Act that Doctors of Civil Law being married may exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction In most humble wise shew and declare unto your Highness your most faithful humble and obedient Subjects the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of this Present Parliament Assembled That whereas your Highness is c. The Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans and other Ecclesiastical Persons who have no manner of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical but by under and from your Royal Majesty to whom by Scripture all Authority and Power is wholly given to hear and determine all Causes Ecclesiastical and to all such Persons as your Majesty shall appoint thereunto And long before this time our Kings were so tender of their Royal Rights in Ecclesiastical Matters that when the Clergy in Parliament 51. Edw. 3d. Petitioned that of every Consultation Conditional the Ordinary may of himself take upon him the true Understanding thereof and therein proceed accordingly that is without Appeal to the King who by his Delegates by Commission under the great Seal might determine the same the Kings Answer was That the King cannot depart with his Right Instit 4th part cap. 74. p. 339. but to yield to Subjects according to Law upon which Sir Edw. Cook gives an Item Nota hoc stude bene By the Statute 1. Edw. 6.2 The Bishops could hold no Court but in the Kings Name and it was no less than Praemunire to issue out Process in their own Names and under their own Seals and though that Statute was Repealed in 1. Mary 2. Yet it lets us see the true Fountain of Prelatical Jurisdiction and some are of opinion that it was revived in general terms in the 1. Eliz. 1. Which annexes and unites all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Imperial Crown of England and shews that the Prelatical Power of our Bishops is wholly founded directed and limited by the Laws of the Land And this is readily granted by our ablest Civilians particularly Godolphin in his Abridgment of the Ecclesiastical Laws Introduct p. 2◠whose words are No sooner had Princes in ancient times assigned and limited certain matters and causes Controversial to the Cognizance of Bishops and to that end dignified the Episcopal Order with an Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction but the multiplicity and emergency of such Affairs require for the dispatch and management thereof the Assistance of subordinate Ordinaries c. Dr. Cases of Consc l. 3. ch 3. fol. 544. Jeremy Taylor acknowledges that the Supream Civil Power is also Supream Governour over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical and he says This is a rule of such great necessity for the conduct of Conscience as that it is the measure of determining all Persons concerning the the Sanction of Obedience to all Ecclesiastical Laws c. And in another place It was never known in the Primitive Church that ever any Ecclesiastical Law did oblige the Church unless the secular Prince did establish it The Nicene Canons became Laws by the Rescript of the Emperor Constantine says Sozomen When the Council of Constantinople was finished the Fathers wrote to the Emperor Theodosius Ibidem cap. 4. fol. 600. Petitioning ut Edicto Pietatis tua confirmetur Synodi sententia The Decrees of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon had the same Confirmation as to the last Marcion the Emperor wrote to Palladius his Prefect Quod ea quae de Christiana fide à Sacerdotibus qui Chalcedone convenerunt per nostra praecepta statuta sunt And indeed what is it that the Civil Magistrate may not do in the making of a Prelate in the Church of England He may elect the Person and does so in reality for he nominates Authoritatively and whatever some pretend Godolph Repert Canon p. 42. the Dean and Chapter have no power to refuse the Conge d'eslire and Mr. Gwin in the preface to his Readings tells us that the King of England had of antient time the free appointment of all Ecclesiastical Dignities investing them first per Annulum Baculum and afterwards by his Letters Patents and that in process of time he made the Election over to others under certain Forms and Conditions and affirmeth with good authorities out of the Books of the Common Law that King John was the first that granted this Liberty of Election to the Dean and Chapter but that all Bishopricks were at first Donative The Civil Magistrate may multiply Bishops ad libitum and if he pleases may appoint one in every Parish by the Statute of 26 Hen. VIII c. 14. Six and twenty Suffragan Bishops are added to the Diocesans as saith the Act hath been accustomed to be in this Realm the Arch-Bishop or Bishop was to name two whereof the King to chuse one and to give him the Name Title and Dignity of Bishop and to that Name Title and Dignity the Arch Bishop with two Bishops or Suffragans more is to consecrate him onely he is to act by the Commission of the Diocesan and to have none of the profits of the Bishoprick this restraint in the exercise might have been taken off if the Legislative Power had so pleased And if this Law had not given them the Episcopal Power they could not have exercised that Power by any Commission from the Diocesan whatsoever He may also delegate the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to whom he pleases either to Lay-Men or to Presbyters 'T is commonly assigned to Lay-Chancellors they do judicially Excommunicate and Absolve and they have their Commission to do it from the King not from the Bishop and in some places the Episcopal Jurisdiction is reserved to a Presbyter as in the Peculiars we have in divers parts of England at Bridgnorth six Parishes are Governed by a Court held by a Presbyter and Godolphin tells us there are certain peculiar Jurisdictions belonging to some certain Parishes the Inhabitants whereof are exempted from the Arch-Deacons and sometimes from the Bishops Jurisdiction of which there are fifty seven in the Province of Canterbury A certain proof that the Bishops Jurisdiction is only by humane Right or Custom because the Law can exempt some Parishes from it but by the Citizen of Chesters Divinity all these peculiars have the peculiar priviledge of being unchurched and their exemption would be tantamount to Excommunication because they are not under the Government of the Bishop without which there can be no Church Unity If any say they are under the Archiepiscopal Jurisdiction I answer they are no otherwise under it than the Bishops are and the Prelatical party themselves acknowledge that Arch-Bishops are but of Humane Institution Lastly The Civil Magistrate may also depose and deprive Bishops when they see just cause and this power has been so lately exerted that it needs no farther proof I would fain know whether the deprived Bishops be not divested of all Episcopal Jurisdiction Perhaps this will be thought an invidious question and an insulting over the misfortunes of those learned Gentlemen but I profess seriously it is
Learned Grotius has fully proved that there never was a Council truly called General excepting that of the Apostles at Jerusalem that Councils have no governing Power Non ideo convocari Synodum quòd in co pars sit imperii Yea that the Church has no Legislative Power by Divine Right That what was written in Synods for Order and Ornament are not called Laws but Canons and have either the force of advice only Burnets Abridement p. 139. or they oblige by way of agreement c. And our Reforming Bishops Cranmer Tonstal and others being required to give their opinions concerning the Authority of General Councils declared that this Authority did not flow from the number of the Bishops but from the matter of their decisions and this indeed is the only true notion of Ministerial Power it depends purely upon the matter of their Canons not the Authority of the Person so that they can never by their Authority make a thing indifferent to become a Duty Praeeant ipsi judicio directivo says Grotius they are Councils not Parliaments and only to shew men what is Sin and Duty not to make any thing Duty which was not so before Dr. Sherlock fairly acquits himself of the Suspicion of ascribing unto a Council of Bishops Vind. of Prot. Princ. p. 30. Vind. of the Def. of Dr. St. p. 162. any Power in matter of Faith or Manners or Catholick Unity and because in a former Treatise he had let fall an Expression that might seem to give them such a Power he by much strugling gets from under it and says he meant no more than a Power of Deposing Heretical Bishops but withal adds It does not follow that any Bishops or any Number of Bishops however assembled have such an Authority to declare Heresie as shall oblige all men to believe that to be Heresie which they decree to be so and therefore the effects of those Censures must of Necessity depond upon that Opinion which People have of them those who believe the Censure just will withdraw from the Communion of such a Bishop those who do not will still communicate with him and whether they do right or wrong their own Consciences must judge in this World and God will Judge in the next And elsewhere he thus speaks As for Ecclesiastical Causes nothing is a pure Ecclesiastical Cause but what concerns the Communion of the Church who shall be received into Communion or câ—st out or put under some less Censures c. Here we see it is not in the Power of Councils or Synods to take away any of that Power from Presbyters that God has given them this is none of the Ecclesiastical Causes belonging to them This is more directly asserted by the Author of the Summary of the Controversies betwixt the Church of England P. 119. and the Church of Rome what he says of the Episcopal Office will hold true of the Ministerial in General That a General Council has no Authority to give away those Rights and Powers which are inherent in every Church and inseparable from the Ministerial Office for it is not in Ecclesiastical as it is in Civil Rights Men may irrevocably grant away their own Civil Rights and Liberties but all the Authority in the Church cannot give away it self nor grant the whole entire Episcopacy with all the Rights and Powers of it to any one Bishop If Bishops or Presbyters will not exercise that Power which God has given them they are accountable to their Lord for it but they cannot give it away neither from themselves nor from their Successors for it is theirs only to use not to part with and therefore every Bishop or Presbyter may reassume such Rights though a General Council should give them away because the Grant is void in it self By ancient Ecclesiastical custom Arch-Bishops were set over Bishops Vind. Prot. Prin. p. 72. and yet Dr. Sherlock confesses they have not direct Authority and Jurisdiction over them and if Bishops have no Superiority over Presbyters but what is grounded upon this Ecclesiastical Right it will not amount to formal Authority But 2. No Power can be claimed by Ecclesiastical Right but what has been acquired according to the Rules of those Councils and Customs by which they claim if it be a jus Ecclesiasticum they must come by it more Ecclesiastico in that method which Ecclesiastical Canons have prescribed and nothing is more evident than that the Rules of the Primitive Churches gave all the Presbyters and the People too a voice in the Election of their Bishops the African Bishops in a Council where Cyprian Presided Cypr. Ep. 68. Concil Nic. Arab. Can. Sozom. l. 1. c. 23. determined that Plebs maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi St. Ambrose Ep. 82. Electio vocatio quae sit à tota Ecclesia verè cartò est divina vocatio ad munus Episcopi That this was the Primitive Custom none will deny though some Question whether this be absolutely necessary or no and I will not say it is necessary where the Office stands upon a Divine Institution but certainly where it only stands upon the Plea of Ecclesiastical Right the Ecclesiastical Method is absolutely necessary to give that Right for our Bishops cannot pretend to stand upon the Foundation of those Canons which they do not observe in their entrance upon that Office since those Canons must needs bind them as much in their Acquisition of Power as the People in their Subjection to them The best Title therefore our Bishops have to shew for their Prelatical Jurisdiction is the Law of the Land Our learned Historians and Lawyers tell us that before William the Conquerors time there were no such Courts in England as we now call Courts Ecclesiastical or Spiritual only by the Laws of Ethelstane the Bishops were allowed to be present with the Sheriffs in their Tourne Courts Brompton de Leg. Ethels where all Ecclefiastical matters were heard and determined Sir Edward Cook says William the Conquerour was the first that by his Charter to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln prohibited Sheriffs to intermeddle any more with Ecclesiastical Causes but leave them wholly to the Bishop 4. l. Institut c. 53. p. 259. and yet there appears no enrolment of any such Charter till the 2d of Rich. 2d And Cook himself mentions the Red Book of Henry the first de general placit Comitat. extant in the Office of the Kings Rememb in the Exchequer wherein 't is said of the Sheriffs Tourne Courts Ibi agantur primo debita Christianitatis jura secundo Regis placita postremo causae singulorum and he adds certain it is the Bishops Consistories were erected and Causes Ecclesiastical removed from the Tourne to the Consistory after the making of the said Red Book Nothing will set this matter in a better Light than our Acts of Parliament especially that of the 37. Hen 8. Entituled An
to him The Marshal only made it his Request that he would not trouble him for holding him so long in Restraint forasmuch as he was a Poor Man and had many Children and did only follow the Orders of his Superiours in what he had done Mr. Yarranton told him He did freely forgive him These dangerous Plotters being now at Liberty they depart every Man to his own Home and were never prosecuted or further questioned about this Matter There was no need of that for the Contrivers had now obtained their End which was to possess the King and Parliament that it was absolutely necessary to make some severe Act against this restless sort of Men who not contented with the King 's Gracious Pardon were always Plotting to disturb the Government Accordingly when the Parliament met together upon the 20th of November 1661. to which time they were Adjourned the King makes a Speech to them wherein are these words My Lords and Gentlemen I Am Sorry to find that the General Temper and Affections of the Nation are not so well Composed as I hoped they would have been after so signal Blessings of God Almighty upon us all and after so great Indulgence and Condescentions from me towards all Interests there are many wicked Instruments still as active as ever who labour Night and Day to disturb the Publick Peace and to make People jealous of each other it may be worthy of your Care and Vigilance to provide proper Remedies for Diseases of that Kind and if you find new Diseases you must find new Remedies c. No sooner was this Parliament in their geers Note this was before the Sham was discovered to Mr. Yarranton but Sir J. P. one of the Knights for Worcestershire with open mouth informs them of a dangerous Presbyterian Plot that was on foot that many of the chief Conspirators were now in Prison at Worcester The like Information was given by some of their Members that Served for Oxfordshire Herefordshire Staffordshire and other places yea this was the general Vogue Some say but by a very few Votes as may appear by the Printed Pamphlets of those times Hereupon a Bill of Uniformity was excogitated and carried on in the Parliament and passed that Sessions I have done with the First Part of this Sham Plot when I have added a Passage or two more concerning Mr. Yarranton As soon as he was Discharged as before he goes up to London and prevails with the Lord of Bristol to acquaint the King with the great wrong he had received and with the wicked Contrivance of some of his Ministers by Sham-Plots to divide the King from his People and his People from one another Hereupon an Order of Council was directed to the Deputy-Lieutenants of Worcestershire that were then in and about London to appear before the Council and to give an Account of this Matter They seemed to clear themselves from being concerned therein and desired such as were in the Country might be consulted The next Post they inform their Brethren in the Country how Matters stood before the Council and that the Lord of Bristol did Patronize Mr. Yarranton upon this Sir J. W. one of the Deputy-Lieutenants hastens up to London and brings with him one Hales an Attorney his Kinsman and Tenant now living in Tenbury which Hales with a Constable of St. Mary Overies and one Halborn a Waterman now living in Pepper-Alley in Southwark Arrested Mr. Yarranton when he was Bowling in Winchester-Park for High Treason and being further assisted by some of the Horse-Guards then in Southwark conveyed him in Halborn's Boat to White-Hall where he was that Night in Custody but on the Morrow the Earl of Bristol sent the King 's Privy Seal to a Friend of Mr. Yarranton's who brought it to him wherein it was declared That it was the King's Pleasure he should Travel where he pleased and not to be molested by any Person whatsoever without a Special Warrant from the King Mr. Yarranton seeing how Matters went in London resolved to return again into the Country where he prosecuted Major Wild and others for Imprisoning of him wrongfully but within Six Months after a Design is laid by some of the Criminals in the former Sham-Plot to Suborn Persons to Swear against him that he had spoken Treasonable Words against the King and the Government the Witnesses were one Dainty a Mountebank formerly an Apothecary in Derby who afterwards acknowledged that he had Five Pounds for his Pains The other Witness lived in Wales and went by two Names this was done at the Assizes in Worcester the Bill being found by the Grand Jury Twisden then Judge Mr. Yarranton put himself upon his Trial and though he did not except against any one of his Jury yet upon a full Hearing of the Case they presently acquitted him to the great disappointment of the designing Gentlemen This Narrative Mr. Yarranton Published under his own Hand and I never could understand that any Answer was made to it and by mentioning the Names of Persons then living and therein appealing to them it appears to be of undoubted credit and if any shall take upon them to contradict it there are so many of the Persons concerned still alive as are sufficient to make out the truth and certainty of it This Act of Uniformity which was gained by such an Infamous Stratagem Some of the Ejected Ministers had been Sufferers for the King as Mr. Cook Mr. Harrison Mr. Kirby Mr. Seddan sent up Prisoners about Sir Geo. Booth's Attempt Collection of Debates p. 212. obliged all Ministers to Subscribe to the Book of Common-Prayer by Bartholomew-Day upon pain of Deprivation ab officio beneficio which about Two thousand Ministers could not do and were accordingly ejected and it is a wonder that all the Ministers in England were not Silenced by it for it is a known and certain Truth that the Liturgy with its new Alterations to which they assented came not out of the Press till about Bartholomew-Eve so that all those that Conformed excepting perhaps one or two in London Subscribed to they knew not what and thus the Effects of that Edict were as scandalous as the cause and rise of it An honourable Member of the House of Commons observed in Parliament in the Year 1680. If the Laws against Dissenters were projected in favour of the Protestant Religion it is strange they were so promoted as many Members now here that Served in that Parliament do remember by Sir Thomas Clifford Sir Solomon Swale and Sir Roger Strickland who have all since appeared to be Papists When the lamentable Effects of this Act began to appear more visible every day than other and the King was sensible how they had been cheated into it by a pretended Plot the Forgery whereof was now discovered He set forth the very same Year Decem. 26. his Declaration of Indulgence and in February next when the Parliament was met Journal of the House of