ought not to loose our Lives Liberties and Estates but where forfeited by Law we ought much rather not to loose them for the profession of the best Religion which by Law is made the publick national Religion And it is strange that some men of the same Religion in profession can think that notwithstanding it makes no matter what is done to a man if he be Religious but if he be not so the least publick injuries and injustice may be resisted vindicated remedyed and by right defended by old Laws or new ones to be made for that purpose The Christian Religion was publisht when the whole world was Pagan and therefore it was submitted to such usage as the Governments would give it But when the Christian Faith had by miracles of patience declared it self to be of Heaven and of a Divine Original According to the Prophecies on that behalf it took possession of the Empire and Crowns and Scepters became submitted to the Cross and the Christians acquir'd a civil right of Protection and Immunity which they ought not they cannot relinquish and abandon no more than they can destroy themselves or suffer violence and cruelty to destroy the Innocent Such as thus perish shall never wear a Martyrs Crown but perish in the next world for perishing in this This will be interpretatively Crucifying Christ afresh after he is received up into Glory i. e. After his Religion is exalted into dignity and honor and civil Authority If the senate of Rome had been Christians they would never have given up the Government to a Pagan Augustus with a power to him and his Successors to make laws for extirpating the Christian Faith what is said of the Christian Religion and Paganism holds between the Reformed Religion and Popery If any man is so vain as to say that an unalterable course of Succession is established amongst us by Divine Right I say he is a man fitted to believe transubstantiation and the infallibility of the Pope he is deeply lapsed into fanaticism he dreams when he is awake and his dreams are dreams of phrensie There are somethings so false that they cannot be disproved as somethings are so evidently true that they cannot be proved This proposition hath no color to ground it self upon no medium to prove it no argument for it which is to be answered nor nothing more absurd than it self to reduce it to But if any shall add that this Doctrin is the Doctrin of the Reformation and adventure to tell the people so they are the most impudent falsaries that ever any age produced when there is scarce a Child but hath heard what was done said and maintained by the Clergy of England in the case of Mary Queen of Scots a Popish Successor in the earliest time of our Reformation here in England Our Age is blessed with a Clergy renownedly Learned and Prudent by the Providence of God and the piety of our Ancestors they possess good though not to be envyed Revenues and Honors It is scarce possible they should have many among them that can countenance a proposition so wickedly impious and sacrilegious that we cannot have new Laws but must loose the old at the pleasure of a Popish Successor against not their own interest and the Rights of the Church but against the Rights and Liberty of Religion it self For she is capable of Franchises and Immunitys which ought above all things to be most zealously asserted and defended by her Ministers can they themselves with their own hands ever pull down her Hedg and destroy her Defensatives and expose her helpless to the rage of her implacable Enemies and suspend all the Legal security she hath for her preservation upon the Life of our present King whom God long preserve If Kings be admitted to have a power to make Laws One Proclamation may establish the Popish Religion amongst us which the Papal Bulls so long as that See continues will never be able to effect Next to Religion her self the Revenues of the Church challenge their faithful care for they are at best but Usu-fructuary Trustees of her Endowments for the Succession which they will wretchedly betray to an Arbitrary Successor if they do not repress such Opinions that pretend to change the Government into an absolute jure Divinity Monarchy which will leave nothing jure divino but it self and the Popedom Kings for their so doing have the authority of Sir Robert Filmer who affirms in his Treatise called the Power of Kings Fol. 1. That the Laws Ordinances Letters Patents Priviledges and Grants of Princes have no force but during their Life if they be not ratified by the express consent or at least by the sufferance of the Prince following who had a knowledge thereof This is but the necessary consequence and result from the Doctrine of the absolute power of a Prince for in such Government the Concessions of a Predecessor can no more oblige the Successor than he can Govern when he is dead and the Successor must be absolute in his time as the Predecessors were in theirs But in vain is the Net spread in the sight of any Bird this deceit is of so gross a thread that it cannot pass with the common people much less upon our Clergy but I will not dissemble what may be the true reason of the seduction of some young good natured Gentlemen of the Clergy They perswade themselves that if these principles and opinions of the Unlimited Power of Kings had been received the late Wars had been prevented Not rightly considering that if such opinions had never been broached or Universally rejected that War could never have ensued and we should together with peace have enjoyed our ancient Government which our Ancestors transmitted to us without that miserable inter-regnum I would not be perversely understood by any man as if I went about to justify our late War This is all I say that every Government once established will continue for ever if all the parts of it would unalterably consent to preserve it to which their narural Allegiance doth oblige them And never any Prince endeavored to change the Government but where part of the people were first willing or content to have it so Those false flatterers that go about to remove the boundaries of power and change the Government are the greatest enemies to the quiet and happy Reigns of the Kings and the peace and prosperity of Kingdoms And if they do adventure to call the ir fellow Subjects by any opprobrious names of disloyalty because they will not joyn with them in such change they are as absurdly impious and insolent as any Prince or State would be who should challenge another as free and absolute as himself for his Tributary and Vassal and traduce him for a troubler of the World because he would not Compose the Quarrel thus injuriously sought with the surrender of his Crown and dignity I desire these Gentlemen to consider that the happiness of a Nation is best
left this Author neither reason or Argument We have stript the Cause of all the Precedents that pretend to favour it and have left it Rara Avis indeed but not nigro simillima Cygno as the learned Author in Octavo hath it with which he reproaches the Right of the Bishops as assisted only with a single Precedent But to a Bird of no colour at all the bird in the Fable I mean furtivis nudata coloribus to be exposed to laughter with its naked Rump CHAP. IV. BUt if these Precedents had been all such as they pretend to be and the Bishops not present in Judgment in any of those Cases which the Octavo and Folio have produced and if they had been all Capital Causes that came in Judgment in that House and all determined judicially and not by the Legislative power of Parliament and no reason was to be assigned for the Prelates absence from the Nature of the Cause If they had had no inducements to withdraw from any dissatisfaction they had in the prosecution and the pretended Right of the Church-men in those days much insisted upon to be exempted from the jurisdiction of secular Courts had not been the Cause of their absence which suppositions are not so in fact And tho' the Bishops had never used the Authority and power in question as they have yet if we can prove they had once a Right those Omissions of theirs can be no prejudice to the meer-Right Though then I confess we should labour a-the gainst invincible prejudice in the Opinions of most 1. For that no man can lose a Right by not using of it but where that right can be usurpt by another and is so And that usurpation having been for immemorable time when no body can tell when it was otherwise shall in a matter prescriptible be intended to be acquired by good Right and that with great reason in favour of possession and the quieting of them for that Estates and Rights can last longer than the Grants and Evidences or Records themselves that first created them But where the nature of the Right is such as this of the Bishops in pretence is which no body can use for them For the Temporal Lords sit in Judgment in their own Right which is a plenary and compleat right and cannot be made more or less Secondly for that no Franchise from the Power and Authority upward of a Court Leet which can be neither more nor less by usuage than the Law hath establisht can be prescribed to And a Quo Warranto will fore-close and extinguish an immemorial usuage of any irregular and illegal Franchise A Right that can never be prejudged and fore-closed by non user and such is every Right that grows from the constitution of the Government though it should be discontinued for a long tract of time may be at any time rightfully and legally continued The happiness of our Case is that we can point to the time when the Right of the Prelates to sit in Judgment in Capital Causes in Parliament was established And which is more imposed upon them and they put under a Compulsory and obliged by the Tenure of their Lands to serve the Crown in that capacity And that was in the beginning of the Reign of William the Conquerour Mr. Selden in his Titles of honour with great probability hath fixed it in the 4 year of his Reign when he made the Bishopricks and Abbies subject to Knight service in chief by creation of new Tenures upon them and so first turned their possessions into Baronies and thereby made them Barons of the Kingdom by Tenure This he saith is justified by Mat. Paris and Roger of Windover out of whom Mat. Paris took this Relation Anno 1070. so are their words Rex Willielmus pessimo usus consilio Episcopatus Abbatias omnes quae Baronias that is by Anticipation for the Lands made Baronies tenebant in purâ perpetuâ eatenus ab omni servitute seculari libertatem habuerunt sub servitute statuit militari c. This he makes further probable for that in a Manuscript Copy which he used in a very antient hand these words are noted in the upper Margin over the year 1070. hoc anno servitium baroniae imponitur Ramesiae It seems saith he the volumn belonged to the Abby of Ramsey And some Monk of the House noted that in the Margin touching his own Abby which equally concerned the rest of the Abbies that were mentioned in that Relation by their Lands being put under the Tenure by Barony and they made Barons they had a Right to sit with the rest of the Barons in Councellor Courts of Judgment For saith Mr. Selden tenere de Rege in capite habere possessiones sicut Baroniam and to be a Baron and to have Right to sit with the rest of the Barons in Council or Courts of Judgment according to the Laws of that time are Synonymies So that there were no distinctions of Barons as to power and Authority or Jurisdiction but the Right of a Baron was the same whether he was a Temporal or Spiritual Baron for the Tenure of both is one and the same and therefore the Services must be the same The office that is the result of this Tenure is the same in the House of Lords and indeed no office can be less than what the Law appoints it The King cannot make a Peer a Judge or a Bishop and put any Restraint upon the exercise of the powers and the jura ordinaria that belongs by the appointment of the Law to a Peer Bishop or Judge And that it is an office by Tenure can make no difference for the Law declares the Power and Authority So that the Powers of all Barons are and must be equal and what is allowed to one Baron cannot be denyed to another William the Conqueror made the Bishops Barons by putting them to hold as by Barony did not intend only the Bishops more honour but himself also more service and better assured He cannot be intended especially to abate them their service in punitive or vindictive Justice which a Conquerour of all other performances cannot want I do not doubt and if it were not unnecessary to this question likewise to shew that before the Conquest the Bishops or Spiritual Lords had a great share with the Thanes or Temporal Lords in the Government and were then one of the three States agreeable to all the Gothish Saxon for the Saxons were Goths which we must not here insist upon and Modern Governments that have been planted in Europe which we shall speak to more hereafter But we will resort no higher than this of their becoming Barons by Tenure in time of the Conquerour for the clearing of the Prelates Right now in question And therefore we are not concerned to say any thing to the Case of E. Godwin mentioned in the Octavo in Edward the Confessor's time For Brevity sake and because we will
Regni definitum est quod Comes Johannes disseiseretur de omnibus Tenementis suis in Anglia Castella sua obsiderentur This is a Cause of Treason for that Richard the First immediately upon the demise of the Crown was King It can be no objection that this was not a formal Parliament for whether it was or no it seems the Bishops power in that Cause was allowed That it was Commune Concilium Regni and had the Nature of a Parliament And that the Bishops therein had a parity of Authority with the Temporal Lords But soon after his return King Richard held a Parliament at Notingham Hoveden mentions the Bishops that were present by Name In which Parliament our Historian tells us That the King Petiit sibi Judicium fieri de Comite Johanne fratre suo qui contra fidelitatem quam ei juraverat Castella sua occupaverat terras suas transmarinas destruxerat foedus contra eum cum inimico suo Rege Franciae contra eum inierat And the like Justice he required against the Bishop of Coventry for that he had adher'd Regi Franciae Comiti Johanni inimicis suis and it was thereupon adjudged Judicatum saith Hoveden quod Comes Johannes Episcopus Coventrensis peremptoriè citarentur si intra quadraginta dies non venerint nec Juri steterint Judicaverunt Comitem demeruisse regnum Episcopum Coventrensem subjacere judicio Episcoporum in eo quod Episcopus erat Judicio Laicorum in eo quod ipse Vicecomes Regis extiterat You see here the Bishops zeal and Loyalty that they adjoyn'd the censure of the Church which they had power of as Bishops to a Civil punishment which they with the Temporal Barons had Authority to pronounce against One of their own Order who was guilty of a design to engage a Nation in a War by opposing the lawful Successour to the Crown and this being so great a Cause We hear nothing here of any scruple the Canon gave them nor mention of any Priviledge of an Ecclesiastick to be exempt from the Judgment of the secular Court In the same Parliament Giraldus de Canavilla was accus'd of harbouring of Pirats and Praeterea saith Hoveden appellaverunt eum de Laesurâ Regiae Majestatis in eo quod ipse ad vocationem Justitiariorum Regis venire noluit nec juri stare de praedictâ receptatione raptorum neque eos ad Justitiam Regis producere sed respondet se esse hominem Comitis Johannis velle in Curiâ suâ Juri stare Hoveden tells us all that were present at this great Council Hubert Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Galfridus Arch-Bishop of York Hugh Bishop of Durham Hugh Bishop of Lincoln William Bishop of Ely William Bishop of Hereford Henry Bishop of Worcester Henry Bishop of Exeter and John Bishop of Carlisle Earl David Brother of the King of Scots Hamelinus Earl de Warrenna Ranulfus Earl of Chester William Earl of Feriers William Earl of Salisbury and Roger Bigot Let any one judge if it was likely that the Bishops did withdraw in the Case of Earl John or the said Bishop when besides them there were but six Barons present at that Parliament What manner of great Council would this Parliament have been that had consisted but of six Barons of what Authority would such a Parliament have been in the absence of the King and a troubled Estate of the Kingdom CHAP. VII IN the time of Edward the Second in the two Judgments against the Spencers the Right of the Bishops to judge in capital Causes in Parliament was carried so high in opinion that their presence was thought necessary to give Authority and validity to the Judgment of the House of Lords in such Cases and their absence was assigned for Error for Reversal of those Judgments for an Error that appears in the irregularity of the Proceedings is an allowable Cause for vacating the Judgment by the same Court that gave it And so far did that Opinion prevail that the presence of the Lords Spiritual was necessary to give Authority to a Judgment of that House that for this Cause because the Prelates were absent that Judgment was reversed Which opinion did arise upon this mistake that because the Lords Spiritual was one of the two States that made the House of Lords nothing could be done without their concurrence But though they are a distinct State from the Temporal Lords they make but one House and they are both there under one Notion and Reason viz. as they are both Lords Spiritual and Temporal the Baronage of England But let any man tell me that can whether if the Lords Spiritual had not been understood Judges in Parliament in Capital Causes it could have been a question whether their absence could avoid the Judgment in the Case of the Spencers much less that such an opinion should prevail that the Judgment should be as it was for that reason reversed And tho' the Reversal of that Judgment was set aside and the Judgment affirmed in 1 E. 3. Yet the publick Recognition of the Bishops Right in the Reversal remains an undeniable Testimony to their Right of sitting Tho' the Reversal of that Judgment was not warrantable for the reason of the Bishops absence as it could not have been reversed by reason of the absence of as many Temporal Barons if there remained enough besides to make a House to give the Judgment And yet we find the Reversal of the Reversal reversed in 21 R. 2. and the Family of the Spencers restored in the person of the Earl of Glocester So prevalent was the opinion that the Bishops Concurrence was necessary in all capital Judgments in Parliament at that time For this see Sir Robert Cottons Abridgment fol. 373. Yet it is observable that the consequence from the Bishops being a third State and an Essential constituent part of that House to a necessity of their presence in all judicial matters even of Capital Offences and Treason did so stick with that Age for they then in that Age did no more know what three States served for or that they both made but one House than some in our time can tell how to find them For that very Reason in 21 R. 2. the first Petition that the Commons made in that Parliament to the King was for that diverse Judgments were heretofore undone for that the Clergy were not present The Commons prayed the King that the Clergy would appoint some to be their Common Proctor with sufficient Authority thereunto The Prelates therefore being severally examined appointed Sir Thomas de la Piercy to assent The words of which Petition and the procuratory Letters for greater Authority and more satisfaction I have thought fit to transcribe Nos Thomas Cantuar. Robertus Eborac Archiepiscopi ac Praelati Clerus utriusque Provinciae Cantuar. Ebor. jure Ecclesiarum nostrarum Temporalium earundem habentes jus interessendi in singulis Parliamentis Domini nostri Regis
to the Encroachment of the Papal Power and in this matter to declare how far the Bishops might if they pleased observe the Canon Law or rather themselves and what was thought then decent to their Order So according to the Print in Gervasius and therein he differs from Matth. Paris it is Quousque judicio perveniatur ad mutilationem membrorum vel mortem which further clears the meaning of that Law to be that the Bishops were thereby excused not altogether from Capital Causes but onely when it was proceeded so far in such like Cause that Judgment was to be pronounced which when the Bishops had nothing to gainsay they might depart and leave Sentence to be pronounced by the House But we cannot after all this allow the Author of the Folio to have so little sense as with a good conscience to say that he who cannot perhaps by reason of his circumstance and some consideration of Indecency execute a thing in his own person therefore cannot do it by another no more than he can authorise one man to murther another Thus he saith fol. 20. when surely this Gentleman cannot think it as fit for a Judge to be a Hang-man as to sign a Kalendar for the Execution of the Condemned Prisoners But the Octavo is somewhat surprizing in this matter For he doth affirm That it is not lawful for Bishops to vote in any Question preliminary and preparatory to the Sentence of Condemnation when such Sentence follows and the matter preliminary is necessary to the Process This he proves by a Logick Rule Causa Causae est Causa Causati one of Sthalius his Axioms hath turn'd round the Head of this Gentleman I find few men can bear Axioms Maxims and Sentences There are none speak so much unnatural Non-sence as they that use them most May not several men I pray do several parts of an affair and yet he that doth the first part is no ways the Cause of what another man doth in the second and third place Is the acting the first part of the Play the cause of acting the last Or is the laying the Foundation the Cause that lays on the Roof Is the Jury the Cause of any more than their Verdict And doth not the Court give Judgment by their own Authority and Causality If men would speak by Nature and according to first Notions and were not so full of second Notions and Universals we should not have so many Errors Mistakes and Confounding Opinions in the Work But this we complain of as too severe in the Octavo that when he had confounded us with his Causa Causae Causati he would render us ridiculous with a Story of a Friar out of Chaucer That would of a Capon the Liver of a Pig the Head But would that nothing for him should be dead This indeed was a fine piece of Wit in the Poet but translated hither by our Author is an insipid piece of Malice His Design sure in this was to enter the Bishops amongst Chaucer's Friars and then the Learned Readers of Chaucer would be very conceited upon them and apply all his pleasant Satyrs against the Friars to the Bishops But for the farther Evidence of the Bishops Baronage and their Jus paritatis it would not be impertinent here to add That the Names of Barons Peers Seniors Grants have been attributed to the Lords Spiritual in all times in Authentick Histories and Records Forasmuch as a Nominal Argument is not a very inartificial Topick in such a Cause as this Besides that this will destroy the very strength of our Adversaries which lies in this that they will not allow Prelates to be comprehended in the Name of Peers Grants and Barons And that where the Records doth not expresly mention Prelates they will conclude they were not meant or intended to be present But the Collection which was made for this purpose shall not trouble the Reader because in two Books since Printed in Defence of the Bishops Right in question this is abundantly performed Besides that it is a very precarious Conclusion that our Adversaries make and without argument For they ground themselves herein upon a most unreasonable Postulatum viz. That Titles do not belong to persons for whom they were made and to whose Character they agree and that Words do not design the things which they were made and imposed to signifie CHAP. XIV NOw we shall proceed to perform a necessary piece of Justice to the Prelates as well as a Right to the Government to recover its true Constitution from the Prejudice of Modern Ignorance to declare and manifest that our Gvernment doth consist of three States the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of England These do make the Great Council of the Kingdom and minister to the King Council and Auxiliaries over which the King doth preside as the Great Superintendent and mover of this mighty Machin The consequence of which is that the Bishops cannot be detruded from that place they bear in the Constitution of the Government for that no Government can be legally or by any lawful power changed but must remain for ever once established And it cannot be no less than Treason of State to attempt a change no Authority in the world is competent to make any alteration The Princes of Christendom after they took to themselves the Election of Bishops which is a natural right of the Sovereign Power become Christian they soon observed the advantage that they might make by advancing them to the greatest Secular Dignities Governments and Trusts and did accordingly advance them to an equality if not to a superiority to the highest of the Secular Nobility gave them Dutchies Marquisates Baronies and rich Endowments and erected that Order into a successive Nobility Another sort of Nobility from that of the Lay Princes concluding that they should be better served by men of their own choice and approved worthiness who had also other advantages over the People than those that the Temporal Princes and Lords had by that Reverence they paid to their Bishops and the Authority and Power that they had over them in the virtue of Religion than by the Hereditary Princes and Nobility who did not always answer to the virtue of the original Ancestors and the first stock Besides that Religious Kings and Sovereign Princes did by advancing Bishops intend to do great advantages and honour to Religion but withall they did not divide the Bishops thus advanced from the Secular Princes and Noblemen in Councils for then they had lost their design The Bishops could not have had any direct influence upon the Councils of the Nobles and Secular Princes nor have tempered their Debates with an excellent Charity and firm Loyalty and other Vertues which belong to their Character It would have made trouble distraction and impediment in the Affairs of Princes and emulation and strife and faction between the Ecclesiastical and Secular Orders and several mischiefs and great inconveniencies would have
Judgments good without an Original upon a Verdict If the Causes that are properly now of the cognisance of that Court of Common Pleas had been allotted to that Court Originally when the distribution of Administration of Justice was made in the Constitution of the Government that Court by its proper Authority and its own Process would have done Justice to all its Suitors without first expecting a Writ out of Chancery to bring the Cause before them or leaving any right without remedy to complain in Chancery of the defects of Justice in that Court But that Law of Magna Charta cap. 11. before-mentioned which erected the Court of Common Pleas fix'd the Judges and appropriated civil Causes to their Judicature no longer now ambulatory was the first step that was made to reduce the Court of Barons called Curia Domini Regis in which the Capitalis Justiciarius did preside Yet still this Court continued a Court of Pleas of the Crown and Appeals and for those that had the Priviledge of that Court as Officers Dependents Suitors as appears by Bracton l. 3. cap. 7. Rex habet unam propriam Curiam sicut Aulam Regiam Justitiarios Capitales qui proprias causas Regias terminant aliorum omnium per querelam i. e. Appeal vel per privilegium seu libertatem This Sir Edward Coke imagines is meant of the Kings Bench but that must be a mistake for sicut Aula Regia is not competent to that Court as now the Capitales Justitiarii were not the Chief Justices we now have For the Office of the Capitalis Justitiarius did yet continue But then that which follows in Bracton the description of the Justices of the Court he before spake of puts the matter out of doubt Item saith he Justitiariorum quidam sunt capitales generales perpetui majores à latere Regis residentes which terms are agreeable to none but the Barons But this sort of Judicature was not fit for continuance and the Barons were to be reduced they were dismist of this Jurisdiction about the time that change was made in reference to them in the Parliament for as long as they continued in their numbers and power so great as they were both Courts and Parliaments were troubled with tumultuous heaps of people brought thither by the Barons to countenance their pretences of which who will may see enough in Eadmerus And this reducement was I doubt not about the end of the Reign of H. 3. when the first Writs were issued to chuse Knights of the Shire Philip Basset was the last of these Capitales Justitiarii Sir Henry Spelmans Glossary p. 415. And then the Court of Kings Bench came to have such Judges as at this day ad obitum H. 3. 1272. Summorum Angliae Justitiariorum authoritas cessarit postea Capitales Justitiarii ad placita coram Rege tenenda appellati sunt saith an ancient Anonymous Author quoted by Sir Hen. Spelman Glossary 406. That ancient Style of Capitalis Justitiarius Angliae is now allowed to the Chief Justice of the Kings Bench though his legal Style is Capitalis Justitiarius ad placita coram Rege tenenda 2 E. 1. Radulphus Hengham was made the first Chief Justice of the Kings Bench as Sir Henry Spelmans Glossary 416. But the Chief Justices of the Common Pleas were first made about the time of King John's Magna Charta when that Court was fixed as is before remembered Sir Henry Spelman out of Florilegus tells us Martin Peteshus was Chief Justice of the Common Pleas 1 H. 3. Neither did E. 1. trust the Barons with the Government of his Revenue as it was before the Capitalis Justic and the power of the Barons was reduced but he made Adam de Stratton a Clerk Chief Baron but in what time of his Reign doth not appear But they continued after they were reduced from the business of the Kings Bench and from that of the Court of Common Pleas to have the Government of the Revenue and making a Court of Exchequer And they still continued the Exercise of their ancient ordinary Right and judged Common Pleas in the Exchequer until the 28 E. 1. And then in the Statute called Articuli super Cartas cap. 4. it was enacted That no Common Pleas shall be henceforth held in the Exchequer contrary to the form of the Great Charter Their exercising their power lastly in that Court may be the reason why the Judges of that Court are called Barons Sir Henry Spelman saith he hath an uninterrupted Succession of the Barons of the Exchequer from the sixth year of Edward the Second by which it appears that the present Constitution was established after the Kings Bench and Common Pleas were made such as they now are But there was one Power and Authority that was inseparable from the Baronage and that is the Tryal of Peers the ancient Curia Regis continues to this day to that purpose as it must no other provision being ever since made therein This is the ancient Court of Peers the Curia Regis when revived The Power and Authority of the ancient Capitalis Justitiarius is as often revived as that Court is erected for Tryal for Offices at Common Law can be no more nor less than the Law appointed That he is called High Steward is no Objection to us for so was the Capitalis Justitiarius called and Justitiarius and Seneschallus are used one for another in the Language of those times Sir Henry Spelmans Glossary 403. And this is the true reason I humbly conceive of that Tradition that the High Steward by the Kings constituting him such hath such mighty powers that are fit to be trusted with him no longer than while he is busie about that piece of Justice for which he is appointed and he is not to receive his Commission but just at his entry upon the business of the Court and not before The power of this Capitalis Justitiarius was the same with that of the Mair of the Palace in France from whence the Conquerour brought this Office which was the same or greater with the Authority of the Praefectus Praetorio amongst the Romans It is a thing to be wished that Gentlemen that apply themselves to the study of Antiquities that relate to our Laws and Government would design to adorn and cultivate the present Laws and to make out their reasonableness rather than to innovate upon us by bringing back what is obsolete rejected and antiquated and that they would contribute what they can to refine it from many absurd reasons that dishonour our Faculty which are the best our Books afford even for some of the Regulae juris I shall instance onely in one or two of them Why the Father cannot inherit the Lands of the Son it is told us for a reason in our Books that Terra est quid ponderosum and will not ascend in the right line whereas the true reason is this the Lord that first granted the Fee neglected the Father gave
him out of the Government and he had no more Christian Graces than Faith Hope and Charity which he attributes to this Ternary of States of his own making But if he had four of those Graces there had been four States if six of those Graces to have match'd them in number he would have found three States in the House of Commons viz. Knights Citizens and Burgesses and have made six States It seems too King James made a Speech in Parliament wherein he was pleased to use his Logick and liked it seems the Ramistical way of Dichotomies The truth is he had more Logick than a wise King could tell how to bestow For in that Speech he saith The Parliament is composed of a Head and a Body himself and the Parliament This Body is sub-divided into two parts the upper House and the lower House The upper House into two Lords Spiritual and Temporal the lower House into two Knights and Burgesses The Citizens were left out for the sake of his Dithotomy His Method was to proceed by the way of two's and therefore 't was impossible we should here in this Speech of any three whatsoever yet this Speech too is produced against three States distinct from the King Besides they tell us that in one of the late King's Declarations drawn by then a young Gentleman but of great hopes and afterwards a very great Man the King is called one of the three States This Gentleman was very probably misled into that Mistake by a Book called Nomotechnia wherein it is said that the King Lords and Commons are the three States a Book of Institutions for young Students which was never yet allowed for Authority in the Law nor ever had the Honor to be cited in our Courts of Westminster These Mistakes or whatever you will call them with the Authority of the Octavo Author are united together to form an Opinion that the King is but the Bishops are not one of the three States which will be a very dishonorable Error For that it will lead us into a Mistake of our Government and which is much worse for that it hath a tendency to subvert it that is to depress the King and to suppress the Bishops It is an Indign thing and not to be suffer'd that we should lose our Government by Surreption and be made a Babel by dividing and confounding our Language To prevent this mischief we have declared our Government from the very Reason and Nature of the Structure thereof to consist of three States that is three different Orders which make the Great Council of the Kingdom whose End and Business is to administer Council and Auxiliaries to the King who is intrusted with the executive Power of the Government and Laws And besides now we will produce great Authorities to put this Mistake out of Countenance and to prevent its gaining any farther Authority with the People For Errors of this nature in process of time turn into Truth and things prove to be so at last as the Error and Mistake first bespake them and this our Lawyers know well enough with whom 't is a Maxime it belongs only to them and matters within their Province Communis Error facit Jus. And first for this purpose we will mention the Stile that the Parliament used which was convened by the Authority of Richard the Second he being then about to relinquish the Crown to H. 4. This Parliament in transacting so weighty an Office had reason to consider and know who they themselves were They without doubt in all their Proceedings in this High Matter used their true as well as biggest Stile which was that of States Walsingham tells us Sede Regali tunc vacua Procurators Regis Richardi Archiepiscop Eborac Hereford Renunciationem dicti Regis cessionem omnibus statibus Regni tunc adunatis ibi publice declararunt And again Quoniam videbatur cunctis Regni statibus super dictis Articulis singulatim ac etiam communiter interrogatis And again Ordinati sunt Comissarii ex parte statuum Communitatis ejusdem Regni Observe here that the King is none of these States that they are called all the States which signifies more than two that there is mention of States besides Community and therefore it was then understood that there were two States in the Lords House But afterwards he recites us the Form of a most important Instrument which follows In Dei nomine Amen Nos I. Episc Assavensis I. Abbas Glasconiensis Thomas Comes Glocestriae Thomas Dominus de Berkley Tho. de Epingham Tho. Gray Miles Willielmus Thirning Justiciarius per Pares Proceres Regni Angliae Spirituales Temporales ejusdem Regni Communitates omnes status ejusdem Regni Representantes Commissarii ad infra scripta specialiter deputati c. By which it is most clear that the Government was then understood to consist of three States of which the King was none as he cannot be with any Congruity 1 R. 3. Rot. Parl. apud Westm die Veneris 23 Jan. it appears that a Bill was exhibited coram Dom. Rege in Parl. Wherein is contained That several Articles on the behalf and in the name of the three States of the Realm viz. Lords Spiritual Temporal and Commons were delivered to the King And farther that the said three Estates were not assembled in form of Parliaments therefore be it ordained by this present Parliament that the Tenor of the said Articles delivered as aforesaid on the behalf of the said three Estates out of Parliament c. Now by the three Estates assembled in this present Parliament be the same ratified and approved Ac idem Dominus Rex de assensu dictorumtrium statuum Regni Authoritate praedicta omnia singula praemissa in billa praedicta contenta concedit ea pro vero indubio pronunciat decernit ac declarat This was in like manner an Act of Parliament for declaring the Right of the Crown to be in Rich. 3. In the Statute made 2 H. 4. the Word State is used plurally and for more than two of which the King was none to signifie the Parliament as appears cap 15. And so it is also in 4 Hen. 4. cap. 4. in which these words are Sith it is the desire of all the States of the Realm that nothing shall be so demanded of our Sovereign the King He will that all those who make any Demand c. So that hereby it is evident that in the Understanding of that time there were three States besides the King But to spare the Reader the trouble of the mentioning the Records at large that testifie the Parliament to consist of the King and the three Estates viz. Lords Spiritual Lords Temporal and Commons I will refer them that doubt to the Collection made in Mr. Pryn's Index to Sir Robert Cotton's Abridgment under that Title who himself was of this Opinion which nothing but the Evidence of the truth of the thing could have
and Officials to whom Custom hath given some Powers and Authoririty which cannot be check'd and controul'd by the Bishops themselves they are not to account neither are they answerable for the Lay-Zeal that hath made the Condition of Excommunicants so very afflictive For whatever some men please to think the Laity have out-done the Ecclesiasticks in the Excesses of intemperate Zeal as they are most apt and prone by their Ignorance to Superstition No man can pass under the Admonitions of the Church and be suspended from the Holy Mysteries until he hath made Satisfaction for his disorderly walking or Spiritual Pride in breaking Order but he is presently given up by the Laity to Satan I mean he suffers beyond the first Intention of the Church in her Discipline Severities enacted by the Law of the State which if reversed by that Authority that established them and a civil Process were enacted for the Ecclesiastical Courts in Causes of a Temporal Nature which are appointed by Law to their cognizance I persuade my self we should hear of no more Complaints against them in the Exercise of the Power of the Keys For we observe that they exercise the Power of the Keys with deference to the Secular Magistrates They never presume to excommunicate the Prince least they should thereby lessen his Authority and shock the Government For that all Government is established by the Honor and Reverence of the Governor according to that Saying of Aristotle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dissolution of Government doth easily follow the Contempt of the Governor As Kings are not subject to Penal Laws nor to be coerced by Penalties So true it is also what Balsamo hath noted ad 12 Canonem Synod Ancyranae Imperatoriâ unctione penitentiam tolli Neither do they presume in Reverence to the King to excommunicate his Counsellors and Ministers of State and Justice For so it was declared amongst other of the Avitae consuetudines of this Realm by the Assize of Clarendon Nullus qui de Rege teneat in Capite nec aliquis dominicorum ministrorum ejus excommunicetur nisi prius Dominus Rex conveniatur In which our Bishops are agreable to the Ancients Hildebert Cenoman after Bishop of Tours who lived about the eleventh Century says he Apud Serenissimum Regem opus est exhortatione potius quam increpatione Concilio quam praeceptis doctrinâ quam virgâ Ivo Bishop of Chartres in his Apology for communicating Gervasius saith thus Quos culpatorum Regia Potestas aut in gratiam benignitatis receperit aut mensae suae participes fecerit eos etiam Sacerdotum populorum conventus suscipere in Ecclesiastica Communione debebit ut quod principalis pietas recipit nec à Sacerdotibus Dei alienum habeatur Thus while the Bishops are not guilty of mean and unfaithful flatteries they do not participate of the pride of the Bishops of Rome or the irreverence and sawciness of a Presbyterian Consistory against their Princes and Governours Neither do they call up any criminal cause originally to their examination but pronounce the sentence of Excommunication on such onely as first are civilly convict of a crime save that matters of Incontinency are by the Common Law submitted to their Censure for that by the venerable gravity of the Judge and by the more private examination of such offences the modesty of the Nation is best preserved which is a surer defensative against the rifeness of such crimes perhaps than the sharpest punishments If they do excommunicate any man without a just cause or do not absolve the Excommunicate when he hath made his satisfactions the Bishop is compellable by the Authority of the Kings Courts to assoil the man under the pain of having his Temporalities seized into the Kings hands though he is not restored without the Episcopal Absolution For it is fit they should finally judge in their own proper Province and they must not they cannot relax the Laws of Christ nor administer the power of the Keys of binding and losing by any other measures for any power on earth But against this power of the Kings Courts they do not dispute or declare but have recognized it by their submission and they can submit to the penalties without complaining of this civil constitution Nay in the general order they approve it though in a particular case perhaps they do not because they cannot obey Our Bishops do not encroach any Temporal Authority in ordine ad spiritualia that stale pretence by which the Bishop of Rome hath arrived to his exorbitant power and by which the Scotch Presbyters would have acquired the like over Kings and Governours Their Authority always administers to and assists but never thwarts or contradicts the Temporal They have accommodated their power of the Keys to the vindication of our established Government against the attempts of Arbitrary Power to which their Allegeance to the King and the regard of the publick Peace did oblige them For such Attempts are mostly the ruin of those that make them always bring the Government it self into the greatest danger and sometimes prove the ruin both of the Government and the Nation This was required of them as an indispensible duty they being a principal part of the Government and the present Bishops Successours to all their Rights have no reason to decline their example if they have the like cause The Bishops anciently were sturdy opposers of King John when he designed to put this Kingdom into vassallage to the Pope and thereupon he writes to the Pope thus as followeth In conspectu paternitatis vestrae humiliamus ad gratias multiplices prout meliùs scimus possumus exhibendas pro cura sollicitudine quam ad desensionem nostram Regni nostri Angliae paterna vestra benevolentia indesinenter apponit licèt duritia Praelatorum Angliae inobedientia impediant vestrae provesionis effectum Pat. 17 Joannis R. M. 15. as I find it related by Mr. Petit in his book entituled The ancient Right of the Commons of England asserted About the 24 H. 3. Edmund then Archbishop of Canterbury at a Synod held at Westminster the King being present Candelis acceptis projectis ac extinctis Chartam Libertatum violantes vel sinistrè interpretantes excommunicantur Mat. Paris p. 151. About 13 years after viz. in 37 H. 3. Boniface then Archbishop of Canterbury the sentence of Excommunication is again repeated against those Qui Ecclesiasticas Libertates vel antiquas Regni Consuetudines in Chartis communium Libertatum de Foresta concessas quascunque arte vel ingenio violaverunt Fleta l. 2. c. 42. Dors Claus 37 H. 3. membr 9. Additament ad Mat. Paris p. 117. Which Sentence of Excommunication was ratified and confirmed in a Parliament held that year as followeth Noverint universi quòd Dominus Rex Angliae illustris Comes Norfolk Mareschallus Angliae H. Comes Hereford Essex J. Comes de Warewico Petrus à Sabaudia ceterÃque magnates Angliae
recommend to all ingenious Gentlemen that would be rightly instructed and informed neither deceive others nor would be deceived themselves as they love truth and virtue wisdom and sober thoughts to dispise this sort of wit in others and repress it in themselves And never allow it to be used but in the hours of mirth in the Relaxations of their minds from serious Contemplations and matters grave and weighty where this prophane thing wit ought always to be shut out with care Enough hath been said for rectifying the mistakes of any true Protestant especially any Clergy-man of the Church of England which you have objected against them about Government or Parliament dissenters from the Church of England and Popery Especially when it is made apparent that these mistakes are made serviceable to the Popish Plot and the means which that party prosecute to compass and bring about the ruine of our Church But that nothing may be wanting that lyes in my poor power for pulling their Foot out of the Snare I shall more distinctly consider them First I shall desire them to consider what our Government is and where the true knowledge of it is to be found And where can it be found but in our Statute Books the Commentaries of our Law the Histories of our Government and of the Kingdom Search them if you be at leisure if you are not consult those that have read them and whose business and employment it is to understand them and you cannot fail to be informed That the King hath no power to make Laws that both Houses of Parliament must joyn with the King in making a Law It can with no more reason be concluded that the King hath the Legislative power because his Assent makes the Bills in Parliament Laws than it can because the third Unit added to two makes a Triad that the other two do not go to the making of that number when a matter 's moved from the King in Parliament to pass into a Law the Commons consent last The Letters Patents of Ed. Sir E. Cook 8 R. 3. for making the Eldest Son of a King in Succession Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall was confirmed as there must have been otherwise they would have been void by the House of Commons And yet we will not say that the House of Commons can make a Prince of Wales or Duke of Cornwall And yet upon no better reason than this some men will talk as if they believed themselves that the Legislative power is in the King when no King of England yet ever pretended to it but by their process of Law have punished such officious and mischievous Knaves They will tell you that the Laws are the measures of our Allegiance and the Kings Prerogative and declare the terms of Obedience and Government That a Legislative authority is necessary to every Government and therefore we ought not to want it and therefore Parliaments in which our Government hath placed the making of Laws cannot be long discontinued nor their Conventions rendred illusory and in vain which is all one as to want them That to Govern by Laws implieth that great fundamental Law that new Laws shall be made upon new emergencies and for avoiding unsufferable mischiefs to the State By the Statutes of 4 Ed. 3. c. 14.36 Ed. 3. c. 10. it is provided that Parliaments be holden once every year The Statute of this King required a Parliament every three years which being an affirmatory Law doth not derogate from those of Ed. the 3. But if the King doth not call a Parliament once in a year He neglects these Laws and if he delays calling a Parliament three years he neglects the other Law of his own time to And for that he is by the Law intrusted with the calling of Parliaments He is at liberty to call them within the times appointed And that Laws ought to be made for Redress of mischiefs that may ensue appears by the Statute of provisors 25. E. 3. cap. 23. In which we have these words Whereupon the Commons have prayed our said Soveraign Lord the King that sith the right of the Crown of England and the Law of the said Realm is such that upon the mischiefs Dammage which happeneth to this Realm he ought and is bound of the Accord of his said People in his Parliament thereof to make Remedy and Law in avoiding the mischief and dammage which whereof cometh which that King agreed to by his Royal Assent thereto given I dare be bold to say that never any Bill in Parliament was lost and wanted the Royal Assent that was promoted by the general desires of the people If Popery therefore which is the greatest mischief to us that ever threatned this Kingdom can be kept out by a Law we ought to have such a Law and nothing can hinder such a Law to be past for that purpose but want of an universal desire to have it I desire these Gentlemen to consider how they will answer it to their Saviour at the last day if they suffer his true Religion and the professors of it to be destroyed and persecuted when nothing but their desires of a thing lawful to be had and of right due was requisite to prevent it Their sufferings will be just and righteous from God if their sin occasioneth it and very uncomfortable to themselves The extent of the Legislative authority is no where to be understood but by our Acts of Parliament in which it hath been exercised and used and by such Acts that declare the extent of its power by the 13. Eliz. cap. 1. it is made Treason during that Queens Life and forfeiture of Goods and Chattels afterwards To hold maintain and affirm that the Queen by the Authority of the Parliament of England is not able to make Laws and Statutes of sufficient force and validity to limit and bind the Crown of this Realm and the descent limitation inheritance and Government thereof And this authority was exercised by Entailing the Crown in Parliaments in the times of Richard the 2d Henry the 4th Henry the 6th Edward the 4th Richard the 3d. Henry the 7th thrice in the time of Henry the 8th and upon the Marriage of Queen Mary to King Philip of Spain both the Crowns of England and Spain were Entailed whereby it was provided that of the several Children to be begotten upon the Queen one was to have the Crown of England another Spain another the Low-Countries The Articles of Marriage to this purpose were confirmed by Act of Parliament Those that are truly Loyal to our present Sovereign have reason to recognize with high satisfaction that such a power of altering and limiting the descent of the Crown is duly lodged in the King and States of the Realm For under the authority of an Act of Parliament of the Kingdom of Scotland we derive our selves to the happiness of his Government and and He his title to the Crown of Scotland which drew to
him the Imperial Crown of England For Robert Steward first King of Scotland of that Family lived in concubinate with Elizabeth Mure and by her had three Sons John Robert and Alexander afterwards he Married Eufame Daughter to the Earl of Ross and after was Crowned King of Scotland He had by her Walter Earl of Athol and David Earl of Straherne When Eufame his Wife dyed he Married Elizabeth Mure. After that by one Act of Parliament he made them first Noble that is to say John Earl of Carrick Robert Earl of Menteith and Alexander Earl of Buchquhane And shortly after by another Parliament he limited the Crown in Tail Successively to John Robert and Alexander his Children by Elizabeth Mure in Concubinate and after to the Children of Elizabeth Ross his Legitimate Children who are to this day in their issue by this limitation by authority of an Act of Parliament in Scotland barr'd from the Crown and we hope ever will be by the continuance of the Line of our most Gracious King For note that though a subsequent Marriage by the civil Law which is the Law of Scotland in such cases doth Legitimate the Children born before Marriage of a Concubine yet it is with this exception that they shall not be Legitimated to the prejudice of Children born afterwards in Marriage and before the Marriage of the Concubine Besides the reason of the Civil Law in Legitimating the Children upon a subsequent Marriage is this viz. a presumption that they were begotten affectu maritali which presumption fails where the man proceeds to Marry another woman and abandons or neglects his Concubine But I desire these Gentlemen that are so unwilling to be safe in their Religion which I believe is most dear unto them That if any Law should exceed the declared measures of the Legislative authority though in such Case they may have leave to doubt of the lawfulness of such a Law yet if it be not against any express Law of God they will upon a little consideration determin it lawful if it be necessary to the Common-weal for that nothing can be the concerns of men united in any Polity but may be govern'd and ordered by the Laws of their Legislature for publick good for by the reason of all political societies For further satisfaction of the lawfulness of the bill of exclusion See a Book called The great and weighty Consideration considered there is a submission made of all Rights especially of the Common Rights of that community to the Government of its own Laws But all this and a hundred times as much will not satisfy some Gentlemen of the lawfulness of our Government the extent of the Legislative power of Parliaments since they have entertained a Notion that Monarchy is jure divino unalterable in its descent by any Law of man for that it is subject to none That all Kings are alike absolute that their Will is a Law to all their Subjects That Parliaments the states of the Realm in their Conventions can be no more than the Monarcks Ministers acting under and by his appointment which he may exauctorate and turn out of Office when he pleaseth For there can be say they under the Sun no obliging Authority but that of Kings to whom God hath given a plenitude of power and what is derived from them That this Divine Absoluteness may Govern and exercise Royal power immensely and that it is subject to nor to be abated or restrained by any humane inventions or contrivances of men however necessary and convenient Kings have thought them in former Ages by such methods and such offices and Officers of which number the States of the Realm may be or not be as Kings shall please as they shall by their absolute Will order or appoint Our Parliaments say they are Rebellious and an Usurpation upon the unbounded Power of Kings which belongs to every King as such jure ordinario and by Divine institution That a mixt Monarchy as ours is is an Anarchy and that we are at present without a Government at least such as we ought to have and which God hath appointed and ordained for us That we by adhering to the present Government are Rebels to God Almighty and the Kings unlimited Power and Authority under him which no humane constitution no not the Will and Pleasure of Kings themselves can limit or restrain For that jura ordinaria divina non recipiunt modum That the Legislative Power is solely in the King and that the business of a Parliament if they would think of being only what they ought to be is only to declare on the behalf of themselves and the people that send them for that purpose certainly the obedience that is due from them to such Laws as the K. shall make and that they may be laid aside wholly when he pleaseth And after all this what matter 's it with them what we say our Government is hath been or where the Legislative Authority of the Nation is placed or how used But I desire these Gentlemen to consider how they come to these Notions upon what reason they are grounded How a Government established by God and Nature for all Mankind should remain a secret to all the wise good just and peaceable men of all Ages That Kings should not before this have understood their Authority when no pretences are omitted for encrease of power and enlargement of Empire I desire them to consider that this secret was not discovered to the World before the last Age and was a forerunner of our late unnatural War and is now again revived by the republishing of Sir Robert Filmers Books since the Discovery of the Popish Plot. I wish they would consider that the reasons ought to be as clear and evident as Demonstration that will warrant them to discost from the sense of all Mankind in a matter of such weight and moment That to mistake with confidence and overweening in this matter will be an unpardonable affront to the Common sense of Mankind and the greatest Violation of the Laws of modesty I desire that they would consider and rate the mischiefs that will certainly ensue upon this opinion and whether a probable reason can therefore support it That they would throughly weigh ponder and examine the Reasons of these bold and new Dogmata For their enquiries ought to be in proportion diligent and strict as the matter is of moment and if they are not their error and mistake will be very culpable and the sin of the error aggravated to the measure of the mischief which it produceth and occasioneth Where is the Charter of Kings from God Almighty to be read or found for nothing but the declared Will of God can warrant us to destroy our Government or to give up the Rights and Liberties of our people If they are lawful I am sure it is villany to betray them since all political Societies are framed that all may assist the Common Rights of
Peer in Parliament Of what consideration decency can be Chap. XII Their Sitting in Judgment not so much against the reason of the Canon as their assent to Bills of Attainder which was never condemned And the Nature of an Act of Attainder Chap. XIII Over-ruling a Plea of pardon doth not condemn the Criminal and therefore they may judge of such Plea Though they are not to be present at the making of a Judgment of Condemnation Quousque perveniatur in Judicio further explain'd And that which follows upon another thing is not always caus'd by it XIV Bishops one of the three Estates of all the Realms of Christian Europe And how they came to be advanc't to that dignity and trust The convenience of their not being divided in a distinct house from Lay Peers They cannot be detruded from that dignity no more than the Government can be chang'd which no Law can do Six Bishops of the twelve Peers of France and their Aristocratical power That all Governments are lawful that are lawfully establish't Chap. XV. William the Conqueror agreeable to all the Princes of that time put Bishops under Tenure by Baronies and all Baronies at that time feudal with the reason of his Policy and the inconvenience it produced Of the Curia Regis which consisted of the Baronage in which the Capitalis Justitiarius Angliae did preside Of the administration of Justice in that time And that the Baronage of England upon special Writs of Summons became a Parliament An account how all our present Courts derived out of it Of the Court of the High Steward and of the Court of Chancery and the reasons of its rise and growth and how inconvenient it is And how we recovered out of the inconveniencies of that Constitution of Parliament by representatives in the time of H. 3. And that this it being allowed can give no countenance to those that are desirous to change our present and better Constitution That in all this Change the Bishops suffered no diminuion But when the ancient reason of Baronage failed they are after to be considered under the new reason of Baronage Chap. XVI The remembrance of the old reason of Baronage became a prejudice in the Judges upon which T. Furnival Plea allowed that he held not per Baroniam An Entail of Baronies with lands after allowed The reason of Nobility changed and no man now Noble by his Acres Many men Summoned to Parliament and yet not Noble No prejudice to the immovable Right of Bishops to have Summons to Parliament and that objection answered Kings may erect new successive Nobility in Clergy-men That Bishops are of a distinct sort of Nobility and under that and other reasons they are considered as a distinct State Chap. XVII Of the three States which make the Government under the King that he is none of them The Objections against this answered And the reasons of their being distinct and the several Offices and Expectances in the Government that make them so That the several Orders of Peers make but one Baronage and in that there is a great trust and honour greater belongs to Bishops than Lay Barons in our present constitution Their Character and qualifications commend them to the highest trust and render them fittest Judges Chap. XVIII The Reason of Tryals per Pares and that the Bishops are competent upon that reason in Parliament though not so fit to be of the High Stewards Court The Law of M. Charta not Lex scripta Bishops ought to be tryed by their Peers How that Right came to be discontinued and that in Parliament they ought still to be Tryed by their Peers Chap. XIX The unreasonableness of maintaining an Opinion upon a single Objection against a matter evidently proved that Questions of this nature should be considered with candor and not opposed with meer possibilities Chap. XX. Several alterations in the Government since the Conquest that the Alteration in what concerns the Baronage the Bishops Right is to be considered in analogy to the Change That changes of Government for the better cannot again be altered but our zeal is required to defend the Government made better and they deserve ill that go about to reduce us to our old mischiefs by their Antiquity Chap. XXI The advantage of the Change in the constitution of our Parliament in the change of granting Subsidies And how the Lords are bound by a Bill of Aids Chap. XXII The beneficial Change that hath been made by the clause praemunientes in the Bishops Writs of Summons to Parliament which gives Authority for the Convocation By this we are discharged of Provincial Councils and Canons of the Church kept distinct from Laws of the State The Church kept in peace from rending Questions and Religion is conducted not by Laws but by Canons not force but perswasion which commends our Episcopal Government Chap. XXIII The danger we avoided of having our Baronage of England ambulatory and fixing of it in Families and an indefectible Succession in which the Right of the Peer-age of Bishops is established Chap. XXIV The advantages the Adversaries seek to their cause by aspersing the Bishops Remembrance of all the faults in all times committed by any of the Order that many of those faults are principally due to the Papal Vsurpation and the neglect of Kings to defend the Rights of their own Bishops and are all the Vitia Temporum the times of Popery Chap. XXV How inculpably our Bishops have been in administration of their Ecclesiastical Authority how faithful in their Temporal Trust and Asserters of the Rights of the people They have not been irreverent to Kings nor have they encroached any power in Civil matters in ordine ad spiritualia That the power that they challenge is meerly spiritual and they challenge nothing of Divine Right but the exercise of their Ministry which they cannot lay aside Mr. Selden's Arguments for Erastianism answered The Church of England doth not tye her self always to think and enjoyn as she doth at present The moderation of the Church in opinions her apprehensions of Schism just and great They are not answerable for the ejectment of the Nonconformists nor for the scandalous Lives of their Clerks nor their Chancellors nor abuse of Excommunications Why matters of Incontinency are committed to their censures They have exercised the power of the Keys against the Infractors of M. Charta and how it hath been guarded with the denunciations of the Church we have reason to expect as much from our Bishops to support the Government of Laws Chap. XXVI We have as much reason that the Protestant Bishops should be as constant to the Reformed Religion as Popish Bishops obstinate for Popery An Apology for their Vnanimity in Voting Their dependance not so great upon the Crown as to oblige them to disserve their Prince The King bestows nothing upon them but what is the Churches the great expectation the Government hath of their fidelity and performances That which advanced them must
Authority or weight enough to perswade the contrary or an alteration therein notwithstanding that complaint which he tells us was made in the 45 of E. 3. fol. by the two Houses Counts Barons and Commons to the King how the Government of the Kingdom had been a long time in the hands of the Clergy Per cet grant mischiefs dammages sont avenuz en temps passe pluis purroit eschire en temps avenir al disherison de la Coronne grant prejudice du Royalme Whereby great mischiefs and damages have happened in times past and more may fall out in time to come to the disherison of the Crown and great prejudice to the Realm And therefore they humbly pray the King that he would imploy Laymen This they had too much reason to desire then when the Pope had advanced his Authority over them and put them under Oaths of Canonical obedience which rendred them less fit to be intrusted in the Government of this Kingdom who were become Subjects of another Empire usurping continually upon us which will never be our Case again if the Bishops can help it CHAP. III. ANd now we proceed to the Precedents of which the Octavo Book principally consists which seem as that Author and the other in Folio would have it to be not only a discontinuance of the Right of the Bishops to judge in Capital Causes but an argumentative proof that they never had any because it can as they say be never proved to be otherwise Immemorial time I confess is a great evidence of the right whether In non user or user and a fair reason to allow or deny the pretence and therefore we will now consider the Precedents As for the argumentative and discoursive parts of those books they will fall in to be answered by way of Objection when we are discoursing and proving the affirmative part of the Question and will best be reproved by being placed near the light of our reasons for establishing the Right of the Prelates If we do not give some satisfaction to these Precedents whatever we shall say I know can signifie no more than an Argument to prove a thing not true which is possible de facto testified by unexceptionable witnesses for such the Precedents will be taken until exceptions are made to their Testimony The Precedents produced by the two Authors are mostly the same only the Octavo hath more than what the Folio Book hath recited The first case that the Octavo produceth against the Lords Spiritual their Right of being Judges in Parliament in Capital Causes is that of Roger Mortimer Earl of March Simon Beresford and others who were no Peers and yet tryed in Parliament and no Bishops present and we agree it probable for his reason because there is mention made of Counts Barons and Peers and Peers being named after Barons could not comprehend the Bishops And because we think it reasonable when the orders of that House are particularly enumerated that the order omitted should be intended absent but we will not allow but that Peers is and so is Grants comprehensive of Bishops Nor will we when the entry is General intend the Bishops absent except he cannot otherwise prove them absent which we mention in the entry once for all as just and common measures between us in this dispute It will appear true what we affirm of the words Peers and Grants by what follows And if we should not insist upon their being present when nothing appears to the contrary we should do wrong to the Cause But to come to the consideration of this Precedent Is this a just Precedent Is not Magna Charta hereby violated Are not the proceedings altogether illegal Here are Commoners tryed by Peers in Parliament It is well known that the high displeasure of the King was concerned and that he did interpose with a plenitude of Power in this particular case against the fundamental constitutions of the Government the greatest crime of this Earl was too much familiarity with the Kings Mother Indignation and Revenge and not Justice formed the Process It was proceeded to condemn him Judicio Zeli upon pretence of the Notoriety of the fact Sir Robert Cotton in his abridgment tells us Anno 4. Ed. 3. That the King charged the Peers who as Judges of the Land by the Kings assent adjudged that the said Roger as a Traytor should be drawn and hanged The Bishops were not present certainly they were none of the Judges that gave Judgment as the King pronounced without Cognisance of the Cause The King had more Honour for their Order than to call then to such Drudgery and service of the Crown The iniquity of the sentence appears by the reversal thereof in Parliament 25 Ed. 3. in which the Original Record is recited Sir Robert Cotton in his Abridgment tells us That this Earl being condemned of certain points whereof he deserved commendation and for other altogether untrue surmises there was a Bill brought into the Lords House for the reversal of the Judgment and it was reverst by Act of Parliament indeed it could not be otherways reverst for no Court can judicially reverse their own Judgment for Error in Law and Judgment in the Lords House being the dernier Resort cannot be repealed but undone it may be by themselves in their legislative Capacity Here saith the Octavo the Bishops were not present at the passing of that Bill but yet the Octavo Gentleman will not pretend that the Bishops are to be excluded in any Acts of Legislation Why therefore was he so willing to impose upon the people so falsely and unrighteously and to produce this as a Precedent against the Bishops Right of Session in matters of that Nature by himself recognized There is nothing can excuse him herein for he is certainly self-condemned of undue Art in thiâ— matter In 20 R. 2. the Case of Sir Thomas Haxey happen'd which the Octavo book page 20 produceth against us He was forsooth condemned in Parliament for that he had preferred a Bill in the House of Commons for regulating the outragious Expences of the Kings House particularly of Bishops and Ladies Haxey was for this tryed and condemned to death for it in Parliament And here appears to be no Bishops and there ought not to have been any for these reasons First that the Bishops were the parties wronged and therefore could not in any fitness give sentence But Secondly if that was not in the Case that that caus'd the process was Royall anger upon a great faction of State in which I believe the Bishops were not engaged made for deposing of Rich. the 2d that was understood by the King to be in acting and promoted by Sir Thomas Haxey by his Bill It was this made the sentence altogether abhorrent from legal justice in matter and form Here was a Tryall of a Commoner by Peers a matter made Treason that did participate nothing of the nature of Treason But the discreet Gentleman
the great convulsions of State and the simultates amongst the Great men and extravagant excesses of injustice to the glory and honour of the Bishops it must ever be remembred that they did preserve themselves from being ingaged in such violences as were committed against the last mentioned Lords But that the Author of the Octavo should produce the Case of Sir John Mortimer against us who was condemned upon a bare Indictment without Arraignment or due Tryal a good reason why the Bishops were not there when he immediately after produceth the Case of the Duke of Suffolk wherein the Bishops were present and will have it stand for nothing because in that it was irregularly proceeded is monstrous partiality and iniquity But in what I pray was the irregularity in the Case of the Duke of Suffolk Why because the Commons desired he might be committed upon a general Accusation But he was not And the second irregularity was that some Prelates and some Lords should be sent down to the House of Commons which is often done But it is not the Prelates that he is thus concerned for but that the Lords lessened their Estate This to excuse him might make him very angry with that Case and quarrelsome And yet after all there is a fallacy in the Case of Sir John Mortimer which he would put upon us for Sir John Mortimer was condemned by Act of Parliament and therefore the Bishops might have been there if they had pleased and that with his leave For it was by the Duke of Glocester who in the Kings absence was commissionated to call and hold that Parliament by the Advice of the Lords Temporal at the prayer of the whole Commonalty in this present Parliament and by the Authority thereof ordered and decreed that he should be led to the Tower and from thence drawn to Tyburn I cannot therefore but observe how by the pretence of the Canon a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes and by other prudent Arts and Recesses from tumultuations the Bishops kept themselves often from being engaged in the Animosities of Great men against one another A matter remarkable for the commendation of their Exemplary Wisdom and Justice and a Recommendation of the men of that Order to be continued in the greatest trusts that the Government hath committed to them But now shortly and summarily to review what we have offered in the matter of Precedents and together to consider what true value and weight they are of in the Cases of Roger Mortimer and Haxey and of Sir John Mortimer 2 H. 6. every body may see a reason why the Bishops should not act if they had Authority and therefore without wilfulness it cannot be concluded they had none Who sees not that these Cases are Precedents for us for that the Bishops judged in the Reversal of the sentence against Haxey which if they had reason for it they ought to have affirmed And the Bishops might have been present rightfully at the undoing the Attainder of Roger Mortimer by the Confessions of these Authors The Proceedings in the Parliament of 15 E. 3. is a true argument of the Bishops modesty But it proves more than he is willing to prove if true viz. that the Bishops cannot joyn in making Laws to punish publick Crimes and therefore logically concludes nothing besides that the matter is false in fact as it is alledged The Cases of Sir William Thorpe and Sir Ralph Ferrers taken at best for him are but militant and have as much to say for as against the Bishops being there present But to be true to the cause of the Bishops We have this advantage against him that the Bishops were always in the possession of their Right because never fore-judged and it was once theirs as we shall prove by and by And this makes a presumption that they always used it when there is nothing to the contrary The Bishops were not present in the Bishop of Norwich's Case but the Bishops may be at any time absent upon a sontica Causa The defendant was a Bishop which was a very allowable one in those times But this must be considered with the Case of Thomas Arundel Bishop of Canterbury in whose judgment they were present virtually by their Proxy and therefore had a Right to be there The Case of John de Gomets and William de Weston is unduely and against the faith of the Record produced against us for upon the truth of the Record the Bishops were present notwithstanding any thing that can be from thence deduced to the contrary The Case of Sir William Rikehil 1 H. 4. is for us so is the Case of the Earl of Northumberland 5 H. 4. The Case of John Hall who murdered the Duke of Glocester and of the two Merchants that killed John Imperial the Genoua Ambassadour 3 R. 2. are foreign to this question and so is the Case of Sir John Mortimer except Judicial Authority and Legislative Authority in Blood are of the same consideration as I think they are and shall hereafter make out to be probable and then those Cases are for our Right They confess that the Bishops might have been present if they pleased and their absence at the passing of those Bills doth not conclude against their Right themselves being Judges The Writ de haeretico comburendo is of another consideration and doth not fall in with the present question There was no Judgment given or to be given in the Cases of the Earl of Huntingdon Kent Salisbury Lord Le Despencer Sir Ralph Lumley the Earl of Northumberland and Lord Bardolph All these Precedents such as they are happened in no long Tract of time but very tumultuous Not one of them pretends to be an exclusion of the Bishops upon Judgment or positive declaration of State They pretend to be only instances of Omission or non user which may well consist with a Right And yet contrary to the true import of these Precedents and the true Nature of them being only of Omission and absence of the Prelates which as they are can make no induction or establish any proposition whereupon to frame an Argument or conclude a prescription Besides that a prescription is not possible in a meer negative and to and of nothing And where no body can use or possess that Authority in pretence in the defailance of the party to use it whose Right it was Besides that it is not a prescriptible matter which we shall further explain hereafter it being in a matter of the Government and a Right arising from its constitution Contrary I say to the whole nature of the matter He makes this Argument à saepe facto ad jus valet argumentum His Argument should have been if agreeable at all to the matter this That where a Right is sometimes not used there can be no Right But if this had been said in English every body would have condemned his reasoning and disallowed if not laughed at the Argument So that we have
resolved what to do desired of the Earls of Leicester and Cornwall that he might have time untill the morrow And the morrow being Sunday time was given until the Munday and then the Bishops came to Becket and advised him for avoiding danger and scandal to submit himself to the Kings Will which if he should do jam audierint in Curiâ Regis perjurii Crimen sibi imponi tanquam proditorem judicandum eò quod terreno Domino honorem terrenum non servaret cum avitas consuetudines Regni observaturum firmasset ad quas specialiter observare jurisjurandi nova se illos astrixerat Religione And now sure it will be believed that Becket was accused in this Parliament of Treason for Treason was his Crime not allowing the King with the consent of his States to make any Laws but such as he should approve aggravated with perjury for he had sworn himself to observe them After Becket had given the Bishops an obstinate and resolute Answer to adhere to his Treasonable Practices to disallow the Authority of the King and States in the Laws called the Assise of Clarendon and to oppose the observance of them Observe what Gervasius saith discesserunt Episcopi ad Curiam properantes By and by Becket comes too but the Bishops were there before him carrying the Cross himself which the King as well as the Bishops took to be a coming armed Upon which saith Gervasius vocatis Episcopis proceribus gravem grandem Rex deponit querimoniam quod Archiepiscopus sic armatus in Curiam veniens ipsum suos omnes inauditâ saeculis formâ naevo notaverit proditoris Whereupon the Bishops by the Mouth of Hilaris Cicestrensis a Bishop more eloquent than the rest thus said to Becket Quandoque ait fuisti Archiepiscopus tenebamur tibi obedire sed quia Domino Regi fidelitatem jurasti hoc est vitam membra terrenam dignitatem sibi per te salvam fore consuetudines quas ipse repetit conservandas tu niteris eas destruere cum praecipue spectant ad terrenam sui degnitatem honorem idcirco te reum perjurii dicimus perjuro Archiepiscopo de caetero obedire non habemus This I take to be a judging in Treason But this the Bishops did for their part as Bishops and Suffragans they did withdraw their obedience from their Metropolitan which was as much as in them lay to deprive him a conviction it was of the Guilt not indeed judicium sanguinis But this is not all for observe what our said Author saith further they going away the King saith to them discernite quid perjurus contumax proditor debeat sustinere Itur judicatur à quo vel qualiter judicium pronuntiandum esset informatur In which matter Stephanides as he is cited by Mr. Selden in his Titles of Honour in the Folio Edition fol. 705. tells us how it was consulted and debated between the Bishops the Spiritual Barons and the Temporal Barons for saith he de proferendo judicio distantia fuit inter Episcopos Barones utrisque alteri illud imponentibus utrisque se excusantibus Aiunt Barones vos Episcopi pronuntiare debetis sententiam ad nos non pertinet nos Laici sumus vos personae Ecclesiasticae sicut ille Consacerdotes ejus Coepiscopi ejus Ad haec aliquis Episcoporum Imo vestri potius est hoc officii non nostri non enim est hoc judicium Ecclesiasticum sed Seculare non sedemus hic Episcopi sed Barones Nos Barones vos Barones pares hic sumus Ordinis autem Nostri rationi frustra innitimini quia si in nobis ordinationem attenditis in ipso similiter attendere debetis eo autem ipso quod Episcopi sumus non possumus Archiepiscopum dominum nostrum judicare By which dispute by the way it doth appear that both the Bishops and Temporal Lords did take themselves to be equally constituted Judges and Peers by reason of their common Baronage in this Case of Becket a Cause of Treason the Bishops owned and avowed a Right of judging him as Barons They did not excuse themselves upon the score of the Canon alledged but from the indecency in respect of the relation that they stood in to the Criminal he being their Superiour and Metropolitan they seem'd willing to decline the making of the Sentence Whether any Judgment was pronounced by whom or what the Judgment was is not certain the Historians differing thereupon But when he went out of the Court he was call'd by the people as he past Traytor and perjured Traytor as the King before had called him And if this be not the clearest proof of Beckets being accused of Treason and the Bishops judging in a capital Cause in Parliament there can be nothing proved to satisfaction Besides that all that writ of his story are unwilling Witnesses they magnify excuse and justify the man all along extolling his virtues They call him Saint Pater Patriae so Gervasius does Coll. 1393. and Martyr Let the Reader consider what is here faithfully recited and then let him tell what Opinion he hath of the Candor of the Octavo Gentleman who could find no fault in Thomas Becket for he saith Folio 62. That Gervasius Dorobernensis saith that Becket was charged with two things Injustice to John Marshall and his own contempt in not appearing to the Kings Summons This Author had nothing of his own knowledge to charge upon him and saith that Stephanides is not to be regarded because he was Beckets friend and an obscure Author it may be not yet come into his Study The Author had reason to see no faults in Becket or to forget them all for the good service the insolencies of that man hath done towards the Scandal of the Order But we have not mispent our own time neither will the Reader regret our length in this matter for this single Case consider'd gives a Resolution to the Question and puts the Right of the Bishops to sit in capital Causes out of all doubt This Case will let in light for the true understanding of the Assise of Clarendon For it must be noted that the Great Parliament of Clarendon was held by Henry the 2. about the latter end of January in the tenth year of his Reign the Bishops and Lords were all Sworn to observe the Statutes there made called the Assise of Clarendon called the Avitae consuetudines Regni of which the Law aforementioned was one This Law therefore must be interpreted in such a sense for that the words will bear it and can be intended in no other than that which may consist with the proceedings in the Case of Arch-Bishop Becket and with the Oaths of all the Bishops and Peers and the great men taken but a short time before to observe the Statutes of Clarendon Now if the whole Order of capital Causes had been intended to be excepted by that Statute above
as many of them as were most proper to judge or assist in the Judgment as the Case did require were appointed by the King or his Capitalis Justiciarius And that it was so in Fact appears by that Famous Cause wherein Arch-bishop Lanfranck recovered against Odo Bishop of Baieux Earl of Kent Eadmerus Hist Nov. l. 1. f. 9. tells us That there was Principum Conventus an Assembly of Barons at Pinneden in Kent and that the Kings Precept was Rex quatenus adunatis primoribus probis viris non solum de Comitatu Cantiae sed de aliis Comitatibus Angliae Querele Lanfranci in medium ducerentur examinarentur determinarentur disposito itaque saith he principum Conventus apud Pinneden Gaufridus Episcopus Constantiensis vir ea tempestate praedives in Anglia Vice Regis for Odo Bishop of Baieux one of the Litigants was at that time the Justiciarius Angliae justitiam de suis querelis strenuissimè jussus fecit where we see Godfrey at the King's Precept took so many Barons of that Country or of any other where any of the Lands lay as Assistants to him For our Historian saith that Lanfranck though Godfred pronounced the Judgment did recover judicio Baronum qui placita tenuerunt The probi homines were such by whom the truth of the matter might be better understood and did probably enquire of it who did accord and agree the Judgment to be right Lanfranc did recover ex communi omnium astipulatione judicio as our Historian also informs us I might cite many more Records of the Method of the Administration of Justice in this Curia Regis but I should be too long in this matter not being strictly necessary to the Question in hand though the understanding of the Nature of this Court and the Constitution of the Government at this time will many ways inserve to the clearing the Right thereof In this Court Peers were tryed all Pleas of the Crown heard and whatever is now the Business of the Courts of Common Pleas and Exchequer was dispatch'd in this Curia Regis Here Fines were levyed as appears by a Record furnished to us by Sir Hen. Spelman in his Gloss f. 279. the word Fines There men famous for their Skill in the Law did attend and by this Judicature some place was assigned them where they were to hear such Causes as were referred and sent down to them and it is very possible that Fines may be levyed i. e. Concord made of the thing in pretence that was referred to them and it may be true that in a Charter of a Grant of Conusance of Causes Words may be conteined for excluding the Intromissions of the Justices of the one Bench and the other For such Charters never want words These matters are produced by Sir Edward Coke in his Preface to the Eighth Report to prove that the Common Pleas was a Court before the Magna Charta of King John for that these matters are in time before that Charter but these Justices were no other than Ministers to the Curia Regis They were not such Justices as now make that Court all Common Pleas being now appropriated to their Judicature For the Writs before that Charter were returnable coram me vel Justitia mea Glanvil l. 1. cap 6. but after that Charter they were returnable coram Justiciariis meis apud Westmonasterium Bracton l. 2. cap. 32. But before this all Common Pleas were adjudged in the Curia Regis and that Court did send down the Cause to such as did attend that Court to receive its References By Magna Charta cap. 11. it was provided Communia placita non sequantur Curiam nostram sed teneantur in aliquo certo loco And now Writs were made returnable there the Common Pleas were taken out of the Jurisdiction of the Curia Regis one Judicature was appointed for all Causes between the Subjects and one place of Attendance for Litigants By this Provision Justice was administred without Noise and Tumult the Administration of it committed to men of Skill and to such who might be answerable for their Judgments and from whom it might be appealed But after Magna Charta made by King John and confirmed by H. 3 9. the Authority continued of the Justitia or capitalis Justiciarius to him was the resort for Writs from whence all Judicial Authority was still derived He did direct and bound the Justice of the Court of Common Pleas by such Formula's as were allowed in the Curia Regis where the Chancellor and his Colledge of Clerks did attend for the forming of Writs according to the nature of the Complaint with the Allowance of that Court but the Authority of this Court ceasing and the Office of this great Justiciary about the end of H. 3. we find in the Statutes of Glouc. 6 E. 1. c. 7. Laws for a Writ of Entry to be granted to the Reversioner where Tenant in Dower Aliens in Fee though her Alienation was a Forfeiture of that Estate at Common Law But it seems there had been no such Writ yet formed and the Chancellor had no such Power of forming a new Writ That Statute provides that in that Case there shall be a Writ of Entry thereof made in Chancery which is called A Writ of Entry in casu proviso And for that Power might not be wanting in the Chancellor to issue out new Writs where no Writs before formed were fitted to the Case So that Writs in Cases of like reason had been granted by W. 2. cap. 24. it was provided quotiescunque evenerit in Cancellaria quod in uno casu reperitur Breve in consimili casu cadente simili indigente remedio concordent Clerici de Cancellaria in Brevi faciendo Whereas in the full Authority of the Court of the Curia Regis no Right could have failed of a Remedy For Jura sunt matres Actionum But Derivative Authorities are always stricti Juris no Rights are now remediable but where they are in a Parity of Reason or Analogy with such Rights as had received relief in the time of that Great and Original Judicature So inconvenient are those Reformations that reform by pulling down Want of Authority to do Right is a greater Fault in Government than the allowance of a Power that may be abused to Wrong and Oppression But this is the true reason why we have so many Causes irremediable at Common Law petitioning for relief at this day in our Court of Chancery though if the Statute of Westm 2. before-mentioned were well improved the Defects of our Law would not be so shameful and notorious By what hath been said it appears that the Common Pleas was not an Original Court or a Court of ordinary Jurisdiction in the First Constitution of the Government and such it remains and continues to this time For that Court cannot proceed to Judgment in any Cause without an Original Writ out of Chancery though a late Statute makes their
to Persons or Territories by the Civil Authority Their Convocations are convened by the King 's Writ they debate nothing without his Leave Their Results become Canons and receive Sanction by the Royal Authority and do not pretend to infringe any Temporal or Civil Right or Law And besides their Convocations are always to be held sittting Parliaments and no longer not at any other times And whatever they debate or resolve is under the Observation of Parliament Nequid detrimenti capiat Respublica The Bishops make no Laws about Religion apart by themselves neither have they any Negative against any that are propounded and therefore are not answerable for any that are made or not made They have not the definition of Heresie but the Law hath declared it since the Reformation And the Writ De Heretico comburendo is since abrogated by the Christian Temper of a Parliament principally consisting of such Members that were conformable to the Institutions of the Church of England that is the legal Establishments of this our Christian Commonwealth The Church of England is no more her own present Establishments than the present thoughts of any man is the man himself as the thoughts of a man are more refined and unreprovable as the man grows wiser so do the Laws and Constitutions the Orders and Rules of a Church or Christian Republick alter amend and improve as the Wisdom and Virtue Religion and Devotion of the Government and the principal parts thereof in Church or State increaseth or advanceth Our Bishops have had and that with the greatest reason greater apprehensions of Schism and Separation than of Errors in Opinion which occasioned it as of worse importance to the Christian Faith than the Errors themselves Besides that a man cannot help being mistaken in many things but it is in every mans power to be modest and peaceable and wise to sobriety and hold the unity of the faith in the bond of peace and charity and not to revile and deprave that which hath the publick approbation though he cannot thereto fully assent It is great iniquity and unrighteousness to pretend to Liberty of Conscience as their right and in the mean time not to tolerate the publick appointments and what is authoritatively allowed and approved If Controvertible Opinions are allowed a Warrant for making a Sect and separate Communion and Churches are denominated and distinguished by them and consequently such Opinions are advanced unduly unto the same necessity of belief as Articles of Faith what will become of the Christian Verity where will it be recognized and purely professed how distinguished how understood how ascertained amidst the number of Opinions contended for by the several dogmatizing Sectaries with more zele than the undoubted and uncontrovertible Articles of Faith Nay I will adventure to say further on their behalf that Schismatical Separations would not offend them so little do they affect to be Magisterial but for that if this Disease should grow Epidemical there would be no such thing as a Christian Church and the Christian Religion would perish from the earth without a miracle It is onely designed by our Church that those whose Subscriptions are required should thereby onely signifie their allowance of the Liturgy and Articles as fit to be used and allowable What Plea then can our Separatists have for a Toleration for themselves who by their Separation seem unwilling to tolerate the publick Establishment either from our Governours Civil or Ecclesiastical or from one another in their divided ways To reform or change to these mens pleasures is impossible for that they cannot they positively differing from each other be all pleased in any one possible Establishment Besides that untill we cease to be Schismaticks and to be of separate and divided Communions upon the score of any dislike or but probable exception to what is publickly received or allowed the altering any thing for our satisfaction will be but applying the Cure to the Symptoms a cutting off one head of the Hydra By this way to effect an union is as impossible as it would be to empty the Ocean without stopping the cur-of the Rivers The Bishops are as all men by how much they are better learned are of the greatest Moderation in Opinions and can tell how duely to rate and value them according to the Prejudice or Advantage they do to the Ends of our Religon those several Opinions that have been contended with furious and rending Zeal in the several Ages of the Church to the Scandal of that peaceable Institution They can have a better Opinion of that man who hath unhappily entertained the less probable side of the Questions controverted if he opines with Modesty than they have of him that holds the most probable part thereof with a Sectary-Zeal Seperation from Contempt and Disdain of those of a different persuasion Their Moderation is known unto all men of it their Opposers have had very sensible Experience the several Dissenters cannot disown it but must confess that they have had severally kinder Usage from the Episcopal Men than their several Parties have from one another By their Learning Wisdom and Moderation which is most eminently known and observed in many of them and hath recommended them to the highest Esteem they must be allowed their Enemies being Judges to be the fittest Arbiters of the Controversies and the most likely and probable Procurers of the Peace of Christendome All the Dissenting Parties have reason to look upon them as their Common Sanctuary and Defence against the Outrages of each other But in this they must be pardoned if they being under a Law or Rule of their Superiors made as they think in a matter lawful act accordingly and do not disobey for their sake who think otherwise though in the mean time they pity their Scruples Indeed the Terms of the Nonconforming Ministers have been made hard upon them But that hath been from Reasons of State which the late unhappy Wars occasioned and they were ejected out of their Livings by Statute-Law And on the other side it is true that many men not to fit for that Holy Function have enjoyed Church Benefices but neither this can the Bishops help For they cannot reject a Clerk presented to a Benefice or eject him but as the Law will so sacred is the Right of Patronage and so fixed by the Law are Ministers in their Livings which is not Nice in the manners of Clerks and the Bishops cannot be severer than the Laws So that if some men not of the most unblamable conversations have kept their Livings and some of very unexceptionable Lives have been ejected The unhappy Nonconformists are directed where to make their Complaint But as there is little Cause of complaint on this part of the Episcopal Authority and function viz. Their Superintendency over the Pastors of their Dioceses So we shall observe how they have behaved themselves in the Exercise of the Power of the Keys For what is done therein by their Chancellors
govern as he pleaseth that the power of the Laws is solely in him that he may if he please use the consent of Parliaments to assist the reason of his Laws when he shall give any but it is great condescention in Kings to give a reason for what they do and a diminution to their most unaccountable Prerogative You say That they are for a Popish Successor and no Parliament and do as much as in them lies give up our antient Government and the Protestant Religion the true Christian Faith to the absolute will of a Popish Successor giving him a Divine Right to extirpate God's true Religion established amongst us by Law and to evacuate our Government by his absolute pleasure Our Government by a King and Estates of Parliament is as antient as any thing can be remembred of the Nation The attempt of altering it in all ages accounted treason and the punishment thereof reserved to the Parliament by 25. Ed. 3. The conservancy of the Government being not safely to be lodg'd any where but with the government it self Offences of this kind not pardonable by the King because it is not in his power to change it This is our Government and thus it is established and for ages and immemorial time hath thus continued a long Succession of Kings have recognized it to be such And just now when we are under the dread of a Popish Successor some of our Clergy are illuminated into a mystery that hath been concealed from the beginning of Governments to this day from the wisdom of all Princes and Ministers of State That any authority in the Government not derived from the King and that is not to yield to his absolute Will was rebellious and against the Divine Right and Authority of Kings in the Establishment against which no usage or prescription to the contrary or in abatement of it is to be allowed That all Rights are ambulatory and depend for their continuance upon his pleasure So that though the Reformation was made here by the Government established by Law and hath acquired civil Rights not to be altered but by the King and the three Estates These men yet speak say you as if they envied the Rights of their own Religion and had a mind to reduce the Church back again into a state and condition of being persecuted and designed she should be stript of her Legal Immunities and Defensatives and brought back to the deplorable helpless condition of Prayers and Tears do utterly abandon and neglect all the Provisions that God 's providence hath made for her protection Nay by this their new Hypothesis they put it by Divine Right into the power of a Popish Successor when he pleaseth at once by a single indisputable and irresistable Edict to destroy our Religion and Government And these opinions you say they are the more inclined to entertain For That they believe no Plot but a Presbyterian Plot for of them they believe all ill and call whom they please by that hated name and boldly avow that Popery is more eligible than Presbytery for by that they shall have greater revenues and more Authority and Rule over the Lay-men This is a heavy charge if true but it is imputable I am sure but to a few and not so generally as some malevolent men of the Popish Faction are industriously busie to have it For if it were I confess it might choque the constancy Resolution and Zeal of the most addicted to the service of the Church men and make them at least very indifferent in their concerns For these mistakes are so gross and inexcusable that they ought to be permitted to suffer the smart of their own follies and to be corrected by the evils they are drawing down upon themselves with their own hands They deserve to suffer as betrayers of their own Country and to be prosecuted with greater shame and ignominy by all of the Reformed Religion than the Traditores were by the antient Christians These their diserting of the true Christian Faith being much less excusable then that of theirs and of greater mischief as of deeper malignity How many of the Clergy-men are thus misled we know not but they seem many more than they are because they are most in view and come often under observation frequent publick houses and talk loud because they want the Complement of their preferments But certainly Sir what you say to be the declared opinions of some Clergy-men is the business now of the Papists to propagate Hoc Ithacus velit magno mercantur Atridae These are agreeable to and indeed make up the most modern Project and Schem of the Popish Plot. Since the discovery of their first design of killing the King and massacring of the Protestants They have taken such courage by observing how little power we have to prevent their design that they have us in scorn and in the vilest contempt They now think that we are not worth destroying but by our own hands that we are not worthy of their trouble or the charge of Executioners of their providing How entertaining is it to his Holiness to find the Church of England the impregnable Bulwark of the Reformed Religion easily fall into his hands by the unpresidented folly of some of her Sons without the trouble of attacking her either by force or Argument which hath hitherto wanted success and the attempts always attended with dishonor and mischief to his See How pleasant will it be to him to see us perish and our destruction to be from our selves With this he will answer all the irrefragable Apologies of the Church of England for her departure from the Communion of the Romish Church Then he will say with triumph our Church destroyed her self and perished by a Divine Fate for her unwarrantable and Sacrilegious Schism for so he will call our follies and impute them to Divine infatuations The manner of our destruction will be a better Argument and of more force against the Doctrine of the Reformation than all the Arguments of all the Doctors of that Church to this day For this purpose since the Discovery of the Popish Plot it is that Sir Robert Filmers Books were Re-printed together and recommended by the Title Page and the publick Gazet to our reading Since the Discovery of the Plot we have had variety of Books Printed to the same purpose viz. To prove that all Kings as Kings are absolute by Divine Right Since the Discovery of the Popish Plot we have had men imployed to search all our antient Records and Histories to find out something more antient than our Parliaments as now constituted that it may serve as a pretence to take them away Since the Discovery of the Popish Plot we have the memory of our late calamitous War revived to raise a Pannick fear of another and to make the King believe that the genius of the Nation is Rebellious and that the Protestant Religion it self is to be apprehended by Kings It is
needs no more than to raise a fit of laughter upon it which has the same effect with the men of Wit and their vain admirers as reducing a false proposition to an absurdity Thus the reason of this age is governed by our risibility The Popish Writers have thus tickled us with their Wit that we are ready to dye and perish laughing and we know not nor care to Judge what does truly concern our preservation And by improving the vanity of some youngsters they have drawn them to question the Truth of the Popish Plot and some can believe every hour of the day when they meet with a merry Popish Pamphlet that there is a Protestant Plot on foot though they believe it I am sure not much longer than they are reading it I will not grudge my pains in furnishing a short Demonstration of the Popish Plot since it is of such importance to the saving of these men and the whole Nation which possibly may fix their minds notwithstanding so vain they be into a belief of it which I have made short that it may be the better remembred which I do in kindness to them since it was lately and may be so again shortly a criminal matter to bring the truth of it into question and they are by all honest men reckoned as Plotters themselves who doubt it The Plot has been declared by the Kings Proclamation and four Parliaments one of them consisting of Pensioners and Dependents on the Court which for eighteen years together were giving Demonstrations of their Loyalty to their Prince almost forgetting the publick Weal A solemn National Fast has been Indicted by the Civil and Ecclesiastical Authority of the Kingdom for averting the mischiefs thereby designed and solemnly Celebrated by the whole Nation in which certainly they did not mock God and deride his providence Many unparalleld Villanies have been committed for the stifling concealing and suppressing the discovery of it which however wicked the Papistical sort of base false and degenerate Christians are we cannot without breach of Charity towards them think they would commit cheaply and without cause and to no purpose They have murdered a Minister of Justice because he had the knowledge of it and left nothing undone that they thought necessary to Assacinate another for strenuously opposing it They have attempted upon the Lives of our Witnesses by perjuries and forgeries they have endeavored to charge them with the most infamous crimes endeavored to destroy them in their Lives and Reputations too in a forme of Justice They have attempted by fears and rewards upon the integrity of all our Witnesses to draw them to retract their Testimony against the Plot for which some of their Agents have been judicially censured One Gentleman to the Pillory Fined a 1000 l. and Condemned to a years imprisonment so evident and notorious was his offence and by the Court thought so heinous That it provoked the passion of the Court and they seemed to exceed the ordinary Rules of Justice for that they judged the Case to be of an exorbitant and transcendent nature The Plot of the Meal Tub is so sublimated a piece of wickedness the last accomplishment of villany it hath out-done all former and will never be out-done in after ages The Papists by the Discovery of the first Plot became less hopeful in a Massacre and of effecting their purpose by force They dare not now kill the King for that the World would not now believe it to be done by Mr. Claypole and his accomplices which must have born the blame from the Papists and he and they long since Executed as Traitors if that part of the Plot against the Kings Life had not been prevented by being detected I say the first design of the Plot being rendered less feasible by the discovery they keep the King alive with care as well for their avoiding the rage of the Nation as to lessen the credit of the Plot But contrive to destroy as many as they thought fit to be Massacred in forme of a legal process and to charge them with a design of raising Rebellion against the King They had made a List of a great number whom they intended to charge principal Nobles and worthy Gentlemen about the Town had prepared witnesses to swear the charge against them and would with more ease after the first Conviction and Execution have sworn all that they had a mind to destroy into the same guilt And thus all the truly Religious the noble good and virtuous of our Nation that had courage enough to own assert and defend the true Christianity and our Government must to the eternal dishonor of our Nation and Religion have suffered the execrable death of Traitors We have reason to think them humane when they only designed a Gun-powder Treason or a Massacre and our abhorrence of this usage dischargeth in us all reluctancy to Martyrdom Let them bring us to the Stake as Martyrs then we shall bear our Testimony to the truth of the best Religion and our Lives will not be cheaply lost but by this means we must be forced to dishonor this Religion by our deaths by a Massacre or a Gun-powder Plot the vileness cruelty and treachery of that Apostate Church had been declared to all the World and that false Religion as well as the professors of it had been rendered detestable for which end a good man would scarce refuse to dye but by this means they would have forced us to personate their own proper Crimes and Villanies and dishonor our own peaceable and holy Religion A man of Honor prefers his Honor to his Life and would redeem it by his Death But by this means we were though innocent to lose our Lives by dishonor and to fasten a stain upon our Memories by our death The Priests their impudent Lyes at their deaths in denying the matters of the Plot of which they were upon clear evidence Convicted and Sentenced must have past for truths and all our worthy men dying with protestations of their innocence must to the everlasting infamy of our Religion and Nation been accounted false and impious at their last breath there is no reason to be assign'd of the patience of God or Man towards such miscreants but that they may have time to add one impiety to another until an easie vengeance triumphs over them for though this last mentioned Plot is cleared beyond all exception their Faces are hardened and they are not yet ashamed but have since contrived and suborned Witnesses to swear the very Discovery of the first Plot to be a false contrivance of a Plot against the Papists To this purpose they suborned a Son by perjury to commit parricide against his Father the greatest Sin against Earth the other the greatest affront against Heaven What a Religion is this that must be thus supported Nay as if they did not fear or care to loose the favour of their most indulgent Prince which they have possest since he
all I cannot imagine they can pretend an umbrage from the Holy Scriptures for such unheard of opinions The Jews indeed had a Government and Laws of Gods framing and appointment and a King of their own choosing and such a King as they desired by God's permission they had But their form of Government ought with less reason to be the Rule of all kingly Governors because it was a Government chosen by themselves then the Laws of the Jews ought to be the Laws of all Nations which they are not though made and enacted by God himself Christ would not make himself a Judge in a private Right submitted to him He determined the right of the Roman Empire by the possession of Soveraign Authority and such as the whole world had made it his Disciples were obliged to acknowledge it by their Obedience and Submissions which is the summ of the Apostles Doctrin in this matter The Christian Religion instituted no form of Governments but enjoyns us to be obedient to those we have not only by express command in the case but by its general Rules of a most refined improved and extensive morality But though I said the Scriptures have not prescribed or directed any universal Form of Government yet the Scripture hath declared the falshood of this new Hypothesis of Kingly Government to be Jure Divino or by Divine Right For St. Peter 1 Peter 2.13 and 14. stiles Kings as well as the Governors under him the ordinance of man which cannot have any other sense but that men make them and give them their powers By St. Paul the power of Government indeed is called Gods Ordnance Rom. 13.2 but that is for this reason because in general God approves of Governments as necessary to the well being of Mankind for the improvement of humane nature for the punishing of Vice Encouragement and security of virtue without them it being impossible to live honestly and in peace And he hath made them the under Ministers of his providence and care over Mankind and expects of them that they should promote his true Honor and Worship in the World which will be always accompanied with the exercise of all civil Virtues These two different places must be so understood that they may be both true and by no other interpretation can they be reconciled and made consistent It is impossible that any thing can be of mans appointment which is of Gods Ordination there can be no such thing as a Co-legislative power of Men with their Maker Government therefore is from God as he hath made Governments necessary in the general order of things but the specification thereof is from Men and the best definition that can be made of Government is in the words of both the Apostles put together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and such Governments which men make God approves and requires our obedience to them upon all those reasons which make Governments necessary The natural and easie consequence and result of these Scriptures is this which I desire those Gentlemen to observe That whatsoever is not lawfully established by men no Law of God not the Christian Law doth oblige us to obey The Christian Religion doth equally condemn in the reason of its Institutions Usurpation and Contumacy Where the Apostle admonisheth us that if we be free we should not become servants he hath by virtue of that Admonition made it commendable not to suffer the Encroachments of power over us Most certainly therefore as the Christian Religion doth not prejudice the Soveraign Rights of Princes such as they are in the several forms and Modells of Monarchical Governments non eripit terrestria qui regna dat coelestia as Sedulius so doth it not enlarge them when by the Gospel God made us free from his own positive Laws to the Jews he did not intend thereby de Jure to render us slaves to the Arbitrary pleasure of Men. No Man intends by any thing in the Scripture that all mankind is obliged to any one form of Government and therefore all Men are left to their own It hath not therefore altered the terms of Government and Obedience that every Nation hath Established for themselves but hath confirmed and strictly obliged the observance of them To Obedience to Government we are obliged by as many ties as there are Christian Virtues and he must disown his Christianity that departs from his due Allegiance And since our Saviour is declared King of Kings and Lord of Lords all Kings Christian Kings especially are to govern in Imitation of his mercy and goodness and in subserviency to the Interest of his Religion and Kingdom Regum timendorum in proprios greges Reges in ipsos imperium est Javis cuncta supercilio moventis Whence then is this absolute Authority of Kings if it come neither from God nor Man Give me leave now to inform you that these opinions render you all Traytors guilty of Treason of State perduellionis rei obnoxious to be punished as Traytors by an Authority lodged in Parliament In the Constitution of the Government You your selves must needs condemn your selves to have forfeited all your own who hold such Principles that tend to destroy every Mans Right by resolving all things into the absolute pleasure of a Monarch in which you mostly disserve the King and are contrary to His Majesties late Declaration The Men of these Principles the less of the Government they are entrusted with the better for the less they have to give up and betray I confess if I could believe that this Doctrin was become Orthodox among them and the prevailing opinion of the Clergy I should conclude us to be the most unhappy people under the Sun This is an Hypothesis indeed that will bring on new Heavens and a new Earth but such wherein no peace or Righteousness can ever dwell But I deem all such as are Defenders and Promoters of it do deserve a civil Excommunication more smarting then their Ecclesiastical and to be condemned to live upon and only feed themselves with their thin speculations and to be excluded from any share of that Government that they professedly in their Principles betray to be punished as seditious persons and most mischievous Schismaticks far more intolerable in this matter than the scrupulous brother-hood for their boglings at an indifferent and insignificant Ceremony For that to the ruin of our Religion and destruction of the publick peace they divide from that polity to which by drawing here their first breath they made Faith and to which the condition of their birth doth oblige them they falsify that which Arrian in his Epictetus calls the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than which nothing is more sacred and inviolable By creating themselves a new Allegiance and obtruding it upon their fellow Citizens and Members of the same Kingdom they set up a Kingdom within a Kingdom more dangerous and mischievous than the Papal Imperium in Imperio which certainly will be introduced if this Modern and
Government and fit to be cut off Neither can the most insolent Paradox of Sir Robert Filmers Patriarcha contribute much to this purpose But that it may be able to deceive but a very few for the time to come for the sake of such Gentlemen who have not Chosen their side are glad of the least Color or dream of a Shadow a single opinion of any body it matters not whom to relieve their modesty in their notorious defections from Truth Justice and the Government I shall here consider his Hypothesis especially for that it was Re-printed and is magnified by the Factors for the Popish Plot. And first I will draw it out shortly in all its strength and make it more argumentative than he hath left it for he hath left his willing readers to find out the Argument and to make the Conclusion Adam saith he was the Father of Mankind that to him as Father belonged an Absolute dominion over all his descendents that all Men being so born are born under subjection to such an Authority This authority so reserved upon us by God and the condition of our birth and the manner of coming into the World is to be submitted to in the person of the present King who by becoming King is for that reason vested with this absolute Authority This power and the duty of our subjection to it results from our being Born and coming into the World after the manner of men This power of Kings is grounded by him meerly upon this natural resultance and not from any positive and express Revelation from God for such neither we nor he yet ever heard of We will now then consider what there is of weight in this fictitious Reason of Government in which the World is so lately illuminated by this Speculator what force there is in it to unravel all Models of Government that are framed in the World to confound Kingdoms and Nations and to give Warranty to the bringing upon us all the miseries that are designed by the Papists for us which we are to be prepared to suffer with most conscientious patience from the comforts and supports of this insolent and vain pretence I appeal to the Reader of him whither in thus stating his Doctrine I have not made it more Argumentative and concluding to his purpose than he left it I will take this method of remonstrating the fertility of his Hypothesis By considering what a Father is and what his Duty towards and Power over his Children in which it will be found that nothing of Empire belongs to him as Father that no more belonged to Adam over his Children than did to any of his Children over their own That the Authority of Parents over their Children continues together with Soveraign power and is not at all abated by it and that it cannot be the same because it continues entire with it That there is no footsteps in the Records of the Old Testament to verify his Hypothesis that we could not have wanted some Declarations about it from God if true it being a matter so necessary for us to know That no claims were made that we know of to any such authority in the earliest times when the Right was unprejudiced and must have been best understood and could not have been forgotten as now it is utterly Besides that it was never used The first Histories Recorded in the Bible makes every Child of the common Ancestor alike independent and absolute and so it would for ever have continued And to this day we should have been in the state of Nature and not United in any Government and so no King yet in the World notwithstanding the Paternal authority That his Instances of exercising Soveraign power by the Fathers of Families are not concluding and to this purpose That admitting Adam had while he liv'd been Universal Monarch yet if there be no other reason and Foundation of Monarchy in the World but this of Sir Robert Filmer Adams right heir not been known and if he were might perhaps be an Ideot or Lunatick some Cobler or Botcher under a Stall or mean Person unfit to govern we can have no rightful King in the World for certain it is that there is nothing in the World so personal as Relations and the duties and Rights that do result from them for they are neither assignable to nor can be exercised or exacted by and between any persons but the Relatives themselves So that this power of Sir R. F. hath no foundation of reason in the nature of things was in Fact never exercised and is now utterly fallen to the ground and all Government with it A more pusled vain sensless and unlearned Paradox was never yet offer'd to the World nor a thing more mischievous ever received The absolute Power of a Prince over his Subjects is not at all connatural to the dutiful Care of a Father over his Children It was the good pleasure of God that this part of the immense world should be planted with men endowed with a capacity to admire his power wisdom and goodness and therefore to render him praise and worship he design'd that we should be happy in our own enjoyments and promote the happiness of each other which is not to be performed but by a mind serene beneficent and loving He provided that the disseminations of Love should run parallel and be under a like necessity with the propagation of our kind For the planting love in our nature he instituted Marriage for Procreation that we might owe our Being to the state of the greatest and most agreeable friendship and tenderest affection That for many years we should be educated by a pure single and undesigning love of our Parents and the friendship of that conjugal State should be maintained by and principally exercised in their common care of their issue Every Act of Love of either of the Parents to the Child being the best instance of love to the other of them an endearment of a reciprocal love and a provocation to the like love and care of the Child God did likewise ordain and so it was that all Mankind should derive from one stock be made of one blood and every Man every Mans Brother of the same family and cognation By this it was provided by the Father of us all that we should be born into the World under the tendrest care for our preservation and improvement of our Nature and be powerfully enclined to love and beneficence whereby we may be pleased with our selves and at Peace and Amity with our whole kind That the Generations of Mankind might certainly proceed God planted in our Natures powerful and irresistible instincts to procreation which the Jews call a Precept tho after this no Precept seem'd necessary for encrease and multiply they make a Command But we follow our own propensions and have no conscience of obedience to a Law when we observe and follow them which are so strong pleasurable and entertaining that if
continues entire together with Sovereign Power and is not at all abated by it and therefore cannot be the same No Soveraign Power can extort the Children from their Fathers Authority and care This is a duty in Nature before Governments They cannot belong to the Government before they are filii precepti and capable of the Conscience of a Law It is a duty in Parents to Educate their Children and a right they have in consequence to govern them that cannot be taken from them It is the Parents duty to form their consciences They are appoint-by God the great Ministers of his Providence to the Children That they perform this Office he hath tyed them to it by the sweatest constraints and almost violences of Nature by an irresistable love and tyes of Endearment that cannot be broken this declares their Right of Authority over their Children against any interposings of Soveraign Authority to its prejudice let or hindrance Thomas Aquinas positively determines that it is not lawful for Christian Kings to baptize the Children of the Jews against the will of their Parents for that saith he it is against the course of natural justice 4ly There is no footsteps in the Records of the old World to verifie this Hypothesis That such Authority was so much as pretended to be used or exercised by Adam but we find instances against it in the short History before the Flood Cain received no sentence from Adam his Prince and Soveraign Judg but from God himself or rather from his Shecinah or some visible Representation of his presence Thence he obtained some degree of impunity and his life protected No mention here at all of Adam his taking the Tribunal or Cains arraignment or of any pardon or indulgence granted by King Adam Lamech that had Kill'd a man by mischance did not alledge his case at his Father Adams Court and the matter of extenuation of the Man-killing we hear of no pardon of Course to be allowed when the circumstances of fact had been first judicially considered How could a thing of such importance be omitted in the story of the old World tho so short It was of more concernment than to know that Tubal Cain was the first Smith and Jubal the first man that made a Musical instrument to know the original nature and reason of Government Besides we find all the grand Children of Noah becoming Princes of Countries and the Sons and grand sons of Esau alike Dukes and Princes that is at least absolute Fathers of their own Families and ruling over such as were their slaves and dependents And the 12 Sons of Jacob are all called Patriarchs When Nimrod played the Tyrant we find nothing said for his justification upon any Patriarchal right But if we consult the Traditions of the Jews they will inform us of another original of Government and that is this They say that God gave several Precepts to Adam and his Sons and Noah and his Sons and one amongst the rest that they should erect Governments which his Sons could not have performed without Rebellion against their King Father if Adam had been so as Sir Robert Filmer first dreamt Also besides that of making Governments there was a Precept given them of honoring their Parents Selden de jure Naturae secundum Hebraeos fol. 2792. And therefore the Precept of honoring Parents is a distinct duty from that of obedience to Governments By this Precept they had Authority in general to establish Governments amongst themselves in the specification of which they were left to rheir own liberty and discretion and therefore were not obliged to any single form of Government It must be understood that the Precept which required the Sons of Adam and Noah to establish Governments required also every mans Submission to their Orders Laws and Decrees when established Lastly We will consider of the instances he gives of the Exercise of Soveraign Power by Fathers of Families which are as impertinent to his purpose as his Doctrine is groundless and precarious but they are these Abrahams War and Judahs judgment upon Thamar As to the first of Abrahams making War We say we cannot allow that making War doth argue any Soveraign Authority It is sufficient that he who makes it is under none to make a vindicative War Lawful For an injured Person may in the State of Nature vindicate wrongs by an authority derived from God and Nature to a just satisfaction Because there is no competent judicature to appeal to for right and redress But see how unhappy the Gentleman is This very instance of his production is clearly against him for if Soveraign Power had been Patriarchal Abraham had been guilty of Treason in making War without a Commission from Melchizedech the King of Salem who as the Learned men conjecture was Shem his Patriarch and Chief and known by him for such But because Abraham the best man perhaps in any Age did not take a Commission from Melchizedech his Patriarchal chief And yet he was blessed by Melchizedech when he returned from the War We may conclude that neither Melchizedeeh nor Abraham knew of any such Patriarchal Soveraignty And also from this great example it appears that it is lawful for him that is not a Soveraign if he be not under any to make War I will not enter into a discourse whence and how is derived the Authority of making War and capital Sentences which must have the same reason to warrant both which hath pusled some great Divines Dr. Hammond that great man was at a loss in this enquiry and thinks that nothing but a Divine Authority can warrant them which hath put them upon strange extravagant Hypotheses of Government and sent this Knights brains a Wool-gathering But this may satisfie any man of sense that whatever is necessary for the general happiness of mankind and for preserving peace in the world and protecting the innocent and disinabling the mighty oppressors is more commendable to be done then the Killing a man in his own defence is simply lawful As to his second instance of Judah his Sentence pronounced upon his Daughter in Law Thamar which he would have an exercise of Patriarchal Soveraign Authority We say how could Judah do this by a Patriarchal Power when Jacob his Father was then alive and for all that appears Judah his Son was not extrafamiliated Besides which is very unlucky Thamar was then none of his Family or of the Subjects of his Domestick Empire for his Son her Husband being dead she was free from the Law of her Husband and ceased to be a Subject of his Paternal Kingdom But Mr. Selden under the Authority of some Rabbins which he cites in his excellent Book before mentioned Fol. 807. saith that Judah might have the Office of a Prince or Magistrate in a district in that Country and by that Authority might judge her according to the Laws of that Country But what the Law was and the Nature and reason of her offence
to depend upon the Will of the Prince nor of Single Persons that bore a part in the Government for their time nor be prejudiced in Succession by their Lachesse The same Priviledge doth belong to the Spiritual Baronage the successive Nobility of this Realm and a Writ of Summons to Parliament can be no more refused any of them or any of their Successors than it can to any of the Temporal Baronage I cannot but upon a review of our Government applaud our happiness that we enjoy and were born to so excellent a Government without our Sweat and Contrivance which was arrived to by several slow Steps and beaten out by the long experience of former Ages But it is a portentous thing and of ill very ill Omen that a Government so Venerable and August so Wise Beneficial and desireable should be assaulted with peevish Dotages froward Petulances and childish Cavillations And that some Brain-sick foolish Antiquaries Rakers in the Rubbish of Time should imagine that they can barter away our Government for mouldy Bread and clouted Shoes But these we have before obviated Another sort we have before engaged to consider in their ill Treatment of the Bishops in their handling this Question of their Right we now defend To which I will now proceed CHAP. XXIV FOr I am not now insensible of the great Prejudices that lie against the Right of the question from those Calumnies that are thrown upon the Order And that no reason not the clearest Demonstration will be admitted to any Degree of satisfaction until this be removed Men's understandings are mingled with their interests and Passions It is a hard matter not to see the person in the Cause and if the person is dis-esteemed his Right cannot be equally favour'd Nay which is more if our Adversaries can persuade the World that the Bishops will abuse this their Right nothing will be able to keep off this Conclusion that they have none We most duly therefore here complain of the dishonest Artifice used by the Gentlemen that we have undertaken in this Cause viz. That they seek all occasions of lessening the esteem of the Bishops and of them they speak what they will He that can believe what he will is an Infidel and he that does what he will is a man of no Conscience and he that can speak what he will wants Truth and Candor But of a culpable sort of Wilfulness we finde these two Authors very blameable We must complain of these fierce disputants that they strive unlawfully they contend with passion and a keen Animosity they strike as well as argue they lay about them right or wrong to assault and wound the Persons whose Right they oppose A wound and Dishonour do they give to their own hurt Animosque in Vulnere ponunt The first and greatest Injustice they do to the Cause against all Right and Reason of which sure they must be self-condemned is an odious Remembrance of any thing culpable in the whole Succession of Bishops in the times of the lowest Degeneracy of the Christian Religion and of the heighth of Papal Usurpation and Tyranny which was more heavy in those times upon the Rights of the Bishops than upon those of the Crown When Princes thorough their own Weakness or to serve their Interest or to support their defective Titles to their Crowns or for obtaining dispensations from his Holiness for an unwarrantable Marriage or for other Ends and Reasons could not or would not defend the Bishops and their Rights The very order of Bishops in those times was attempted upon to be annulled by that Oecumecall Usurper It was disputed and boldly maintained in the Council of Trent that the Bishops were only jure Pontificio and had no Authority in the Church but such as his Holiness would vouchsafe them It was endeavoured to make them but his Substitutes He pretended Powers to create and translate them diminish or enlarge their Dioceses gave them more or less Authority did suspend them also and deprive them and pretended that they had only a vicarious and precarious Authority from him and in such Measures as he should think fit to limit and appoint Were not Provisions and Reservations first made by the Pope upon Benefices belonging to Churchmen The Statute of the 25 E. 3. gave their Presentations to the King when the Pope usurped upon them as a Fortification against his Usurpation and Invasion Did he not urge his Canon upon them that they should not agitare judicium sanguinis so much talk'd of in this Question that he might strip them out of their Secular Greatness that he might the better go over them and tread upon them and their Ecclesiastical Rights Is there no Consideration to be had by those Gentlemen in this Case of the Error temporis or Vitia Temporum They will snatch at this unduely when it seems for their turn but can they think that any Bishop under a Protestant Sovereign will ever return under the old Yoak And yet the business of Provisions Reservations and Dispensations and of Pluralties must be laid at the Bishops Door yea though Dispensation of Pluralties is now established by Statute Law with all the Usurpations exercised by the Pope the First-born of the Children of Pride to which they willingly-unwillingly were forced to submit But how unrighteous a thing is it to load the Order it self with all the Miscarriages of a long Course of Succession as if the Faults of the Bishops in all Ages did stick to their respective Chairs and had passed into the Office it self But it is no wonder that they remember the Faults of those Bishops unduely to the Disparagement and Dishonor of the Order and Succession When the Folio turns matter of Commendation into Reproach and calls their contending for due Administration of Justice and Laws Clamors for the Breach of Magna Charta Invisos seu bene seu male facta premunt By this he sems to argue them guilty of affecting Temporal Power and intermedling unduely in Secular Affairs CHAP. XXV BUT to discharge this Imputation we will shortly remember how modest they have always been in the exercise of their Ecclesiastical Office and how faithful they have always been in former Ages to that Temporal Trust which the Laws and Constitutions of this Government hath annexed to the Spiritual Office of a Bishop The Bishops challenge nothing to belong to them of Divine Right but the Exercise of their Ministry in the Cure of Souls They do not assume the Office of themselves but are appointed thereto by the Sovereign Power and therefore the Bench of Bishops are not answerable for every one of their Order They rightfully acknowledge the Right of Investiture and Collation of Bishopricks to be in the King subject to Royal Exemptions and Priviledges from their ordinary Right From which Exemptions Mr. Selden is too forward to conclude his Doctrine of Erastianism for that the Exercise of their Function may be restrained as well in reference