Majesty his Heirs and Successors in England and which were granted to them with non-obstante's to all Acts of Parliament B. And the Act 22 o Car. 2. entitled Seditious Conventicles prevented and suppressed passing in the Parliament of England in the same Year that the Act against Conventicles did in Scotland and concluding with a Proviso That nothing therein contained shall extend to invalidate or avoid his Majesties Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Affairs but that his Majesty and his heirs and Successors may from time to time c. exercise and enjoy all Power and Authority in Ecclesiastical Affairs c. any thing in this Act notwithstanding shewed such a Concordant Sympathy between the two Realms in tenderness for the prerogative of dispensing with the Penal Laws Ecclesiastical as is between the Strings of two distant Lutes on the touching the String but of one of them But I must tell you that tho by this Proviso the benefit of the Dispensative Power hath been sufficiently secured to the Churches of Forreigners here and the King 's Ecclesiastical Supremacy justify'd in its power of indulging the Conventicles of all sorts of Recusants yet as in the Scotch Act the Crown 's dispensing with Conventicles hath been more express then in the English Act so hath the administration of Prerogative in that kind been more tenderly and signally exercised in Scotland then I have observ'd it to be in England For I find in a Look call'd A Compendious History of the mâ—…st remarkable Passages of the last 14 Years c. printed An. 1680. that in p. 205. the Author referring to the Month of Iuly 1677. saith that upon a Rebellion in that Kingdom being nipt in the Bud his Majesty was pleas'd to publish a Proclamation Commanding the Iudges and all Magistrates to apprehend and punish all such as frequented any Field-Conventicles c. according to the Prescript of the Law as also to prosecute with all Legal Rigour the execrable Murtherers of the late Arch-Bishop of St. Andrews declaring withal that his Majesty being desirous to reclaim all such as had been mis-lead through Ignorance or blind zeal had according to the Power reserved to his Majesty by the 5th Act in the 2d Session of the 2d Parliament suspended the execution of all Laws and Acts against such as frequent house-Conventicles on the south-side of the River Tay excepting the Town of Edenburgh and two Miles round the same c. And the truth is it must likewise be to the honour of that Nation acknowledged that in the worst of Times they after their Covenant did not Contract any such guilt of Perjury by a superfetation of enterfering Oaths as great Numbers of our Land did and that they were exemplary to England in Loyalty and in propping up the hereditary Monarchy while so many here in the Plott-Conjuncture were infatuated with the Project of the EXCLUSION as to give me occasion by a fresher instance and but of yesterdays occurrence to invite you to behold a Spectacle of the divine Iustice in abandoning such Men here to the guilt of Superstition who used unjust means to extirpate it Such among us who had not took notice of that English and Scotch SAINTE LIGUE and its being so generally exploded and who in the late Ferment about Popery would have fortify'd an Exclusion with an Association and again set up Association as of Divine-Off-spring you see how being wild with excessive Fears and Iealousies of the growth of Popery they were guilty of the Superstition of founding Dominion in Grace A. Considering how Men here have laughed at the Obligation of their lawful Oaths and that for unlawful Oaths a Land mourns methinks 't is an adventurous thing for a Prince to take possession of his Inheritance of the Empire of such a Land so encumbred with the guilt of Swearing and Forswearing O when may we see that antient general tenderness in point of Oaths here that flourished among us in the days of our first Reformation nay even in some times of our Roman Catholick Ancestors B. I believe never till after all the living here being resolved to dust and a new Race of Mankind enriching themselves and their Country by the Culture of the Earth and Manufactures men shall be above Temptations from necessity to take God's Name in vain and when the very use of Oaths Assertory or Promissory will be dispens'd with by Nature I am sure the Spectacle of mangled and slaughter'd Bodies covering a Field immediately after a Battle hath not more horror in it then the sight of the Consciences mai'md and wounded by the inobservance of publick Oaths hath been since the Aera of 41. And as our Chronicles mention that they who were born in England the Year after the great Mortality An. 1349. wanted some of their cheek Teeth I may say that generally they who have been born here the Years after 41. wherein the Plague of Perjury by the outraging those Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy was so epidemical have seem'd able only to swallow those Oaths but not to â—…hew upon them in serious and considerate thoughts no not at the very frequent times of their taking them And still tho in speculative Points in England Consulitur de Religione yet conclamatum est as to a general tender regard to the Religion of those Oaths There was I think a want of tenderness in some as to their sworn assisting and defending all the Priviledges and Preheminences belonging to the Crown during the late Ferment about my Lord Danby's Pardon and I may more sadly reflect on the same Mens want of recollecting their Oath obliging them to the King his Heirs and Successors at the time of the Ferment about the Exclusion A. I think that many who by repentance have been cured of the Epidemical Plague of Perjury that reged here in 41. and of such a Plague and another of Fears and Iealousies since 81 have yet sustain'd more damage thereby then they who were born the Year after 1349 did in wanting some of their Cheek Teeth and that their case is like that of those who were recover'd of the great Plague at Athens that Thucydides hath described and who tells us that after their recovery their Souls had lost the faculty of Memory and were dozed with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about what themselves had done or what had passed in the World during the horror of that very Plague or before or since But after all this said I am to ask you if you will make all those perjured who having took the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy promoted the exclusion B. By no means I have more Humanity and Christian Charity then to do so I shall here observe to you that Divines in their measures of Mens sinful Actions do often make use of the distinction of materialiter and formaliter Thus for example Ames in his Cases of Conscience l. 5. c. 53. Si quis falsum dicit putans esse verum mentitur tantum
in that particular when the same tyranny was exercised there by the Power of a few ill men which at that time had spread it self over this Kingdom and therefore we had no reason to expect that we should at this season when we are doing all we can to wipe cut the memor of all that hath been done amiss by other men and we thank God have wiped it out of our own Remembrance have been our self assaulted with those rep oaches which we will likewise forget And it was goodness worthy the great Soul of a King to forget the Outrages of such who did strip their Political Father of his Power and then reproach him with his nakedness I may here likewise tell you and not mal a propos how much the patience and long-suffering of the same Prince was exercised in a late Conjuncture that so much eclipsed his Prerogative in the Case of the Earl of Danby's Pardon and when the Commons did set up against it somewhat in his Father's Answer to the 19 Propositions before mention'd that nothing but the tempest of the Age in the Parliament of 40 could have occasion'd viz. Since therefore the Power legally placed in both Houses of Parliament is more then sufficient to restrain the Power of Tyranny c. But because a Parliament so perpetuated as that was did prove more then sufficient to restrain pretended Tyranny and real just Government will a considerate man say any such thing now when the breath of Prerogative can dissolve them in a moment and in that moment all their thoughts perish and all the high-flying thoughts that would soare above Imperial Power be found dead in the Nest And I may here tell you that in the Answer of some Nonconformists to Dr. Stillingfleet's Sermon an Answer Printed in London in the year 1680. during the ferment about the Plot and wherein they desire Indulgence I think their attacquing the Service on the Gun-Powder Treason Plot in thanking God for Preserving the King and the Three Estates of the Realm assembled by saying That the late King made no scruple in his Answer to the 19 Propositions to reckon himself one of the three Estates was a thing that on recollection they will judge ought not to have been done But I am here further to tell you that though it may be consistent with our Oath in some such case as was mention'd to endeavour the altering by the Legislative Power some uncontroverted Privileges of the Crown and in such a way as I have mention'd I likewise wish you in your thoughts to make a distinction of those Privileges or Preheminences belonging to the Crown that are absolutely Essential to its Preservation and to that of the whole Realm and which are by God and the Law put as a Depositum into the hands of Kings and the removing of one of which would have the effect of taking a Stone out of an Arched Building and such as no Sovereign Princes can be without and such as our Princes have in their flourishing Reigns to the great content and happiness of their People always exercised and Rights as the late Earl of Shaftsbury said of that of the Flagg that our Princes cannot part with and Privileges that are not such and two of which former sort of Privileges and which are parts of the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom I account we are expresly in the Promissory Clause of that Oath Sworn to defend and assist namely of the lineal Succession to the Crown and of the King's Prerogative and of which Prerogative we have this Description in Blount's Law-Dictionary That the Prerogative of the King is generally that Power Preheminence or PRIVILEGE which the King hath over and above other Persons and above the ordinary Course of the Law in the Right of his Crown And then adds Potest Rex ei lege suae dignitatis condonare si velit etiam mortem promeritam LL. Edw. Confess cap. 18. and then saith that Spelman calls it the Lâ—…x Regiae dignitatis The Author of the Law-Dictionary had there his eye on the Law of Edward the Confessor where under the title of Misericordia Regis Pardonatio it is declared that si quispiam forisfactus which the Margin interprets rei Capitalis Reus poposcerit Regiam misericordiam pro forisfacto suo timidus mortis vel membrorum perdendorum potest Rex ei lege suae dignitatis condonare si velit etiam mortem promeritam ipse tamen malefactor rectum faciat in â—…quantumcunque poterit quibus forisfecit tradat fidejussores de pace legalitate tenenda si vero fidejussores defecerint exula bitur à Patria And I remember there is a famous Act relating to the old Privileges and Prerogatives of the Crown and to their resumption by the Crown viz. The Act of 27. H. 8. c. 24. call'd The Recontinuing of certain Liberties taken from the Crown and it begins with saying that whereas divers of the most ancient Prerogatives and Authorities of Iustice appertaining to the Imperial Crown of this Realm have been severed and taken from the same by sundry Gifts of the King 's most Noble Progenitors to the great diminution and detriment of the Royal Estate of the same and to the hinderance and great delay of Iustice and thereupon saith for Reformation whereof be it Enacted by Authority of this present Parliament that no Person or Persons c. shall have any Power or Authority to pardon or remit any Treasons Murders Man-slaughters or any kinds of Felonies nor any Accessaries to any Treasons Murders c. or any Out-laries for any such Offences aforesaid committed perpetrated done or hereafter to be committed done or divulged by or against any Person in any part of this Realm c. but that the King's Highness his Heirs and Successors shall have the whole and sole Power and Authority thereof united and knit to the Imperial Crown of this Realm as of good RIGHT and Equity it appertaineth c. and then orders all Writs in a County Palatine to be made in the King's Name c. That Statute doth give you a Prospect of great variety and use in order to the Settlement of your thoughts about some things in your Oath You there see the Natural recourse of the Royal Rivers of Prerogative to the Ocean from whence they came and when you there find that the Crown could communicate to Subjects the exercise of the Prerogative of Pardoning Murder however restrain'd by ACT of Parliament and all the dreadful Disabilities incurr'd by Out-laries for Felony and Treason you are not to wonder at any ones telling you that the King himself hath the Privilege of Pardoning a Disability incurr'd by Law for Heterodoxy in Religion and especially when you shall see the whole and sole Power of Pardoning the same united and knit to the Imperial Crown of this Realm as of GOOD RIGHT and EQUITT appertaineth And according to those words in your Oath about your defending all the
o Eliz. beforemention'd B. I can easily direct you to such a Writer of our Church who hath done the thing to the universal Satisfaction of the Inquisitive as to this Point and that is the Lord Primate Bramhal in his Book of Schism Guarded He saith there in p. 330 and 331. As our Grievances so our Reformation was only of the abuses of the Roman Court. Their bestowing of Prelacies and Dignities in England to the Prejudice of the right Patrons Their Convocating Synods in England without the King's leave Their Prohibiting English Prelates to make their old feudal Oaths to the King and obliging them to take new Oaths of Fidelity to the Pope Their imposing and receiving Tenths and first Fruits and other Arbitrary Pensions upon the English Clergy and lastly their Usurping a Legislative Iudiciary and Dispensative Power in the exterior Court by Political Coaction these are all the branches of Papal Power which we have rejected This Reformation is all the Separation that we have made in point of Discipline And for Doctrine we have no difference with them about the old Essentials of Christian Religion and their new Essentials which they have patch'd to the Creed are but their erroneous or at the best probable Opinions no Articles of Faith. Thus then according to these measures you see how much the hinge of the Reformation turns on the Usurpation of the Papacy in Dispensing for in all these particulars enumerated the Pope dispens'd with the King's Laws And he had before in p. 26. said This Primacy neither the Ancients nor we deny to St. Peter of Order of Place of Preheminence If this first movership would serve his turn the Controversie were at an end for our parts But this Primacy is over-lean the Court of Rome have no gusto to it They thirst after a visible Monarchy on Earth an absolute Ecclesiastical Soveraignty a Power to make Canons to abolish Canons to dispense with Canons to impose Pensions to dispose of Dignities to decide Controversies by a single Authority This was that which made the breach not the Innocent Primacy of St. Peter And afterward in p. 149. he saith But I must contract my Discourse to those Dispensations that are intended in the Laws of Henry the 8th that is the Power to dispense with English Laws in the exterior Court Let him bind or loose inwardly whom he will whether his Key erre or not we are not concern'd Secondly As he is a Prince in his own Territories he that hath Power to bind hath Power to loose He that hath Power to make Laws hath Power to dispense with his own Laws Laws are made of Common Events Those benign Circumstances that happen rarely are left to the Dispensative Grace of the Prince Thirdly As he is a Bishop whatever Dispensative Power the ancient Ecclesiastical Canons or Edicts of Christian Emperors give to the Bishop of Rome within those Territories that were subject to his Iurisdiction by Humane right we do not envy him so he suffer us to enjoy our ancient Privileges and Immunities freed from his Encroachments and Usurpations The Chief ground of the ancient Ecclesiastical Canon was let the old Customs prevail A possession or Prescription of Eleven hundred years is a good ward both in Law and Conscience against an Human Right and much more against a New pretence of Divine Right For Eleven hundred years our Kings and Bishops enjoy'd the sole Dispensative Power with all English Laws Civil and Ecclesiastical In all which time he is not able to give one instance of a Papal Dispensation in England nor any shadow of it when the Church was formed Where the Bishops of Rome had no Legislative Power no Iudiciary Power in the exteriour Court by necessary Consequence they could have no Dispensative Power He then in p. 169. mentions the said Statute of 25. H. 8th and having referr'd to the Proviso there to shew that its intent was not to vary from the Church of Christ in any other things declared by the Holy Scripture and the Word of God necessary to Salvation he saith then followeth the scope of our Reformation only to make an Ordinance by Policies necessary and convenient to repress Vice and for good Conservation of the Realm in Peace Unity and Tranquillity from ravine and spoil ensuing much the ancient Customs of this Realm in that behalf not minding to seek for any relief succours or remedies for any worldly things and Humane Laws in any cause of necessity but within this Realm at the hands of your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings of this Realm which have and ought to have an Imperial Power and Authority in the same and not obliged in worldly Causes to any other Superior Thus then you see this Prelates sense of how much the taking away the Pope's Dispensative Power here and restoring that Power to the Crown was the Soul of the Reformation and tota in toto of it And this Act you see revived by the First of Elizabeth without garbling it in the least and the Dispensative Power thereby restored to her her Heirs and Successors and a Declaration that no Subjects of the Realm need for any worldly things and Humane Laws in any Cause of Necessity seek for any relief but within this Realm at the hands of our Soveraign as aforesaid And I shall tell you that the Bishop in the next Page refers to the Statute of the First of Eliz. and saith on his view of both Statutes Whatsoever Power our Laws did devest the Pope of they invested the King with it And of this the Power of Rehabilitating any of his Lay or Clerical Subjects is a part as was beforesaid A. You have cited somewhat out of this Great Champion for the King's Supremacy and for the Church of England and reputed to be the most clear Vindicator of it from Schism our Church hath had which hath created more anxiety in my mind about the Assertory part of the Oath then any thing hath done For the words in the Oath are I do utterly testify and declare c that no Foreign Prelate or Person hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction Power Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm and you have brought in the Primate granting that the Pope hath Power here to bind or loose inwardly and asserting that he hath here a Spiritual Power B. You judge right of the Bishop's Opinion and which is indeed express'd throughout his whole Book He tells us in p. 25. That St. Cyprian made all the Bishopricks in the World to be but one Masse whereof every Bishop had an entire part And he saith in p. 60 and 61. That neither King Harry the 8th nor any of our Legislators did ever endeavour to deprive the Bishop of Rome of the Power of the Keys or any part thereof either the Key of Order or the Key of Iurisdiction I mean Iurisdiction purely Spiritual which hath place only in the inner Court of Conscience and over such Persons as
and defend all Privileges and Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the King his Heirs and Successors c. But I doubt not but the Consciences of the Considerate Loyal now expostulating with them in the cool of the day whether they did then well in being angry with the Imposers sense of their Oaths and in not penetrating into the Obligations thereby incurred and particularly in not weighing whether such who had taken those Oaths and yet by Projects and Expedients would have banish'd the Heir even after he should come to be Actual Successor from the effects of their Sworn Allegiance and of their Sworn Assistance and Defence of all Privileges and Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging c. had not visibly out-ran their Oaths they will recollect the late dreadful want of tenderness for the observance of the same It will be hard for many men on a serious Self-examination to reflect otherwise on themselves after that Sir W. I. himself as the Printed Speeches in the Oxford-Parliament have it call'd an Expedient of that kind Iesuite's Powder and mentioned that on the Heirs coming to the title of King the learned Lawyers say that by 1. H. 7. all Incapacity is taken away by the Possession of the Crown and after that another learned Lawyer had there said I owe the Duke Obedience if he be King but if he be King and have no Power to Govern he is the King and no King and had before said That an Act of Parliament against Common sense is void To make a man King and not suffer him to exercise Kingly Power is a Contradiction And I am sure 't is a Contradiction to nothing more then our Oaths I desire not by referring to the breach of those Oaths to touch the tenderness of any man's sore place or to reproach him as to what he hath done for the time past but to promote the tenderness of his Conscience and that his Conscience may not reproach him for the time to come for not assisting and defending all Privileges and Preheminences belonging to the Crown When I consider the noble and vigorous Loyalty that your self and others who were mistaken in the Point of the Exclusion have since shewn in the Service of His gracious Majesty and the great Care that you and they in the Post where you were took in the Settlement of his Revenue and of avoiding the Character of those of Israel who brought their newly anointed King no Presents and your readâ—…ness at his call to venture your life for the support of his Crown and do observe in you and them a fix'd Preparation of mind for the defence of every Privilege that is made to appear to you as belonging to the Crown and that your Loyalty like a bone well sett is the firmer for having been broken I account that the Si non eâ—…rasset fecerat ille minùs may be apply'd to you and that after His Majesty's Pardon and the Series of your Heroical Actions of Loyalty in his Service you ought by all equal Judges according to the Instance I mention'd before to be absolv'd as who in all things have approved your selves to be clear in this Matter And I believe you being one of the Church of England the Adherents to which do now as generally call themselves The Loyal as the Independents did once vocifeâ—…ate themselves to be The Saints and the Principles of which Church do enjoyn Remorse and Penitence and rending of the heart and as much tenderness to any who have disrobed the Crown of any of its Rights and Privileges as was in David when his heart smote him because he had cut off the skirt of Saul ' s Garment and whose Divines do not only Preach the Doctrine of Non-resistance but whose Oaths bind to it and that of Supremacy binding to a positive Assistance of all Privileges c. your â—…nlighten'd Conscience will be your constant Remembrancer against any relapse A. I thank you for thus gently leading me by the hand to such a height of Noble thoughts relating to that Oath as from whence I am able to look back with grief on my past aberrations through inadvertence from what my Oath obliged me to in relation to the Support of the hereditary Monarchy and concerning which Obligation the Casuistical Discussion you sent me did sufficiently illuminate me and to take a prospect into my duty that lies before me to assist and defend to my Power all Iurisdictions Privileges c. granted or belonging to the King's Highness c. or united and annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm I am sensible that as some vain Swearers in common Discourse will upon their being occasionally reproved for it be apt to swear that they did not swear and that as there are Fools that say in their Souls that there is no God and that there is no Soul so there is a sort of careless men who having taken this great Promissory Oath will yet by their Actions deny their having sworn to assist and defend some of those Privileges and likewise be apt to say in their hearts they have not invoked God as Witness and Revenger in the case of that Oath and that they are not absolutely bound by it or but only by their reserved sense or as if a man representing his Country he were only to take a kind of formal Oath in animam Domini and not to venture his own Soul. But for my part I account it as vile to be perjured in a solemn Promissory Oath as in a judicial Assertory one and shall hereafter think my self as much bound to use all exactness and tenderness in the recollection oâ—… my thoughts after a Promissory Oath as every Man of Honour doth before an assertory Oath when he is a witness in a Court of Law. And I think that it is only the multitudo peccantium about solemn promissroy Oaths as for example about the promised assistance and defence of the Privileges of the Crown in the Oath of Supremacy that diminisheth the Shame and â—…gnominy of mens being either through corrupt affections or incogitancy and the crassa negligentia which the Law makes to be dolus malus Vacillant or Contradictory in the Series of their actings promised or through lachesse or subdolcus pretences withholding their performance of part of what they obliged themselves to do and that keeps the populace from a nauseous looking on them as falsarii and as much as on Witnesses produced in Courts who in the things asserted by their Testimony are for want of precaution of thought varii vacillantes and contradictory to themselves and minglers of Falshood with truth and who conceal part of the whole truth they were to depose B. There is another thing that makes the Moral offices required in an Oath Promissory call for some kind of Consideration that an Oath Assertory doth not for we are not to depose oâ—… Matter of Law but only of Fact but in the Promissory parts
Now you know how much Simplicity becomes an Oath and how requisite it is that it should be conceiv'd in plain and liquid terms and taken in the Imposer's sense and without mental reservations and that you should Swear therein to no dogmatical Assertion and as to which Mr. Nye saith well in his Observations on that Oath to swear positively to any dogmatical Assertion is not required It would be a taking the Name of God in vain for if it be a certain and undoubted truth in it self and to others as are Principles of Reason and Articles of Faith an Oath is vain for it ends no strife If doubtful and a question whether true or not tho such an Oath puts it out of question that I believe so yet not that it is a truth My belief tho never so much evidenced and confirm'd doth not make a doubtful matter in it self more credible nor is one man's believing an Assertion just ground for another man to believe the same Such an Oath therefore is in vain and not a fit Medium to end such a Controversy Now how far your declaring in your Oath that no foreign Prelaâ—…e hath nor ought to have any Iurisdiction Spiritual within this Realm and the Interpretation of it pursuant to the 37th Article delivering the Plain words The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction c. may bring you within the Verge of swearing what is dogmatical I leave you to judge but shall take the liberty to tell you that when I see some of our Laws and particularly this about our Oath girdled with so many Interpretations like new tender-sided Ships I shall be apt to take little pleasure in embarquing my Conscience in such an Oath and am apt to call to mind the Censure which Mr. Milton's Character of the Long Parliament of 40. fulminates against his Countrymen and by which he so much disables our understandings as to Political Government and saith that the Sun which we want ripens Wits as well as Fruits and as Wine and Oyl are imported to us from abroad so must ripe understanding c. B. But however tho our Wine and Oyl are imported to us from abroad our Dispensations are not and we have no Occasion to send Gold to Rome for Lead And I assure you he who shall consider that the English Virtuosi were the last that did receive the yokes of the old Imperial and later Papal Power of Rome and the first that threw them off will tho we are Crasso sub aëre nati have no cause to vilifie our understandings but rather to envy their triumphs over Infallibility so call'd And perhaps when I shall have told you of another passage of the Bishop P. 59. in his Schism guarded you will think the Eyes of our Ancestors understandings did look out sharp when the two Statutes of the 25th of H. 8. and 1 o Eliz. were made and there he saith Suppose any of our Reformers have run into any Excesses or Extremes either in their Expressions or perhaps in their Actions it is a difficult thing in great changes to observe a just mean it may be out of Humane Frailty as Lycurgus out of hatred to Drunkenness cut down all the Vines about Sparta or it may be out of Policy as men use to bend a Crooked rod as much the contrary way or as expert Masters of Musick do sometimes draw up their Scholars a Note too high to bring them to a just tone what is that to us as long as we practice the Mean and maintain the Mean and guide our selves by the certain line and level of Apostolical and Primitive Tradition There is no doubt but in the framing of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. and the Oath therein regard was had to the Oath in the 35th of H. 8. c. 1. viz. I having now the veil of Darkness of the Usurped Power Authority and Iurisdiction of the See and Bishops of Rome clearly taken away from mine Eyes do utterly testify and declare in my Conscience that neither the See nor the Bishop of Rome nor any foreign Potentate hath nor ought to have any Iurisdiction Power or Authority within this Realm neither by God's Law nor any other just Law or means c. and that I shall never consent nor agree that the aforesaid See or Bishop of Rome or their Successors shall exercise or have any manner of Authority Iurisdiction or Power within this Realm c. And this Oath remain'd the same all the rest of his Reign and all Edward the 6th's time and as to which Queen Elizabeth changed the Expression of Supreme Head and both Harry the 8th and She having their Eyes on the effect of Papal Excommunications and concern'd to have the nullity of them believed by their Subjects might seem according to the Primate's Expression to bend the crooked rod of the Papal Iurisdiction overmuch the contrary way in their Oaths that so it might come to that just straitness referr'd to according to the Primate's measures of it But after all I shall tell you that I think no Political respects can justifie the putting doubtful Expressions into an Oath or the taking of one with mental reservations of a sense different from the Common one of the words and I do therefore joyn issue with you in the Point that the Clause in the Oath That no foreign Prelate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction c. being the very same in the 37th Article and in the Interpretation of which Article King Iames his Canons have as you said made you a sharer with the Clergy you and all others who take the Oath may be thankful for the benefit of that King having further exercised the Dispensative Power of his interpreting the whole intent of that Oath And that Interpretation of it which hath made the Coast of the Oath clear to you in this Point you will find agreeing to what he hath in our Language Publish'd to the World and dedicated to eternity For he having in his Premonition to all Christian Monarchs mention'd how he caus'd the House of Commons to Reform a Clause they had put into the Oath of Allegiance derogatory to the Pope's spiritual Power viz. That the Pope had no Power to Excommunicate him and that he was ready to consent that the Bishop of Rome should have the first Seat and be Patriarch of the West and be Primus Episcopus inter omnes Episcopos princeps Episcoporum so it be no otherwise but as Peter was Princeps Apostolorum takes occasion in his Apology for the Oath of Allegiance to let the World know his Royal judgment of the intent of the OATH of SUPREMACT and there in Confutation of the Pope's Breves and Bellarmine's Letter he saith in p. 108. that the rendring Christian Kings within their own Dominions Governors of their Church as well as of the rest of their People in being Custodes utriusque tabulae not by making new Articles of Faith c. but by
ever was who setting his feet on two of Gods Kingdoms the one upon the Sea the other upon the Earth lifting up his hand to Heaven as you are to do this day and so Swearing Rev. 10. c. and consider how he there makes this Oath to be the most effectual means for the ruining Popery and Prelacy and leaves it to be consider'd whether seeing the preservation of Popery hath been by Leagues and Covenants God may not make a League and Covenant to be its Destruction after he had before-mention'd the Associations of the Religious Orders and Fraternities and the Combination by the la Sainte Ligue for the muniting of Popery as incentives to this League and how he doth again go to the Magazine of the Apocalypse for some Weapons for this Covenant and hath other artillery for it from the Iewish State citing the words of the Prophet Let us joyn our selves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten how according to the ratio nominis of Superstition viz. of mens over-importunate Prayers that their Children might out-live them he concludes with a devout Prayer that this Covenant may out-live their Childrens Children and let any one behold in Mr. Henderson's Speech the like flame of Enthusiastick Zeal or of the Superstition quam vulgo bonam intentionem vocant against Superstition and Idolatry in Worship c. and concluding it with his belief that the weight of that Covenant would cast the balance in our English Wars I say let any one consider all this and tell me if ever he saw a more pompous Scene of Superstition and more magnificent Procession bestow'd on it and contrived as Bishop Sanderson's words are in his Lecture De bonâ intentione and having his eye on that Covenant viz. Obtentu gloriae Dei reformandae Religionis propagandi Evangelii extirpandae superstitionis exaltandi regni Domini nostri Iesu Christi and if ever he saw what the Bishop in that Lecture calls The Iesuites Theology viz. Omnia metiri ex Commodo Sanctae matris Ecclesiae more strongly asserted then in the Contexture and Imposition of that Covenant But those two Divines lived to recover their Allegiance and a due sense of their Oaths for it and to see that foetus of their Brain that at its solemn Christning they wish'd immortality to renounced publickly as a spurious Birth and to the Scandal of that Age a race of other Oaths in England as infamously born intercept its inheritance Nay let me tell you that in the Nation of Scotland Loyalty hath been a growing Plant of Renown since the year 1660. and the Idol of their former Covenanted Presbytery been by the Loyal Nobility and Gentry and Populace there generally abhorr'd And tho Sir George Wharton in his Gesta Britannorum relates it as a strange thing that on the 21st of August A. 1663. the Parliament of Scotland Passâ—…d an Act for a National Synod the first that ever was in that Kingdom under the Government of Bishops yet I can tell you of an Act of Parliament that pass'd there afterward that declared the right of the Crown to dispense in the external Government of the Church I shall entertain you with it out of the Scotch Statutes viz. In the first Session of the Second Parliament of King Charles the Second there pass'd an Act asserting His Majesty s Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical Edenburgh November 16 th 1669. THe Estates of Parliament having seriously considered how necessary it is for the Good and Peace of the Church and State That His Majesty's Power and Authority in relation to Matters and Persons Ecclesiastical be more clearly asserted by an Act of Parliament Have therefore thought fit it be Enacted Asserted and Declared Like as his Majesty with Advice and Consent of his Estates of Parliament doth hereby Enact Assert and Declare That his Majesty hath the Supreme Authority and Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical within this his Kingdom and that by virtue thereof the Ordering and Disposal of the External Government and Policy of the Church doth properly belong to his Majesty and his Successors as an inherent Right to the Crown And that his Majesty and his Successors may Setle Enact and Emit such Constitutions Acts and Orders concerning the Administration of the External Government of the Church and the Persons employed in the same and concerning all Ecclesiastical Meetings and Matters to be proposed and determined therein as they in their Royal Wisdom shall think fit Which Acts Orders and Constitutions being recorded in the Books of Councel and duly published are to be observed and obeyed by all his Majesty's Subjects any Law Act or Custom to the contrary notwithstanding Like as his Majesty with Advice and Consent aforesaid doth Rescind and Annul all Laws Acts and Clauses thereof and all Customs and Constitutions Civil or Ecclesiastick which are contrary to or inconsistent with his Majesty's Supremacy as it is hereby asserted and declares the same void and null in all time coming A. You told me before how the King dispens'd with the five Articles of Perth setled by Act of Parliament but this Act yields so great a territory to the Dispensative Power that my thoughts cannot suddenly travel through it It acknowledgeth in the Crown a more sublime Power then of dispensing with Presbyterians or Independents or of suspending the Penal Laws against them namely of abolishing Episcopacy and of making Presbytery or Independency the National Church-Government Car tel est notre plaisir now for the external Form of Church-Government is allow'd to make the Pattern in the Mount. And 〈◊〉 accordingly as Mr. Baxter in his Book call'd a Search for the Schismaticks represents Archbishop Bramhal's new way of asserting the Church of England in his Book against him 1. To abhor Popery 2. That we all come under a foreign spiritual Iurisdiction obeying the Pope as the Western Patriarch and also as the Principium Unitatis to the Universal Church governing by the Canons c. may not the King by this Act make the external Government of the Church of Scotland Patriarchal and the Pope Patriarch B. The Act needs no Comment and if you will tell me that the Scots shew'd themselves Erastians or Latitudinarians when they made it I shall acquaint you that that Archbishop in his Schism guarded p. 319. asserts That a Sovereign Prince hath Power within his own Dominions for the Publick good to change any thing in the external Regiment of the Church which is not of divâ—…ne Institution and that he had in p. 4. of that Book allow'd the Pope his Principium unitatis and his Preheminence among Patriarchs as S. Peter had among the Apostles and that in p. 78. of his Iust Vindication of the Church of England he takes notice that by the Statute of Carlisle made in the days of Edward the First it was declared That the Holy Church of England was founded in the
materialiter Si quis verum dicit putans esse falsum mentitur formaliter And he having before in l. 4 c. 4 viz Of Heresy made pertinacy a requisite to a man's being formally an Heretick and said that Pertinax est qui non est paratus Captivare intellectum rationem suam omnem Sacrae Scripturae adds Haereticus igitur potest esse quis materialiter dum assensum praebet erroâ—…i pernicioso vel ex simplici facilitate out temeritate haereticis or dendi qui sub honestâ aliquâ specie fallunt vel ex ignorantiâ qui â—…ormaliter non est haereticus cum pertinacia obstinatio animi deest atque adeo pro simpliciter haereticâ—… non est babendus Concordant with these measures of Ames have I observ'd those of some ingenuous Roman-Catholick Writers who have declared that they will not pronounce all Protestants to be Hereticks formaliter And it is therefore no wonder that such their Judgment of Charity hath been retaliated by some of the most Renowned Divines of the Church of England viz. the Lord Primate Bramhal Bishop Taylor Dr. Hammond and others who have deny'd to pronounce the worshipping the Host to be formal Idolatry that is to say to be not so at all in reality since we know that according to the trite Rule forma dat esse And thus that Primate in his Schism Guarded saith very well for that purpose p. 57. Every one who is involved materially in a Schism is not a formal Schismatick more then she that Marries after long expectation believing and having reason to believe that hâ—…r former Husband was dead is a formal Adulteress or then he who is drawn to give Divine Worship to a Creature by some misapprehension yet addressing his Devotions to the true God is a formal Idolater And having there cited S. Austin of Heresy He who did not run into his error out of his own over-weening Presumption nor defends it pertinaciously but receiv'd it from his seduced Parents and is careful to search out the truth and ready to be Corrected if he find it cut he is not to be reputed among Hereticks he saith it is much more true of Schism that he who is involv'd in Schism through the error of his Parents or Predecessors who carefully seeketh after truth and is prepared in his mind to embrace it whensoever he finds it he is not to be reputed a Schismatick I know Azorius de Iuramento gives his Judgment well in thesi That when a Law is changed to which a man is bound by Oath tho he is thereby materially discharged yet formally he is bound in respect of his will for if ever he actually assents to the alteration he is really perjured And so leaving it to such who were Men of great Knowledge and Consideration and had took the Oaths and were ready to promo'e a new Law for altering the hereditary Monarchy to think of the danger they incurred of the formal guilt of that Crime I have more Charity then to conclude all the rash and the incogitant and the weak and the seduced by the fantastick Interpretation of the Oath to have been perjured But as about the year 1164. Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury was at a Council held at Northampton accused by the King of Perjury and Condemned as guilty of it because he had not observ'd those English Customs that he was sworn to as I find Francisc. Long. de Concil p. 806. Col. 1. cited for it so if you have taken the Oath of Supremacy and Sworn to defend all the Privileges and Preheminences granted or belonging to the King his Heirs and Successors and united to the Imperial Crown of this Realm and are of opinion that one of the Privileges of those Heirs and Successors is to succéed to that Crown as it comes to their turn according to Proximity of Blood and by their inherent Birth-right and as the Hereditary Succession juâ—…e Coronae is setled by the Common Law of England I shall tell you that the Pious and profoundâ—…ly Learned Divine Dr. Hicks who hath study'd this Point as much as any man hath in his Writings told you that having taken this Oath you could not honestly consent to a Bill of Exclusion which would have deprived the next Heir and in him virtually the whole royal Family of the chief Privilege and Preheminence that belong'd to him by the Common Law of this Realm c. Your Curiosity I believe hath led you to read over his learned Iovian and to observe what he there saith in his Preface that some Men did pervert the meaning of the word Heirs in the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy from its common and usual acceptation to another more special on purpose to elude the force and Obligation which otherwise they must have had on the Consciences of the Excluders themselves But it is not only the Authority of this single great Divine that I can lay before your thoughts for the rendring the Attempt of the Exclusion contrary to our Oath but I can direct you to the censure of the three Estates of a Loyal Nation and of His late Majâ—…sty in the case For the Oaths in Scotland binding the takers both to the King and his Heirs and Successors as ours do here I can tell you that in the Third Parliament of King Charles the Second Aug. 13. 1681. you will find the Act in these words viz. The Estates of Parliament considering that the Kings of this Realm deriving their Royal Power from God Almighty alone do succeed lineally thereto according to the known degrees of Proximity in Blood which cannot be interrupted suspended or diverted by any Act or Statute whatsoever and that none can attempt to alter or divert the said Succession without involving the Subjects of this Kingdom in Perjury and Rebellion c. I know that during the late turbid interval of the Nation some Loyal men of the Church of England were so much misguided as to think that because de facto Parliaments have heretofore directed and limited the succession of the Crown in other manner then in course it would otherwise have gone as the words in the Printed Exclusion-Bill were they might therefore of right do so again notwithstanding they knew that after the Parliament of King Iames to prevent the Right of Succession from fluctuating any more had justly recognized and declared That the Imperial Crown of this Realm and Rights belonging to the same did by inherent Birth-right and lawful and undoubted Succession descend and come to him as being lineally justly and lawfully next and sole Heir of the Blood Royal of this Realm it did afterward by a New Oath of Obedience or Allegiance oblige mens Consciences both to the Crown and the hereditary lineal Succession and notwithstanding they knew that that Parliament had took care of continuing the Obligation of the Oath of Supremacy for the bearing Faith and true Allegiance to the King his Heirs and lawful Successors and to assist
metaphysical universale however they may â—…ansie it to be a real being but what I know cannot exist a part from the particular Rights and Privileges belonging to the Crown being assisted and defended and from a serious endeavour to understand the truth about their belonging to it And my solicitousness to find out which in the shortest way possible and particularly as to the Privilege of discharging incapacity or disability incurr'd by Act of Parliament as I told you at our last meeting engaged me to divert you out of the course of your method and whereupon you told me you would refer my thoughts to the Assertory part of the Oath B. Well what ever damps I may see on English Mens loyalty or degeneracy from its nature by the arts of faction a while perverting them not to assist and defend this or that Privilege of the Crown I shall never despair of their coming again to themselves and that tho as in a vessel of Water and Oyl while any one is shaking it the Water may over-top the Oyl so likewise in their minds while shaken and stirred by Demagogues the Oyl of the Lord 's anointed is not there uppermost yet that through its own nature and through the English good nature and their natural addiction to Religion it will in time naturally appear to be so And now to go on without further prefacing on either side what if I should tell you that it imports you to consider that in in the Assertory part of the Oath of Supremacy you have declared and asserted that authority as due to the King that was challenged and used by king Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th that is that the King under God hath the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of Persons born within these his Realms of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so ever so as no other foreign Power shall or ought to have any superiority over them A. I would then tell you that you have mentioned some things to be in this Oath that I remember not to be there B. I grant that I mention'd to you somethings that are not express'd in the Oath and in the form of it as it is administred and was enacted 1 Eliz. c. 1. and by which Act the refusers of such Oath are punish'd with DISABILITY to bear Office. But in the same year in which that Act pass'd Queen Elizabeth in an ADMONITION annext to her Injunctions thought fit to exercise her Royal authority of the Interpretation or Declaration of the sense of that Oath enjoyn'd by Act of Parliament and in that Admonition you will find those words that you remember not in the Oath you took as likewise her ACQUITTAL of all Persons from all manner of Penalties and consequently of disability who took the Oath according to the sense of it publish'd in her Interpretation And if you consult the Act you will see that the disabilities inflicted in the Act on the refusers of the Oath are various And thus then you see that as soon as you have done taking the Oath you are immediately call'd on by your Conscience to defend the Privilege and preeminence of your Prince viz. of interpreting his Laws and of discharging the disabilities thereby inflicted A. I now remember that I have read that Admonition of the Queens but I account Proclamations Injunctions and Admonitions of Princes to be but temporary Laws and that therefore this Interpretation of the Queen's and her discharging of Disabilities expired with her Reign B. To obviate such thought I shall tell you that in the Act of the 5th of Queen Elizabeth c. 1. and by which the Refusal of the Oath of Supremacy is punish'd more severely then by the before-mention'd disability viz. by Proemunire for the first Refusal and by making it Treason for some Persons to refuse it a second time but Penalties that none ever doubted but the Crown might by its Pardon discharge there is a Proviso that the Oath viz. of Supremacy expressed in the said Act made in the said first year shall be takeu and expounded in such form as is set forth in an Admonition annexd to the Queens Majesties Injunctions Publish'd in the first year of her Reign that is to say to confess and acknowledge in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors none other Authority then was challenged and lately used by the Noble King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth as in the said Admonition may more plainly appear And this too lets you see that the Parliament by thus referring to the Queen's Admonition did approve of her Power therein exercised and of her having acquitted her Subjects from the Punishment of disability A. I must then I see fairly grant you that by that Parliament's having thus perpetuated the interpretation of the Oath of Supremacy contain'd in Queen Elizabeth ' s Admonition I am bound in Conscience to take it in that sense and am perjured if I do not so keep that Oath and must likewise grant that you have shewn how auspicious that Oath by the Queens interpreting the same and the Parliament about five years after approving that Interpretation was to the Assertion of such her Power and that if any taker of the Oath should gain-say such Power you have prepared such a Confutation in the case as was used to the old Philosopher who disputed against Motion and whom his Adversary confuted by removing him from his place But as you are a fair arguer I am to take leave to tell you That that Parliament tho they approved the Queen's Admonition in general did not particularly shew their Approbation of the Queen's Power of dispensing with the Penalties that she exercised in that Admonition B. They did sufficiently shew their Approbation of the whole and therefore you need not question their approving of its parts But because you seem to lay some stress on that Parliament's not expresly approving in terminis the Queen 's Power of discharging the Penalties and one of which by the Act of 1 o Elizabethoe was disability I shall tell you that whereas Queen Elizabeth had thought it expedient for the Supporting of the Consecration of the Bishops of the Church of England to dispense with whatever might cause Disability according to her Supream Authority by her Letters Patents the very same Parliament at their next Session did 8 o Elizabethoe c. 1. in terminis terminantibus declare their Approbations of the Queens dispensing with disability by those Letters Patents for it having been in that Statute mention'd that for the avoiding of all Ambiguities and Questions that might be objected against the lawful Confirmations investings and Consecrations of the said Archbishops and Bishops her Highness in her Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England c. hath used and put in her said Letters Patents divers other general words and Sentences whereby her Highness by her Supreme Power and Authority hath DISPENS'D with all Causes or doubts of any Imperfection or DISABILITY
commanding Obedience to be given to the Word of God by reforming Religion according to his prescribed Will by assisting the Spiritual Power with the Temporal Sword by reforming Corruptions by procuring due Obedience to the Church by judging and cutting off all frivolous Questions and Schisms as Constantine did and finally by making decorum to be observ'd in every thing and establishing Orders to be observ'd in all indifferent things for that purpose is the ONLY intent of the Oath of Supremacy and whereby as he effectually confuted the Cardinal whose Letter charged the Oath of Supremacy as tending to this end That the Authority of the Head of the Church in England may be transferr'd from the Successor of St. Peter to the Successor of King Henry the 8th and to oppose the Primacy of the Apostolick See so at the end of his Book he shews that his design of Publishing the same was to satisfie all his good and natural Subjects and likewise Strangers about the things therein contain'd and whereby the King's Mind was publickly notify'd that in the right done to the Crown by the Oath of Supremaâ—…y as well as of Allegiance there was no wrong intended to St. Peter or his Successors A. I hope you have now put a Period to the History of the Dispensative Power of the Crown that was exercised in-the interpreting of any parts of the Oath of Supremacy or the 37th Article thereto relating You have named to me so many interpretations of the Oath that according to the wisdom of our State and the Lex Consuetudo Parliamenti making a Bill to be thrice read in each House of Parliament and then receiving the Royal Assent to be thought like Gold seven times purify'd may shew the interpretation of the Law to be so too But tho I will account any good Law to be more precious then Gold yet if like Gold it be too far extended by ductile interpretation it may be drawn to such a thinness as to lose all its weight and estimation and retain only a poor tincture and colour that will signifie little or nothing And as Pliny in his Panegyrick on Trajan said that by reason of the multitudes of sutes upon Penal Laws in Rome there was danger till Trajan's time ne Civitas fundata legibus legibus everteretur so a Law whose Obligatoriness is founded on interpretations may be endanger'd by the multitudes of them to be destroy'd and may like the Papal Laws of New Rome by the infinite interpretations of Casuists in the forum internum which is their Tribunal be brought to signifie nothing in either forum and to be only an Engine to make Perplexities You have given me here such a Genealogy of interpretations that according to the common Story of Arise Daughter c. one may say Arise Interpretation and go to thy Interpretation c. I shall therefore be glad now you have been so largely communicative of your thoughts to me about the assertory part of the Oath you will deal as frankly with me in acquainting me with what may in the Promissory part of the Oath be of importance for me to know in order to the better discharge of my Duty in the Case before me B. I shall therein be most ready to serve you when we meet next for the entire Consideration of what according to the Assertory part of the Oath you are obliged to do will I see be as great a load as both our patiences will at this time bear and therefore according to the Saying of Must is for the King I am to tell you that let our Kings make never so many interpretations one after another of this your Oath you must finding them all Consistent with one another consider them all with all due regarâ—… 〈◊〉 thank God and them when their Consciences being inclined to a tenderness for the doubting of yours they interpose their Dispensative Power of that kind And hereupon I shall tell you that in the year 1628. King Charles the First did cause the 39 Articles to be reprinted and with a Declaration before the same made by him as Supreme Governor of the Church within his Dominions that those Articles contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England and that if any Difference should arise about the external Policy concerning Injunctions Canons or other Constitutions whatsoever belonging to the Church of England the Clergy in their Convocation is to order and settle them c. he approving their said Ordinances c. that the Bishops and Clergy shall have licence under the Broad Seal to deliberate of and do all such things as being made plain by them and assented to him shall concern the setled Continuance of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England c. and then having respect to the Article wherein the Arminians and Antiarminians were concern'd 't is order'd that no man hereafter shall either Print or Preach to draw the Article aside any way c. But the first Canon that was afterward viz. A. 1640. made was that concerning the Regal Power which begins with taking notice that sundry Laws Ordinances and Constitutions had been formerly made for the acknowledgment and profession of the most lawful and independent Authority of our Dread Sovereign Lord the King over the state Ecclesiastical and Civil and then enjoyns them to be ALL carefully observ'd by all persons whom they Concern upon the Penalties in the said Laws and Constitutions express'd and then decrees that the Clergy shall read the following Explanation of the Regal Power and where the words A Supreme Power is given to this most excellent Order i. e. of Kings by God himself in the Scriptures which is that Kings should rule and Command in their several Dominions all persons of what Rank or Estate soever whether Ecclesiastical or Civil and that they should restrain and punish with the Temporal Sword all stubborn and wicked doers shew they had then the 37th of the 39 Articles in their eye and some other words viz. for any person or persons to set up maintain or avow respectively under any pretence whatsoever any independent Coactive Power either papal or popular c. is to undermine their great Royal Office shew they had an Eye on that 37th Article and on your Oath and where they did speak out that sense of the Clause The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction c. and of the words in the Oath that no foreign Prelate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction c. that is that the Bishop of Rome had here no independent Coactive Iurisdiction the sense in which all considerate Persons who were Members of the Church of Rome in Harry the 8th's time and of the Church of England in Edward the 6th's time took the old Oath of Supremacy and the Members of the Church of England in Queen Elizabeth's time and ever since took the new one As for Non-conformists who think the Government of Bishops unlawful this Clause that no foreign
clear'd of those doubtful Expressions in them which cause their scruples c. whereby they may to the entire Satisfaction of His Majesty and the Nation fully testifie the Allegiance and Fidelity of faithful Subjects and true Patriots and no longer remain as they generally now do distrusted c. But there was another Book that year Publish'd by a Roman Catholick of which the title was A seasonable Discourse shewing how that the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy as our Laws interpret them contain nothing which any good Christian ought to boggle at and where the Saying of Tertullian is quoted Bonae res neminem scandalizant niâ—… malam mentem c. and where having taken notice of the Queen's Admonition and the Proviso of the Statute of 5 o Eliz. and the 37th Article and the Iudgments of the Bishops Bramhal and Carleton as Sir Iohn Winter had done and for the same purpose giveth his Judgment that the taking of those Oaths gives no Scandal and he in p. 38. averrs that Sir John Winter told him many years ago that he had the Iudgment of Sorbouists Secular Priests and Iesuites that he might take the Oath of Supremacy declaring the sense which the Law allows And I shall here by the way take notice that as to the Oath of Allegiance F. Cressy saith in his Epistle Apologetical p. 111. that few Roman Catholicks if any at all would refuse that Oath if that unlucky word heretical were blotted out c. or if they might change heretical into contrary to the Word of God which he saith he verily believes was the sense intended by King James But now after all this said I shall tell you that according to what is observ'd by the generality of Writers oâ—… Princes easing their Subjects by their Dispensative Power of interpreting their Laws viz. That they take occasion then to intermix with such interpretation somewhat else that may advance their Power there were Fears and Iealousies that some of these foremention'd interpretations tho lessening the spiritual Power of the Crown might enlarge its temporal and particularly such as in the Queen's Admonition mention'd the Duty Allegiance and Bond acknowledg'd to be due to Harry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth and as I partly before hinted such as in the Proviso in the Act of the 5th of the Queen that ratifying the Admonition hath in it the additional words of acknowledging in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors the Authority that was challenged and lately used by Harry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth and such as in the 37th Article explain'd the Queen's Power by that given by God himself to all GODLY Princes in Scripture and where notwithstanding the Word Godly being put in there to gild the Pill of the Absolute Power of the Iewish Kings and to make it be the more easily swallow'd the real meaning was the Power given to all the Iewish Kings for the right of their Power depended not on their Godliness and such as in the Canons of King Iames ipso facto Excommunicate all that do not give the King the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical not only that the Godly Kings had among the Iews but what the Christian Emperors had in the Primitive Church And there too notwithstanding the word Christian might be for the like reason put in as that of Godly was and to cause the owning of that absolute Imperial Power which pursuant to the Lex Regia was used by the Christian Emperors as well as their Heathen Predecessors in punishing Heterodoxy ad libitum the meaning of the Canon was not to devest Heathen Emperors of their right of judging about Matters of Religion and as to which Grotius in his Letter to the States Embassador having said neither would Paul have appeal'd to Nero had he judged that no right of Iudging in a Case of Religion belong'd to him addeth Wherefore as Trajan Civilly honest Nero wicked are equal in the Right of Government so Pious Constantine and Impious Nero are equal in the right of judging in aptitude and skill unequal The Canons therefore of Forty enjoyning the Explanation or Interpretation of the Regal Power there inserted to be one Sunday in every Quarter of the Year read by the Clergy to their Flocks did well provide for the cautioning them as against the setting up any independent Coactive Power either Papal or Popular so against Fears and Iealousies relating to their Properties in their Goods and Estates and by that Explanation they shew that Christ came not to Undermine or Disturb but to Confirm the Civil Government of Pagan Princes and that in the first times of Christ's Church Christians were ready to submit their very Lives to the very Laws and Commands of those Princes A. But doth that Explanation of the Regal Power assert any thing in Defence of the Dispensative part of it B. You see how without wyre-drawing any Consequences the very first Paragraph of the Explanation doth both strengthen the foundation of the assertory part of your Oath we have been so long discussing and strike out new lights in the Fabrick of the Oath You see it tells you downright that A Supreme Power is given to the Order of Kings by God himself in the Scriptures which is that Kings should rule and Command in their several Dominions all Persons of what rank or estate soever c. And the Explanation doth effectually enough provide by the second Paragraph that Kings should take care that none in their Dominions but the stubborn and evil doers may be restrain'd with the Temporal Sword for it saith The Care of God's Church is so committed to Kings in the Scripture that they are commended when the Church keeps the right way and taxed when it runs amiss and therefore her Government belongs in chief to Kings For otherwise one man would be Commended for another's Care and taxed but for another's Negligence which is not God's way And this is an Argument taken ab absurdo and the strongest that can be used in Law and not to be set aside but by the alledging something as more absurd against it and amounts to this that it is absurd that Kings who are commended when those who are not stubborn nor evil doers are not under any restraint by the Temporal Sword for the Church runs not the right way when that Sword is a terror to any but evil doers and tax'd on the contrary being done should not be judged to be authorized to exempt those from all restraint thereby And when the People are not liable to blame for Kings erring in their Judgment about the Persons to be so exempted from restraint nor to be commended or rewarded for their not erring therein can any thing be more absurd then for the independent Coactive Power of Kings it self to be restrain'd to the Punishing such as they shall judge Innocent But the two tenderest things in the World are Sovereign Power and Conscience and both of them were made with a
Thomas and Sorrell tell you that by one of the great Councel who argued in it it was asserted with great Learning That the Non-obstante in that Case remain'd good after the King's death That tho Acts the King doth in his Natural Capacity determine by his death as making of Iudges c. for those referr to his Natural Will yet things done in his Royal Capacity as King do not determine by his death as a License to alien in Mortmâ—…in in one King's time serves in anothers and the Reason is when the Subject is once exempt out of the Restraint of the Act he is ever exempt unless the Exemption be limited Coke 1. Inst. 52. 6. If the Lessor licence his Lessee that is restrain'd by Condition not to Alien tho the Lessor die the licence shall serve the Lessee to alien and is not determin'd by the Lessor's death And in this Point he cited Trin. 2. Jac. C. B. Rot. 2835. Wright versùs Radcliffe and Trin. 2. Jac. Norris v. Mason C. B. as Cases adjudged in this point And I shall then shew you how the same thing was then by others asserted but you may now for this purpose remember how the instances I have given you of Queen Elizabeth's Parliaments approving and declaring to be good what she did of this kind and the instances of what others of our Princes did by their own Authority and out of Parliament being valid and being afterward approved in Parliament have supported the extent of the Regal Authority of this kind as to point of time But because according to the Rule of Unumquodque dissolvitur eo modo quo colligatur many Indulgences and Injunctions and Dispensations being revocable by Kings themselves and by their Successors and because declaratory Acts of Parliament cannot be repeal'd but by other Acts common Prudence doth suggest it to all to endeavour the perpetuating to themselves by the Legislative Power what they account beneficial And if you will you may use the term of having it confirm'd by that Power that is if you will allow it to have been firm before you may call it confirm'd by the Prince and the three Estates afterward enacting it and making its firmness perpetual And this is the thing I aim'd at in what you might take for a Criticism when I said that the 39 Articles owed no Confirmation nor Authority to the Act of the 13th of Eliz. A. I know the reason of your cautious speaking here about a tender Point You accounting even every Declaratory Judgment of Parliament for our Religion to be a Treasure and having often said that you would allow some Roman-Catholicks to mock on in calling our Religion a Parliamentary Religion did I judge design to do honour to our Religion as well as to our Prince's in shewing that it was here orderly establish'd by God's Vicegerents before it was by the Deputies of the People or the Magnates Regni B. You guess right at my meaning in this way to salve Phaenomena And if you will look on a Book Printed in Oxford A. 1645. entituled Parliaments Power in Laws for Religion or an Answer to that old and groundless Calumny of the Papists nick-naming the Religion of the Church of England by the name of a Parliamentary Religion c. you will find the Fact in this Point clearly deduced through the course of our Laws and Constitutions in a long series temporum from the Reign of Harry the 8th downward and for the honour of our Kings and of the Church and the Reformation and the measures I have taken in our discourse have been suitable to those of the judicious and learned Author of that Book A. Well Sir we have had a great deal of frank Discourse and I will now take the freedom to put one Question more to you You have entertain'd me with the several Interpretations of our Oath and have shew'd me how the obligatoriness of them all hath been perpetuated and you have likewise salved the Phaenomena in the Iustice of the Government as to the Laws in terrorem But you know the Story of one who being Lord of a place did leave a Pit long open too near the High-way and who at Night erected Lights about it to prevent its being mischievous and he afterward hearing that sometimes poor Blind men who were Travellers fell into it and that at other times by various accidents the Lights were not helpful to other Passengers as being took away or going out too soon and he therefore at last very fairly removed both his Nuisance and Lights together And now may it hot be wish'd that the Prince and the three Estates would remove the Laws about our Oaths and the Interpretations too and so likewise all the Laws in terrorem among which I suppose you reckon the Test-Acts at which so many have taken offence B. You may easily guess that till we have both of us at another meeting discours'd of the Obligation resulting from the Promissory part of the Oath I will not engage your thoughts in any matter of Controverfie that may in the least perplex them But as soon as we have fully discours'd that I shall frankly give you my thoughts at large relating to the question about Repealing of the Test-Acts in a Parliamentary manner but do at present wholly forbear to mention what I think thereof And I have before told you my judgment of the likelihood of the continuance of our great Oath as a great luminary that may perhaps enlighten our English World in the measures of Loyalty to the end of time and as I have told you the Oath giveth no offence to the Considerate so I will hope none will be taken at it But I must here tell you that I have a greater veneration for the Oath because I look on the serious Consideration of the assertory part of it as likely to be very Instrumental in allaying the ferment we have been speaking of A. God grant it may be so B. You remember what I hinted to you about the Clause whereby you testify'd and declared that the King is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal and from whence it follow'd by way of natural Consequence that no foreign Prince c. hath any Iurisdiction within this Realm being the Corner-stone on which the great And therefore I mean your forsaking foreign Iurisdiction was built And I assure you that the same first Declaration doth bind you to the like AND THEREFORE to renounce the belief of any Power on Earth being able to dissolve your King 's right of Commanding your Obedience and your Obligation to obey him And indeed if I had produced to you no Iudgment of Parliament for the purpose I have done but that which is contain'd in the assertory part of the Oath and which is unanimously interpreted by Divines and Lawyers as expressive of the King 's right jure naturae to Command the Obedience of