Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	act_n	king_n	parliament_n	3,039	5	6.6283	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25628	An Ansvver to this quodlibetical question, whether the bishops make a fundamental and essential part of the English Parliament collected out of some memorials in a larger treatise for the information of some, the confirmation of others, and the satisfaction of all.		1661 (1661)	Wing A3454; ESTC R22861	15,455	24

Remember what was said before touching the Writ of Summons in the said Kings time from this time till the last Parliament of King Charles there is no Kings Reign of which we have not many though not all the Acts of Parliament still in Print amongst us Nor is there any Act of Parliament in the Printed Books to the Enacting of which the Bishops Approbation and Consent is not plainly specified either in the general Proeme set before the Acts or in the body of the Acts themselves as by the Books themselves doth at large appear 7ly And to this kind of proof may be further added the Form and Manner of the Writ by which the Prelates in all times have been called to Parliament being the very Law Verbatim with that which is directed to the Temporal Barons save that the Spiritual Lords are commanded to attend the Service in fide dilectione the Temporal in fide Homagio and of late times in fide Ligeantia quibus nobis tenemini A Form or Copie of which Summons as antient as King Johns time is still reserved upon Record directed Nominatim to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury (†) Titles of Hon. part 2. cap. 1. and then a scriptum est similiter to the residue of the Bishops Abbates Earls and Barons Then adde the Privilege of Parliament for themselves and their Servants during the time of the Sessions the Liberty to kill and take one or two of the Kings Deer as they passe by any of his Forests in comming to Parliament upon his Commandment (†) Charta de foresta cap. their injoying of the same immunities which are and have been heretofore injoyed by the Temporal Barons (†) Camden in Britania and tell me if the Bishops did not sit in Parliament by as good a Title as the Temporal Lords and therefore certainly Essential Fundamental parts of the Court of Parliament By this discourse it may appear that the Bishops Sit and Vote in Parliament by a double capacity as Bishops first in reference to their several Sees and secondly as Peers in regard of their Baronies In both respects accounted one of the three Estates and the first also of the three as from the Premises may be gathered without any great trouble But in so nice a point as this we shall not only build upon general Inferences but particular Evidences And first it is affirmed by Titus Livius in his relation of the Life and Reign of King Henry the 5th That when his Funerals were ended the 3 Estates of the Realm of England did assemble together and declare his Son King Henry the 6th being an Infant of 8 Months old to be their Soveraign Lord (†) Tit. Liv. M. S. in Bibl. Bodl. as his Heir and Successor And three Estates there could not be to perform that service unlesse the Bishops were acknowledged to be one of the number 2ly In the Parliament Roles of King Richard the third there is mention of a Bill or Parchment presented to that Prince being then Duke of Gloucester on the behalf and in the name of the 3 Estates of the Realm of England that is to wit of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and of the Commons by name which for as much as neither the said 3 Estates nor the persous which delivered it on their behalf were then assembled in form of Parliament was afterwards in the first Parliament of that King by the same three Estates assembled in this present Parliament I speak the very words of the Act it self and by Authority of the same enrolled recorded and approved (†) An. Speed in K. Rich. 3. And at the request and by the assent of the three Estates of this Realm that is to say the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of this Land Assembled in this present Parliament and by Authority of the same it be pronounced decreed and declared that our said Soveraign Lord the King was and is the very and undoubted Heir of this Realm of England c. And 3ly So it is acknowledged in a (†) 1 Eliz. Cap. 3. Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 3. where the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in that Parliament Assembled being said expresly and in terminis to represent the three Estates of the Realm of England did recognize the Queens Majestie to be their true Lawful and Undoubted Soveraign Leig'd Lady and Queen And in a Statute of the 8th year of the said Queens Reign the Bishops and Clergy are declared to be the greatest Estates of the Realm and called the High Estate of Prelacy in another place It may perhaps be thought unnecessary or impertinent to adde the Testimony and Authority of a private person to that which hath been said by our Laws and Statutes But being it is such a Person as was accounted for the Oracle of Law when he served in Parliament his Judgement may be taken for a creditable and sufficient Evidence in the present Case It is the Testimony and Authority of Sir Edward Coke successively Chief Justice of either Bench who in his book concerning the Jurisdiction of Courts speaks thus of Parliaments (†) Coke of Parl. Fol. 1. This Court saith he consisteth of the Kings Majesty sitting there as in his Royal Politick Capacity and of the three Estates of the Realm viz. of the Lords Spiritual Archbishops and Bishops who sit there by Succession in respect of their Counties Baronies parcel of their Bishopricks which they hold also in their Politick Capacity And every one of these when any Parliament is to be holden ought ex debito Justitiae to have a Writ of Summons Secondly the Lords Temporal Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts and Barons who sit there by reason of their dignities which they hold by Discent or Creation and likewise every one of these being of full age ought to have a Writ of Summons Ex debito Justitiae The 3d. Estate is the Commons of the Realm whereof there be Knights of Shires or Counties Citizens of Cities and Burgesses of Burghes All which are respectively Elected by the Shires or Counties Cities and Boroughs by force of the Kings Writ ex debito Justitiae and none of them ought to be omitted And these represent all the Commons of the whole Realm and are trusted for them So He and this is plain enough beyond all exception Adde hereunto ex abundanti that in all Christian Kingdomes of the Gothick Model there are no more nor fewer than three estates convented at the will and pleasure of the Supreme Prince for their assistance and advice in Affairs of consequence that is to say the Bishops and other Ecclesiastical persons who are alwayes one the Nobles for themselves and the Commissioners for the Commons of their several Provinces For so we find it in the Constitution of the Roman Empire and the Realms of Spain the Kingdoms of France Poland Hungary together with those of Dane mark Sweden and the Realm of Scotland And it

much as in answer unto that Record supposing that the words thereof be rightly senced as I think they are not and that by Clerus there we are to understand Archbishops and Bishops as I think we be not there being no record I dare boldly say it either of History or Law in which the word Clerus serves to signifie the Archbishops and Bishops exclusive of the other Clergy or any writing whatsoever wherein it doth not either signifie the whole Clergy generally or the inferiour Clergy only exclusive of the Archbishops Bishops and other Prelates Therefore in answer unto that so much applauded Cavill of Excluso Clero from what Record soever it either hath been hitherto or shall hereafter be produced I shall propose it to the consideration of the sober Reader whether by Clerus in that place or in any other of that kind and time we must not understand the Inferiour Clergy as they stand distinguished in the Laws from my Lords the Bishops For howsoever it be true that Clerus in the Ecclesiastical notion of the word doth signifie the whole Clergy generally Archbishops Bishops Priests and Deacons Yet in the Legal notion of it it stands distinguished from the Prelates and signifyeth only the inferiour Clergy Thus do we find the Ecclesiasticks of this Realm divided into Prelates men of Religion and other Clerks 3 Edw. 1. cap. 1. the Seculars either into Prelates and Clerks 9 Edw. 2. cap. 3. 1 Rich. 2. cap. 3. or Prelates and Clerks beneficed 18 Edw. 3. cap. 2. or generally into the Prelates and the Clergy 9 Edw. 2. cap. 15. 14 Edw. 3. cap. 1. and 3. 18 Edw. 3.2.7 and 25 Edw. 3.2.4 and 8 of Hen. 6. cap. 1. And in all Acts and grants of Subsidies made by the Clergie to the Kings or Queens of England since the 32 of Hen. 8. when the Clergie Subsidies first began to be confirmed by Act of Parliament So also in the Latin Idiom which comes neerest home Nos Prelati Clerus in the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the eighth (†) Regist Watham and in the sentence of divorse against Anne of Clere (†) Regist Cranmer and in the Instrument of the grant of the Clergy Subsidies presented to the Kings of England ever since the 27th of Queen Eliz. and in the form of the Certificates per (†) Stat. 8. Eliz. c. 17. ever fince Praelatos Clerum returned by every Bishop to the Lord High Treasurer and finally Nos Episcopi Clerus Cantuatiensis Provinciae in hac Synodo more nostro solito dum Regni Parliamentum celebratur Congregati (†) Stat. 1. Phil. Mary c. 8. in the Petition to K K. Phillip and Mary about the confirmation of the Abby Lands to the Patentees So that though many Statutes have been made in these latter times Excluso Clero the Clergy that is to say the inferiour Clergy who antiently had their place in Parliaments being quite shut out and utterly excluded from those publique Councils Yet this proves nothing to the point that any Act of Parliament hath been counted good to which the Bishops were not called or at the making of which Act they either were shut out by Force or excluded by Cunning. But then besides the so much celebrated Argument of Excluso Clero the Author of the Pamphlet before remembred hath told us somewhat on the credit of Kilbancies book In which the Justices are made to say 7 Hen. 8. That our Soveraign Lord the King may well hold his Parliament by him and his Temporal Lords and by the Commons also without the Spiritual Lords for that the Spiritual Lords have not any place in the Parliament Chamber by reason of their Spiritualties but by reason of their Temporal possessions But first this is but the opinion of a private man of no Authority or Esteem for ought we can find in the Realm of England and therefore not concluding in so great a businesse And 2ly admitting him to be a man of more note and credit than perhaps he was yet he must needs fall short in all respects both for abilities and reputation of Chief Justice Coke whose Judgment to the contrary we have seen before But 3ly it runs crosse to the antient practice of the Saxon times in which the Bishops sate in Parliament as Spiritual persons without relation to their Temporal possessions or their Barons Fees as afterwards in the raign of the Norman Kings And finally admitting that Kilbancies plea were of weight enough to keep the Bishops down from rising to their place in Parliament it must be strong enough to exclude all the Temporal Lords The Temporal Lords being called to Parliament on no other ground than for the Temporal possessions which they hold by Barony Adeo argumenta ab absurdo petita ineptos habent exitus said Lactantius truly It is the Fate said he of ill chosen Premises that they produce ridiculous and absurd Conclusions There remains one Objection more and indeed the greatest not extant in the Pamphlet before remembred though possibly promoted and occasioned by it that is to say that the Bishops are excluded from their Place and Vote by Act of Parliament deliberately made and passed by the Kings consent For answer whereunto it will be necessary first to state this Question viz. Whether that any two of the three Estates confirming or agreeing together may conclude any thing which tends to the Subversion of the third Bodinus that renowned Statesman hath resolved it negatively and determined thus Nihil a duobus ordinibus discerni posse quo uni ex tribus incommodum inferatur c. (†) Bodin de Rep. l. 3. s. 7. That nothing can be done by two of the three Estates to the disprofit of the third in case the point proposed be such as concerns them severally And he resolved thus in favour of the Commons of the Realm of France who were upon the point of being excluded from the Parliament or Convention of the three Estates if he had not notably bestirred himself in their behalf he being then a Delegate or Commissioner for one of the Provinces and by his diligence and care preserved their Interests And to preserve their Interest he insisted chiefly on the antient customes of the Realm of France as also of the Realms of Spain and England and the Roman Empire In each of which it was received for a ruled Case Nihil a duobus ordinibus statui posse quo uni ex tribus prejudicium crearetur That nothing could be done by any of the two Estates unto the prejudice of the third And if it were a ruled Case then in the English Parliaments there is no reason why it should be otherwise in the present times the Equity and Justice of it being still the same and the same reasons for it now as forcible as they could be then Had it been otherwise resolved of in the former ages wherein the Clergy were so prevalent in all publique Counsels how easie a matter had it been for them either by joyning with all the Nobility to exclude the Commons or by joyning with the Comonalty to exclude the Nobles Or having too much Conscience to venture in so great a change and alteration so Incompatible Inconsistent with the Constitution of a Parliament how easily might they have suppressed the Potency and impair the Priveleges of either of the other two by working on the humours or affections of the one to keep down the other Nor doth it help the matter in the least degree to say that the Exclusion of the Bishops from the House of Peers was not done meerly by the procurement of some of the other two Estates but by the Assent of the King of whom the Laws say He can do no wrong And by an Act of Parliament whereof our Lawyers say que nul doit imaginer chose dishonourable (†) Plowden in Commentar that no man is to think dishonourable For we know well in what condition the King was when he passed that Act to what extremities he was reduced on what terms he stood how he was forced to withdraw from his City of London to part with his dear Wife and Children and in a word so over-powred by the prevailing Party in the two Houses of Parliament that it was not safe for him as his Case then was to deny them any thing And for the Act of Parliament thus insisted on besides that the Bill had been rejected when it was first brought unto the Lords and that the greater part of the Lords were frighted out of the House when contrary unto the course of Parliament it was brought again it is a point resolved both in Law and Reason that the Parliament can do nothing to the distruction of it self and that such Acts as are under a constraint are not good and valid whereof we have a fair example in the book of Statutes (†) 15 Ed. 3. For whereas the King had granted certain Articles pretended to be granted in the Form of a Statute expresly contrary to the Laws of the Realm and his own Prerogative and Rights Royal mark it for this is just the case which he had yielded to escue the dangers which by denying of the same were like to follow in the same Parliament it was repealed in these following words It seemed good to the said Earls Barons and other wise men that since the Statute did not proceed of our free Will the same be void and ought not to have the name nor strength of a Statute and therefore by their Counsell and Assent we have decreed the said Statute to be void c. Or if it should not be repealed in a Formal manner yet is this Act however gotten void in effect already by a former Statute in which it was enacted in full Parliament and at the self same place where this Act was gained That the Great Charter by which and many other Titles the Bishops held their place in Parliament should be kept in all points and if any Statute be made to the contrary it shall be holden for none (†) 42 Ed. 3. c. 1. More Arguments than these against the Bishops Place and Vote in Parliament I have no where found And these being answered and refelled I hope the point in question hath been fairly proved viz. That the Bishops make a Fundamental and Essential part of our English Parliaments FINIS