Spiritual Government then it would be considered what the spiritual Government is and in what points it doth chiefly remain I find sayes he in the Gospels that when Christ gave to St. Peter the Supreme Government of the Church he said to him Tibi dabo claves Regni coelorum c. That is I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth c. Now if you mean to give to the Queen that Authority which our Lord gave to St. Peter if you will say Nos tibi dabimus claves Regni coelorum c. We will give to your Majesty the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven I pray you shew your Commission by which you are authorised to make such a Gift Again for the same purpose Our Lord said to St. Peter Pasce c. Pasce c. Pasce c. Feed my sheep Feed my sheep Feed my lambs As likewise Tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres When thou art converted confirm thy Brethren Now if you mean to say so much to the Queen let us see your Commission and withall consider whether her person being a Woman be in a capacity to receive and execute such an Authority since St. Paul forbids a Woman to teach in the Church Thus argued the said Lord Chancelour proceeding in the same manner upon other branches of spirituall Government and concludes That without a mature consideration of all these premises their honours shall never be able to shew their faces before their Enemies in this matter 23. But notwithstanding all this the Lords c. proceeded to frame an Act without any distinct explication whether it was a Temporal or Spirituall Authority which they gave the Queen Or rather they framed it with such clauses as that the most obvious sence of it imported that it was an Authority purely spiritual that they invested her withall and most certain it is that if she had executed such an Authority she might have justified her so doing by that Act. 24. However after that Parliament was ended but before the first year of her Raign was expired such considerations as the Lord Chancelour had formerly in vain represented had so great an influence upon the Queen that she was obliged by an Admonition prefixed to her Injunctions to declare that which the Parliament would not that it was not her intent by vertue of that Act to challenge Authority and power of Ministry of Divine Offices in the Church but only to have Soveraignty and rule over all manner of persons born within her Realmes of what State either Ecclesiastical or Temporall soever they be Which explication of hers was confirmed four years after by Parliament yet without changing the foregoing Act or any clauses in it 25. And consequently she left ordering of matters purely Spiritual to Bishops c. Expresly renouncing it For as for the power of Excommunication having again taken it from the Pope she did not fear it from any of her Bishops 26. In the times succeeding after her what qualifications were made and declared by three Kings touching spiritual Jurisdiction shall be shewed afterward They had not any such interests nor such fears as the three foregoing Princes had and therefore look'd with a more indifferent eye upon the matter Without repealing lawes or changing the Exteriour Forme of the oath of Supremacy they esteemed it sufficient to qualifie it by moderate interpretations as shall be shewed 27. As for the other Oath of Allegiance the compiler whereof was King James the most sad and horrible occasion of it is but too well known the intention of it is obvious and the sence plain So that it did not stand in need of such a Multiplicity of Acts of Parliament with many clauses to shew the extention of it Excepting one party scarce any except against it and were it not for some few incommodious expressions and phrases nothing pertaining to the substance and design of the Oath it would freely and generally be admitted and taken notwithstanding the foresaid parties condemning it who take that advantage to decry the substance of the Oath from which they have an aversion in as much as Fidelity is promised thereby SECT V. That the Oath of Supremacy as it lies and according to the sence of the first Law giver cannot lawfully and sincerely be taken by any Christian. 28. IT is a truth from the beginning acknowledged by the Fathers of the Church that all Kings are truly Supream Governours over the persons of all their Subjects and in all causes even Ecâ—lesiastical wherein their civil authority is mixed Constitutions of Synods however they may oblige in conscience and be imposed under spirituall censures yet are not lawes in any Kingdom that is they they are not commanded nor the transgression of them punishable in external Courts by outward punishments as Attachments Imprisonment c. further then supream Civil Governours do allow 29. This is a right due to all Kings though Heathens Hereticks c So that Kings by being converted to Christianity or Catholick Religion have not any new Jurisdiction added or their former enlarged thereby They do not thereby become Pastours of Souls but sheep of lawfull pastours And it is not a new Authority but a new duty that by their conversion accrews to them obliging them to promote true Religion by the exercise of their Civil Authority and Sword And subjects are bound to acknowledge and submit to this Authority of theirs that is not alwayes to do what Princes in Ecclesiasticall matters shall command but however not to resist in case their inward Beliefs be contrary to theirs but patiently to suffer whatsoever violence shall be offerâ—d them 30. Such a submission therefore to Kingly authority may when just occasion is be lawfully required by Kings from all their Subjects yea a profession thereof by oaths But such an one was not the Oath of Supremacy when it was first contrived and imposed For there an authority in many causes purely spirituall was by our Princes challenged as hath been shewed Therefore if we consider that Oath as now imposed on Subjects infinitely differing from their Princes beliefe and Judgment both in Point of doctrine and discipline it is not imaginable how it can be taken in such a sense as was first meant by any congregations no not even by that which is of the Kings own Religion 31. The Oath consists of two parts one Affirmative and the other Negative The Affirmative clause obliges all the Kings Subjects though never so much differing in their beliefs to swear an acknowledgment that the King is the only supreme Head and Governour of his Realme as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as Temporal And the Negative to deny that any forraign Prince Prelate c. hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realme and to renounce all such 32. These two Recognitions if the
or repugnant to the Kings Prerogative as now a new head of the Church or to the laws of God By which means without one single voice of the Clergy all former Ecclesiasticall Lawes might be abrogated 4. An authority was allowed to the King to represse and correct all such errours Heresies abuses and enormities whatsoever they were which by any manner of spirituall Jurisdiction might lawfully be repressed c. any forreign Lawes or any thing to the Contrary notwithstanding 5. All manner of Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall was by Parliament ackowledged to belong to the King as Head of the Church So that no Bishop had any Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction but by under and from the King 6. Supreme Power of dispensing with any Ecclesiastical Constitutions is ascribed to the King and Parliament as recognised Supreme Head of the Church and the Archbishop is made only the Kings Delegate So that in case he should refuse two other Bishops might be named to grant such Dispensations And after all the King and his court of Chancery are made the last Judge what things in such Dispensations are repugnant to Scriptures what not 7. Though the King did not personally himself exercise the power of the Keys yet this right he claimed that no Clergy man being a member of the English Church should exercise it in his Dominions in any cause or over any person without the leave and appointment of him the Supreme head Nor any refuse to exercise it whensoever he should require 8. It was moreover enacted that no speaking doing or holding against any spiritual Lawes made by the See of Rome which be repugnant to the Lawes of the Realme should be deemed heresies As also that whosoever should teach contrary to the determinations which since the year 1540 were or afterwards should be set forth by the King should be deemed and treated as a Heretick So that the King and Parliament are hereby constituted Judges of Heresy 9. In the dayes of King Edward the sixt an Act is made in which the King and Parliament Authorise Bishops c. by vertue of their Act to take informations concerning the not useing the Forme of Common Prayer then prescribed and to punish the same by Excommunication c. 10. There were also appointed six Prelates and six others nominated by the King by the same authority to frame a new forme of Consecration of Bishops c. 17. Hereby it is apparent that a Jurisdiction purely Spiritual was communicated to or assumed by King Henry the eighth this he further shewed by many practises For besides Jurisdiction as if he had the Key of divine knowledge given him by Christ he set forth Books of instructions in Catholick doctrine by his own authority declaring them hereticks that taught otherwise The labour indeed and we may say drudgery of composing those books as also of executing other spiritual functions was left either wholly or in part to the Clergy but when they had done he perused them and and made what additions and alterations he pleased in them and without remanding them to the Bishops caused them to be printed The Book with his Interlinings and Changes is still ex-tant 18. Indeed it was only spiritual Jurisdiction that he by his new Title of Head of the Church sought to deprive the Pope of for he feared not his pretended temporal Power which in those dayes the world was little troubled withal For he stood in need of a power to justify his Divorce and to dispense with the horrible Sacriledge designed by him He was unwilling to be looked on by his Subjects as a Heathen and a Publican and therefore to prevent this danger he devested the Pope and assumed to himself the power of Excommunication also that is not the execution of it but the disposing of of it by Delegation to the Arch-bishop who should execute it according to his will and directions only 19. A further irrefragable proofe that it was a power purely Spiritual which that King challenged by his new Title is taken from the Declaration of Stephen Gardiner Bishop of Winchester the contriver of the Oath as we find it recorded by Calvin himself For saith he when Stephen Gardiner was upon the Kings affairs at Ratisbon he there taking occasion to expound the meaning of that Title of Supream head of the English Church given to King Henry the eighth taught that the King had such a power that he might appoint and prescribe new Ordinances of the Church even matters concerning Faith and Doctrine and abolish old As tamely that the King might forbid the marriage of Priests and might take away the use of the Chalice in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and in such things might appoint what he lâ—ft A Title thus interpreted the same Calvin vehemently inveighs against calling Gardiner and worthily an impestour and Archbishop Cranmer with his fellowes inconsiderate persons who make Kings too spirituall as if beside theirs there were no Ecclesiasticall Government and Jurisdiction 20. As for his Son King Edward the sixth the same Title with the plenitude of power was given him which he likewise as very a child as he was executed for he by his Authority made Ecclesiastical Lawes to be new reformed Church service and Administration of Sacraments to be changed and new Instructions in matter of Religion to be published quite contrary to what the foregoing Head though his Father had decreed to be Christian Doctrine And the reason was the same because new Sacriledge was to be committed by the Protectour for which he was loath to be excommunicated 21. His elder sister succeeding repealed and renounced this Jurisdiction and restored it to the Church But her younger sister repealed her repealings and took it again when it was in as high language yea higher confer'd on her by Parliament And there was a greater necessity for it than her Brother had For her Mothers Marriage was declared Null by the Pope and consequently her right to the Crown 22. And that this was the design intention of the Parliament in the first year of her Raign when they renewed the Title of her Supremacy in Church matters though they blushed to call a Woman Head of the Church may sufficiently be collected from a Speech yet extant and made in that Parliament upon that occasion by the then Lord Chancelour Nicholas Heath For arguing very strongly against the said Title and the Authority imported by it he takes it for granted that by giving the Queen such a Title they must forsake and fly from the Sea of Rome the inconveniencies of which he desires may be better considered In the next place he recommends to their Advice what this Supremacy is For sayes he if it consist in Temporal Government what further Authority can this House give her then she hath already by right of Inheritance and by the appointment of God without their Gift c. But if the Supremacy doth consist in
and accordingly in many particulars practised it to the which several clauses also both in this and following Statutes seem as if they gave warrant yet the Parliament by the said Provizo laid a ground how they might in future and better times shew how they meant no such thing The words are these PROVIDED alwayes that this Act nor any thing or things therein contained shall be hereafter interpreted or expounded that your grace your Nobles and Subjects intend by the same to decline or vary from the Congregation of Christs Church in any things concerning the very Articles of the Catholick Faith of Christendom or in any other things declared by holy Scripture and the word of God necessary for your and their Salvation but only to make an ordinance by policies necessary and convenient to repress vice and for good conservation of this Realm in peace unity and tranquillity from rapine and spoil insuing much the old ancient customes of this Realm in that behalfe Not minding to seek for any reliefes succours or remedies for any worldly things and humane lawes in any case of necessity but within this Realm at the hands of your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings of this Realm which have and ought to have an imperial power and authority in the same and not obliged in any worldly causes to any other Superiour By this Proviso never repealed the Parliaments Ordinance is declared to be meerly Political that the Kings Independence on forraign power is in worldly things and humane lawes he being in worldly causes not obliged to any other Superiour 50. Thus far of the sence in which both the most judicious among the English Protestants have declared and have been authorised to declare what power it is that by the Oath is deferred to the Kings of England and renounced to be in any forraign Prince or Prelate to wit a civil Political power wheresoever it can be exercised in any causes Ecclesiastical c. Against this there is not extant a contradictory Testimony of any one Protestant Writer So that the Protestant Subjects of England do intend and judging that they have unquestiónable grounds to judge this only to be the sence of the Oath in this sence only do they take it and require it to be taken by others SECT VII In what sence the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance seem to be taken by Presbyterians Independents c. 51. IT is a wonderfull Mystery how it should come to pass that our English Prebyterians c. should especially now of late with so much willingness and greediness themselves swallow these Oaths and so clamorously not without threatning urge the imposing them upon others Is it because the Oath of Supremacy has so peculiar a conformity to their principles and that of Allegiance to their practises or that they are so ready and pressing to disclaim and condemn all that themselves have done these last twenty years 52. First for ther Doctrinal principles I do not find that any of those Sects of late in England in peaceable times have publickly declared in what sence they allowed his Majesty to have a supreme Jurisdicton in causes Ecclesiastical or Spiritaul as to themselves But as to the oppression and destruction of poor Roman Catholicks they have alwayes shew'd too great a willingness to exalt the Kings Authority and to draw out and sharpen his sword far more then himself was willing I do not find that any of them have busied themselves as a world of Protestants and Catholicks have with making discourses upon the Oathes Their silence in this point wherein they are doubtless much concern'd one way or other is surely very argumentative 53. Who ever knew or heard to flow from the tongue or drop from the pen of a Presbyterian so Christian a positon as is sincerely avouched both by English Protestants and the generall body of Roman Catholicks viz. That even in case a Christian or Heathen Prince should make use of his civil power to persecute truth that power ought not upon any pretences to be actively resisted by violence or force of armes but though they cannot approve they must at least patiently suffer the effects of his misused Authority leaving the judgment to God only How unknown at least how unreceived such a Doctrine has hitherto been among their Brethren abroad will but too manifestly appear in a volume entitled Dangerous positions collected by Archbishop Bancroft out of severall books written by Calvinisticall preachers What judgment their patriarch Calvin made of King Henry the eighths new Title of the Head of the Church we have seen before And what an exception terrible to Princes the French Calvinistical Church hath made in their confession of Faith speaking of Obedience due to the supreme Magistrate appears at least every Sunday in all their hands in print Where they acknowledge such obedience due to them except the Law of God and religion be interested or to use their own expression mogennant que l'empire de Dieu demeure en son entire that is upon condition that Gods Soveraignty remain undiminished Which clause what it means their so many and so long convinced Rebellions do expound 54. And as for their practices in England and Scotland it were to be wished they could be forgotten especially all that has hapned the last twenty years And it may suffiice only in gross to take notice that the most efficacious Engin for begining the late war and engaging their party in the prosecution of it was a publick declaration that their design was to root out Popish Doctrines favoured by the King and Bishops to abolish publick Formes of Church-service and to destroy Episcopacy and Church Government root and branch which had been established in England by the universal authority of the whole Kingdom 55. These things considered is it not a great Mystery that such persons of such perswasions should be so zealous to take and impose generally either of these Oaths To think that they do knowingly directly and formally forswear themselves and force others to do so would be uncharitable Therefore an Evasion they have to secure themselves in their own opinions from perjury How little they deferr to Kings in their own Ecclesiastical matters and Government yea how they declare that none must be excepted from their consistories and Synodical Jurisdictions even externally coercive is evident both in Scoâ—land and elsewhere And it is observable that in the form of an Oath lately contrived in Scotland the word Ecclesiastical is studiously left out How comes it then to pass that they can in England swear that the King is supreme Head and Governour in all causes Ecclesiastical or spirituall Who can reconcile these things together in such a sence 56. Surely it will be extremely difficult if not impossible to imagine any colourable Evasion or pretext for cousening themselves except it be this That both the Oaths were made only against Roman Catholicks acknowledging the Pope to be supreme
by that of Allegiance Though how can Equivocation be excluded when according to them one Equivocation may be renounced by another A most horrid example whereof England has lately seen in the R. Padre Antonio Vais 72. Neither do Protestants think that a Declaration formerly made by the Pope and forbidding Catholicks to take those Oaths with any Interpretation whatsoever needs to be a hindrance to the taking of it in the forementioned sence so publickly avouched but onely in any secret meanings invented or mentally reserved by particular persons For surely the Pope intends not to take a power from Law-givers to interpret their own lawes nor to forbid their Subjects to admit their interpretations if they be agreable to truth and that the words be capable of being so interpreted as these are pretended to be Certain it is that the Pope was never informed of this so legal an interpretation For if he had he would never have forbidden that to distressed English Catholicks which to his knowledg all good Subjects in France Germany Venice c. neither will nor dare refuse to acknowledge and profess Besides say they is England now become the only Kingdom in Christendom where all manner of Briefs must be immediately submitted to without a publick Legal acceptation and without examination of the Motives or suggestions by which they wâ—re procured It is far otherwise now in the most Catholick Countries and was formerly even in England when it was most Catholick the Lawes then made against receiving or executing Bulls from Rome without a publick admission under the penalty of incurring a Praemunire are still in force 73. If Catholicks rejoyning say that there is another regard for which they are unwilling even to receive information touching any qualifications of these Oaths viz. because the mere admitting a probability that they may lawfully and without prejudice to Catholick Faith be taken would argue that so many vertuous wise and holy Men as have suffered death c. for refusing them have suffred without any necessary cause Such were Bishop Fisher Sir Thomas More c. in King Henry the eights dayes and many good Priests since 74. Notwithstanding say Protestants such a consequence is not necessary For first it hath been shewed that King Henry the eighth intended to exclude the purely spiritual Jurisdiction of the Pope his power of determining matters of Faith according to former Lawes of the Church c. And therefore no wonder that good Catholicks then would not betray their consciences But it is well known that Sir Thomas More advised the King to limit some excesses of the Popes Jurisdiction And an eminent writer tells us that Bishop Fisher offered to take the Oath if it might have been permitted him to explicate his sence of it which could be no other then this that he should deny the Popes temporal Jurisdiction Secondly as for those that suffred in Q. Elizabeths time it is certain that all good Catholicks would never have esteemed it a Martyrdom to dye for refusing to the King a supreme Kingly Power and attributing that to the pope They had therefore a quite different notion of what the state of England required by this Oath But of late good occasion has been given for a more exact examination of it For to make a sincere and ingenuous confession it was a Committee of the late rebellious parliament that probably first of all discovered what use they made of the foresaid proviso in the Act 5. Eliz. to warrant them to take this Oath without submitting their Religion to the King And the same use they judged that all other Sects might make of the same and justify their so doing by law even Roman Catholicks themselves 75. All these things considered it is no wonder that English protestants not being fully informed of the state of Catholicks should wonder at Roman Catholicks for their so Universal agreement in refusing an Oath so interpreted without the least prejudice to their faith but with so unexpressible a prejudice both to their estates and exercise of their Religion 76. The Authour of these Reflexions does freely acknowledge that he has been inquisitive with more then ordinary diligence into the grounds upon which Protestants do make no scruple at all to take an oath which if it had no Expounders to qualifie the sence properly imported by the words he knows they could not take it with a good conscience Nay moreover he has given all the advantage that he could to the proofes produced by them to justify that no other sence ought to be given therto by any English Subject in so much as he may apprehend that he shall incurr a danger to be esteemed by Catholicks to have a design to encourage them also to take it since that sence is such as is very convenient to the principles of Catholick Religion 77. But he protests the contrary His end in writing all this is besides a satisfaction given to his mind that he cannot now without breach of Charity charge Protestants with such an unsincerity in their taking this Oath as Presbyterians c. are apparently guilty of to afford unto the World an illustrious proof of the most perfect sincerity and the greatest tendernesse of conscience expressed on this occasion by the generality of English Catholicks that I believe ever was given by any Church since Christs time 78. They live here in their own native Country with lesse priviledg then strangers they are excluded from having any influence on any thing that concerns the Common-weale of which they are freeborn Subjects When laws are made against them as guilty persons they are not permitted to separate their cause from a few that only deserved the penalties of those lawes they are by lawes obnoxious to greater sufferings then enemies they see their families impoverished their houses invaded by savage officers their lives forfeited as Traytours for entertaining those without whom they could not live otherwise then as Pagans deprived of performing any service and worship to God c. All these miseries they groan under without proofe of any demerit on their parts the crimes of a few miserable seduced and seducing wretches and their bloody Doctrine by none in the Kingdom more detested then by themselves are made their guilt And these calamities they could avoid by taking an oath the present new acknowleded sence whereof as to his Majesties right is just and lawful And yet they dare not take it Why Because they fear God above all But do not Protestants fear him too They are no Judges of the consciences of others This they assure themselves of that if those that now take the Oath had been to have framed it they would have shewed a greater proof of their fear of God then to have expressed the Kings Supremacy in termes fit for none but K. Hen. the VIII 79. But moreover great difference there is between the case of Protestants and Roman Catholicks in regard of this Oath For