undutifulnesse will needs transferre this right of ruling Gods Church unto a Parliament of Lay-men the King shall be denuded of what God hath given him and the people shall be indued with what God and all good men have ever denyed them I deny not but the Parliament men as they are most noble and worthy Gentlemen so many of them may be very learned and not a few of them most religious and I honour the Parliament rightly discharging their duties Hugo de Sancto Vict. lib. 2. de sacr fid par 2. cap. 3. Laicis Christianis fidelibus terrena possidere conceditur clericis verò tantùm spiritualiâ— committuntur quae autem illâ— spiritualia sunt subjicit c. 5. dicent omnis ecclesiastica administratio in tribus consistit in sacramentis in ordinibus in praeceptis Ergo Laici nihil juris habent in legibus praeceptis condendis ecclesiasticit as much as their modesty can desire or their merit deserve neither doe I gain-say but as they are pious men and the greatest Councell of our King so they may propose things and request such and such Lawes to be enacted such abuses to be redressed and such a reformation to be effected as they thinke befitting for Gods Church but for Aarons seed and the Tribe of Levi to be directed and commanded out of the Parliament chaire how to performe the service of the Tabernacle and for Lay men to determine the Articles of faith to make Canons for Church-men to condemne heresies and define verities and to have the chiefe power for the government of Gods Church as our Faction now challengeth and their Preachers ascribe unto them is such a violation of the right of Kings such a derogation to the Clergy and so prejudiciall to the Church of Christ as I never found the like usurpation of this right to the eradication of the true religion in any age for seeing that as the Proverb goeth Quod medicorum est promittunt medici tractant fabrilia fabri what Papist or Athiest will be ever converted to professe that religion which shall be truly what now they alleadge falsely unto us a Parliamentary religion or a religion made by Lay men with the advice of a few that they choose è faece Cleri I must seriously professe what I have often bewayled to see Nadab and Abihu offering strange fires upon Gods Altar to see the sacred offices of the Priests so presumptuously usurped by the Laity and to see the children of the Church nay the servants of the Church to prescribe Lawes unto their Masters and I did ever feare it to be an argument not onely of a corrupted but also of a decaying State when Moses chaire should be set in the Parliament House and the Doctors of the Church should never sit thereon therefore I wish that the Arke may be brought backe from the Philistines and restored to the Priests to be placed in Shilo where it should be and that the care of the Arke which King David undertooke may not be taken out of his hands by his people but that he may have the honour of that service which God hath imposed upon him For 3. Opinion Of the Oâ—thodox Quia religio est ex potioribus reipublica partibus ut aâ—t Aristot Polit. l. 7. c. 8. ipsa sola custodit hominum inter se societateâ— ut ait Lâ—ctant de ira Dei cap. 12. Veritura Troia perdidit primum Deos. 3. As nothing is dearer to understanding righteous and religious Kings then the increase and maintenance of true religion and the inlargement of the Church of Christ throughout all their Dominions so they have at all times imployed their studies to this end because it is an infallible maxime even among the Politicians that the prosperity of any Kingdome flourisheth for no longer time then the care of religion and the prosperity of the Church is maintained by them among their people as we see Troy was soone lost when they lost their Palladium so it is the truest signe of a declining and a decaying State to see the Clergy despised and Religion disgraced and therefore the provision for the safety of the Church the publique injoying of the Word of God the forme of Service the manner of Government and the honour and maintenance of the Clergie are all the duties of a most Christian King which the King of Heaven hath imposed upon him for the happinesse and prosperity of his Kingdome and whosoever derive the authority of this charge either in a blinde obedience to the See of Rome as the Jesuites doe or out of their too much zeale and affection to a new Consistory as the late Presbyterians did or to a Lay Parliament as our upstart Anabaptists and Brownists doe are most unjust usurpers of the Kings right which is not onely ascribed unto him and warranted by the Word of God but is also confirmed to the Princes of this Land by severall Acts of Parliament Therefore the Tyrians châ—yâ—â—d their gods lest if they fled thâ—y should be destroyed to have the supremacie in all causes and over all persons as well in the Ecclesiasticall as in the Civill governement which being so they are exempted thereby from all inforcement of any domesticall or forraigne power and freed from the penalties of all those Lawes both Ecclesiasticall and Civill whereunto all their Subjects Clergy and Laity Q. Curtius de rebus Alexand. Joh. Beda p. 22 23. and all inferiour Persons and the superiour Nobility within their Kingdomes are obliged by our Lawes and Statutes as hereafter I shall more fully declare Therefore it behoveth all Kings and especially our King at this time seriously to consider what prejudice they shall create unto themselves and their just authority if they should yeild themselves inferiour to their Subjects aggregativè or repraesentativè or how you will or liable to the penall Lawes for so they may be soone dethroned by the unstable affection and weake judgement of discontented people or subject to the jurisdiction of Lay Elders and the excommunication of a tyrannous Consistory who denounceing him tanquam Ethnicum Matth. 18.17 may soone adde a stranger shall not raigne over thee Deut. 17.15 and so depose him from all government For seeing all attempts are most violent that have their beginning and strength from zeale unto religion be the same true or false and from the false most of all and those are ever the most dangerous whose ringleaders are most base as the servile warre under Spartacus was most pernicious unto the Romans there can be nothing of greater use or more profitable either for the safety of the King How necessary it is for Kings to retaine their just rights in their hands the peace of the Church and the quiet state of the Kingdome then for the Prince the King to retaine the Militia and to keepe that power and authority which the Lawes of God and of our Land have granted
and faithfully discharged brings most glory unto God and the greatest honour to all Kings when it is more to be with Constantine a nursing father to Gods Church then it is to be with Alexander the sole Monarch of the known world I will first treat of their charge and care and the power that God hath given them to defend the faith and to preserve true religion And 1. 1. Care of Kings to preserve true Religion Aug. de utilitate credendi cap. 9. Religion faith a learned Divine without authority is no Religion for as Saint Augustine saith no true Religion can be received by any meanes without some weighty force of authority therefore if that Religion whereby thou hopest to be saved hath no authority to ground it selfe upon or if that authority whereby thy Religion is setled be mis-placed in him that hath no authority at all what hope of salvation remaining in that Religion canst thou conceive but it is concluded on all sides that the right authority of preserving true religion must reside in him and proceed from him by whose supreme power and government it is to be enacted and forced upon us To whom the charge of preserving religion is commited and therefore now the question is and it is very much questioned to whom the supreame government of our Religion ought rightly to be attributed 3 Opinions whereof I finde three severall resolutions 1. Papisticall which leaneth too much on the right hand 2. Anabaptisticall which bendeth twice as much on the left hand 3. Orthodoxall of the Protestants that ascribe the same to him on whom God himselfe hath conferred it Opinion 1 1. That the Church of Rome maketh the Pope solely to have the supreme government of our Christian Religion is most apparent out of all their writings Vnde saepè objiciunt dictum â—lâ—su ad Constantium Tibì Deus impertum commisit nobis quâ— sunt ecclesiastica concredidit Sed hâ—c intelligitur de executione officij non de gubernatione ecclesiae Sicut ibi manifestum est cum dicitur ne que fai est nobis in terris imperium tenere neque tibi thymiamatum soâ—rorum potestatem habere i e. in pradicatione Evangelij administratione Sacramentorum similibus and you may see what a large book our Countrey-man Stapleton wrote against Master Horne Bishop of Winchester to justifie the same And Sanders to disprove the right of Kings saith Fatemur personas Episcoporum qui in toto orbe fuerunt Romano Imperatori subjectas fuisse quoniam Rex praeest hominibus Christianis verùm non quia sunt Chrstiani sed quia sunt homines episcopis etiam ea ex parte rex praeesset So Master Harding saith that the office of a King in it selfe is all one every where not onely among the Christian Princes but also among the Heathen so that a Christian King hath no more to doe in deciding Church matters or medling with any point of Religion then a Heathen And so Fekenham and all the brood of Jesuites doe with all violence and virulencie labour to disprove the Princes authority and supremacy in Ecclesiasticall causes and the points of our Religion and to transferre the same wholly unto the Pope and his Cardinals Neither doe I wonder so much that the Pope having so universally gained and so long continued this power and retained this government from the right owners should imploy all his Hierarchie to maintaine that usurped authority which he held with so much advantage to his Episcopall See though with no small prejudice to the Church of Christ when the Emperours being busied with other affaires leaving this care of religion and government of the Church to the Pope the Pope to the Bishops the Bishops to their Suffragans and the Suffragans to the Monkes whose authority being little their knowledge lesse and their honesty least of all all things were ruled with greater corruption lesse truth then they ought to be so long as possibly he should be able to possesse it But at last when the light of the Gospell shined and Christian Princes had the leisure to looke and the heart to take hold upon their right the learned men opposing themselves against the Popes usurped jurisdiction have soundly proved the Soveraigne authority of Christian Kings in the government of the Church that not onely in other Kingdomes but also here in England this power was annexed by divers Lawes unto the interest of the Crowne and the lawfull right of the King and I am perswaded saith that Reverend Archbishop Bancroft had it not beene that new adversaries did arise Survey of Discip c. 22. p. 2â—1 and opposed themselves in this matter the Papists before this time had been utterly subdued for the Devill seeing himselfe so like to lose the field How the Devill raised instruments to hinder the reformation stirred up in the bosome of Reformation a flocke of violent and seditious men that pretending a great deale of hate to Popery have notwithstanding joyned themselves like Sampsons Foxes with the worst of Papists in the worst and most pernicious Doctrines that ever Papist taught to rob Kings of their sacred and divine right and to deprive the Church of Christ of the truth of all those points that doe most specially concerne her government and governours and though in the fury of their wilde â—eale they do no lesse maliciously then falsly cast upon the soundest Protestants the aspersion of Popery and Malignancie yet I hope to make it plaine unto my reader that themselves are the Papists indeed or worse then Papists both to the Church and State For 2. As the whole Colledge of Cardinals Of the Anabaptists and Puritans and all the Schooles Opinion 2 of the Jesuites doe most stiffely defend this usurped authority of the Pope which as I said may be with the lesse admiration because of the Princes concession and their owne long possession of it so on the other side there are sprung up of late a certaine generation of Vipers the brood of Anabaptists and Brownists that doe most violently strive not to detaine what they have unjustly obtained but a degree farre worse to pull the sword out of their Prince his hand and to place authority on them which have neither right to owne it Where the Pâ—ritans place the authority to maintaine religion 1. In the Presbyterie nor discretion to use it and that is either 1. A Consistory of Presbyters or 2. A Parliament of Lay men For 1. These new Adversaries of this Truth that would most impudently take away from Christian Princes the supreme and immediate authority under Christ in all Ecclesiasticall Callings and Causes will needs place the same in themselves and a Consistorian company of their own Faction a whole Volume would not contain their absurdities falsities and blasphemies that they have uttered about this point I will onely give you a taste of what some of the chiefe
destruction of the Common-wealth As the neglect thereof brought ignorance unto the Church and ruine to the Romane Empire for as in Augustus time learning flourished and in Constantines time piety was much embraced because these Emperours were such themselves so when the Kings whose examples most men are apt to follow either busied with secular affaires or neglecting to understand the truth of things and the state of the Church do leave this care unto others then others imitating their neglect doe rule all things with great corruption and as little truth whereby errours and blindnesse will over-spread the Church and pride covetousnesse and ambition will replenish the Common-wealth and these vices like the tares that grow up in Gods field to suffocate the pure Wheat will at last choake up all vertue and piety both in Church and State Therefore to prevent this mischiefe the King on whom God hath laid the care of these things ought himselfe what he can to learne and find out the true state of things and because it is far unbefitting the honour and inconsistent with the charge of great Princes whose other affaires will not permit them to be alwayes poring at their bookes as if they were such critiques as intended to exceed all others in the theorick learning like Archimedes that was in his studie drawing forth his Mathematicall figures when the Citie was sackt and his enemies pulling down the house about his eares How Kings may attaine unto the knowledge of religion and understand the state of the Church and how to governe the same therefore it is wisedome in them to imitate the discreet examples of other wise Kings and religious Emperours in following the meanes that God hath left and using the power and authority that he hath given them to attaine unto more knowledge and to be better instructed in any religious matter then themselves could possibly attaine unto by their owne greatest studie and that is 1. To call able Clergy-men about them 1. As Alexander had his Aristotle ready to informe him in any Philosophicall doubt and Augustus his prime Orators Poëts and Historians to instruct him in all affaires so God hath granted this power unto his Kings to call those Bishops and command such Chaplaines to reside about them as shall be able to informe them in any truth of Divinity and so direct them in the best forme of government of Gods Church and these Chaplaines should be well approved both for their learning and their honesty for to be learned without honesty as many are is to be witty to doe evill which is most pernitious and doth often times make a private gaine by a publique losse or an advantage to themselves by the detriment of the Church and to be honest without knowledge How they should be qualified or to have knowledge without experience especially in such places of eminencie and for the affaires of importance may be as dangerous when their want of skill may counsell to doe matters of much hurt but when both are met together in one person that man is a fit Subject to doe good service both to God and the King and the King may be assured there cannot be a better furtherance to assist him for the well ordering of Gods Church then the grave advice directions of such instruments as it appeareth by that memorable example of King Ioas left to be remembred by all Kings who whilest the wise and religious Priest Jehoiada assisted and directed him had all things successefull and happy to his whole Kingdome but after Jehoiada's death 2. Reg. 12.1 the King destitute of such a Chaplaine to attend and such a Priest to counsell him all things came speedily to great ruine Therefore I dare boldly avouch it they are enemies unto Kings and the underminers of Gods Church and such instruments as I am not able to expresse their wickednesse that would exclude such Jehoiada's from the Kings counsell for was not Saul a wicked King and Ahab little better yet Saul would have Samuel to direct him though he followed not his direction and Ahab would aske counsell of Micaiah though he rejected the same to his owne destruction and King David 1. Reg. 22.16 though never so wise and so great a Prophet and Josias and Ezechias and all the rest of the good Kings had alwayes the Priests and the men of God to be their Counsellors and followed their directions especially in Church causes as the oracles of God Mar. 6.20 so wicked Herod disdained not to heare John the Baptist and to be reformed by him in many things and happy had he beene had he done it in all things And if you reade Eusebius which is called Pamphilus for the great love he bare to that his noble Patron and Socrates and the rest of the Ecclesiasticall Historians or the Histories of our owne Land you shall finde that the best Kings and greatest Emperours had the best Divines and the most reverend Bishops to be their chiefest Counsellors and to be imployed by them in their weightiest affaires How then hath the Devill now prevailed to exclude them from all Counsels and as much as in him lyeth from the sight of Princes when he makes it a suspicion of much evill if they do but talke together How hath he bewitched the Nobility to yeild to be deprived of their Chaplaines Is it not to keepe them that have not time to studie and to find out truth themselves still in the ignorance of things and to none other end then to overthrow the true religion and to bring Kings and Princes to confusion 2. When the King seeth cause 2. To call Synods to discusse and conclude the harder things God hath given him power and authority to call Synods and Councels and to assemble the best men the most moderate and most learned to determine of those things together which a fewer number could not so well or at least not so authoritatively conclude upon for so Constantine the Great called the great Councell of Nice to suppresse the Heresie of Arius Theodosius called the Councell of Ephesus in the case of Nestorius Valentinian and Martian called the Councell of Calcedon against Eutyches Justinian called the Councell of Constantinople against Severus that renewed the Heresie of Eutyches Constantine the Fifth called the sixth Synod against the Monothelites and so did many others in the like cases God having fully granted this right and authority unto them for their better information in any point of religion and the governement of the Church And therefore they that deny this power unto Kings or assume this authority unto themselves whether Popes or Parliament out of the Kings hand they may as well take his eyes out of his head because this is one of the best helpes that God hath left unto Kings to assist and direct them in the chiefest part of their royall government The unparallel'd presumption of the Faction to call a Synod without
houses that are against it shall be destroyed because as S. Peter saith we have forsaken all to become his servants that otherwise might have served Kings with the like honour that they doe and we have left the world to build up his Church we put our trust under the shadow of his wings and being in trouble we doe cry unto the Lord and therefore he will heare our cry and will helpe us and we shall never be confounded Amen CHAP. X. Sheweth that it is the Kings right to grant Dispensations for Pluralities and Non-residency what Dispensation is reasons for it to tolerate divers Sects or sorts of religions the foure speciall sorts of false professors S. Augustines reasons for the toleration of the Jewes toleration of Papists and of Puritans and which of them deserve best to be tolerated among the Protestants and how any Sect is to be tolerated 2. WHereas the Anabaptists and Brownists of our time 2. That the King may lawfully grant his dâ—spensation for Pluralities and Non-residency with what conscience I know not cry out that our Kings by their Lawes doe unreasonably and unconscionably grant dispensations both for Pluralities and Non-residency onely to further the corrupt desire of some few aspiring Prelates to the infinite wrong of the whole Clergy the intolerable dishonour of our religion the exceeding prejudice of Gods Church and the lamentable hazard of many thousand soules I say that the Pluralities and Non-residency granted by the King and warranted by the Lawes of this Land may finde sufficient reasons to justifie them â—n anno 112. for if you consider the first limitation of Benefices In anno 636. that either Euaristus Bishop of Rome or Dionysius as others thinke did first assigne the precincts of Parishes The first distribution of Parishes and appointed a certaine compasse to every Presbyter and in this Kingdome Honorius Archbishop of Canterbury was the first that did the like appointing the Pastorall charge and the portion of meanes accrewing from that compasse to this or that particular person whereas before for many yeares they had no particular charge assigned nor any Benefice allotted them but had their Canonicall pensions and dividents given them by the Bishop out of the common stocke of the Church according as the Bishop saw their severall deserts for at first the greater Cities onely had their standing Pastors and then the Countrey Villages imitating the Cities to allow maintenance according to the abilities of the inhabitants had men of lesser learning appointed for those places â—iuâ— auticâ— and Non residency no transgression of Gods Law Therefore this limitation of particular Parishes being meerly positive and an humane constitution it cannot be the transgression of a divine ordinance to have more Parishes then one or to be absent from that one which is allotted to him when he is dispensed with by the Law maker to do the same for as it is not lawfull without a dispensation to doe either because we are to obey every ordinance of the higher power for the Lords sake so for the higher power to dispense with both is most agreeable to reason and Gods truth Gods Law admitteth an interpretation not a dispensation of it for all our Lawes are either divine or humane and in the divine Law though we allow of interpretation quia non sermoni res sed rei sermo debet esse subjectus because the words must be applyed to the matter else we may fall into the heresie of those that as Alfonsus de Castro saith held it unlawfull upon any occasion to sweare because our Saviour saith sweare not at all yet no man King nor Pope hath power to grant any dispensation for the least breach of the least precept of Gods Law he cannot dispense with the doing of that which God forbiddeth to be done nor with the omitting of that which God commandeth but in all humane Lawes so far as they are meerly positive and humane Mans Law may be dispensed with it is in the power of their makers to dispense with â—hem and so quicquid fit dispensatione superioris non fit contra praeceptum superioris and he sinneth neither against the Law nor against his owne conscience because he is delivered from the obligation of that Law by the same authority whereby he stood bound unto it And as he that is dispensed with is free from all sinne so the King which is the dispenser is as free from all fault as having full right and power to grant His dispensations For seeing that all humane Lawes are the conclusions of the Law of nature or the evidences of humane reason shewing what things are most beneficiall to any society either the Church or Common-wealth and that experience teacheth us our reason groweth often from an imperfection to be more perfect when time produceth more light unto us we cannot in reason deny an abrogation and dispensation to all humane Lawes which therefore ought not to be like the Lawes of the Medes and Persians that might not be changed and so Saint Augustine saith Aug. de libero arbit l. 1. Lex humana quamvis justa sit commutari tamen pro tempore justè potest any humane Law though it be never so just yet for the time as occasion requireth may be justly changed dispensatio est juris communis relaxatio facta cum causae cognitione ab eo qui jus habet dispensandi Dispensation what it is and as the Civilians say a dispensation is the relaxation of common right granted upon the knowledge of the cause by him that hath the power of dispensing or as the etymologie of the word beareth dispensare est diversa pensare The reward of learning and vertue how to be rendered to dispense is to render different rewards and the reward of learning or of any other vertue either in the civill or the ecclesiasticall person being to be rendered as one saith not by an Arithmeticall but a Geometricall proportion and the division of Parishes being as I said before a positive humane Law it cannot be denyed but the giver of honour and the bestower of rewards which is the King hath the sole power and right to dispose how much shall be given to this or that particular person Ob. If you say the Law of the King which is made by the advice of his whole Parliament hath already determined what portion is sit for every one and what service is required from him Sol. I answer that the voice of equity and justice tells us that a generall Law doth never derogate from a speciall priviledge or that a priviledge is not opposite to the principles of common right and where the Law it selfe gives this priviledge as our Law doth it yet envy it selfe can never deny this right unto the King to grant his dispensation whensoever he seeth occasion and where the Law is tacite and saith nothing of any priviledge yet seeing in all Lawes as
in all other actions the end is the marke that is aymed at The end of every Law is chiefly to be respected and this end is no other then the publique good of any society for which the Law is made if the King which is the sole Law-maker so as I shewed in my Discovery of Mysteries seeth this publique good better procured by granting dispensations to some particular men doth he not performe thereby what the Law intendeth and no wayes breake the Law of common right as if a mans absence from his proper Cure should be more beneficiall to the whole Church then his residence upon his Charge could possibly be Reasons of dispensations as when his absence may be either for the recovery of his health or to discharge the Kings Embassage or to doe his best to confute Heretiques or to pacifie Schismes or to consult about the Church affaires or some other urgent cause that the Law never dreamt of when it was in making shall not the King whom the Lawes have intrusted with the examination of these things and to whom the principall care of religion and the charge of all the people is committed by God himselfe and the power of executing his owne Lawes have power to grant his dispensations for the same Certainly they that would perswade the world that all Lawes must have such force that all dispensations are transgressions of them as if generall rules should have no exceptions would manacle the Kings hands and binde his power in the chaines of their crooked wils that he should not be able to doe that good which God and right and Law it selfe do give him leave and their envy towards other mens grace How God doth diversly bestow his gifts is a great deale more then either the grace of humility or the love of truth in them for doth not God give five talents to some of his servants when he gives but one to some others Matth. 25.15 and did not Joseph make Benjamins messe five times so much as any of his brethrens and have not some Lords 6 or 8 Gen. 43.34 or 10 thousand pounds a yeare and some very good men in the Common-wealth and perhaps higher in Gods favour not ten pounds a yeare and shall not the King double the reward of them that deserve it in the Church of God or shall he be so curbed and manacled that he shall neither alter nor dispense with his owne Law though it be for the greater glory unto God and the greater benefit both to the Church and Common-wealth Besides who can deny but that some mens merits vertue paines and learning are more worthy of two Benefices then many others are of one and when in his younger time he is possessed of a small Benefice he may perchance afterwards when his yeares deserve better farre easier obtaine another little one to keepe with it then get what I dare assure you he would desire much rather * For who would not rather chuse one Living of a 100l a yeare then two of 50l a piece one Living of equall value to them both and shall the unlearned zeale of an envious minde so farre prejudice a worthy man that the Kings lawfull right shall be censured and his power questioned and clipped or traduced by this ignorant Zelot I will blesse my selfe from them and maintaine it before all the world that the Kings dispensations for Pluralities Non-residency and the like Priviledges not repugnant to common right are not against Law nor the giving or taking of them upon just causes against conscience but what the violence of this viperous brood proclaimeth an intolerable offence we dare warrant both with good reason and true Divinity to be no sinne no fault at all but an undoubted portion of the Kings right for the greater benefit both of the Church and State and the greater glory unto God himselfe And therefore most gracious King we humbly desire your Majestie The Authors Petition to His Majestie suffer not these children of Apollyon to pull this flower out of your royall Crowne to abridge you of your just right of granting dispensations for Pluralities and Non-residency which the Lawes of your Land doe yet allow you and which they labour to annull to darken the glory of Gods Church and to bring your Clergy by depriving them of their meanes and honour into contempt lest that when by one and one they have robbed you of all your rights they will fairely salute you as the Jewes did Christ Haile King of the Jewes when God knowes they hated him and stript him of all power I speake not of his Divinity either to governe them or to save himselfe 3. As the King hath right and power to grant his dispensations both of grace and of justice of grace when it is meerely of the Kings Princely favour as in legitimations and the like and of justice when the King findeth a just cause to grant it so likewise it is in the Kings power and right to remit any offence that is the mâ—lct or penalty and to absolve the offender from any or all the transgressions of his owne Lawes from the transgression of Gods Law neither King nor Pope nor Priest nor any other can formally remit the fault and absolve transgressors but as God is the Law-giver so God alone must be the forgiver of the offence Mar. 2.7 so the Jewes say who can forgive sins but God onely Yet as God which gives the Law can lawfully remit the sinne and forgive the breach of the Law so the King which makes these positive Lawes cannot be denyed this power As David pardoned Absolon and Solomon Abtathar to pardon when he seeth cause or is so pleased the offenders of his Lawes as you see they do many times grant their pardons for the most haynous faults and capitall crimes as treasons Christ biddeth that the tares should grow Matth. 13.30 And the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there must be heresies therefore there must be a toleration of divers Sects 1 Cor. 11.19 murders felonies and the like And if they may grant their pardons for the breach of the Law and remit the mulct imposed for the transgression thereof it is strange if they should not have right to dispense with whom they please when they see cause from the bond of the Law and therefore we are to discusse how farre the King in these Lawes of the Church may give exemptions and tolerations unto them whose consciences cannot submit themselves to the observation of the established Lawes for seeing all men are not of the same faith nor doe professe the same religion and it is the nature of all men to dislike that which themselves will not professe and if opportunity serve to root out that which they dislike it is requisite it should be shewed how farre a prudent and a pious Prince may grant a toleration the Law in terminis not forbidding it unto
for he expecteth that as he made Kings his Vice-gerents so they should feare him preserve the right of his Church uphold his service defend his servants and do all that he commandes them entirely without taking the least libertâ—â—or feare of the people to dispense with any omission of his hâ—nour or suffering the hedges of his Vineyard the governours of his Church to be troden downe and torne in pieces that the beasts of the field may destroy the grapes and defile the service of our God Therefore to conclude this point let all Kings doe their best to hinder their people to corrupt the Covenant of Levi Malath 2. â— which is a Covenant of Salt that is to indure for ever let them remember Moses prayer Blesse Lord his substance Deut. 33.11 and accept the worke of his hands smite through the loynes of them that rise against him and of them that hate him that they rise not againe and let them alwayes consider Psal 35.27 that God taketh pleasure in the prosperity of his servants CHAP. XI Sheweth where the Protestants Papists and Puritans doe place Soveraignty who first taught the deposing of Kings the Puritans tenet worse then the Jesuites Kings authority immediately from God the twofold royalty in a King the words of the Apostle vindicated from false glosses the testimony of the Fathers and Romanists for the Soveraignty of Kings the two things that shew the difficulty of government what a miraculous thing it is and that God himselfe is the governour of the people 2. The duty of the King in the government of the Common-wealth 2. HAving set downe some particulars of the Kings right in the government of Gods Church it resteth that I should shew some part of his right and duty to serve God as he is a King in the government of the Common-wealth touching which for our more orderly proceeding I will distribute my whole discourse into these five heads Five points handled 1. To justifie his right to governe the people 2. To shew the difficulty of this government 3. To set downe the assistants that are to helpe him in the performance of this duty 4. To distinguish the chiefest parts of this governement 5. To declare the end for which this government is ordained of God 1. Point 1. Where the Protestants place Soveraignty 1. We say that the Kings Soveraignty or royall power to governe the people is independent from all creatures solely from God who hath immediately conferred the same upon him and this we are able to make good with abundance both of divine and humane proofes and yet we finde the same adversaries of this truth though with a farre lesse shew of reason that we met withall about the government of Gods Church For 2. In whom the Papists do place Soveraignty 2. They that are infatuated with the cup of Babylon the Canonists and some Jesuites doe constantly averre that summum imperium the primary supreame power of this government is in the Pope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolutely and directly The Pope's sad Message to Hen. 3. Imp. Quem meritum investivimus quare immeritum non devestâ—amus quia ad quem pertinet institutio ad eundem pertinet destitutio as he is the Vicar of Christ who hath all power given him both in Heaven and earth from whom it is immediately derived unto his Vicar and from him to all Kings mediately by subordination unto him so Baronius Carerius and others But Bellarmine and the rest of the more moderate Jesuists say that this imperium in reges the Popes power over all Kings and States is but indirectum dominium a power by consequent and indirectly in ordine ad bonum spirituale as the civill State hath relation to religion and this great Cardinall lest he should seeme sine ratione insanire doth as the Heretiques did in Tertullians time Caedem Scripturarum facere ad materiam suam alleadge 22 places of Scripture mis-interpreted to confirme his indirect Divinity and as Potiphars wife he produceth very honest apparell but to prove a very bad cause and therefore attributing to the Pope by the greatnesse of his learning and the excellency of his wit more then he could justifie with a good conscience he was so farre from satisfying the then Pope that he was well nigh resolved to condemne all his workes for this one opinion and Carerius undertooke his confutation ex professo Carerius lib. 1. cap. 5. and taxeth him so bitterly that he putteth him inter impios haereticos which he needed not to have done because the difference is onely in the expression when the Pope by this indirect power may take occasion to king and unking whom he pleaseth and doe what he will in all Christian States 3. 3. Where the Puritans place the Soveraignty Majestas regia sita est magis in populo quam in persona regis Parsons in Doâ—â— man The Anabaptists and Puritans either deny all governement with the Fratricelli and all superiority by the title of Christianity as the Author of the Tract of Schisme and Schismaticks or doe say that originally it proceedeth and habitually resideth in the people but is cumulatively and communicatively derived from them unto the King and therefore the people not denuding themselves of their first interest but still retaining the same in the collective body that is in themselves suppletivè if the King in their judgement be defective in the administration or neglect the performance of his duty may question their King for his mis-government dethrone him if they see cause and resuming the collated power into their owne hands againe may transferre it to any other whom they please Which opinion if it were true would make miserable the condition of all Kings and I beleeve they first learned it from the Sorbonists The Sorbonists first taught the deposing of Kings and why who to subject the Pope to the community of the faithfull say that the chiefe spirituall power was first committed by Christ unto them and they to preserve the unity of the Church remitted the same communicatively unto the Pope but suppletively not privatively or habitually devesting themselves thereof retaining the same still in themselves if the Pope failed in the faith of the Church and therefore he was not only censurable but also deposable by the Councell if he became an heretique or apostated from the religion of Christ and to make this both the more plausible and probable they alleaged how Kings were thus eligible Buchan de jure regni p. 75. 91. and likewise deposable by the community of the people for out of this Buchanan saith Romani Pontifices longè regum omnium conditione superiores legum tamen poenis haud eximuntur sed eos quanquam sacrosanctos Christianis omnibus semper habitos Synodus Basiliensis communi ordinum consensu senatui sacerdotum obnoxios esse pronunciavit that is in briefe the Popes are
deprivable by the Counsell So are Kings by the community of the people and so both the Papist and the Puritane doe agree to depose their Kings and as the Poet saith Claudian de 4. Consul Honorii Ausus uterque nefas domini respersus uterque Insontis jugulo never a barrell better herring both alike freinds to Kings But to this Blacvodaeus answereth most truly that although the Pope should be deprivable by the counsell which I am sure neither Pope nor Jesuite will allow yet for divers different reasons betwixt the examples Kings are not deposable by their Subjects especially if you coÌ„sider the great difference betwixt the Church of Christ that is guided by the Spirit of God and the representation thereof in the flower of her Clergy Blac v. cap. 23. p. 304. and a giddyheaded multitude that is led by their unruly and unreasonable passions and are represented by those that either basely bought their Votes as the Consulls and other great men did the votes of the people of Rome or that their partiall and most ignorant affection oftentimes without judgement have made choice of ex quo sequitur ut non sit eadem populi potestas in regem quae in pontificem est Ecclesiae So that the reason is farre unlike But though the Sorbonists to justifie their former tenet The Puritans opinion worse then the Jesuites in two respects were the first broachers of this uniust opinion of the deposition of Kings by the people from whence the Iesuites to subject the King unto the Pope suck't it afterward Yet in two maine respects I find this tenet as it is held by the Puritanes far worse then the doctrine of the Jesuites 1. Because some of them say that the people may not restraine Respect 1 the power which they have once transmitted unto the King when the Law of justice doth not permit that Covenants should be repealed or a donation granted should be revoked though it were never so prejudiciall to the donor and Bellarmine makes this good by the example of the soldiers Bellar. in tract cont Pat. Paul that had power to accept or reject their Emperour before he was created but being once elected they had no coactive power over him whereas all the Puritanes will make and unmake promise and breake doe and undoe at their pleasure 2. Because the Iesuites permit not the people nor any Peeres Respect 2 to depose their King untill the Pope as an indifferent judge deputed by Christ shall approve of the cause and our Sectaries depresse Kings so farre as to submit them to the weake judgement and extravagant power of the people who to day cry to Gideon raigne thou and thy sonne over us for ever and to morrow joine with the base sonne of Ierubbaal and the Sichemites to kill 70 of the Children of Gideon Judges 91 and to create Abimilech to be their King But though the Anti-Cavalier takes it ill Our Opinion proved Anti-Cav in Os Ossor p. 25. that I should affirme that the Kings power and right unto his government is immediately from God yet if he would beleeve learned authors he might find enough of this judgement for the sublime power and authority that resideth in earthly Potentates is not a derivation or collection of humane power scattered among many and gathered into one head but a power immediately granted by God to his Vicegerents * So acknowledged by Act of Parliament 25 H. 8. c. 12. 28. c. 10. quam nunquam fuisse populo demandatam legimus which God never communicated to any multitudes of men Dt Sarav fol. 175. Bellar. de Lâ—cis cap. 6. 8. saith Saravia And Bellarmine himselfe against the Anabaptists confuteth their error that denyed the power and authority of Kings to be immediately from God I. From Script Sap. 6. Esay 45. Hierom 27. Dan. 2. Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2. II. from the Councell of Constans Sess 8. 15. III. from S. Aug. de civit Dei l. 5. c. 21. where he saith non tribuamus dandi regni potestatem nisi Deo vero which giveth felicity in the kingdome of heaven onely to the godly but the earthly Kingdomes he giveth both to the godly and to the wicked nam qui dedit Mario ipse Caesari qui Augusto ipse Neroni Idem de Rom. Pont. l. 5. c. 3. Irvinus de jure regni c. 2. p. 40. qui Vespasianis vel patri vel filio suavissimis imperatoribus ipse Domitiano crudelissimo qui Constantino Christiano ipse Apostatae Iuliano And IV. it is proved from the confession of the Popes of Rome as Leo. ep 38. 43. Gelasius epist ad Anastasium Greg. l. 2. epist 61. Nicholaus epist ad Michaelem out of all which saith Irvinus it is apparent all and every King non multitudini aut hominibus sed Deo soli regum regi quicquid juris habent acceptum ferre And he might consider that a thing may be said to be immediately from God divers wayes as specially 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absque ullo signo creato 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum aliquo actu conjuncto that is 1. Solely from God and no other presupposing nothing praevious to the obtaining of it So Moses and Ioshua had their authority from God Heningus fusè c. 1. p. 4 5. de distinct duplici jurisdict Sive electione sive postulatione vel successione vel belli jure Princept fiat Principitamen facto divinitus potestaâ—data est Cunerus c. 5. de â—ffic Princip 2. Jointly with an interposed act of some other instrument as the Apostolicall power of Matthias was immediately from God though his constitution was from the Apostles so Kings though some of them be after a sort elected by men yet as our Saviour saith to Pilate that his power was from above though he was deputed by Caesar So may they be said to have their authority immediately from God though they should be some wayes deputed by men for we must distinguish betwixt the soveraignty the Subject and the collation of the Soveraignty to the Subject the Soveraignty is immediately from God the Subject is from it's naturall causes and the unition of the Soveraignty to the Subject is likewise immediately from God not onely approving but appointing the same in all the Kings of his ordination or to speake with the Schooles we must distinguish betwixt deputationem personae and collationem potestatis the designation of the person which is sometimes done by men that is where the King is elective the donation of the power which is proper onely unto God for so the Psalmist saith God hath spoken once and twice Psal 62.11 I have also heard the same that power belongeth unto God and the Apostle saith Rom. 13.2 the powers that are are ordained of God which is to be understood of the regall or Monarchicall power because Saint Paules 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 higher powers are
is not to be taken alike in all places but is to be interpreted secundum materiam subjectam yet the Septuagine that should know both the propriety of the word and the meaning of the Holy Ghost in that place as well as any other translate the word to signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and we know the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Septuagint useth and jus which the Latine useth is never taken in the worser sence Apparet nomen juris significaâ—e hic potestatem jure concessam Arnisaeus c. 1. p. 216. the Scripture never using to call vices by the names of vertues or to give a right to any one to exercise tyranny which then might be better termed jus laironis because an unjust tyrant is no better then an open thiefe 2. There is nothing here set downe by Samuel that is simply forbidden by the Law of God but that any the very best Kings may doe as the occasions shall require for being a King he must have the royalty of his house supported and the necessities of his warre supplied and you may reade in Herodotus how Dioces after he was chosen King had all things granted unto him that were needfull to expresse his royall state and magnificence and here is nothing else in the text for if you marke it the Prophet saith not he should kill their sonnes nor ravish their wives nor yet take their daughters to be his Concubines which are the properties of a tyrant * Instat terribilis vivis mortentibus haeâ—â—â— Virginibus raeptor thalamis obscanus adulter Divitibusque dies nox metuenda narâ—tiâ—â— Quis uis vel locuples pulchrà vel conjuge notus Crimini pulsatur falso si crimina desunt Accitus conviva perit mors nulla refugit Artificem Claudian de bello Gildon Bilson diff fol. 356. but he should take them to support his state and to maintaine his warre which as his necessities require is lawfull for him to doe so that it is not the doing of those things but the motives that cause the King to doe them or the manner of doing them that do make it either an unjust tyranny or the just right of a King for as Doctor Bilson saith Kings may justly command the goods and bodies of all their Subjects in the time both of warre and peace for any publique necessity or utility And Hugo de Sancto Victore saith Nunquam possessiones à regin potestate ita elongari possunt quin si ratio postulaverit necessitas illis ipsa potestas debeat patrocinium illis ipsa possessiones debeant in necessitate obsequium And so most Authors say the Subjects ought to supply the Kings necessities and he may justly demand what is requisite and necessary for his publique occasions and who shall judge of that necessity but his owne conscience and God shall judge that conscience which doth unjustly demand what he hath no reason to require because the greatnesse of his authority gives him no right to transcend the rules of equity whereof both God and his conscience will be the impartiall Judges And therefore in Deut. Modus describitur res non prohibetur and in Samuel Jus ponitur ratio subintelligitur for many things may be prohibited in some respect that in other respects may be allowed and many things lawfull in some wayes which other wayes may be most sinfull as it is most lawfull to drinke ad satietatem but not ad ebrietatem and many other the like things so it is lawfull for the King to doe all that Samuel saith ad supplendam reipubl necessitatem supportandam regiam majestatem but not ad satisfaciendum suo fastui luxui lucro vanitati aut carnali voluptati which is the thing that Moses forbiddeth So that in briefe the meaning is if the Subjects should be unwilling to doe what Samuel saith then the King when just necessity requireth may for these lawfull ends lawfully assume them And if he takes them any other way or for any other end then so habet Deum judicem conscientiae ultorem injustitiae Ob. But then it may be said Ahab did not offend in taking away Naboths vineyard if Samuel did properly describe the right of Kings Ans I cannot say that Ahab sinned in desiring Naboths vineyard neither doe I finde that the Prophet blames him for that desire there is not a word of that in the text but for killing Naboth and then taking possession for this he might not doe the other he might doe so he doe it to a right end and in the right manner wherein he failed Ahabs sinnes 1. In being so discontented for his denyall because his conscience telling him that he had no such urgent necessity whereby he could take it and Naboth being unwilling to sell it he should have beene satisfied 2. In suffering his wife whom he knew to be so wicked to proceed in her unjust course against Naboth 3. In going downe to take possession when he knew that by his wifes wicked practice the poore man was unjustly murdered Naboths fault when he should have rather questioned the fact and have punished the murderers Lex posterior derogat priori specialis generali ceremonialia atque forensia cedunt moralibus And yet Ahabs sinne doth not excuse Naboths fault both in the denyall of the Kings right if the King had a just necessity to use it and also for his uncivill answer unto the King farre unlike the answer of Arauna to King David but nearer like the answer of Naball which the Holy Ghost seemes to take notice of when after he had said The Lord forbid it me which was rather a Prayer and postulation that God would forbid it as we say absit when we heare of any displeasing likelyhood then any declaration of any inhibition of God to sell it who never denyed them leave to sell it untill the yeare of redemption the Prophet tels us in the next verse 1. Reg. 21.4 Which very answer seemes to be the cause why Ahab was so much displeased that Naboth said I will not give thee the inheritance of my father But whether this speech of Samuel sheweth the just right of a King what he might doe or his power what he would do what belongs to him of equity or what his practice would be by tyrannie I will not determine but I say that although it should not be a just rule for him to command yet it is a certaine rule for them to obey and though it should not excuse the King from sinne yet it wholly disables and disavowes the peoples resisting their King because in all this the Prophet allowes them none other remedy but to cry out unto the Lord The Kings absolute power not given him to inable him for oppression but to retaine his Subjects from rebellion for seeing God hath given him directum dominium absolutum imperium
in cogendis pecunus quotidianoque victu sequebantur Aubanus What things kings have granted And there be some things which our Kings have granted unto their Subjects and restrained themselves from their full right as the use of that power which makes new Lawes or repeales the old or layeth any taxe or summes of monies upon his Subjects without the consent of the Lords and Commons in Parliament and it may be some other particulars which the Lawyers know better then I. And all these Priviledges of the Subjects are but limitations and restrictions of the Kings right made by themselves unto their people and therefore where the Law cannot be produced to confirme such and such Liberties and Priviledges granted unto them I say there the Kings power is absolute and the Subject ought not in such cases to determine any thing to the disadvantage of the King because all these Liberties that we have are injoyed by vertue of the Kings grant as you may see in the ratification of Magna Charta where the King saith We have granted and given all these Liberties 9. Hen 3. But I could never see it produced where the King granted unto his Subjects that they might force him and compell him with a strong hand by an Army of Souldiers to doe what they will or else to take away either his Crowne or his Life this Priviledge was never granted because this deprives the King of his supremacy and puts him in the condition of a Subject and would ever prove an occasion of rebellion when the people upon every discontent would take Armes against their King And therefore this present resistance is a meere usurpation of the Kings right a rebellion against his Lawes an High Treason against his person and a resistance of the ordinance of God which heape of deadly sinnes can bring none other fruit then damnation saith the Apostle CHAP. XIV Sheweth the Kings grants unto his people to be of three sorts Which ought to be observed the Act of excluding the Bishops out of Parliament discussed the Kings Oath at his Coronation how it obligeth him and how Statutes have beene procured and repealed 2. 2. The Kings obligation to observe his grants WE are to consider how farre the King is obliged to observe his promise and to make good these Liberties and Priviledges unto his Subjects where I speake not how farre the fathers grant may oblige the sonne or the predecessor his successor Peter de lâ Primandas saith Laws annexed to the Crowne the Prince cannot so abrogate them but his Successor may disanull whatsoever he hath done in prejudice of them p. 597. who cannot be deprived of his right dominion by any act of his precedessors but for the rights of his dominion how farre precedent grants and the custome of their continuance with the desuetude and non-claime of his right may strengthen them unto the Subject and oblige the successors to observe them I leave it unto the Lawyers and Civilians to dispute but I am here to discusse how farre the King that hath promised and taken his oath to observe his Lawes and make good all priviledges granted to his Subjects is bound in conscience to keepe and observe them Touching which you must understand that these grants of immunities and favours are of three speciall kindes 1. Of grace 2. By fraud 3. Through feare For 1. The King that hath his full right 1. All grants of grace ought to be observed either by conquest or succession over his people to governe them as a most absolute Monarch and out of his meere grace and favour to sweeten the subjection of his people and to binde them with the greater love and affection to his obedience doth minuere sua jura restraine his absolute right bestow liberties upon his people and take his oath for their security that he will observe them is bound in all conscience to performe them and can never be freed from injustice before God and man if he transgresse them Quia volenti non fit injuria because they doe him no injury when he doth voluntarily either totally resigne or in some particularity diminish his owne right The true Law of free Monarchs p. 203. but after he hath thus firmely done it he can never justly goe from it and therefore King James saith that a King which governeth not by his Lawes can neither be accountable to God for his administration nor have a happy and established raigne because it cannot be but that the people seeing their King failing of his duty will be alwayes murmuring and defective in their fidelity And Yet the Kings breach of oath doth neither forfeit his right nor warrant their disloyalty because another mans sinne doth no way lessen mine offence and neither God nor the King granted this priviledge unto Subjects to rebell and take Armes against their Soveraigne when they pretend he hath broken his promise 2. Grants obtained through fraud which to be observed 2. When the King through the subtle perswasions of his people that pretend one thing and intend another shall be seduced to grant those things that are full of inconveniences as our King was over reached and no better then meerly cheated by the faction of this Parliament to grant the continuance of it till it should be dissolved with the consent of both Houses and the like Lawes that are procured by meere fraud that soonest over-reacheth the best meaning Kings I answer with the old Proverbe Caveat emptor he ought to have beene as wise to prevent them as they were subtle to circumvent him and therefore Josh 9.20 as Joshua being deceived by the Gibeonites could not alter his promise nor breake his league with them lest wrath should fall upon him so no more should any other King breake promise in the like case Psal 15.5 But you must observe that the Psalmist saith The good man which shall dwell in the Tabernacle of the Lord is he that sweareth unto his neighbour and disappointeth him not though it were to his owne hinderance marke though it were to his owne hinderance never so much Quicquid fit dolo malo annullat factum imponit poenam summa Angel he must performe it but what if he hath promised and sworne that which will be to the great dishonour of God to the hinderance of thousands of others and it may be to the ruine of a whole Kingdome which is a great deale more then his owne hinderance is a King bound or is any man else obliged to performe such a promise or to keepe such an oath to tell you mine owne judgement I thinke he ought not to performe it and our owne Law tels us what grants soever are obtained from the King under the broad Seale by fraud and deceit those grants are void in Law therefore seeing the act for the perpetuity of this Parliament was obtained dolo pessimo to the great dishonour of God and the ruine both of
Church and State when their pretence was very good though the goodnesse of his Majestie in the tendernesse of his conscience was still loath to allow himselfe the liberty to dissolve it untill he had other juster and more cleare causes to pronounce it no Parliament as the abusing of his grant to the raising of an Army and the upholding of a Rebellion against their Soveraigne yet I believe he might safely have done it long agone without the least violation of Gods Law when their evill intentions were openly discovered by those Armies which they raised For I doubt not to affirme it with the Author of The sacred Prerogative of Christian Kings p. 144. if any good Prince or his royall Ancestors have beene cheated out of their sacred right by fraud or force he may at the fittest opportunity when God in his wise providence offereth the occasion resume it especially when the Subjects do abuse the Kings concessions to the dammage of Soveraignty so that it redounds also to the prejudice either of the Church or Common-wealth 3. When the King through feare 3. Grants gotten by force not to be observed not such as the Parliaments feare is who were afraid where no feare was and were frighted with dreames and causelesse jealousies but that feare which is reall and not little but such as may fall in fortem constantem virum doth passe any Law especially that is prejudiciall to the Church and injurious to many of his Subjects I say that when he shall be freed from that feare he is not onely freed from the obligation of that Law but he is also obliged to doe his uttermost endeavour to annull the same it is true that his feare may justly free him from all blame at the passing of it as the feare of the thiefe may cleare me from all fault in delivering my purse unto him because these are no voluntary acts and all acts are adjudged good or evill according to the disposition of the will the same being like the golden bridle that Minerva was said to put upon Pegasus to guide him and to turne him as she pleased The will must never consent to forced acts that are unlawfull His Majesties answer to the Petition of the Lords and Commons 16. Iuliâ— p. 8. but when his feare is past and God hath delivered him from the insurrection of wicked doers if his will gives consent to what before he did unwilling who can free the greatest Monarch from this fault Therefore His Majestie confessing which we that saw the whole proceedings of those tumultuous routs that affrighted all the good Protestants and the Loyall Subjects doe know that it could not be otherwise that he was driven out of London for feare of his life I conclude that the act of excluding the Bishops out of Parliament being past after his flight out of London can be no free nor just nor lawfull act and the King when he is more fully informed of many particulars about this act that is so preiudiciall to the Church of Christ and so injurious to all his servants the Clergy whose rights and priviledges the King promised and sware at His Coronation to maintaine Ob. cannot continue it in my judgement and be innocent Pag 31. But this is answered by the answerer to Doctor Ferne that he is no more bound to defend the rights of the Clergy by his oath then the rest of the lawes formerly enacted whereof any may be abrogated without perjury when they are desired to be annulled by the Kingdome Sol. His Majesties answer to the remonstrance or declaration of the Lords and Commons 26. of May. 1642. To which I say that as His Majestie confesseth there are two speciall questions demanded of the King at his Coronation 1 Sir Will you grant and keepe and by your oath confirme to the people of England the lawes and customes to them granted by the Kings of England your lawfull and religious predecessors And the King answereth I grant and promise to keepe them 2. After such questions as concerne all the commonalty of this Kingdome both Clergy and Laity as they are his Subjects one of the Bishops reads this admonition to the King before the people with a loud voice Our Lord and King we beseech you to pardon and to grant and to preserve unto us and to the Churches committed to our charge all Canonicall priviledges and due law and iustice and that you would protect and defend us as every good King in His Kingdome ought to be the protector and defendor of the Bishops and the Churches under their government And the King answereth With a willing and devout heart I promise and grant my pardon and that I will preserve and maintaine to you and the Churches committed to your charge all Canonicall Priviledges and due law and justice and that I will be your protector and defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in His Kingdome in right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under their Government Then the King laying his hand upon the booke saith The Kings oath at His Coronation two fold the things which I have before promised I shall performe and keepe so helpe mee God and the contents of this Booke Where I beseech all men to observe that here is a two fold promise and so a two fold oath 1. The one to all the Commonalty and people of England The frst part of the oath Populo Anglicano Vide D. p. 165. Clergy and Laity and so whatsoever he promiseth may by the consent of the parties to whom the right was transferred be remitted and altered by the representative body in Parliament quia volenti non fit injuria and the rule holds good quibus modis contrabitur contractus iisdem dissolvitur and therefore as any compact or contract is made good and binding so it may be made void and dissolved mutuo contrahentium assensu by the mutuall assent of both parties that is any compact where God hath not a speciall interest in the contract as he hath in the conjugall contract betwixt man and wife and the politicke covenant betwixt the King and His Subjects Contracts wherein God is interessed can not be dissolved without God which therefore cannot be dissolved by the consent of the parties untill God who hath the cheifest hand in the contract gives his assent to the dissolution and so when things are dedicated for the service of God or Priviledges granted for his honour neither donor nor receiver can alienate the gift or annull that Priviledge without the leave and consent of God that was the principall party in the concession as it appeareth in the example of Ananias and is confirmed by all Casuists 2. The other part of the oath is made to the Clergy in particular and so also with their consent The second part of â—he oath Clericis Ecclesiasticis D. p. 165. some things I confesse may perhaps