apostolical Authority over the Churches planted and setled by them But to let us see how far the Apostles were from thinking that this Part of their Office was peculiar to themselves we find them in their own time as they saw occasion to appoint others to take care of the Government of the Churches within such bounds as they thought fit Thus Timothy was appointed by St. Paul at Ephesus to examine the Qualifications of such as were to be Ordained and not to lay hands suddenly on any to receive Accusations if there were cause even against Elders to proceed judicially before two or three Witnesses and if there were Reason to give them a publick Rebuke And that this ought not to be thought a slight matter he presently adds I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ and the elect Angels that thou observe these things without preferring one before another doing nothing by partiality Here is a very strict and severe Charge for the Impartial Exercise of Discipline in the Church upon Offenders And although in the Epistle to Titus he be only in general required to set in order the things that are wanting and to ordain Elders in every City as he had appointed him yet we are not to suppose that this Power extended not to a Iurisdiction over them when he had Ordained them For if any of those whom he Ordained as believing them qualified according to the Apostles Rules should afterwards demean themselves otherwise and be self-willed froward given to Wine Brawlers Covetous or any way
will be the diligent Labours and the exemplary Lives of the Clergy in it But if Men will not regard their own or the Churches Interest in this matter if they will break their Rules in such a manner as to dishonour God and the Church and themselves by it then you are to consider the next thing I was to speak to which is II. What Authority is given to us for the punishing Offenders in our Diocesses by the Ecclesiastical Law of this Realm For this we are to consider That our Authority herein is not derived from any modern Canons or Constitutions of this Church altho' due Regard ought to be shewed to them but from the ancient Common Law Ecclesiastical in this Realm which still continues in force For as there is a Common Law with respect to Civil Rights which depends not on the Feudal Constitutions altho' in many things it be the same with them but upon ancient Practice and general Consent of the People from Age to Age. So I say there is a Common Law Ecclesiastical which altho' in many things it may be the same with the Canon Law which is read in the Books yet it hath not its force from any Papal or Legatine Constitutions but from the Acceptance and Practice of it in our Church I could easily shew if the time would permit that Papal and Legatine Constitutions were not received here altho' directed hither that some Provincial Constitutions never obtained the Force of Ecclesiastical Laws but my business is to shew what did obtain and continue still to have the Force of such Ecclesiastical Laws among us By the Statute of 25 H. 8. c. 19. it is declared That such Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals Provincial being already made which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the Laws Statutes and Customs of this Realm nor to the Damage or Hurt to the King's Prerogative Royal shall now still be used and executed as they were afore the making of this Act c. It 's true a Review was appointed but such Difficulties were found in it as to the shaking the Foundations of the Ecclesiastical Law here that nothing was ever legally established in it and therefore this Law is still in force In the Statute 25 H. 8. c. 21. it is said That this Realm Recognizing no Superiour under God but the King hath been and is free from Subjection to any Man's Laws but only to such as have been Devised Made and Observed within this Realm for the Wealth of the same or to such other as by the Sufferance of the King and his Progenitors the People of this Realm have taken at their free Liberty by their own Consent to be used amongst them and have bound themselves by long Use and Custom to Observance of the same not as to the Observance of the Laws of any Foreign Prince Potentate or Prelate but as to the Customs and ancient Laws of this Realm originally established as Laws of the same by the said Sufferance Consent Custom and none otherwise All that I have now to do is to shew what Authority the Bishops had over the Clergy by the Ancient Ecclesiastical Law of this Realm and what Censuâ—es they were liable to for some particular Offences I. By the Ecclesiastical Law the Bishop is Iudge of the Fitness of any Clerk presented to a Benefice This is confessed by the Lord Coke in these Words And the Examination of the Ability and Sufficiency of the Person presented belongs to the Bishop who is the Ecclesiastical Iudge and in the Examination he is a Iudge and not a Minister and may and ought to refuse the Person presented if he be not Persona idonea But this is plain to have been the Ancient Ecclesiastical Law of this Realm by the Articul Cleri in Edw. II. time De Idoneitate Personae praesentatae ad Beneficium Ecclesiasticum pertinet Examinatio ad Iudicem Ecclesiasticum ita est hactenus usitatum fiat in futurum By the Provincial Constitutions at Oxford in the time of Hen. III. the Bishop is required to admit the Clerk who is presented without Opposition within two Months dum tamen idoneus sit if he thinks him fit So much time is allowed propter Examinationem saith Lyndwood even when there is no Dispute about Right of Patronage The main thing he is to be examined upon is his Ability to discharge his Pastoral Duty as Coke calls it or as Lyndwood saith whether he be commendandus Scientia Moribus As to the former the Bishop may judge himself but as to the latter he must take the Testimonials of others and I heartily wish the Clergy would be more careful in giving them by looking on it as a Matter of Conscience and not meerly of Civility for otherwise it will be impossible to avoid the pestering the Church with scandalous and ignorant Wretches If the Bishop refuses to admit within the time which by the Modern Canons is limited to Twenty eight Days after the Presentation delivered he is liable to a Duplex Querela in the Ecclesiastical Courts and a Quare impedit at Common Law and then he must certifie the Reasons of his Refusal In Specot's Case it is said That in 15 Hen. 7. 7 8. all the Iudges agreed that the Bishop is Iudge in the Examination and therefore the Law giveth Faith and Credit to his Iudgment But because great Inconveniencies might otherwise happen the general Allegation is not sufficient but he must certifie specially and directly and the general Rule is and it was so resolved by the Judges That all such as are sufficient Causes of Deprivation of an Incumbent are sufficient Causes to refuse a Presentee But by the Canon Law more are allowed In the Constitutions of Othobon the Bishop is required particularly to enquire into the Life and Conversation of him that is presented and afterwards that if a Bishop admits another who is guilty of the same Fault for which he rejected the former his Institution is declared null and void By the Canon Law if a Bishop maliciously refuses to admit a fit Person he is bound to provide another Benefice for him but our Ecclesiastical Law much better puts him upon the Proof of the Cause of his Refusal But if the Bishop doth not examine him the Canonists say it is a Proof sufficient that he did it malitiosé If a Bishop once rejects a Man for Insufficiency he cannot afterwards accept or admit of him as was adjudged in the Bishop of Hereford's Case If a Man brings a Presentation to a Benefice the Bishop is not barely to examine him as to Life and Abilities but he must be satisfied that he is in Orders How can he be satisfied unless the other produce them How can he produce them when it may be they are lost What is to be done in this Case The Canon is express That no Bishop shall institute any to a Benefice
Incouragement both to repair Old Churches and to build New However the Work went on slowly Augustin consecrated but two Bishops which were setled at London and Rochester where Ethelbert built and endowed two Churches for the Bishops and their Clergy to live together In the Western Parts Bicinus built several Churches about Dorchester where his See was fixed Wilfred converted the South-Saxons and settled Presbyters in the Isle of Wight but they were but two In the Kingdom of Mercia there were five Diocesses made in Theodore's time and Putta Bishop of Rochester being driven from his See he obtained from Saxulphus a Mercian Bishop a Church with a small Glebe and there he ended his Days In the Northern Parts we read of two Churches built by two Noblemen Puch and Addi upon their own Manors And the same might be done elsewhere but Bede would never have mentioned these if the thing had been common But in his Epistle to Egbert Archbishop of York a little before his Death he intimates the great Want of Presbyters and Parochial Settlements and therefore earnestly perswades him to procure more And if Egbert's Canons be genuine of which there are several Ancient MSS. the Duties of Presbyters in their several Churches are set down However the Work went not on so fast but in his Successor Eanbaldus his time the Bishops were required to find out convenient places to build Churches in and the same passed in the Southern Parts by general Consent In the Council of Cloveshoo we read of Presbyters placed up and down by the Bishops in the Manors of the Laity and in several Parts distinct from the Episcopal See and there they are exhorted to be diligent in their Duties In the times of Edgar and Canutus we read of the Mother Churches which had the Original Settlement of Tithes after they were given to the Church by several Laws and of the Churches built upon their own Lands by the Lords of Manors to which they could only apply a third Part of the Tithes But in the Laws of Canutus we find a fourfold Distinction of Churches 1. The Head Church or the Bishop's See 2. Churches of a second Rank which had Right of Sepulture and Baptism and Tithes 3. Churches that had Right of Sepulture but not frequented 4. Field-Churches or Oratories which had no Right of Burial The second sort seem to be the Original Parochial Churches which had the Endowment of Tithes and were so large that several other Churches were taken out of them by the Lords of Manors and so the Parishes came to be multiplied so much that in the Laws of Edward the Confessor c. 9. it is said That there were then Three or Four Churches where there had been but One before In this Diocess I find by an Epistle of Wulston Bishop of Worcester to Anselm that before the Conquest there were Churches in Vills or upon particular Manors that were consecrated And if William the Conqueror demolished Six and thirty Parish Churches in the Compass of the New Forest as is commonly said there must be a very great Number before the Conquest although so few are said to appear in Doomsday Book yet there are many parochial Churches of this Diocess in it above twenty in two Deanaries but the Normans almost ruined the parochial Clergy by seizing the Tithes and making Appropriations of them But in the Saxon times the Number still encreased as Lords of Manors and others were willing to erect new Churches and to have a settled Parochial Minister among them who was to take Care of the Souls of the people within such a Precinct as hath obtained the Name of a Parish But Parishes now are of a very different Extent and Value but the Obligation which the Law puts upon them is the same only where the Maintenance is greater they may have the more Assistants And from hence came the Difference among the Parochial Clergy for those whose Parishes were better endowed could maintain inferior Clerks under them who might be useful to them in the publick Service and assist them in the Administration of Sacraments And this was the true Original of those we now call Parish-Clerks but were at first intended as Clerks-Assistant to him that had the Cure and therefore he had the Nomination of them as appears by the Ecclesiastical Law both here and abroad And Lyndwood saith Every Vicar was to have enough to serve him and One Clerk or more and by the Canon-Law no Church could be founded where there was not a Maintenance for Assisting-Clerks In the Synod of Worcester under Walter Cantelupe in Henry the Third's time they are called Capellani Parochiales and the Rectors of Parishes were required to have such with them And the Canon Law doth allow a Rector to give a Title to another to receive Orders as an Assistant to him and this without any prejudice to the Patron 's Right because but One can have a Legal Title to the Cure But Lyndwood observes very well That those who gives Titles to others as their Assistants or Curates are bound to maintain them if they want These are called Vicarii Parochiales Stipendiarii but Conductitii Presbyteri who are forbidden were those who took Livings to farm without a Title But after Appropriations came in then there were another sort of Vicars called Perpetui and were endowed with a certain Portion of the Temporalities and were admitted ad Curam Animarum But such could not Personam Ecclesiae sustinere in an Action at Law about the Rights of the Church but as to their own Right they might But still there is another sort of Vicars who are Perpetual but not Endowed any otherwise than the Bishop did allow a congrua Portio and this was in Appropriations where the Bishop consented only upon those Terms as they generally were so made till the Neglect made the Statutes necessary 15 R. 2. 6. and 4 H. 4. 12. The Bishops were to make or enlarge the Allowance say the Canonists after Presentation and before Institution and were to see that it were a sufficient Subsistence But there were some Cures which had Chapels of Ease belonging to them and they who offiuated in them were called Capellani and had their Subsistence out of the Oblations and Obventions and were often Perpetual and Presentative And where the Incumbents had several Chapels of Ease and only Assistants to supply them the Canon Law doth not call them Rectores but Plebani who had a sort of peculiar Jurisdiction in lesser Matters but still they were under the Bishops Authority in Visitations and other Ecclesiastical Censures because the Care of the whole Diocess belonged to him Iure Communi and so it was taken for granted in all Parts of the Christian World And especially in this Kingdom where Parochial Episcopacy was never heard of till of late
made the Christian Doctrine ridiculous to found its Fundamental Precepts on extravagant Notions and Mystical Contemplations And so for the Love of our Neighbours to allow only a Love of Benevolence and Charity and not of Delight and Complacency is to make Nice Distinctions where God hath made none But to take away the Love of Complacency in Friends and Relations and the Blessings which God gives for the Comfort of Life is to overthrow the due Sense of God's Goodness in giving them and to take away a great Measure of that Gratitude we owe to God for them But when any seem very fond of such Notions and shew so much Self-Complacency in them it is impossible upon such Principles that they should love their Neighbours as themselves 4. If you would understand the New Testament aright fix in your Minds a true Scheme of the State of the Controversies of that Time which will give you more light into the true knowledge of the Scriptures than large Volumes of Commentators or the best Systems of Modern Controversies As what the Iewish Notions of Justification by Works and Expiation of Sin were and of God's Decrees of Election and Reprobation as to themselves And what the Principles of the Judaizing Christians were as to the joyning the Law and the Gospel and the Pythagorean Superstition together And what the Gnosticks who were professed Libertines held as to Grace Redemption Liberty Government c. All which tend very much to the clearing the Sense of the New Testament 5. Where the Sense appears doubtful and Disputes have been raised about it enquire into the Sense of the Christian Church in the first Ages as the best Interpreter of Scripture as whether the Apostles left Bishops or Presbyters to succeed them in the Government of Churches Whether the Apostles appointed the Lords Day to be observed as the Day of Publick Worship Whether Baptism were not to be Administred to Infants as well as Circumcision both being Seals of God's Covenant Whether Divine Worship doth not belong to Christ and were â—oâ— given to him in the Hymns and Doxologies of the Primitive Church and Whether Divine Worship can be given to any Creature Whether the Form of Baptism was not understood so as to imply a Trinity of Persons and Whether all true Christians were not Baptized into this Faith and consequently Whether denying the Trinity be not renouncing Christian Baptism These and many other such Questions of great Importance receive great Light from the Writings of the first Ages But some Rules may be very useful for right judging the Sense of those Times 1. To distinguish the Genuine and Supposititious Writings of that Time This hath been examined with so much Care by Learned Men of this last Age that it is no hard matter to make a true Judgment about them 2. In those that are Genuine to distingush the Sense of the Church delivered by them from their own particular Opinions the Sense of the Church is best known by Publick Acts as by Creeds Sacraments Hymns Prayers and Censures of such as oppose or contradict them 3. To put a Difference between the Authority of private Persons and of the Bishops and Governours of the Church who may be presumed to understand the Sense of the Church and the Doctrine of the Apostles better than the other And so Clemens Ignatius Polycarp Theophilus and Irenaeus are more to be trusted as to the Sense and Practice of the Christian Church than such as Hermes and Papias and Tatianus who had neither the Judgment nor the Authority of the other 4. That may be justly looked on as the Sense of the Church which is owned both by the Friends and the Enemies of it The Enemies of Christianity charged them with many Things which the Apologists utterly denied Now we find Pliny charging the Christians with singing Hymns to Christ as to God several Christian Writers of that time mention this but never go about to soften or to excuse or deny it And so we find Lucian deriding the Christians for the Doctrine of Three and One which the Apologists of that time are so far from denying that they assert and vindicate it as appears by Athenagoras and others But these things I only touch at to shew how the Sense of the Church is to be taken and how from thence the Sense of the Scriptures may be cleared OF THE Particular Duties OF THE PAROCHIAL CLERGY AT A VISITATION October 27 th 1696. My Brethren AS often as it pleases God in his wise Providence to bring me among you in the ordinary Course of my Visitation I cannot satisfie my self that I do my own Duty unless I put you in mind of doing yours We live in an Age wherein the Contempt of the Clergy is too notorious not to be observed but the true Reasons are not so well considered as they ought to be Some to increase the Contempt of the Clergy have given such Reasons of it as seem to make it a light and jesting matter but truly it is very far from being so For the Contempt of Religion is oft-times both the Cause and the Effect of it It is not at all to be wondred at that those who hate to be reformed should hate those whose Duty and Business it ought to be to endeavour to reform them But when Religion is struck at through our Sides we ought with Patience to bear the Wounds and Reproaches we receive in so good a Cause Wo be to us if those who are Enemies to Religion speak well of us For it is a strong Presumption that they take us to be of their side in our Hearts and that we are distinguished only by our Profession which they look on only as our Trade And we give too much occasion for such Suspicions of us if we do not heartily concern our selves for the Honour and Interest of true Religion in the World whatever we may suffer as to our Reputation for the sake of it It is possible that if we go about to humour such Persons in their Infidelity and Contempt of Religion we may escape some hard Words for the present but they cannot but have the greatest inward Contempt and Hatred of all those who live upon Religion and yet have not the Courage to defend it And what Satisfaction can such have when they reflect upon themselves and think what Occasion they have given to confirm such Persons in their Infidelity and to make them think the worse of Religion for their sakes The best thing we can do to recover the Honour of Religion and to set our Profession above Contempt is to apply our selves seriously and conscientiously to do our Duties For if others find that we are in earnest and make it our great Business to do all the Good we can both in the Pulpit and out of it if we behave our selves with that Gravity Sobriety Meekness and Charity which becomes so holy a Profession we shall raise our selves above the common
with it since they let go so many Advantages over the People by the Reformation Thanks be to God we have Scripture and Reason and Antiquity of our side but these are dry and insipid things to the common People unless some Arts be used to recommend them But since our main Support lies in the Honesty and Justice of our Cause without Tricks and Devices we ought to look very well to that part of our Profession which keeps up any Reputation among the People and that is Preaching Those who are so weak or lazy as to be glad to have that laid aside too in a great measure never well considered the Design of our Profession or the way to support it It 's true for some time Preaching was an extraordinary thing in the Church and none but Great and Eloquent Men of Authority in the Church were permitted to preach and the greatest Bishops were then the Preachers as appears by the Sermons of S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Augustin c. And even some of the Bishops of Rome whatever Sozomen saith were frequent Preachers as appears by Gregory's Homilies on Ezekiel and the Gospels And if it were not then practised he did very ill to complain of the Burden of it and the Danger of neglecting it But in other Churches while the Bishop and the Presbyters lived together before parochial Cures were settled the Presbyters had no constant Office of preaching but as the Bishops appointed them occasionally But afterwards when the Presbyters were fixed in their Cures they were required to be very diligent and careful in preaching or instructing the people committed to their Charge as may be seen in many early Canons of the Gallican Church and so it was here in England Council of Cloveshoo c. 8. 14. Egbert Can. 3. and that not only in the moving way in the Pulpit but in the familiar and instructing way which we call Catechizing Concil Cloveshoo c. 11. Can. Egbert 6. Both ought to be done because they are both very useful The Principles and Foundations of Religion must be well laid to make the people have any Taste or Relish of preaching otherwise it is like reading Mathematicks to those who understand not Numbers or Figures Erasmus observes that the Sense of Religion grows very cold without preaching and that the Countess of Richmond Mother to H. 7. had such a Sense of the Necessity of it in those times that she maintained many Preachers at her own Charges and imployed Bishop Fisher to find out the best qualified for it And since the Reformation the Church of Rome hath been more sensible of the Necessity of it as appears by the Council of Trent Cardinal Borromeo one of the most Celebrated Saints since that time frequently insists upon it gives Directions about it and speaks of it as a thing which tends very much to the Glory of God and the Salvation of Souls And to the same purpose other Great Men among them as Cardinal Palaeotus Godeau Bordenave and others Would it not then be a great Shame for us who pretend to a Zeal for Reformation and the true Religion to neglect or lessen the Reputation of those things which our Adversaries have learnt from us and glory in them and those are Diligence in Preaching and Catechizing Which none can despise who value Religion none can neglect who have any Regard to the Interest or Honour of their Profession 3. The next Duty is the solemn Administration of the Sacraments which ought to be done in the publick Assemblies where there is not a great Reason to the contrary The Saxon Canons are express That Baptism unless in Case of Necessity should be administred only in due Times and Places Egber Can. 10 11. While the Ancient Discipline was kept up and Baptism only celebrated at the great Festivals there was a Necessity of its being publick and the Catechumens underwent several Scrutinies which lasted several days in the Face of the Church as S. Augustin observes after they had been kept under private Examination for some time before But when whole Nations were not only converted but Infants generally baptized the former Method of Discipline was changed But yet the Church retained her Right as to Satisfaction about the due Admission of her Members And that is the true Reason why after private Baptism the Child is required to be brought to the publick Congregation For Baptism is not intended to be done before a select Number of Witnesses but in the Face of the Church which is the regular and solemn Way however the Bishop may dispense in some particular Cases which he judges reasonable At first Baptism was administred publickly as Occasion served by Rivers as Bede saith Paulinus baptized many in the Rivers before Oratories or Churches were built Afterwards the Baptistery was built at the Entrance of the Church or very near it which is mentioned by Athanasius S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Augustin c. The Baptistery then had a large Bason in it which held the Persons to be baptized and they went down by Steps into it Afterwards when Immersion came to be disused Fonts were set up at the Entrance of Churches But still the place was publick But in Case of Necessity there is a Form prescribed and I do not see how any without leave can use the Form of Publick Baptism in private Houses which is against both our Ancient and Modern Canons In the Greek Church it is Deprivation to do it and the Synod under Photius confirms it both as to the Eucharist and Baptism because publick Order is to be preserved But it is there understood to be done in Opposition to the Bishop's Authority whose Consent may make the Case different if they judge it reasonable But Ministerial Officers are not Judges in an equitable Case against a standing Rule 4. Another Duty of the parochial Clergy is to be able and ready to resolve Penitential Cases which relate to the Internal Court of Conscience and not the External and Judiciary Court which respects the Honour of the Church as to scandalous Offences committed by the Members of it And this takes in the Private and Occasional Duties of the parochial Clergy for they ought to inform themselves of the Spiritual Condition of their People that they may be able to give suitable Advice and Directions to them both in Health and Sickness But chiefly to be able to give them safe and seasonable Advice under Troubles of Conscience by reason of wilful Sins Duarenus a very considerable Lawyer thinks the main Business of the Clergy as to the Cure of Souls lies in the Power of Binding and Loosing i. e. in dealing aright with the Consciences of Men as to the Guilt of their Sins And the Rules of the Penitential Court are different from those of the Ecclesiastical Court as well as the End is different In the
License but if any one preached in other parts of the Diocess or were a Stranger in it then he was to be examined by the Diocesan and if he were found tam Moribus quam Scientia idoneus he might send him to preach to one or more Parishes as he thought meet and he was to shew his License to the Incumbent of the Place before he was to be permitted to preach under the Episcopal Seal And thus as far as I can find the Matter stood as to Preaching before the Reformation After it when the Office of Ordination was reviewed and brought nearer to the Primitive Form and instead of delivering the Chalice and Patten with these words Accipe potestatem offerre Deo Sacrificium c. the Bishop delivered the Bible with these words Take thou Authority to Preach the Word of God and to Minister the Holy Sacraments in the Congregation c. The Priests Exhortation was made agreeable thereto wherein he exhorts the Persons in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ to consider the Weight and Importance of the Office and Charge they are called to not barely to instruct those who are already of Christ's Flock but to endeavour the Salvation of those who are in the midst of this naughty World And therefore he perswades and charges them from a due regard to Christ who suffered for his Sheep and to the Church of Christ which is so dear to him to omit no Labor Care or Diligence in instructing and reforming those who are committed to their Charge And the better to enable them to perform these things there are some Duties especially recommended to them viz. Prayer and Study of the Holy Scriptures according to which they are to instruct others and to order their own Lives and of those who belong to them And that they might the better attend so great a Work they are required to forsake and set aside as much as they may all worldly Cares and Studies and apply themselves wholly to this one thing that they may save themselves and them that hear them After which follows the solemn Profession wherein they undertake to do these things This is that my Brethren which I earnestly desire of you that you would often consider You are not at liberty now whether you will do these things or not for you are under a most solemn Engagement to it You have put your Hands to the Plough and it is too late to think of looking back and you all know the Husbandman's Work is laborious and painful and continually returning It is possible after all his Pains the Harvest may not answer his Expectation but yet if he neither plows nor sows he can expect no Return if he be idle and careless and puts off the main of his Work to others can he reasonably look for the same Success Believe it all our Pains are little enough to awake the sleepy and secure Sinners to instruct the Ignorant to reclaim the Vitious to rebuke the Profane to convince the Erroneous to satisfie the Doubtful to confirm the Wavering to recover the Lapsed and to be useful to all according to their several Circumstances and Conditions It is not to preach a Sermon or two in a Weeks Time to your Parishioners that is the main of your Duty that is no such difficult Task if Men apply their minds as they ought to do to Divine Matters and do not spend their Retirements in useless Studies but the great Difficulty lies in Watching over your Flock i. e. knowing their Condition and applying your selves uitably to them He that is a Stranger to his Flock and only visits them now and then can never be said to watch over it he may watch over the Fleeces but he understands little of the State of his Flock viz. of the Distempers they are under and the Remedies proper for them The Casuists say That the Reason why there is no Command for Personal Residence in Scripture is because the Nature of the Duty requires it for if a Person be required to do such things which cannot be done without it Residence is implied As a Pilot to a Ship needs no Command to be in his Ship for how can he do the Office of a Pilot out of it Let none think to excuse themselves by saying that our Church only takes them for Curates and that the Bishops have the Pastoral Charge for by our old Provincial Constitutions which are still in force so far as they are not repugnant to the Law of the Land even those who have the smallest Cures are called Pastors and Lyndwood there notes that Parochialis Sacerdos dicitur Pastor and that not meerly by way of Allusion but in respect of the Care of Souls But we need not go so far back For what is it they are admitted to Is it not ad curam Animarum Did not they promise in their Ordination To teach the People committed to their Care and Charge The Casuists distinguish a threefold Cure of Souls 1. In foro interiori tantum and this they say is the Parochial Cure 2. In foro exteriori tantum where there is Authority to perform Ministerial Acts as to suspend excommunicate absolve sine Pastorali Curâ and this Archdeacons have by Virtue of their Office 3. In utroque simul where there is a special Care together with Jurisdiction this is the Bishops And every one of these say they secundum commune Ius Canonicum is obliged to Residence i. e. by the common Law Ecclesiastical of which more afterwards The Obligation is to perpetual Residence but as it is in other positive Duties there may other Duties intervene which may take away the present force of it as care of Health necessary Business publick Service of the King or Church c. But then we are to observe that no Dispensation can justifie a Man in point of Conscience unless there be a sufficient Cause and no Custom can be sufficient against the natural Equity of the Case whereby every one is bound from the Nature of the Office he hath undertaken I confess the case in Reason is different where there is a sufficient Provision by another fit Person and approved by those who are to take care that Places be well supplied and where there is not but yet this doth not take off the force of the Personal Obligation arising from undertaking the Cure themselves which the Ecclesiastical Law understands to be not meerly by Promise but cum effectu as the Canonists speak which implies personal Residence Not that they are never to be away Non sic amarè intelligi debet ut nunquam inde recedat saith Lyndwood but these Words are to be understood civili modo as he expresses it i. e. not without great Reason There must not be saith he callida Interpretatio sed talis ut cessent fraudes negligentiae i. e. There must be no Art used to evade the Law nor any gross Neglect of
Saxon times there were both here There were Ecclesiastical Law which related to Judicial Cases wherein a publick Penance was injoyned in order to the Churches Satisfaction But there were many Cases which were not publick and yet great Care was to be used as to the Direction of Penitents as appears by the Penitentials of Theodore and Bede in the Saxon times Whereby we learn that a Difference was to be observed as to the Nature of Offences and the Circumstances of Persons and Actions and the Measure of Contrition and the particular Method is set down in the penitential Books which was in very material Circumstances different from the Methods used in the Church of Rome But it is a thing necessary for every parochial Minister to be able to settle doubting Consciences and to put them into the best Methods of avoiding Sin for the future without which the Absolution of the Priest signifies nothing For where God doth not absolve the Church cannot 5. Giving a good Example to the People committed to your Charge This is often mentioned in the Saxon Canons Council at Cloveshoo c. 8. Canons of Egbert 14 15 18 19 33. in the Laws of Alfred c. 3. of Edward c. 3. Constit. of Odo c. 4 5. of Edgar 57 58 59 60 61 64. of Canutus c. 26. And in the Conclusion of one Collection of his Laws are these Words Happy is that Shepherd who by his good Life and Doctrine leads his Flock to Eternal and Heavenly Ioys and happy is that Flock that follows such a Shepherd who hath rescued them out of the Devil's Hands and put them into God's 6. Lastly the Performance of all these Duties supposes a constant Residence among your People without which it is impossible to discharge them in such a manner as to give them and your selves full Satisfaction This I am sensible is a very nice and tender Point and the Difficulties of it do arise from these things On one side it is said 1. That there is an Allowance by the Law given to several Persons to hold more Benefices than one and since the Distribution of Benefices is not by the Law of God but by the Law of the Land what Fault is there in making use of the Privileges which the Law gives But there cannot be constant Residence in more Places than one 2. That the general Service of the Church is more to be preferred than taking Care of a particular Parish because the necessary Duties of a Parish may be supplied by persons approved by the Bishop and a single Living seldom affords a sufficient Competency for persons to be capable of publick Service 3. That the way of Subsistence for the Clergy is now much altered from what it was when Celibacy was enjoyned For a Competency was always supposed where Residence was strictly required and what was a Competency to a single person is not so to a Family 4. That the Church hath a power of Relaxing the Severity of Ancient Canons from the different Circumstances of things and when the general Good of the Church may be more promoted therein as in the Removal of Clergymen from one Diocess to another and the Translation of Bishops 5. That the Case is now very different as to Dispensations from what it was in the Church of Rome as to the Number of Benefices and the manner of obtaining them that a great Restraint is laid by our Laws upon Pluralities and our own Metropolitan is the Judge when they are fit to be granted But on the other side it is objected 1. That in the first Constitution of parochial Churches every Incumbent was bound to a strict Residence so in the Canons of Egbert Can. 25. Presbyters are said to be settled in those Churches which had a House and Glebe belonging to them and many Canons were then expresly made That no Person should have more than one Church and it is said in the Capitulars that this had been several times decreed And so it is in Herardus his Collection of Canons Can. 49. in Isaac Lingonensis Tit. 1. c. 24. in Chrodegangus c. 67. in Ivo Carnotensis part 3. c. 51. in Regino l. 1. c. 254. The like we find in the Spanish Churches Concil Tolet. 16. c. 5. and thence in the Canonâ—Law C. 10. Q. 3. c. 3. and in the Greek Churches Concil 7. Can. 15. C. 21. Q. 1. c. 1. And as soon as the Abuse crept in in these Western Churches it was complained of and endeavoured to be redressed Concil Paris 6. c. 49. Concil Aquisgran 2. part 2. c. 5. Concil Metens c. 3. That afterwards not meerly the Mendicant Friars complained of them as some have suggested but some of the greatest Bishops have been zealous against them as Gulielmus Parisiensis Peraldus Archbishop of Lions Iacobus de Vitriaco Bishop of Acon Robert de Câ—orton Cardinal Guiard Bishop of Cambray and Gregory IX declared That he could only dispense with the Penalty of the Law After a solemn Disputation at Paris it was determined against Pluralities if one Benefice be sufficient and all the Divines joyned with the Bishop therein except two so that it seemed to be the current Opinion of the Learned and Pious Men of that Time Aquinas saith It is a doubtful Point but Cajetan is positive against them So that all the Zeal against Pluralities is not to be imputed to the Piques of the Friars against the Secular Clergy although there is no Question but they were so much the more earnest in it but in the Council of Trent the Bishops of Spain were the most zealous as to the Point of Residence and the Friars against it as appears by Catharinus and others 2. Setting aside all Authorities the Argument in Point of Conscience seems the strongest against Non-residence because persons have voluntarily undertaken the Cure of Souls within such Limits and although the Bounds be fixed by Human Authority yet since he hath undertaken such a Charge personally knowing those Bounds it lies upon his Conscience to discharge the Duties incumbent upon him which cannot be done without constant Residence as the Magistrates are bound in Conscience to do their Duty although the Bounds are settled by Human Laws And so in the case of Property Human Laws bind so that it is a Sin to invade what is settled by them And if it be left to a Man's Conscience whether a Man answers his Obligation more by personal Attendance or by a Curate whether the Honour of Religion and the Good of Souls be more promoted and the Peace of his own Mind secured by one or the other it is no hard matter to judge on which side it must go It is impossible to defend all the Arguments used in the old Canons against Pluralities as that Polygamy is unlawful under the Gospel So that as a Bishop hath but one City and a Man but one Wife so a Presbyter ought to have but one
publick Service the Severity of the Ancient Canons is with Reason abated and a person is supposed to undertake the Cure with those Measures which the Law and Canons allow But every Man who regards the doing his Duty out of Conscience will consider how much lies upon himself and that the original Intention of the Church and Laws was That no Man should undertake more than he was willing and ready to discharge as far as one Man's Abilities could go For in great Cities one great Parish requires more than several Churches in the Countrey and in such Cases an equitable Construction must be put upon such Canons which require personal performance of these Duties OF THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PAROCHIAL CLERGY BY LAW THE Subject I intend now to consider is the Incouragement which the Parochial Clergy have by Law for the doing their Duties Which are the Manse the Oblations and the Tithes I. The Manse or House and Glebe In the Canons of Egbert it is said Can. 25. That an entire Manse ought to belong to every Church without any other than Ecclesiastical Service By a Manse Mr. Selden saith in the old Charters the same is meant as a Casat or Hyde of Land Bignonius and Sirmondus say So much Glebe as was an Imployment for an Husbandman and two Servants Spelman saith It takes in the House too Lyndwood saith As much Land as would Imploy a Yoke of Oxen and so the Gloss on the Canon Law But in another place the Gloss saith The Manse is the original Endowment of the Church without which it cannot be supplied and without which it could not be consecrated For the Endowment was first to be produced before the Building Collatâ primitùs donatione solemni are the Words of the Canon Law And the same appears by Concil Valent. 3. c. 9. Concil Bracar 2. c. 5. Vit. Udalrici c. 7. Regino l. 1. c. 23 24. which is there explained to be a substantial Sustenance for those who were to attend the Service of that Church And in the Acts of Consecration of a parochial Church in Baluzius the Bishop in the first place declares himself satisfied with the Endowment unde dignè domus Dei sustentaretur And upon this the Original Right of Patronage was founded not upon the Soil which gave no Title where there was not a Church built and endowed with a competent Subsistence So that all Advowsons or Rights of Presentation in private Patrons were at first Appendant to Manors and not in Gross because the Right came from the Endowment out of the Manor And the Name of Patron in the Sense of the Feudal Law is the same with Lord of the Fee and so Beneficium is a Feudal Term and till the Feudal Law prevailed the Name of Patrom is rarely used in this Sense And when it came to be used the Patrons in France would have brought those who had their Benefices to a kind of Feudal Service and to have received Investiture from them This Mr. Selden drives at as though the Patrons had the Right of Investiture belonging to them because some such Practice is often complained of in the French Canons and as often condemned not meerly by Ecclesiastical Canons but by as good Laws as any were then made It cannot be denied that bad Practices are the Occasion of making good Laws but doth it follow that those Practices which were against Law were the Law of that time Yet this is Mr. Selden's way of Arguing he grants That there were Laws made but they were little obeyed Must we therefore conclude those illegal Practices to have been the standing Law and the Laws themselves to be illegal There were two things aimed at by those Patrons 1. To keep the Clergy in a sole Dependance on themselves witout Regard to the Bishop's Authority 2. To make such Bargains with them as they thought fit Both these were thought necessary to be redressed by Laws since the Canons were slighted by them And if the Practice be good against Law in one case why not in the other also Why is not Simony justified as well as the Patron 's absolute Power over the Incumbents but the Laws were severe against both For in the time of Lud. Pius A. D. 816. there was a solemn Assembly of the Estates of the Empire where several Ecclesiastical Laws were passed and among the rest these two 1. That no Presbyters should be put in or put out of Churches without the Authority and Consent of the Bishops and that the Bishops should not refuse those who were presented if they were probabilis Vitae Doctrinae i.e. such as the Bishops could not object against either for Life or Learning 2. That every Church should have an entire Manse belonging to it free from any Feudal Service but if they had other Estates of their own for them they were to answer to the Lords of the Manor as others did And from hence this came into the Collections of Ivo Regino Burchardus and Gratian and passed for a Law generally received As to the former a new Sanction was added to it in another Assembly at Worms A. D. 829. c. 1. and repeated in the Capitulars l. 5. c. 98. Addit 4. c. 95. and the like as to the latter l. 5. c. 100. Capit. A. 829. c. 4. But it seems there were some still continued obstinate in their former Practices and therefore these Laws were reinforced in another Assembly A. D. 869. in the time of Carolus Calvus who mentions the Laws of his Father and Grandfather to the same purpose c. 9. and there takes notice of the Contrivances made use of to defeat the Intention of those Laws and the bottom of all is there said to be abominable Simony Which shews what it was which these Patrons aimed at by claiming Investiture without the Bishop And it was then judged necessary that the Bishop's Consent was required to prevent this Mischief But still some Patrons required Feudal Service for the Glebe they had given to the Church but the Law commands them to restore it free from such Service Capit l. 5. c. 100. Addit l. 4. c. 98 163. And after much struggling Hinomarus who lived at that time saith That these Laws were observed The Patron 's Right by Virtue of the Endowment was not disputed but an Arbitrary Power as to the Incumbents was utterly denied them and they were put under the Bishop's Care who was to receive Complaints against them and to proceed according to the Churches Canons But I am apt to think that all this stir in France did not arise from the pretence of Original Donation and Endowment of Churches but from the Infeodation of Church Lands and Titles by Charles Martel as an old MS. in Filesacus saith and others in France whose Custom it was to give them in Recompence to their Souldiers who then looked on them as their
looked on Tithes in general as due to the Church as appears by very many of their Ancient Charters but they thought they did very well when they appropriated them to Monasteries of their own Erection or others as they thought fit But this Humour took so much among the Norman Nobility and served so many Purposes of Honour and Devotion as they thought besides Reason of State that the parochial Clergy were reduced to so poor a Condition that Alexander IV. complained of it as the Bane of Religion and Destruction of the Church and as a Poison which had spread over the whole Nation And it must be very scandalous indeed when the Pope complained of it For the Monks that were able generally got their Appropriations confirmed in the Court of Rome 2. There was a Competency to be settled on the parochial Clergy by the Bishops Consent which was required in order to the confirming an Appropriation as may be seen in Multitudes of them in the Monasticon besides those which are preserved in the Churches Registers Sometimes the Endowment is expressed and at other times it is reserved in the Bishop's power to do it as he sees Cause But the Bishops were either so remiss in those Times or the Monks so powerful at Rome that the poor Vicars fared so hardly that in the time of H. 2. Alexander III. sent a Reprimand to the Bishops for favouring the Monks too much and the Clergy too little and therefore requires the Bishops to take care that the Vicar had a competent Subsistence so as to be able to bear the Burden of his Place and to keep Hospitality This was directed to the Bishop of Worcester for it seems so long since the poor Vicars here were hardly provided for And yet I have seen several Forms of Appropriations made by the Bishops here after the Conquest wherein there is a twofold Salvo one for the Bishop's Right and another for a sufficient Maintenance for the Curate although the Church were appropriated ad communem usum Monachorum as of Wolstan Roger and of William in the time of Hen. II. when Alexander III. lived and of Walter de Grey Sylvester c. But it seems where a competent Subsistence had been decreed the Monks took the first Opportunity to lessen it which occasioned another Decretal in the Canon Law wherein any such thing is forbidden without the Bishop's Consent In other Places they pleaded Custom for it thence came another Decree of the Lateran Council to void all such Customs by whomsoever introduced where there was not a competent Subsistence for him that served the Cure The Monks were still refractary in this matter and because the Bishops had Power to refuse any person presented by the Monks unless they did consent to such a reasonable Allowance as the Bishop thought fit therefore they grew sullen and would not present in which Case another Decretal was made to give the Bishop Power to present And after all Clement V. De Iure Patron c. 1. reinforced the former Decretals and injoyned the Diocesans in the strictest manner not to admit any person presented to a Cure where the Church was appropriated unless sufficient Allowance were made by the Bishop's Consent and Approbation and all Custom and Privileges to the contrary are declared to be void But how far doth this hold among us now since the Appropriations are become Lay-Fees and the Bishop's Power is not mentioned in the Statute of Dissolution To this I shall give a clear Answer but I doubt not satisfactory to all Parties concerned For as Necessity and Power so some Mens Interest and Reason live very near one another 1. The Statute of Dissolution leaves all matters of Right as to persons interested just as they were before For by the Surrender the King was to have the Monasteries and Tithes in as large and ample a manner as the Abbots then had them in Right of their Houses and in the same State and Condition as they then were or of Right ought to have been And so res transit cum suo onere But this is not all For there is an Express Salvo for all Rights Claims Interests c. of all Persons and Bodies Politick So that if by the Law of England there was such an Antecedent Right in the Vicar to his Allowance and in the Bishop to assign it it is not taken away by this Statute nor any other 2. By the Law of England the Bishop had a Right to provide a competent Maintenance for supplying the Cure upon an Appropriation We are told by an unquestionable Authority in point of Law that 9 Car. 1. this Point was brought before the Kings Bench in the Case of Thornburgh and Hitchcot The Vicar complained that the Church was appropriated and that he wanted a competent Maintenance a Prohibition was prayed but denied upon this Reason That the Vicar had Reason for his Suit and that the Ordinary might compel the Impropriator to make it greater because in all Appropriations that Power was reserved to the Ordinary And so in the Year-Books it is allowed That the Ordinary may increase or diminish the Vicar's Portion 40 E. 3. Cas. 15. f. 28. By our Provincial Constitutions the Bishop is to take care that the Vicar have a competent Allowance which at that time was set at Five Marks but Lyndwood observes that as the Price of things rose so the Allowance was increased and in Stipendiaries it was then advanced to Eight or Ten Marks which according to Sir H. Spelman's Computation comes to above Sixty Pounds per Annum But some have told us That by some old Statutes even beneficed Persons were not by Law to have above Six Marks per Annum for this was the Sum allowed to Parish Priests which is so gross a Mistake in any that pretend to Law or Antiquity that it is to be wondred how they could fall into it The Truth of the Case was this the parochial Chaplains or Priests were complained of 36 E. 3. n. 23. that they could not be gotten to attend after the Plague but at excessive Rates upon this a Provincial Constitution was made extant in the Parliament Rolls wherein they are obliged to demand no more than Six Marks But who were these Parish-Priests Not such as had the legal Endowments but those who depended on the Good-Will of the Parson or People and were hired to officiate in Chapels of Ease or to perform Offices for the Dead which were so frequent at that time And these were called Annual Chaplains or Masse Chaplains and were distinguished from Domestick Chaplains who officiated in great Mens Houses in their private Oratories and from Beneficed Persons as appears by many Constitutions But whatever was understood by the Act of Parliament then it was repealed 21 Iac. 1. 28. 3. The Law of England as to a competent Subsistence for the Vicars or
and the more Ancient the more Suspicious But the Lord Chancellor and three Chief Judges declared That by the Common Law of England every Bishop in his Diocess and the Archbishops in Convocation may make Canons to bind within the Limits of their Jurisdiction 3. The subordinate Jurisdiction which was lodged in the Bodies of the Clergy resident in Cathedral Churches and of Archdeacons in the several Diocesses I cannot find either of these to have had any Jurisdiction here before the Conquest neither were there any Courts of Justice out of the several Counties before for all Causes were transacted in the County-Courts and Sheriffs Turns and Appeals lay from them to the Supreme Judicature of the King and the Lords But this doth not hinder but these Courts may be founded on the Law of England And so the original Jurisdiction which of Right belonged to the Bishop might by degrees and a gradual Consent come to be committed as to some parts to the Bodies of Cathedral Churches and to the Archdeacons who are saith my Lord Coke Sixty in England We are told in a late Case of Woodward and Fox That there are Archdeaconries in England by Prescription which have no Dependency on the Bishop but are totally exempt And for this Godolphin is cited who refers to the Gloss on the Legatine Constitutions f. 27. where we read of some Archdeacons having a customary and limited Iurisdiction separate from the Bishop for which a Prescription lies But this is only for some special Iurisdiction as the Archdeacon of Richmond for Institutions which came first by Grant from the Bishops but that not being to be produced they insist upon Custom and Prescription as the Deans and Chapters do where the Ancient Compositions are lost But none who understand the Ancient Constitution of this Church can suppose either of them to have been Original since the Right to the Jurisdiction of the Diocess was in the Bishop before there were here either Archdeacons or Chapters with Jurisdiction In the Case of Chiverton and Trudgeon it was declared That an Archdeacon might have a peculiar Jurisdiction as to Administration c. as the Dean of St. Paul's had at S. Pancras and so the Archdeacon of Cornwall as to Wills In the case of Gastril and Iones the Chief Justice declared That the Archdeacon is the Bishop's Officer and his Authority subordinate to the Bishops and granted by them but if special Custom be pleaded that must be well proved to which Dodderidge agreed But we must distinguish between Archdeaconries by Prescription for which I can find no Foundation being all derived by Grant from the Bishop and Archdeacons having some kind of Iurisdiction by Prescription which others have not which cannot be denied All the Power which the Archdeacons have by virtue of their Office is per modum scrutationis simplicis as Lyndwood speaks tanquam Vicarius Episcopi Whatever Power they have beyond this is not Iure communi but Iure speciali and depends either upon Grant or Custom which the Gloss on the Legatine Constitutions calls a limited Iurisdiction The Archdeacon's Court is declared by the Judges in Woodward ' s Case to have been time out of Mind settled as a distinct Court from which there lies an Appeal to the Bishop's Court by the Statute 24 H. 8. c. 12. And so the Archdeacon's Jurisdiction is founded on an immemorial Custom in Subordination to the Bishops As to Deans and Chapters I observe these things 1. That although Ecclesiastical Bodies in Cathedrals were very ancient yet we read not of any Jurisdiction peculiar to themselves during the Saxon times My Lord. Coke saith There were Chapters as the Bishop's Council before they had distinct possessions And by their Books he saith it appears that the Bishops parted with some of their Possessions to them and so they became Patrons of the Prebends of the Church Such were London York and Litchfield 2. That several of our Chapters were founded and endowed by the Bishops since the Conquest Such was that of Salusbury by Osmund out of his own Estate as appears by his Charter and the Confirmation of H. 2. So was that of Lincoln by Remigius who removed the See from Dorchester thither and placed there a Dean Treasurer Praecentor and Seven Archdeacons as Henry of Huntingdon saith who lived near the time And in following times those of Exeter and Wells were settled as Dean and Chapter for they were Ecclesiastical Bodies before but not under that Denomination 3. That some had the legal Rights of Dean and Chapters as to Election of Bishops and Confirmation of Leases c. but were a Monastick Body consisting of Prior and Convent Such were Canterbury Winchester Worcester after the Expulsion of the Secular Canons for the Monks not only enjoyed their Lands but were willing enough to continue the Name of Dean among them As at Canterbury after Dunstan's time Agelmothas is called Dean in Worcester Wolstan is called Dean when he was Prior and Winsius upon the first Change is said to be placed loco Decani by Florence of Worcester At Norwich Herbert the Bishop founded the Prior and Convent out of his own Possessions in the time of William II. and they became the Chapter of the Bishop by their Foundation Now as to these it is resolved in the Dean and Chapter of Norwich's Case That when the King transferred them from a Prior and Convent the Legal Rights remained the same And in Hayward and Fulcher's Case the Judges declared That an Ecclesiastical Body may surrender their Lands but they cannot dissolve their Corporation but they still remain a Chapter to the Bishop And it was not only then delivered but since insisted upon in a famous Case That it was the Resolution of the Iudges That a Surrender cannot be made by a Dean and Chapter without Consent of the Bishop because he hath an Interest in them 4. That H. 8. endowed some as Chapters to new erected Bishopricks as Chester Bristol Oxford c. 31 H. 8 9. 34 H. 8. 17. and united others as Bath and Wells and Coventry and Litchfield 33 H. 8. 30. 34 H. 8. 15. 5. That where the Custom hath so obtained there may be a Legal-Chapter without a Dean as in the Diocesses of S. David's and Landaff where there is no other Head of the Chapter but the Bishop but they must act as a distinct Body in Elections and Confirmations of Grants by the Bishops 6. That by the Ancient Custom of England there are sole Ecclesiastical Corporations as well as aggregate A sole Ecclesiastical Corporation is where a single Person represents a whole Succession and under that Capacity is impowered to Receive and to Convey an Estate to his Successors As Bishops Deans Archdeacons Parsons c. But Parsons and Vicars are seized only in Right of the Church but as to a Bishop he may have a Writ of
Customs of the Realm By which no less Men of the Law than Coke Popham and other Judges did think the Stile of the Court and Manner of their Proceedings was comprehended And the Ancient Episcopal Iurisdiction is declared to be according to Law by the Stat. 1 El. c. 1. and all Foreign Iurisdiction is abolished and the Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction annexed to the Crown of this Realm which is owned by every Bishop when he takes the Oath of Supremacy How then can it be imagined that he should do any more to the Prejudice of the Crown by the Process being in the Bishop's Name than the Lord of a Manor doth when he keeps his Courts in his own Name To suppose that it is owning a Foreign Iurisdiction is ridiculous for the Bishops of England never pretended to act as Ordinaries by Virtue of a Jurisdiction from the Pope but by Virtue of their Original Authority which they had by the Laws of the Realm as to their exterior Jurisdictions And the Authority they then acted by from the Pope was in Cases extraordinary when they were delegated by particular Commission And if there had been any real Derogation from the King's Prerogative in the Process being in the Bishop's Name can any Man of Sense imagine that it would have been permitted in such jealous times as to Supremacy as the latter end of H. 8. and the whole Reign of Q. Elizabeth were wherein the Bishops wanted not Enemies but their Malice would have been too apparent if they had insisted on such Objections But to proceed in shewing that the Ecclesiastical Laws have been owned by Acts of Parliament since the Reformation 2 E. 6. c. 13. n. 13. The Ecclesiastical Iudges are required to proceed according to the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws And to the same purpose 1 El. c. 2. n. 23. Accordingly my Lord Coke frequently owns the Ecclesiastical Laws and Iurisdiction so they be bounded by the Laws of the Realm of which there can be no Question For deciding of Controversies and for distribution of Iustice saith he there be within this Realm two distinct Iurisdictions the one Ecclesiastical limited to certain spiritual and particular Cases the other secular and general for that it is guided by the common and general Law of the Realm And to the same purpose my Lord Chief Justice Hales in several places in a MS. Discourse of the History and Analysis of the Common Law ch 1 and 2. But here the great Difficulty lies in finding out what these Canons and Constitutions are which have been so received and allowed by our Laws For it is certain that several Canons made by Popes were not received here as in the Statute of Merton about Legitimation of Children born before Marriage Stat. Mert. c. 9. where the Lords declared they would not alter the old Laws for a new Canon For Alexander III. in the time of Hen. II. had made a Canon to that purpose but as Glanvil saith it was contra jus consuetudinem Regni The Canon to take away the Benefit of the Clergy from Bigami was debated in Parliament how far it should be received and the Sense there declared which was complained of 51 E. 3. and taken away 1 E. 6. c. 12. The Canon against Investiture of Bishops by a Lay-hand was never here received for although H. 1. after a long Contest gave it up yet it was resumed by his Successors The Canons for Exemption of the Clergy were never fully received here Some Lawyers say it was never observed I suppose they mean according to the Canons but that they had legal Privileges here although not a total Exemption cannot be denied by any one versed in our Laws from the Saxon times The Pope's Canon for the Clergy not being taxed without his consent was never received as appears by the Contests about it in the time of E. 1. and their Submission afterwards The Pope's Canons about Appeals Provisors Dispensations c. were never received by such a general Consent as to make them Laws they were sometimes practised by Connivence and the Kings when it served their purposes let them alone but as often as there was occasion they were contested and denied and Statutes made against the Execution of them Some Canons I find disputed whether they were received by the Law of England or not As the Canon against Clergy mens Sons succeeding their Fathers in their Benefices immediately without a Papal Dispensation is not only a part of the Canon Law but enter'd in our Provincial Constitutions But in the Case of Stoke against Sykes it was held by Dodderidge and Iones two learned Judges That this Canon was not received here And Dodderidge instanced in two other Canons not received as against a Man's marrying a Woman he had committed Adultery with and a Lay-man's not revoking his first Presentation And Sir Iohn Davis mentioned reckoning the Months for Presentation by Weeks and not by the Calendar But both these are disputable Points For some say as to the former That none but the King can revoke a Presentation But the Canonists think a private Patron may vary with the Bishop's Consent And as to the way of computing the Months it hath been differently resolved but in Catesbie's Case it was determined to be Calendar-Months for many Reasons But in the ancient Resolution in the time of E. II. the Tempus semestre was reckoned from Notice to the Patron and not from the Death of the Incumbent Rolls saith By our Law it is from the time the Patron might have notice with regard to the distance of the Place where the Incumbent died Which leaves the matter uncertain But the Register reckons from the Vacancy In many other Cases the foreign Canons were not received for they allow but Four Months to a Lay-Patron but our Law Six Months they deny any Sale of a Right of Advowson but our Law allows it and a Separation of it from the Inheritance which the Canon Law allows not and so in other particulars but these are sufficient to my purpose It is observable that after the Council of Lions where the Pope was present Peckham Archbishop of Canterbury called a Provincial Council wherein he mentions the difference of our Customs from all others and a Temperament to be made suitable to them And our Judges in the great Case of Evans and Ayscough declared That no Canons bind here but such as are recieved by the Realm And Dodderidge said That our Ecclesiastical Law doth not consist of the Pope's Decretals but is an Extract out of the Ancient Canons General and National But the Judges agreed That when they are received they become part of our Law Lord Chief Justice Vaughan saith That if Canon Law be made a part of the Law of the Land then it is as much the Law of the Land and as well and by the same Authority as
any other part of the Law of the Land In another place That the Ancient Canon Law received in this Kingdom is the Law of the Kingdom in such Cases In a third That a lawful Canon is the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament III. I now come to the third thing viz. The Power of making Canons by Act of Parliament This is founded on the Statute 25 H. 8. c. 19. The Words are That no Canons Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial or Synodal shall be made promulged and executed without the King 's Royal Assent or Licence Canons so made and authorized by the King's Letters Patents according to the Form of the Statute are said by Lord Chief Justice Vaughan to be Canons warranted by Act of Parliament And such he affirms the Canons of A. D. 1603. to be But some have objected That these are only Negative Words and are not an Introduction of a new Law but a Declaration of what the Law was before But my Lord Coke with far greater Judgment limits that Expression That what was then passed was declaratory of the Common Law to that Clause That no Canons should be in Force which were repugnant to the Laws of the Realm But as to the making of new Canons he only saith That their Iurisdiction and Power is much limited because they must have licence to make them and the King 's Royal Assent to allow them before they be put in Execution But he never imagined the Sense of the Statute to be That no Canons could be made but in Parliament or that the King had not a Power to confirm new Canons made by the Convocation As to the Law as it stood before we must distinguish these two things 1. Convocations called by the King 's Writ to the Bishops and the body of the Clergy could never assemble without it But the Writ for the Convocation to sit with the Parliament not together in Place but at the same time is contained in the Writ to the Bishop and begins with the Clause Praemunientes And it is most probable that it began on the same Ground that the Attendance of Burgesses did viz. That when they were brought into the Payment of Subsidies they ought to give their Consent For I find that in the time of H. 3. A. R. 39. the Inferiour Clergy complained That they were taxed without their Consent 2. Convocations called by the King 's Writ to the Archbishops and in this Province the Archbishop sends his Mandate to the Bishop of London who is to summon all the Bishops c. to appear at a certain Time and Place and to act as they receive Authority from the King The not distinguishing these two Writs hath caused so much Confusion in some Mens Minds about the Rights of the Convocation For they imagine that the Convocation as it treats of Ecclesiastical Matters sits by Virtue of the first Writ which is in the Bishops Summons to Parliament but that related to them as one of the three Estates of the Realm whose Consent was then required to their own Subsidies which were distinctly granted but confirmed by the other Estates But the other Writ was directed to the Archbishop by which the Bishops and Inferiour Clergy were strictly required to appear and then to understand the King's further Pleasure as appears by the most ancient Writs for a Convocation Which shews that the Convocation properly so called is an Occasional Assembly for such purposes as the King shall direct them when they meet And this was the true Foundation upon which the Statute 25 H. 8. was built For it cannot be denied that in Fact there had been Convocations for Ecclesiastical Purposes called without the Kings Writ by Virtue of the Archbishop's Legatine Power which was permitted to be exercised here although it were an Usurpation upon the King 's Right So even in the time of H. 8. although there were a Convocation summoned by the King 's Writ to the Archbishop of Canterbury yet Cardinal Wolsley by Virtue of his Legatine Power superiour to that of the Archbishop removed the Convocation to another place and presided in it Which was as great an Affront to the King 's as well as the Archbishop's Authority as could well be imagined But this was then patiently born Wherefore the Statute is to be understood of Legal and not of Legatine Convocations But when H. 8. was sufficiently provoked by the Court of Rome he resolved to resume the ancient and legal Rights of the Crown how soever disused by modern Usurpations And among these he claimed this of summoning the Convocation and directing the Proceedings therein The Difference of these Writs will best appear by the Instance of the Convocation A. D. 1640. In the Year 1639. about the first of February the Parliament Writ was issued out to the Bishops for calling their Clergy to Parliament and this is only ad consentiendum iis quae tunc ibidem de communi Concilio Regni nostri contigerint ordinari The other Writ for the Convocation to the Archbishops was issued out the twentieth of February and had this Clause ad tractandum consentiendum concludendum super praemissis aliis quae sibi clarius exponentur ex parte meâ The Parliament at that time being dissolved it 's certain the Convocation sitting by Virtue of the Writ to the Bishops must fall with it But a great Question arose Whether the Convocation sitting by the Writ to the Archbishops was dissolved or not And the greatest Judges and Lawyers of that time were of Opinion it was not But those were not times to venture upon such Points when people were disposed to find Fault as they did to purpose when the next Parliament met who made use of the Sitting of this Convocation and the Canons then pass'd as one of the popular Themes to declaim upon against the Bishops and to inflame the Nation against the whole Order The greatest Objection in Point of Law was That the Commission had a Respect to the Convocation sitting in Parliament-time which began 13 April 1640. and the Commission bore Date April 15. the Parliament was dissolved May 5. and the 12th of May a new Commission was granted which made void that of the fifteenth of April and so what was done by Virtue of that must be done out of Parliament and so not in Convocation according to 25 H. 8. 19. although these Canons were confirmed by the King's Authority the thirtieth of Iune the same Year After the King's Restoration an Act of Parliament passed for Restoring the Bishops Ordinary Jurisdiction wherein a Clause is added That this Act did not confirm those Canons of 1640. but left the Ecclesiastical Laws as they stood 1639. which Act being passed by the King's Assent it voids the former Confirmation of them and so leaves them without Force But the Alteration of our Law by the Act 25 H. 8. c. 19. lay not in this that
years For nothing can be plainer in our History than what is affirmed in two of our Laws Stat. of Carlisle 25 E. 1. and the Stat. of Provisors 25 E. 3. That the Church of England was founded in Prelacy or Diocesan Episcopacy For our first Bishops were so far from being confined to one Church or Town that at first in the Saxon-Division of Kingdoms every Bishop had his Diocess equal with the Extent of the Kingdom except in Kent where one Suffragan to the Archbishop at Rochester was confirmed The first Conversion of the English Nation to Christianity from Paganism was by the Diocesan Bishops who were sent hither from several Parts and the Presbyters imployed by them and as the Number of Christians increased the Number of Bishops did so too so that in the Parts of Mercia one Diocess was divided into five that they might the better look after the Government of them and every Bishop as appears by the Saxon-Councils was bound to see parochial Churches built and the Clergy to be settled in them to attend upon the Duties of their Function among the people committed to their Charge That which I have aimed at in this Discourse was to shew That the Original Constitution of this Church was Episcopal but yet that the Bishops did still design to fix a Parochial Clergy under them as Churches could be built and endowed It remains now to shew That this Constitution of a Parochial Clergy is more reasonable than that of an unfixed and unsettled Clergy by Law which will easily appear if we consider 1. The greater Advantage as to Unity and real Edification among the People For this makes them to be as one Body within certain Bounds And the People know whither to resort for publick Worship and Sacraments and the Inconveniencies as to the difference of Mens Abilities is not so great as the Inconveniency of a broken divided people as to Religion which always creates Suspicions and Jealousies and generally Contempt and Hatred of each other And I think every wise and good Christian will consider that which tends to Peace and Unity is really more Edifying than a far better Talent of Elocution or the most moving Way of exciting the Fancies and Passions of Hearers For S. Paul tells us Charity is beyond miraculous Gifts It is easie to observe that the wisest Methods are seldom the most popular because the generality of Mankind do not judge by Reason but by Fancy and Humour and Prejudices of one kind or other From hence the Heats of Enthusiasm and odd Gestures and vehement Expressions with no deep or coherent Sense take much more with ordinary and injudicious people than the greatest Strength and clearness of Reason or the soundest Doctrine and the most pious Exhortation if they be not set off in such a Way as strikes their Imaginations and raises their Passions And this is that which such do commonly call the most Edifying Way of Preaching which is like the coming up of the Tide with Noise and Violence but leaves little Effect whereas the other is like a constant Stream which goes on in a steady and even Course and makes the Earth more fruitful The one is like a Storm of Thunder and Lightning which startles and confounds and amuses more but the other is like a gentle Rain which softens and mellows the Ground and makes it more apt to produce kindly and lasting Fruit. We are to judge of true Edification not by the sudden Heat and Motion of Passions but by producing the genuine Effects of true Religion which are fixing our Minds on the greatest and truest Good and calming and governing our disorderly Passions and leading a godly righteous and sober Life But we too often find violent and boisterous Passions an ungovernable Temper Envy Strife and Uncharitableness growing up with greater Pretences to Zeal and better Ways of Edification I never expect to see the World so wise as to have Persons and Things universally esteemed according to their Real Worth For there will be a Tincture in most persons from Temper and Inclination and the Principles of Education but generally speaking Matters of Order and Decency and Things which tend to a publick Good affect those most who have the best Judgment and Temper and irregular Heats and disorderly Methods of praying and preaching those whose Religion makes more Impression upon their Fancies than their Judgments and is seen more in the inflaming their Passions than in keeping them in their due Order 2. There is a greater Advantage as to Discipline For if among the Teachers they are under no Bounds nor Subjection to a Superiour Authority it is very easie to avoid any kind of Censure for the most corrupt Doctrines or Practices We cannot boast much of the strict Exercise of Discipline among us and one great Reason is That many have more mind to complain of the Want of it than to do their Endeavour to amend it We hear of many Complaints of the Clergy in general and sometimes by those who have more mind to have them thought guilty than to prove them so for fear they should acquit themselves or at least the Church should not bear the blame of their Miscarriages But we cannot proceed arbitrarily we must allow them timely notice and summon them to appear and a just Liberty of Defence but if upon Proof and sufficient Evidence we have not proceeded against them with the just Severity of the Law then we ought to bear the Blame but not otherwise But whatsoever personal Neglects or Faults there have been or may be my Business is to shew that our Way is much better fitted for the just Exercise of Discipline than that of Independant Congregations altho' the Managers of them pick and cull out the best they can for their Purpose and one would think when they had made choice of Members to their mind and bound them together by an Explicit Covenant they should be very easie and tractable and submissive to their own Discipline But they have found the contrary by their sad Experience they grow too heady and wilful to bear any such thing as strict Discipline for when they had the Courage to exercise it their Congregations were soon broken to pieces and the several divided Parts were for setting up new Heads one against another till at last they found it was much easier to be Teaching than to be Ruling Elders And so they have let the Reins of Discipline fall to keep their Congregations together But suppose the Teachers should fall out among themselves as to give a fresh and late remarkable Instance Suppose some set up Antinomianism and preach such Doctrines to the People or Flocks before you which others think of dangerous Consequence What is to be done in such a Case They may send some Brethren to enquire whether the Matters of fact be true Suppose they find them true What then What is to be done next It may be some would have them come up