o Eliz. beforemention'd B. I can easily direct you to such a Writer of our Church who hath done the thing to the universal Satisfaction of the Inquisitive as to this Point and that is the Lord Primate Bramhal in his Book of Schism Guarded He saith there in p. 330 and 331. As our Grievances so our Reformation was only of the abuses of the Roman Court. Their bestowing of Prelacies and Dignities in England to the Prejudice of the right Patrons Their Convocating Synods in England without the King's leave Their Prohibiting English Prelates to make their old feudal Oaths to the King and obliging them to take new Oaths of Fidelity to the Pope Their imposing and receiving Tenths and first Fruits and other Arbitrary Pensions upon the English Clergy and lastly their Usurping a Legislative Iudiciary and Dispensative Power in the exterior Court by Political Coaction these are all the branches of Papal Power which we have rejected This Reformation is all the Separation that we have made in point of Discipline And for Doctrine we have no difference with them about the old Essentials of Christian Religion and their new Essentials which they have patch'd to the Creed are but their erroneous or at the best probable Opinions no Articles of Faith. Thus then according to these measures you see how much the hinge of the Reformation turns on the Usurpation of the Papacy in Dispensing for in all these particulars enumerated the Pope dispens'd with the King's Laws And he had before in p. 26. said This Primacy neither the Ancients nor we deny to St. Peter of Order of Place of Preheminence If this first movership would serve his turn the Controversie were at an end for our parts But this Primacy is over-lean the Court of Rome have no gusto to it They thirst after a visible Monarchy on Earth an absolute Ecclesiastical Soveraignty a Power to make Canons to abolish Canons to dispense with Canons to impose Pensions to dispose of Dignities to decide Controversies by a single Authority This was that which made the breach not the Innocent Primacy of St. Peter And afterward in p. 149. he saith But I must contract my Discourse to those Dispensations that are intended in the Laws of Henry the 8th that is the Power to dispense with English Laws in the exterior Court Let him bind or loose inwardly whom he will whether his Key erre or not we are not concern'd Secondly As he is a Prince in his own Territories he that hath Power to bind hath Power to loose He that hath Power to make Laws hath Power to dispense with his own Laws Laws are made of Common Events Those benign Circumstances that happen rarely are left to the Dispensative Grace of the Prince Thirdly As he is a Bishop whatever Dispensative Power the ancient Ecclesiastical Canons or Edicts of Christian Emperors give to the Bishop of Rome within those Territories that were subject to his Iurisdiction by Humane right we do not envy him so he suffer us to enjoy our ancient Privileges and Immunities freed from his Encroachments and Usurpations The Chief ground of the ancient Ecclesiastical Canon was let the old Customs prevail A possession or Prescription of Eleven hundred years is a good ward both in Law and Conscience against an Human Right and much more against a New pretence of Divine Right For Eleven hundred years our Kings and Bishops enjoy'd the sole Dispensative Power with all English Laws Civil and Ecclesiastical In all which time he is not able to give one instance of a Papal Dispensation in England nor any shadow of it when the Church was formed Where the Bishops of Rome had no Legislative Power no Iudiciary Power in the exteriour Court by necessary Consequence they could have no Dispensative Power He then in p. 169. mentions the said Statute of 25. H. 8th and having referr'd to the Proviso there to shew that its intent was not to vary from the Church of Christ in any other things declared by the Holy Scripture and the Word of God necessary to Salvation he saith then followeth the scope of our Reformation only to make an Ordinance by Policies necessary and convenient to repress Vice and for good Conservation of the Realm in Peace Unity and Tranquillity from ravine and spoil ensuing much the ancient Customs of this Realm in that behalf not minding to seek for any relief succours or remedies for any worldly things and Humane Laws in any cause of necessity but within this Realm at the hands of your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings of this Realm which have and ought to have an Imperial Power and Authority in the same and not obliged in worldly Causes to any other Superior Thus then you see this Prelates sense of how much the taking away the Pope's Dispensative Power here and restoring that Power to the Crown was the Soul of the Reformation and tota in toto of it And this Act you see revived by the First of Elizabeth without garbling it in the least and the Dispensative Power thereby restored to her her Heirs and Successors and a Declaration that no Subjects of the Realm need for any worldly things and Humane Laws in any Cause of Necessity seek for any relief but within this Realm at the hands of our Soveraign as aforesaid And I shall tell you that the Bishop in the next Page refers to the Statute of the First of Eliz. and saith on his view of both Statutes Whatsoever Power our Laws did devest the Pope of they invested the King with it And of this the Power of Rehabilitating any of his Lay or Clerical Subjects is a part as was beforesaid A. You have cited somewhat out of this Great Champion for the King's Supremacy and for the Church of England and reputed to be the most clear Vindicator of it from Schism our Church hath had which hath created more anxiety in my mind about the Assertory part of the Oath then any thing hath done For the words in the Oath are I do utterly testify and declare c that no Foreign Prelate or Person hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction Power Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm and you have brought in the Primate granting that the Pope hath Power here to bind or loose inwardly and asserting that he hath here a Spiritual Power B. You judge right of the Bishop's Opinion and which is indeed express'd throughout his whole Book He tells us in p. 25. That St. Cyprian made all the Bishopricks in the World to be but one Masse whereof every Bishop had an entire part And he saith in p. 60 and 61. That neither King Harry the 8th nor any of our Legislators did ever endeavour to deprive the Bishop of Rome of the Power of the Keys or any part thereof either the Key of Order or the Key of Iurisdiction I mean Iurisdiction purely Spiritual which hath place only in the inner Court of Conscience and over such Persons as
Godly Iealousie and tenderness to support one another and that Tender-Conscienced Prince who confirm'd this Canon did in it variously dispensare in lege as I may properly say with Allusion to Suarez de Legibus where in stead of using the Common Expression of dispensing WITH Laws he so frequently mentions that of dispensing IN them and thereby doth seem to take off somewhat of the harshness of Questions about Popes or Princes dispensing WITH Laws For when Sovereigns do dispensare in lege they really distribute their Sovereign Power throughout the Body of their respective Laws for their Preservation and as the heart doth dispense or distribute Blood in and throughout the Body-natural and the Brain Animal Spirits throughout the genus nervosum all the Body over And here the King having a tender regard to the firm and infirm Consciences of his People respectively and to their various Capacities of understanding and he being as Zealous for all their keeping their Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance as any Prince could be for their taking them doth in the beginning of the Canon let such as you know who have been brought up to Study and who have a tenacious Memory and could remember more interpretations of the Oath then I have recounted to you if they had been given by our Princes that whereas sundry Laws Ordinances and Constitutions have been formerly made for the acknowledgment and profession of the most lawful and independent Authority of our Dread Sovereign Lord the King 's most Excellent Majesty over the State Ecclesiastical and Civil c he doth enjoyn them all to be carefully observ'd by all such Persons whom they concern upon the Penalties in the said Laws express Here then the Acts of Parliament before-mention'd and the Oaths and Articles and Canons and Authentick interpretations appear to look you in the face and the Articles particularly do so to the Clergy as having subscribed them But that Pious Prince as their Sovereign Pastor being desirous that his Clergy should gently allure the Layety with Line upon Line and Precept upon Precept to keep their Faith to God and Loyalty to himself rather then by Interpretation upon Interpretation of their Oaths would not in this Canon have them frighted with the sight of the Oaths themselves and which are there not named and all Archbishops Bishops and inferior Priests are moreover by the Canon required to Preach Teach and Exhort their people to obey honour and serve their King and that they presume not to speak of his Majesty's Power any other way then in this Canon is exoress'd but which Canon gives them a very fair licence to speak to their People of and for the King's Power of disabling and of rehabilitating his Subjects For it disables the publick Abâ—…ttors of any Position contrary to the Explications of the Regal Power therein by Excommunicating them till they repent and for the first Offence suspends them two years from the Profits of their Benefices and for the second deprives them of all their spiritual Promotions and it was in the Canon before said That if any Parson Uicar Curate or Preacher shall neglect his Duty in Publishing the said Explications c. he shall be suspended by his Ordinary till such time as upon his Penitence he shall give sufficient assurance or Evidence of his amendment and in case he be of any EXEMPT Iurisdiction he shall be censureable by His Majesty's Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical And the Canon makes any Offenders against it in the Universities as being exempt Jurisdictions there censureable or before His Majesty's Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes and so you have the Canon likewise by securing the Rights of exempt Jurisdictions asserting the Dispensative Power But if you will take Mr. Bagshaw's word in his first Argument in Parliament concerning the Canons he there tells you that that very Canon of the Convocation containing the Explanation of the Regal Power did necessarily imply their declared sense of the Laws being dispens'd with For saith he in making Determinations concerning Royal Power they have done against Law and have medled with things of which they have no Conusance for the Exposition of them belongs to the Iudges of the Land and they have no more right to expound them then the Iudges have to expound Texts of Scripture And we know that our Laws have been so careful of preserving the Judges right of interpreting them that they allow not the Bishops and their Officials Power to interpret any Acts of Parliament tho made about Matters of their Jurisdiction and Matters merely Spiritual as appears out of Hobart 84. Spenloe's Case and Coke 3. Inst. where he saith that an Act of Parliament made about things merely Spiritual shall be construed by the Common Law 〈◊〉 Judges But how far the disabling by the Power of His Majesty's Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes such who explain'd not the Regal Power according to that Canon might appear as an Instance of the Prerogative of Disabling and of occasional re-ennabling Mr. Bagshaw's second Argument in effect exposeth it to Consideration by mentioning that the last Letters Patents of the High Commission were Mich. 9. Car. in which are contain'd all things wherein the Commissioners were to meddle and that therefore the Punishing of any there on the account of this new Canon made not a year ago could not be pursuant to those Letters Patents His first Argument likewise wherein he gives his Iudgment that by Law that Convocation was dissolv'd by the Dissolution of the Parliament may let us see how far they in making any Canon depended on the Dispensative Power of Prerogative But any one who hates Faction will find that that Author did needlesly inflame the minds of that Parliament of Forty against those Canons and particularly with the foremention'd Exception against the first on the Account of the Explanation of the Regal Power having not been made by the Iudges and where the Exception doth through the sides of the Convocation strike at the honour of that King by whom those Canons were Confirm'd His Majesty in his memorable Speech at the Prorogation of the Parliament on the 20th of October 1628. occasionally said I Command and all you that are here to take notice of what I granted you in your Petition i. e. the Petition of Right but especially you my Lords the Iudges for to you only under me belongs the interpretation of the Laws for none of the Houses of Parliament joynt or separate have any Power either to make or declare a Law without my Consent Nor will any one wonder at the tenderness of any Crown'd heads in preserving their Right as to the interpretation of their Laws who hath consider'd that the usage of the ancient Romans in making their Civil Law to be among the things Sacred and Ceremonies of their Gods preserv'd in the Collegium Pontificum and appropriating the interpretation of it to their Pontifices did induce Augustus to be inaugurated Pontifex Maximus and
the Commissioners be COMPETENT that is if they be spiritual men they may proceed to Sentence of Excommunication which may right well be Certify'd as well as Excommunication before Commissioners Delegates both of these Authorities being under the Great Seal c. And Excommunication certify'd ly Commissioners Del gates hath been allowed as it appeareth in 23. Eliz. Dyer 371. And in many Cases Acts of Parliament have adjudged men Excommunicate ipso facto But if they be meer Lay-men the fault is not in the Statute or in the Law but in the Nomination and upon Certificate made of the Excommunication according to Law a Significavit or Cap. Excom shall be awarded out of the Chancery for the taking and imprisoning the Bodies of such Excommunicate Persons But had his Lordship as I said in the Case of the other Author consider'd how by the Statute of 37. H. 8. it was declared that by Holy Scripture all Authority and Power is given to His Majesty and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Uice and Sin whatsoever he would not I believe have thought Lay-men incompetent or incapable Persons so to have acted in the high Commission or Delegacy or have said there was any fault in the Nomination of Lay-men And yet you see my Lord Coke shews you how the Government then acquiesced in such Nomination and assisted the execution of the Sentences given by such as he thought incompetent Nor are we therefore to wonder at what Mr. Bagshaw mentions of the Civilians in the House of Commons not objecting that the King had done contrary to an Act of Parliament in taking from Bishops Chancellors and Officials the Power of exercising Church Censures given them by the Act and which by the Power declared in that Act to be given him by Holy Scriptures he might have either continued to them or abridged or taken away the exercise thereof from them if he had pleas'd And considering that the Lex Scandali doth equally oblige Kings as well as Subjects in Point of Conscience it is not to be wonder'd that that Tender-conscienced King did in that Conjuncture think himself obliged so equitably to make his Interpretation of that Statute as in complaisance with some of his Subjects who had took offence at Lay-Chancellors Power of Excommunicating to disable them to it I told you before how that Pious Prince did in complaisance with the Fathers of our Church think himself obliged to exercise his Regal Power of interpreting or declaring and when in A. 1637. he issued out his Proclamation Declaring that the Bishops holding their Courts and issuing Process in their own Names were not against the Laws of the Realm and that the Iudges resolutions were notify'd therein to that purpose and that the ferment about that Point was setled and the Bishops issuing out their Processes was setled too the which Proclamation too you will find Mr. Bagshaw mentions in his second Argument where p. 40. he tells you of the Bishop's having procured a Proclamation A. 1637. declaring the Opinions of the Iudges that the Statute of 1 o Edw. 6. c. 2. is repeal'd and of no force at this day and that Bishops may keep Courts in their own Names And I shall now tell you that as in the year 1637. the Bishops were in so full and peaceable possession of their Privilege of issuing out of their Processes in their own names by means of what His Majesty had declared pursuant to the Resolutions unanimously given by all the Iudges and the Barons of the Exchequer and of which Sir E. Coke saith Inst. 2. that they are for Matters of Law of highest Authority next to the Court of Parliament so by Iudgment of Parliament the settlement of that Controversie by virtue of His Majesty's Declarative Power so exercised was afterward approved A. That is a thing I would gladly hear of for one would think that the exercise of the Regal Power of Declaring or Interpreting what relates to an Act of Parliament might occasionally heighten a ferment in stead of abating it B. You will find little or no cause if you consult our ancient English Story and there see how the mutual Confidence between King and People hath in several Ages supported the Government to fancy that Declaratory Proclamations relating to Acts of Parliament did make any ferment The Interpretation of the Statutes hath in all Causes between Party and Party and wherein meum and tuum and Property are concern'd been by ancient usage under our Kings still left to the Iudges and the Proclamations of our Princes on great emergent occasions in the State declaring or interpreting their Laws pursuant to the Supreme Power committed to them by God for the good of their People hath still been observ'd to tend both to the good of the People and the Laws too If you will look on all the Declaratory Proclamations in the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King Iames of which you have a Collection you will I believe find none but what were acceptable among all their Loyal Subjects But as to this Declaratory Proclamation of King Charles the First before-mention'd you will find it as I told you approved in Parliament And if you will please to consult in your Statute-Book the Act of 13 o Car. 2. c. 12. of which the title is Explanation of a Clause contain'd in an Act of Parliament made in the 17th year of the late King Charles Entituled an Act for repeal of a branch of a Statute 1 o Elizabethae Concerning Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical you will there find that this Act of the late King 's loyal long Parliament viz. 13 o Car. 2. hath in it three Proviso's The first is concerning the High Commission-Court the second Proviso is concerning the taking away the Oath ex officio And the third Proviso is to limit and confine the Power of Ecclesiastical Judges in all their Proceedings to what WAS and by Law might be used before the year 1639 which plainly includes allows and approves King Charles the First 's Proclamation in the year 1637. In the time of a former disloyal long Parliament the Regal Power of Interpreting or declaring was by them represented as a Gravamen and while yet they usurp'd that Power themselves If you will look on the Declaration of the Lords and Commons in Husband's Collections p. 686. you will there find they say It is high time for the whole Kingdom now to understand that His Majesty's Authority is more in his Courts without his Person then in his Person without his Courts when the Power of DECLARING Law shall be deny'd to the whole Court of Parliament in particular Causes before them for we have claim'd it we have exercised it no otherwise to be obligatory as a judicial Declaration of the Law and shall be attributed to His Majesty to do it in general by his Proclamation without relation to a particular Case and
ever was who setting his feet on two of Gods Kingdoms the one upon the Sea the other upon the Earth lifting up his hand to Heaven as you are to do this day and so Swearing Rev. 10. c. and consider how he there makes this Oath to be the most effectual means for the ruining Popery and Prelacy and leaves it to be consider'd whether seeing the preservation of Popery hath been by Leagues and Covenants God may not make a League and Covenant to be its Destruction after he had before-mention'd the Associations of the Religious Orders and Fraternities and the Combination by the la Sainte Ligue for the muniting of Popery as incentives to this League and how he doth again go to the Magazine of the Apocalypse for some Weapons for this Covenant and hath other artillery for it from the Iewish State citing the words of the Prophet Let us joyn our selves to the Lord in a perpetual Covenant that shall not be forgotten how according to the ratio nominis of Superstition viz. of mens over-importunate Prayers that their Children might out-live them he concludes with a devout Prayer that this Covenant may out-live their Childrens Children and let any one behold in Mr. Henderson's Speech the like flame of Enthusiastick Zeal or of the Superstition quam vulgo bonam intentionem vocant against Superstition and Idolatry in Worship c. and concluding it with his belief that the weight of that Covenant would cast the balance in our English Wars I say let any one consider all this and tell me if ever he saw a more pompous Scene of Superstition and more magnificent Procession bestow'd on it and contrived as Bishop Sanderson's words are in his Lecture De bonâ intentione and having his eye on that Covenant viz. Obtentu gloriae Dei reformandae Religionis propagandi Evangelii extirpandae superstitionis exaltandi regni Domini nostri Iesu Christi and if ever he saw what the Bishop in that Lecture calls The Iesuites Theology viz. Omnia metiri ex Commodo Sanctae matris Ecclesiae more strongly asserted then in the Contexture and Imposition of that Covenant But those two Divines lived to recover their Allegiance and a due sense of their Oaths for it and to see that foetus of their Brain that at its solemn Christning they wish'd immortality to renounced publickly as a spurious Birth and to the Scandal of that Age a race of other Oaths in England as infamously born intercept its inheritance Nay let me tell you that in the Nation of Scotland Loyalty hath been a growing Plant of Renown since the year 1660. and the Idol of their former Covenanted Presbytery been by the Loyal Nobility and Gentry and Populace there generally abhorr'd And tho Sir George Wharton in his Gesta Britannorum relates it as a strange thing that on the 21st of August A. 1663. the Parliament of Scotland Passâ—…d an Act for a National Synod the first that ever was in that Kingdom under the Government of Bishops yet I can tell you of an Act of Parliament that pass'd there afterward that declared the right of the Crown to dispense in the external Government of the Church I shall entertain you with it out of the Scotch Statutes viz. In the first Session of the Second Parliament of King Charles the Second there pass'd an Act asserting His Majesty s Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical Edenburgh November 16 th 1669. THe Estates of Parliament having seriously considered how necessary it is for the Good and Peace of the Church and State That His Majesty's Power and Authority in relation to Matters and Persons Ecclesiastical be more clearly asserted by an Act of Parliament Have therefore thought fit it be Enacted Asserted and Declared Like as his Majesty with Advice and Consent of his Estates of Parliament doth hereby Enact Assert and Declare That his Majesty hath the Supreme Authority and Supremacy over all Persons and in all Causes Ecclesiastical within this his Kingdom and that by virtue thereof the Ordering and Disposal of the External Government and Policy of the Church doth properly belong to his Majesty and his Successors as an inherent Right to the Crown And that his Majesty and his Successors may Setle Enact and Emit such Constitutions Acts and Orders concerning the Administration of the External Government of the Church and the Persons employed in the same and concerning all Ecclesiastical Meetings and Matters to be proposed and determined therein as they in their Royal Wisdom shall think fit Which Acts Orders and Constitutions being recorded in the Books of Councel and duly published are to be observed and obeyed by all his Majesty's Subjects any Law Act or Custom to the contrary notwithstanding Like as his Majesty with Advice and Consent aforesaid doth Rescind and Annul all Laws Acts and Clauses thereof and all Customs and Constitutions Civil or Ecclesiastick which are contrary to or inconsistent with his Majesty's Supremacy as it is hereby asserted and declares the same void and null in all time coming A. You told me before how the King dispens'd with the five Articles of Perth setled by Act of Parliament but this Act yields so great a territory to the Dispensative Power that my thoughts cannot suddenly travel through it It acknowledgeth in the Crown a more sublime Power then of dispensing with Presbyterians or Independents or of suspending the Penal Laws against them namely of abolishing Episcopacy and of making Presbytery or Independency the National Church-Government Car tel est notre plaisir now for the external Form of Church-Government is allow'd to make the Pattern in the Mount. And 〈◊〉 accordingly as Mr. Baxter in his Book call'd a Search for the Schismaticks represents Archbishop Bramhal's new way of asserting the Church of England in his Book against him 1. To abhor Popery 2. That we all come under a foreign spiritual Iurisdiction obeying the Pope as the Western Patriarch and also as the Principium Unitatis to the Universal Church governing by the Canons c. may not the King by this Act make the external Government of the Church of Scotland Patriarchal and the Pope Patriarch B. The Act needs no Comment and if you will tell me that the Scots shew'd themselves Erastians or Latitudinarians when they made it I shall acquaint you that that Archbishop in his Schism guarded p. 319. asserts That a Sovereign Prince hath Power within his own Dominions for the Publick good to change any thing in the external Regiment of the Church which is not of divâ—…ne Institution and that he had in p. 4. of that Book allow'd the Pope his Principium unitatis and his Preheminence among Patriarchs as S. Peter had among the Apostles and that in p. 78. of his Iust Vindication of the Church of England he takes notice that by the Statute of Carlisle made in the days of Edward the First it was declared That the Holy Church of England was founded in the
commonly call'd Ecclesiastical Court c. as by the said Councils and Constitutions Provincial appeareth which standing and remaining in their effect not abolish'd by your Grace's Laws did sound to appear to make greatly for the said usurp'd Power of the Bishop of Rome and to be directly repugnant to your Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church and Prerogative royal your GRACE being a LAY-MAN and albeit the said Decrees Ordinances and Constitutions by a Statute made in the 25th year of your Reign be utterly abolish'd c. But forasmuch as your Majesty is the only and undoubted Supreme Head of the Church of England and also of Ireland to whom BY HOLY SCRIPTURE all Authority and Power is wholly given to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Uice and Sin whatsoever and TO ALL SUCH PERSONS AS YOUR MAIESTY SHALL APPOINT THEREUNED that in Consideration thereof as well for the Instruction of Ignorant Persons c. and setting forth of your Prerogative Royal and Supremacy It may therefore please your Highness that it may be Ordain'd and Enacted that all and singular Persons as well LAY as those that be now Married or hereafter shall be Married c. which shall be made ordain'd constituted and deputed to be any Chancellor Uicar General c. Scribe or Register by your Majesty or any of your Heirs and Successors or by any Archbishop Bishop c. may lawfully execute and execute all manner of Iurisdiction commonly call'd Ecclesiastical c. Here you see the enacting clause founded on the previous solemn acknowledgment of the King's supremacy and on his having the power given him not by Parliaments or People but by SCRIPTURE to appoint such to be ecclesiastical Judges who were by Custom and by the Laws of Councils and Provincial Synods formerly equivalent to Acts of Parliament incapacitated so to be And from whence it is consequently apparent that no positive humane Laws whatsoever inflictive of Penal incapacity could against the Right inherent in him by the positive Law of God oblige him not to dispense with the others by his supreme Power when he found it necessary so to do For 't is on all hands confessedly true that Parliaments can no more then the Bishop of Rome delete such Power as is given by God to the Princes of the Earth A. But because a Parliament declared that such a supreme Power is given by the Scripture to Princes you know it doth not follow that it is so And moreover you know that was a Popish Parliament that so declared it B. But I likewise know that as 't is in my Lord Chief Iustice Vaughan ' s Reports in Hill and Good ' s Case that if a Marriage be declared by Act of Parliament to be against Gods Law we must admit it to be so for by a Law that is an Act of Parliament it is so declared so that Act of Parliament having declared it that by Holy Scripture all Authority and Power is wholly given to the King and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to hear and determine c. tho such Persons were by a lawful Canon incapacitated so to do a Canon that that Iudge in the words immediately following the other makes to be the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament we must admit such Power and Authority inherent in the King's Supremacy by the Word of God thus to supersede incapacity And whether the incapacitating Canons were lawful ones or no it is not tanti to enquire since as we know a Power inherent in Kings by the Word of God cannot be either by lawful Canon or Act of Parliament taken away and much more ought such Power to be construed and admitted as inherent in him by the Scripture while the Act of Parliament continues in being But I shall yet bring the acknowledgment of your Prince's Supremacy in this point as thus founded on Scripture closâ—…r to your Conscience by letting you see that you have not only the Judgment of a Popish Parliament in the Case but of that very Statute of Queen Elizabeth that enjoyns your Oath of Supremacy for it revives that Statute oâ—… Harry the 8th and all and every branches and Articles in it as you will find it in your Statute-book A. You have mention'd one thing in that Statute of Harry the 8th that doth a little startle me and that is that he and the three Estates apply'd there the design of keeping up those Canons of Councils and provincial Constitutions that incapacitated LAYMEN as level'd at the exclusion of the King himself not only from his Prerogative but from being in a capacity to exercise ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as supreme head of the Church as I find by those remarkable words YOUR GRACE BEING A LAY-MAN B. You do well to take notice of that and are therefore not to wonder at it if you should hear your Prince who was a Dissenter to the Church of England and others concern'd for him to have apprehensions of what prejudice might be meant him by some subtle Projectors of Laws to incapacitate all Papists and Presbyterians from acting in any Office in Church or State however many loyal Persons might be far from intending such prejudice thereby his Grace being a Papist or Presbyterian A. I must confess that if the Kings Power of commanding the Services of all his Subjects be inherent in him by the Word of God and as such declared by Parliament any Mens endeavours to take away that Power may well be imputed to great incogitancy B. You say right and I was hence induced to wonder that after the Act and Acknowledgment of his Majesty's Prerogative in the Choice of his Officers of State-Councellors and Iudges had thus passed in the first Parliament of Scotland in the late King's reign viz. The Estates of Parliament considering the great Obligations that lie upon them from the Law of God the Law of Nations the Municipal Laws of the Land and their Oathes of Allegiance to maintain and defend the Soveraign Power and Authority of the King's Majesty and the sad Consequences that do accompany an encrochment upon or diminution thereof do therefore from their sense of humble duty declare that it is an inherent privilege of the Crown and an undoubted part of the Royal Prerogative of the Kings of this Kingdom to have the sole Choice and Appointment of the Officers of States and Privy Councellors and Nomination of the Lords of Session as in former times and that the King 's sacred Majesty and his Heirs and Successors are by virtue of that Royal Power which they hold from God Almighty over this Kingdom to have the full exercise of that Right c. any Men could by a following Act of Parliament there be incapacitated to serve their Prince in those Stations I shall here tell you that the incapacitating a few Papists or Quakers Presbyterians or Anabaptists to serve their Prince may to some seem materia
of the Advocate for Conscience Liberty discoursing of the Oath of Supremacy in p. 181. seq saith That Luther Calvin Knox Gilby disliked it and mentions that a Iurisdiction purely spiritual was communicated to H. the 8th by his Supremacy and assumed by him and that he wanted his Spiritual By-title of Supremacy to justifie his Divorce aâ—…d his taking the Church Revenue into his hands and that the Protectorship in E the 6th's time by virtue of the Oath of Supremacy continued to make new Church-Laws Institutions c. and that Queen Elizabeth reassumed this Iurisdiction having a greater necessity for it then her Brother because her Marriage was declared null by the Pope So then the state of Protestancy abroad and at home call'd on the Queen to distribute or dispense her Supreme Power in her Law by her Interpretation making a change not of it but in the body of it and which had it been changed by a repeal in Parliament for another would have seem'd to blemish her figure of semper Eadem and have reflected on the Understandings and Consciences of those who had before took the Oath There was then in that Conjuncture an universal outcry of Conscience that Sin lies at the door a thing worse then Hannibal ad Portas a burthen that hath caus'd all the Groans of the Creation that ever happen'd And where there is Periculum animae there is always Periculum in morâ and which the Queen 's authentick Interpretation did remove and which was approved by the next Parliament and no noise made or complaining heard in our streets about any seeming Alteration made in the Law or Oath it self by the Prerogative of interpretation or acquittal from the disabling Punishments then exercised And it is but congruous to humane Nature and common Policy in men when they see any thing not ill in it self done that hath eminently conduced to make the World easie not to embarass such thing with litigious scruples about the fieri non debuit nor to adventure to trouble the World again when it is inclined to and resolv'd upon its rest Some thoughts of this Nature probably inclined my Lord Coke to shew the Complaisance he did not only to King Iames his incapacitating Canon about the double Subscription but as to the Oath against Simony that of Canonical obedience and which inclined Judge Croke to be pleas'd with the Canons of 1640. tho containing the Oath with an Et caetera and which made the Iudges so apt to over-rule some of Sir E. Coke's Exceptions to the Sheriffs Oath as I have mention'd You may indeed find that some among the Puritans in some Conjunctures in Queen Elizabeth's time did presume to reproach the Government of the Church with her having dispens'd with the disability of some Persons incurr'd by Act of Parliament The Author of the famous Book publish'd in her Reign call'd An Abstract of certain Acts of Parliament hath in the Conclusion these two factious Queries viz. Whether a mere Lay-man no Doctor of the Civil Law may be a Bishop's Chancellor and so may Excommunicate Whether a mere Lay-man no Doctor of the Civil Law may be a Bishop's Register contrary to an Act of Parliament The Author intendeth there to referr to the Statute of 37 o. H. 8. c. 17. and as he had before expresly done in p. 196. Seq and of which Statute we have so much discours'd and he in p. 201. instanceth in many Lay-men who were not Doctors of the Civil Law and yet then exercised Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction He had too in p. 196. took notice that as that Statute establish'd and confirm'd to the King and his Successors and so unto our most Gracious Soveraign the Queen's Majesty that now is lawful Preheminence Power Superiority and Lordship over all Persons within her Dominions of what state or Condition soever touching Punishments for any Heresies Errors Vices Schisms Abuses Idolatries Hypocrisies and Superstitions springing or growing by means of any her disobedient and disloyal Subjects so hath her Majesty by her Injunctions publish'd that her Highness did never pretend any Title or challenge any Authority to punish any of her Subjects for any of the said Offences by Censure Ecclesiastical in right belonging to her Royal Person but that her Highness meaning and intent is and always hath been to commit the execution thereof always to the Ecclesiastical State of her time and he then sets down her Interpretation in the Admonition But had that Author consider'd how it was declared by that Statute that by Holy Scripture all Authority and Power is given to His Majesty and all such Persons as His Majesty shall appoint to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Uice and Sin whatsoever and that this Statute was revived by the 1st of Eliz. he would not have wonder'd at the Queen's allowing that Statute to be dispens'd with as it was Nor would any one therefore wonder at the Royal Martyr in the 12th and 13th Canons of A. 1640. Condescending to humour the Complaints of the Puritans by an equal Interpretation of that Statute of 37 o H. 8. and by dispensing with it as he did and that so far as to the disabling Lay-Chancellors to proceed in such Censures as they were enabled by that Statute to do Mr. Bagshaw in his first Argument in Parliament concerning the Canons thus reflects on the Clergy for those two Canons viz. Concerning the 12th and 13th Canons touching the freeing and discharging of Chancellors and Officials from executing any Excommunication in their own Person or any Censure against the Clergy because they are Lay-men I say that in doing and enacting this they have done quite contrary to an Act of Parliament still in force in taking from them this Power of exercising the Censures of the Church which that Statute gives them which I did look when some Civilians now in the House should have maintain'd And altho it were to be wish'd that only Clergymen should have this Power of Excommunication and other Censures of the Church yet seeing an Act of Parliament hath given this Power to Lay-men it is high Presumption to make Canons against it But he well knew that after the stamp of the Royal Authority put on these Canons as well as before Lay-men in the Court of Delegates did Excommunicate and as they did in the high Commission And you may observe it that in the Commission granted Primo Elizabethae to her Commissioners pursuant to the Statute of that year there were but two Clergy-men and those Bishops and 17 Lay-men My Lord Coke Inst. 4. c. 74. writing of the High Commission in Causes Ecclesiastical saith There is no question but the Commissioners for such Causes as are committed to them by force of this Act may if the Commissioners be Competent proceed to deprivation of the Popish Clergy which was the main object of the Act or to punish them by Ecclesiastical Censures c. And without question if
of a Law and dispensing to be different things B. He had an excellent Metaphysical head and his Method of writing in that Chapter Of the Several ways of the changing of Humane Laws was partly after the Example of Suarez in his Book De Legibus and who was a voluminous Writer of Metaphysicks and writing of any Subject could not recedere ab arte suâ in that Learning that is so infinitely prolifick of Artificial distinctions without Natural differences I mention'd the Bishop's but PARTLY writing after the way of Suarez for he was far from crumbling the weightier Points of the Law into the Minutiae of Metaphysicks as the other did and he in his excellent Preface doth very passionately complain of Moral Theology having been made an Art of the Schools and that what God had made plain Men have intricated and for that purpose saith There is a Rule among the Lawyers which very much relates to the Conscience of those Men who are engaged in Suits and Sentences of Law in all Countrys which are ruled by the Civil Law in quolibet Actu requiritur Citatio of this Rule Porcius brings an hundred and sixteen Ampliations and an hundred and twenty four Limitations c. And thus Suarez in his 6th Book De Legibus and the Title of which Book is The Interpretation Cessation and change of Humane Laws hath there Twenty seven Chapters concerning the same and where his first Chapter is Of the way of rightly Interpreting an Humane Law his 2d Of the Extension in them by Interpretation of them and his 3d Of the Extension to a Case not Comprehended his 4th Doubts of the Extension of Laws his 5th Of the Restriction by Interpretation his 6th Of the Ceasing of the Obligation of a Law in particular Contrary to its words his 7th Of the Excusing of a Law by Equity his 8th Of the Use of Equity without recourse to the Prince his 9th Of the Ceasing of a Law upon its Cause ceasing his 10th Of Dispensation in an Humane Law his 11th Of the Effects of Dispensation his 12th Of the Material Cause of Dispensation his 13th Of the form of Dispensation and so on in the others with much Metaphysical subtlety But the Bishop in his before-mention'd Third Book and 6th Chapter viz. Of the Interpretation Diminution and Abrogation of Humane Laws brings in but seven ways of the changing of humane Laws so that the Obligation of Conscience is also changed whereof his first is by Equity His second is by Interpretation His third by a Contrary or a ceasing reason And his fourth by Dispensation c. and of which latter he saith If we use the word improperly Dispensation can signifie a Declaration made by the Superior that the Subject in certain Cases is not obliged that the Law-giver did not intend it c. but when Dispensation signifies Properly it means an Act of mere Grace and Favour proceeding from an extrinsick Cause that is not the Nature of the thing or the merit of the Cause but either the merit of the Person or some degrees of reasonableness in the thing which not being of it self enough to procure the favour of the Law is of it self enough to make a man capable of the Favour of the Prince c. But as here in this nice distinction he is enforced to make him who doth dispensare to do that which the Canonists make the ratio nominis of it namely diversa pensare and in the Scales of Equity to weigh and interpret the degrees of the reasonableness of the thing so in his handling of the Prince's Power of interpreting he makes Equity Co-incident with it and refers to the Law in the Code viz. Inter aequitatem jusque interpositam interpretationem nobis solis oportet licet inspicere and his instances of that Power of Interpretation are referr'd to the favours shew'd by it to Persons and particularly to Solomon's absolving Abiathar from the Sentence of Death because he had formerly done worthily to the Interests of his Father David And then saith Now this Power tho it may be done by Interpretation yet when it is administred by the Prince it is most commonly by way of Pardon absolute Power and Prerogative When a Law determines that under such an Age a Person shall be UNCAPABLE of being the General of an Army the Supreme Power can declare the meaning of the Law to be unless a great excellency of Courage and maturity of Iudgment supply the want of years in which very Case Scipio Africanus said wisely when he desir'd to be employ'd in the Punick War Se sat annorum habiturum si populus Romanus voluerit Thus Tiberius put Nero into the Senate at Fifteen years of Age and so did Augustus the like to Tiberius and his Brother and the People declar'd or dispens'd with the Law in Pompey ' s Case and allow'd him a triumph before he had been Consul or Praetor And he had before said When the Law-giver interprets his Law he doth not take off the Obligation of his Law i. e. meaning the Obligation of his Law in general but declares that in such a Case it was not intended to oblige Tacitus tells of a Roman Knight who having sworn to his Wife that he would never be divorced from her was by Tiberius dispens'd with when he had taken her in the unchaste Embraces of his Son-in-Law The Emperor then declared that the Knight had only obliged himself not to be divorced unless a great Cause should intervene And thus Suarez himself in his said 10th Chapter De Dispensatione in lege humanâ makes Dispensation apply'd to signifie an act quo quis ab obligatione legis eximitur and saith quia unus modus esse potest per Interpretationem ideo potuit etiam in eâ significatione usurpari tamen in hac etiam significatione sumpta non quamcunque interpretationem legis sed illam solam quae in casu dubio per potestatem superioris datur ad liberandum subditum ab obligatione legis significat quia haec tantum est Actus administrationis potestatis ADEO Commissae Et illa tantum tollit aliquo modo onus legis quod sine tali potestate auferri non posset and so saith he 't is agreed on by all that Dispensation is an Act of Iurisdiction but 't is drawn into the Law to signifie the taking away the vinculum of the Law in particular Cases and so we generally use it A. But Metaphysicks apart I shall not trouble my self about what is what but what is my Duty by virtue of my Oath And I observe that what you cited out of the Bishop viz. That when the Power that made the Law doth interpret the Interpretation is authentical c. may render him no favourer of an Interpretation not made in Parliament by the Legislative Power B. I shall sometime at our meeting again observe to you what the Bishop hath there asserted l. 3. c. 3. that Kings
own Municipal ones who hath ex Professo and argumentatively writ of the Prince's Prerogative of dispensing with a Penal disability in particular Cases and deny'd it A. I did not as to our Lex terrae account it tanti to set up the Judgment of any one particular man when you have entertain'd me with Iudgment of Parliament in the Case But I am sure you cannot but know how that great Man in that great Case we have referr'd to I mean my Lord Chief Justice Vaughan in Thomas and Sorrel's Case seems to be of opinion that the King cannot dispense in the Case of Incapacity He saith the reason why the King cannot dispense in the Cases of buying Offices and Simoniacal Presentations is because the Persons were made incapable to hold them And a Person incapable is as a dead Person and no Person at all as to that wherein he is incapable c. B. Tho that great Man hath not therein as in other Passages in his Argument discuss'd the Point argumentatively I shall yet pay so much respect to his opinion as to give decent Burial to his dead Man. But you see that after he had said The Reason why the King cannot dispense c. is because the Persons were made incapable to hold them he only gives it as a reason of their being uncapable and of the King 's not being able to dispense in their Case viz. that they are dead Men that a Person uncapable is as a dead Person and whereby he giveth us a Magisterial gratis dictum or a Petitio Principii instead of what might deserve the name of a Reason or what might prove that the King could not dispense in the Case of one Politically dead or one dead in Law. I have formerly told you of the Saying used by Magerus and other Civil Law-writers that Mors civilis naturali non aequiparatur nisi in casibus in jure expressis And there are Cases enow express'd there that shew how the Prince who is according to the style of Seneca viz. Animus Reipublicae illa Corpus suum and ille spiritus vitalis quem haec tot millia trahunt and who in the Scripture Phrase is the breath of our Nostrils can according to the Law of the Land as I told you in the Case of Sir Walter Raleigh animate a Person dead in Law. And none need question why King Iames the Second cannot thus raise the dead as Queen Elizabeth did and King Iames the First or our following Princes and I may say as well as any who went before him Infames dicuntur civiliter mortui is a common Saying but you see that Fas est cuivis Principi maculosas notas vitiatae opinionis abstergere is as common Thus too Magerus tells us that Banniti pro mortuis reputantur and we know that the Excommunicate may in some respect by reason of their temporary disability be termed so too And if you will look on the Book call'd Reformatio legum Ecclesiasticarum under the title De excommunicatione you will there in the Chapter of the Denunciation of the Excommunicate find the Minister enjoin'd to tell the People that they must all abstain from the Excommunicate Person tanquam à Putri Projecto membro c. that an Excommunicate Person is to be thrown out of the Church as a dead Carcass but you will there find in the Formula reconciliationis excommunicatorum with what tenderness it is said reum hunc charissimum fratrem membrum assumamus agnoscamus Communis in Christo nostri corporis intimus ut noster affectus in hoc corporis nostri recuperato membro testatior sit c. and that the Pastor in the Absolution of that returning Prodigal who was dead and is alive again must in the administration of the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws say tibi rursus pristinum in Ecclesiâ tuâ locum plenum jus restitue Thus too at the end of the Canons A. 1571. you will find the same style of tenderness in Vogue in Queen Elizabeth's time that was in Edward the 6th's as likewise of the powerfulness in raising the dead You see there a Form of the Sentence of Excommunication viz. Fratres quoniam quicunque profitemur nomen Christi sumus omnes membrum ejusdem corporis par est ut unum membrum alterius membri sensu dolore afficiatur c. And it being afterward mention'd that the Person having been accused of such a Crime and having been contumaciously absent it followeth the Bishop in God's Name and by his Authority hath Excommunicated such a one from the Society of Christ's Church tanquam membrum emortuum amputasse à Christi corpore c. that you may shun his Company tamen ut Christiana charitas nos monet let us pray for him to God who is a merciful God and who can lapsos etiam à morte revocare And you may take notice of what is said in Croke 2d and Coke 8th Report Trollop's Case about the King's Pardon raising the Excommunicate from this civil death and that a man need not be Absolved by the Church if the King Pardons And thus Hobart Serle's Case p. 294. shews you that after the discharge of a Clerk Convict he shall never be question'd in the Ecclesiastical Court for deprivation You may likewise see it in Coke Inst. 3. Chapter Of Pardons The King may Pardon one Convict of Heresie or of any other offence Punishable by the Ecclesiastical Law. You may too in that Chapter observe his tenderness for Prerogative where having mention'd that by the 13th of R. 2. it is provided that no Charter of Pardon for Murther c. shall be allow'd c. if they be not specify'd in the same Charter and that before that Statute by the Pardon of all Felonies Treason was Pardon'd and so was Murder and at this day by the pardon of all Felonies the death of a Man is not pardon'd he thus goeth on these are excellent Laws for direction and for the Peace of the Realm But it hath been conceiv'd which we will not question that the King may DISPENSE with these Laws by a Non-obstante be it general or special albeit we find not any such Clauses of Non-obstante but of late times These Statutes are excellent Instructions for a Religious and Prudent King to follow but he doth not make them obligatory to him My Lord Coke then saith This is to be added that the intention of the said Act 13. R. 2. was not that the King should grant a Pardon of Murther by express Name in the Charter but because the whole Parliament conceiv'd that he would never Pardon Murther by special Name for the Causes aforesaid therefore was that Provision made which was grounded on the Law of God Quicunque effuderit humanum Sanguinem fundetur Sanguis illius c. Nec aliter expiari potest nisi per ejus Sanguinem qui alterius Sanguinem effuderit His Margin there cites Genes 9. 6.