clear'd of those doubtful Expressions in them which cause their scruples c. whereby they may to the entire Satisfaction of His Majesty and the Nation fully testifie the Allegiance and Fidelity of faithful Subjects and true Patriots and no longer remain as they generally now do distrusted c. But there was another Book that year Publish'd by a Roman Catholick of which the title was A seasonable Discourse shewing how that the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy as our Laws interpret them contain nothing which any good Christian ought to boggle at and where the Saying of Tertullian is quoted Bonae res neminem scandalizant niâ—… malam mentem c. and where having taken notice of the Queen's Admonition and the Proviso of the Statute of 5 o Eliz. and the 37th Article and the Iudgments of the Bishops Bramhal and Carleton as Sir Iohn Winter had done and for the same purpose giveth his Judgment that the taking of those Oaths gives no Scandal and he in p. 38. averrs that Sir John Winter told him many years ago that he had the Iudgment of Sorbouists Secular Priests and Iesuites that he might take the Oath of Supremacy declaring the sense which the Law allows And I shall here by the way take notice that as to the Oath of Allegiance F. Cressy saith in his Epistle Apologetical p. 111. that few Roman Catholicks if any at all would refuse that Oath if that unlucky word heretical were blotted out c. or if they might change heretical into contrary to the Word of God which he saith he verily believes was the sense intended by King James But now after all this said I shall tell you that according to what is observ'd by the generality of Writers oâ—… Princes easing their Subjects by their Dispensative Power of interpreting their Laws viz. That they take occasion then to intermix with such interpretation somewhat else that may advance their Power there were Fears and Iealousies that some of these foremention'd interpretations tho lessening the spiritual Power of the Crown might enlarge its temporal and particularly such as in the Queen's Admonition mention'd the Duty Allegiance and Bond acknowledg'd to be due to Harry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth and as I partly before hinted such as in the Proviso in the Act of the 5th of the Queen that ratifying the Admonition hath in it the additional words of acknowledging in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors the Authority that was challenged and lately used by Harry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth and such as in the 37th Article explain'd the Queen's Power by that given by God himself to all GODLY Princes in Scripture and where notwithstanding the Word Godly being put in there to gild the Pill of the Absolute Power of the Iewish Kings and to make it be the more easily swallow'd the real meaning was the Power given to all the Iewish Kings for the right of their Power depended not on their Godliness and such as in the Canons of King Iames ipso facto Excommunicate all that do not give the King the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical not only that the Godly Kings had among the Iews but what the Christian Emperors had in the Primitive Church And there too notwithstanding the word Christian might be for the like reason put in as that of Godly was and to cause the owning of that absolute Imperial Power which pursuant to the Lex Regia was used by the Christian Emperors as well as their Heathen Predecessors in punishing Heterodoxy ad libitum the meaning of the Canon was not to devest Heathen Emperors of their right of judging about Matters of Religion and as to which Grotius in his Letter to the States Embassador having said neither would Paul have appeal'd to Nero had he judged that no right of Iudging in a Case of Religion belong'd to him addeth Wherefore as Trajan Civilly honest Nero wicked are equal in the Right of Government so Pious Constantine and Impious Nero are equal in the right of judging in aptitude and skill unequal The Canons therefore of Forty enjoyning the Explanation or Interpretation of the Regal Power there inserted to be one Sunday in every Quarter of the Year read by the Clergy to their Flocks did well provide for the cautioning them as against the setting up any independent Coactive Power either Papal or Popular so against Fears and Iealousies relating to their Properties in their Goods and Estates and by that Explanation they shew that Christ came not to Undermine or Disturb but to Confirm the Civil Government of Pagan Princes and that in the first times of Christ's Church Christians were ready to submit their very Lives to the very Laws and Commands of those Princes A. But doth that Explanation of the Regal Power assert any thing in Defence of the Dispensative part of it B. You see how without wyre-drawing any Consequences the very first Paragraph of the Explanation doth both strengthen the foundation of the assertory part of your Oath we have been so long discussing and strike out new lights in the Fabrick of the Oath You see it tells you downright that A Supreme Power is given to the Order of Kings by God himself in the Scriptures which is that Kings should rule and Command in their several Dominions all Persons of what rank or estate soever c. And the Explanation doth effectually enough provide by the second Paragraph that Kings should take care that none in their Dominions but the stubborn and evil doers may be restrain'd with the Temporal Sword for it saith The Care of God's Church is so committed to Kings in the Scripture that they are commended when the Church keeps the right way and taxed when it runs amiss and therefore her Government belongs in chief to Kings For otherwise one man would be Commended for another's Care and taxed but for another's Negligence which is not God's way And this is an Argument taken ab absurdo and the strongest that can be used in Law and not to be set aside but by the alledging something as more absurd against it and amounts to this that it is absurd that Kings who are commended when those who are not stubborn nor evil doers are not under any restraint by the Temporal Sword for the Church runs not the right way when that Sword is a terror to any but evil doers and tax'd on the contrary being done should not be judged to be authorized to exempt those from all restraint thereby And when the People are not liable to blame for Kings erring in their Judgment about the Persons to be so exempted from restraint nor to be commended or rewarded for their not erring therein can any thing be more absurd then for the independent Coactive Power of Kings it self to be restrain'd to the Punishing such as they shall judge Innocent But the two tenderest things in the World are Sovereign Power and Conscience and both of them were made with a
some mens Minds are involv'd in they can no more alter their beliefs about Transubstantiation then they can transubstantiate themselves into other Creatures and are under a Moral incapacity of preventing another incurred by Law. And therefore as it would be Injustice in a Judge to Punish a man for the Errors of the mind that he knoweth not to be voluntary and for a man 's not putting himself into a Capacity to serve the King by the Professing of the truth in Problematical Points when the King of Kings hath by the not sufficient promulgating of such truth to his understanding render'd him innocent in his disbelief thereof and so long morally uncapable to profess it so by one man's after another appearing thus unable to qualifie himself to serve the King he may be totally unserved I have often heard you complain of the narrow Idea's of the King's Supremacy in some of the Non-Conformists but if you will read the Protestation of the King's Supremacy made by the Nâ—…n-conforming Ministers and Printed A D. 1605. you will find that they have there given in sufficient caution for tâ—…eir Principles not allowing any of the King's Subjects being disabled from serving him For they having said in § 1. We hold and maintain the same Authority and Supremâ—…cy in all Causes and over all Persons Civil and Ecclesiastical granted by Statute to Queen Elizabeth and expressed and declared in the Book of Advertisements and Injunctions and in Mr. Bilson against the Iesuites to be due in full and ample manner without any limitation or qualification to the King and his Heirs and Successors for ever they add in § 2. We are so far from judging the said Supâ—…emacy to be unlawful that we are persâ—… aded that the King should sin highly against God if he should not assume the same to himself and that the Churches within his Dominions should sin damnably if they should deny to yield the same to him yea tho the STATUTES of the Kingdom should deâ—…y it to him And they tell you in Sect. 6. that the height of the King 's Royal Dignity consists in his Supremacy It is thus likewise a kind of familiar or Vulgar Error among Protestants to think that in the â—…ncient times this Fundamental Assertory part of your Oath tâ—…at the King is the only Supreme Governor of this Râ—…alm was not allow'd Long before the Rescript of the University of Oxford to Henry the 8th A. 1534. mention'd that he was next under God their happy and Supreme Moderator and Governor and on which being brought into the Parliament House an Act passed whereby the King was declared Supreme Head and Governor of the Church and long before it was declared by the Parliament 16. R. 2. c. 5. that the Crown â—…t England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no earthly subjection but immediately subject to God in all things touching the Regality of the same Crown and to none other and long before Bracton's writing in the Reign of H. 3. Omnis quidem sub Rege ipse sub nullo sed tantum sub Deo and ipse autem Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo. c. you will find if you look into Coke's 4th Instit. c. 74. that in the Law before the Conquest the style runs Rex autem quia Uicarius summâ—… Regis est ad hoc est constitutus ut Regnum terâ—…enum populum Domini super omnia sanctam veneretuâ—… Ecclesiam ejus regat c. and where he tells you of the style of King Edwin in his Charters viz. of Angâ—…orum Rex totius Britannicae telâ—…uris Gubeâ—…nator Rector And he there refers likewise to several Grants made by Abâ—…ots and Priors to King E. 4. wherein they style him by these very words Supremus Dominus noster But that he might perimere litem as to the point of the ancientness of the King's Supremacy he there referreth to the judgment of Parliament declared in the Statute of 24 o. H. 8. c. 12. viz. That by divers authentick Histories and Chronicles it is manifestly declared and expressed that this Realm of England is an Empire and so hath been accepted in the World governâ—…d by one Supreme Head and King c. unto whom a Body-Politick compact of all sorts and degrees of People divided in terms and by names of Spiritualty and Temporalty been bounden and owen to beat next unto God a natural and humble Obedience c. And here I am led to tell you that as it is on this Foundation of the King 's being the Supreme Governor and Ruler of all sorts and degrees of men thus anciently acknowledged by our Roman Catholick forefathers that the Regal Power of Dispensing with the Laws that were Penal by Incapacity and particularly in order to the Crown 's being enabled to command the Obedience and Service of all Estates and Degrees of men was built so it is on the same that the Usurpations of the Papal Dispensative Power of that kind were opposed I shall before we part give you instances hereof A. I thank you but shall here tell you that the Expression you used just now about the King being disabled by his Subjects being so hath overcast my thoughts with some kind of horror B. I cannot help it but if you will have me speak with the frankness of a Philosopher concerning the Nature of things the disabling of the Subjects must have that effect in Nature and of the disabling of their Country too And I think too you gave me a hint for some such thought at our last meeting If you do but consider the Services done to Monarchs by that abject Nation of the Iews and who by Tacitus were call'd the Vilissima pars servientium and how in our Saviour's time they were serviceable to the Roman Empire in the Collection of the Customs and how much they have been since and still are useful to the Grand Signior and to many Christian Princes by gathering in their Imposts you will easily imagine the loss that would redound to Princes by Religionary Heterodoxy disabling any to serve them It is but natural to men of the most inquisitive and penetrating thoughts to differ from many Points of Theology receiv'd by Princes and their People and since such heterodoxy doth difficult their access to Preferment it is but Natural to them by their working Thoughts and Industry to arrive at the excelling the duller Orthodox in whatever course of life they take and by that means to try to push on their way into their Prince's favour and consequently to have very sharp regrets against any Methods that would incapacitate them for it And as if this Civil Death were to Men of great Thoughts the terrible of terribles and what as hindring them from serving their Prince and Country were like Burying them alive I shall shew you how a Man of great Abilities and who had made a great Figure in the Church
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
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
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
Harvey who open'd such great Springs of real Learning as refresh'd that noble thirst so it seems before the Date of His late Majesty's Declaration of Indulgence in the 24th year of his Reign and of the Act about the Test in the 25th year of it and both which were likely to produce among the Learned so many Inquiries into the Legality of the Dispensative Power inherent in the Crown and even among the unlearned an Epidemical Disease of talking about the same it came to pass in the course of Providence that by as Learned Iudges as ever sate on the English Bench and as Learned Councel as ever appear'd at its Bar the Learning about the Dispensative Power was ventilated and discuss'd in a Series of several years in the Case of Thomas and Sorrell For the Cause began in the King's Bench 18. Car. 2. and was there argued by some of the Great Councel of the Kingdom and there again argued on both sides by other Councel in Michaelmas-Term in the 19th year of his Reign And in Hilary-Term in 25. and 26. Car. 2. this Cause for the weight and difficulty of it was adjourn'd out of the King's-Bench into the Exchequer Chamber and there argued by others of the Greatest Councel of the Kingdom and many Law-Books quoted And the Case was afterward argued by all the Iudges of England at six several Days in Easter Trinity Michaelmas and Hilary Terms viz. by two Iudges each day and the Iudges differ'd in several Points and even about the definition or meaning of Dispensation For so that learned Chief Iustice tells you and saith That some of his Brothers defined it to be liberatio à poenâ and others to be Provida relaxatio Juris which saith he is defining an ignotum per ignotius and liberare à poenâ is the effect of a Pardon not of a Dispensation c. Thus as I may say there was a Circumvallation by the Learning which concern'd Dispensing that encompass'd some time preceding that Declaration of Indulgence in the 24th year of his Reign and some time following both it and the Act of the Test. I shall some other time perhaps entertain you with the Learned Manuscript Report of the whole Case but shall now tell you that during that Series of years there was no angry motion in the Sea of the Populace occasion'd by any thing said in any of the Arguments that propp'd up the Dispensative Power no not by that mention'd in Keeble's Reports about Thomas and Sorrell's Case to have been said in the Exchequer Chamber by Ellis the King's Serjeant and whose Opinion was as Currant for Sterling-Law as any Man 's of the long Robe Viz. That the King may SUSPEND an Act of Parliament till next Session And now since it hath thus appear'd out of that Chief Iustice his Report that at least a sixth part of the Sworn Iudges of the Realm as he thought were unacquainted with the meaning of Dispensing I think it may pass for a Miracle if any great number of the mobile did understand it But without their troubling their heads with Law-Books if they would but mind their English Bibles and there consult the 12th of S. Mathew they would soon forbear calling the lawful Dispensing with the Laws establish'd a Contradiction Our learned Ames on the Priests in the Temple Prophaning the Sabbath and being blameless observes very well in his Cases of Conscience 1. 3. c. 17. That Praecepta Deiex suâ naturâ nunquam ita Concurrent at necesse sit alterum eorum propriè violare per peccatum Quum enim praeceptum aliquod minus negligendum est ut majus observetur minus illud cessat pro illo tempore obligare that is to say is dispens'd with ita ut qui ex tali occasione illud negligunt sint planè inculpabiles id est non peccent Matth. 12. 5 7. And as to that in the Chapter of David's entring into the House of God and eating the Shew-bread which was not lawful for him to eat c. the Lord Bishop of London in his Second Letter to his Clergy Printed A. 1680. in the Paragraph about The half Communion occasionally thus observes with great Judgment That a positive Command of God cannot be disobey'd without guilt unless on some one or more of these grounds either 1. That God dispenses with it as he did with Circumcision in the Wilderness Or 2. That some Evil greater then the Consequence of the Non-Performance of it will certainly follow as when David ate the Shew-bread and they that were with him which depends on that rule of our Saviour which tho apply'd to the Sabbath yet extends to all other positive Commands that man was not made for them but they for man Or lastly in case of incapacity as the Children of Israels not going up to Ierusalem in the time of Captivity And there are other words in a foregoing Chapter of S. Matthew that are still applicable to the Pharisaical ignorance of such as reproach DISPENSING as unlawful Go and learn what that means I will have mercy and not sacrifice But according to the Example of our Blessed Lord in Having Compassion on the multitude I think you have taken a just occasion for the pitying so many of your Countrymen who in the present Conjuncture presume to exercise themselves in great Matters or in things too high for them relating to Law and State and who without enquiring about the modus of Dispensing with the Laws establish'd wherein Lawyers differ cry down the thing it self wholly and absolutely as a Contradiction to the lex terrae and in which not being so all Lawyers agree My Lord Primate Bramhal in his Book of A fair Warning to take heed of the Scottish Discipline shewing in Chap. 6. that I have before referred to That it robs the King of his Dispensative Power doth wish any one averse to that Power no greater Censure then that the Penal Laws might be duly executed on him till he recant his error And how Penal a thing by the Laws of Nations it is to alienate the hearts of People from the Prince's Government all the great Writers of those Laws and of the Iura Majestatis have enough shewn Moreover how Criminal a thing of that Nature is in the Court of Conscience our two great Writers of it Ames and Sanderson have enough taught us The Moral offices of Subjects toward their Princes are well set forth in Ames his Cases of Conscience 1. 5. c. 25. and where he saith Debent ex singulari reverentiâ cavere ne temerarium judicium ferant de ipsorum administrationes Exod. 21. 28. Eccles. 10. 20. 2 Pet. 2. 10. Jud. 8. Fundamentum hujus cautionis est 1. Candor ille qui cum erga omnes debet adhiberi tum singulariter erga Superiores 2. Difficultas explorandi fontes causas negotiorum Publicorum 3. Moderatio illa quâ leves infirmitates offensiones tolerare debemus communi tranquillitati
metaphysical universale however they may â—…ansie it to be a real being but what I know cannot exist a part from the particular Rights and Privileges belonging to the Crown being assisted and defended and from a serious endeavour to understand the truth about their belonging to it And my solicitousness to find out which in the shortest way possible and particularly as to the Privilege of discharging incapacity or disability incurr'd by Act of Parliament as I told you at our last meeting engaged me to divert you out of the course of your method and whereupon you told me you would refer my thoughts to the Assertory part of the Oath B. Well what ever damps I may see on English Mens loyalty or degeneracy from its nature by the arts of faction a while perverting them not to assist and defend this or that Privilege of the Crown I shall never despair of their coming again to themselves and that tho as in a vessel of Water and Oyl while any one is shaking it the Water may over-top the Oyl so likewise in their minds while shaken and stirred by Demagogues the Oyl of the Lord 's anointed is not there uppermost yet that through its own nature and through the English good nature and their natural addiction to Religion it will in time naturally appear to be so And now to go on without further prefacing on either side what if I should tell you that it imports you to consider that in in the Assertory part of the Oath of Supremacy you have declared and asserted that authority as due to the King that was challenged and used by king Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th that is that the King under God hath the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of Persons born within these his Realms of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so ever so as no other foreign Power shall or ought to have any superiority over them A. I would then tell you that you have mentioned some things to be in this Oath that I remember not to be there B. I grant that I mention'd to you somethings that are not express'd in the Oath and in the form of it as it is administred and was enacted 1 Eliz. c. 1. and by which Act the refusers of such Oath are punish'd with DISABILITY to bear Office. But in the same year in which that Act pass'd Queen Elizabeth in an ADMONITION annext to her Injunctions thought fit to exercise her Royal authority of the Interpretation or Declaration of the sense of that Oath enjoyn'd by Act of Parliament and in that Admonition you will find those words that you remember not in the Oath you took as likewise her ACQUITTAL of all Persons from all manner of Penalties and consequently of disability who took the Oath according to the sense of it publish'd in her Interpretation And if you consult the Act you will see that the disabilities inflicted in the Act on the refusers of the Oath are various And thus then you see that as soon as you have done taking the Oath you are immediately call'd on by your Conscience to defend the Privilege and preeminence of your Prince viz. of interpreting his Laws and of discharging the disabilities thereby inflicted A. I now remember that I have read that Admonition of the Queens but I account Proclamations Injunctions and Admonitions of Princes to be but temporary Laws and that therefore this Interpretation of the Queen's and her discharging of Disabilities expired with her Reign B. To obviate such thought I shall tell you that in the Act of the 5th of Queen Elizabeth c. 1. and by which the Refusal of the Oath of Supremacy is punish'd more severely then by the before-mention'd disability viz. by Proemunire for the first Refusal and by making it Treason for some Persons to refuse it a second time but Penalties that none ever doubted but the Crown might by its Pardon discharge there is a Proviso that the Oath viz. of Supremacy expressed in the said Act made in the said first year shall be takeu and expounded in such form as is set forth in an Admonition annexd to the Queens Majesties Injunctions Publish'd in the first year of her Reign that is to say to confess and acknowledge in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors none other Authority then was challenged and lately used by the Noble King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth as in the said Admonition may more plainly appear And this too lets you see that the Parliament by thus referring to the Queen's Admonition did approve of her Power therein exercised and of her having acquitted her Subjects from the Punishment of disability A. I must then I see fairly grant you that by that Parliament's having thus perpetuated the interpretation of the Oath of Supremacy contain'd in Queen Elizabeth ' s Admonition I am bound in Conscience to take it in that sense and am perjured if I do not so keep that Oath and must likewise grant that you have shewn how auspicious that Oath by the Queens interpreting the same and the Parliament about five years after approving that Interpretation was to the Assertion of such her Power and that if any taker of the Oath should gain-say such Power you have prepared such a Confutation in the case as was used to the old Philosopher who disputed against Motion and whom his Adversary confuted by removing him from his place But as you are a fair arguer I am to take leave to tell you That that Parliament tho they approved the Queen's Admonition in general did not particularly shew their Approbation of the Queen's Power of dispensing with the Penalties that she exercised in that Admonition B. They did sufficiently shew their Approbation of the whole and therefore you need not question their approving of its parts But because you seem to lay some stress on that Parliament's not expresly approving in terminis the Queen 's Power of discharging the Penalties and one of which by the Act of 1 o Elizabethoe was disability I shall tell you that whereas Queen Elizabeth had thought it expedient for the Supporting of the Consecration of the Bishops of the Church of England to dispense with whatever might cause Disability according to her Supream Authority by her Letters Patents the very same Parliament at their next Session did 8 o Elizabethoe c. 1. in terminis terminantibus declare their Approbations of the Queens dispensing with disability by those Letters Patents for it having been in that Statute mention'd that for the avoiding of all Ambiguities and Questions that might be objected against the lawful Confirmations investings and Consecrations of the said Archbishops and Bishops her Highness in her Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England c. hath used and put in her said Letters Patents divers other general words and Sentences whereby her Highness by her Supreme Power and Authority hath DISPENS'D with all Causes or doubts of any Imperfection or DISABILITY
that can or may in any wise be objected against the same c. it follows That all Acts and things heretofore had made or done by any Person about any Consecration Confirmation or Investing of any Person elected to the Office or Dignity of any Archbishop or Bishop c. by Uirtue of the Queens Majesty's Letters Patents or Commission c. be and shall be by Authority of this present Parliament declared judged and deemed at and from every of the several times of the doing thereof good and perfect to all respects and purposes any matter or thing that can or may be objected to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding Sir E. Cook in the 4th part of his Iustitutes c. 74. viz. Of Ecclesiastical Courts takes notice how our adversaries had made objections against our Archbishops and Bishops consecrated about the beginning of the reign of Queen Eliz. and consequently against the Bishops ever since That they were never consecrated according to law because they had not three Bishops at least at their Consecration and never a Bishop at all as was pretended because they being Bishops in the reign of Edward the 6th were deprived in the reign of Queen Mary and were not as was pretended restored before their presence at the Consecration These pretences being but Cavils are answer'd by the Statute of 8 o Eliz. c. 1. and provision made by authority of that Parliament for the establishing of Archbishops and Bishops both in proesenti and in futuro in their Bishopricks But Mason in his 3d Book c. 7th De ministerio Anglicano in his answering the objection hath recourse to the Queens Patents referr'd to by the Statute of 8 o Eliz. and having mention'd the Queen's dispensing by her supreme authority cum quavis causâ aut suspicione câ—…jusvis DEFECTUS aut INABILITATIS quoe quovis modo contra eorum consecrationem obtendi poterat he saith verba in diplomate Regio sic se habent supplentes nihilominus suprema authoritate nostra Regia ex mero motu certa scientia nostris si quid in hiis quae juxta mandatum nostrum per vos fient aut in vobis aut vestrum aliquo conditione statu aut facultate vestris ad praemissa perficienda desit aut deerit eorum quae per statuta hujus Regni aut per leges ecclesiasticas in hac parte requiruntur aut necessaria sunt temporis ratione aut rerum necessitate sic postulante and then adds unde serenissima Regina ut omnem calumniandi ansam proecidere ipsique invidioeos obstruere posset c. DISPENSARE dignata est siquid forte Lynceis oculis invidia alicujus statuti vel canonis violati proetextu possit obtendere And then having brought in his Popish opponents objection Hem quid audio Vos Pâ—…ntificis maximi Dispensationes dente canino soletis arrodere jam nihil pudet in Actis Parliamentariis laicali magistratui Reginoe foeminoe dispensandi facultatem transcribere Dispensandi inquam cum quavis causâ aut suspicione ullius defectus aut INABILITATIS quoe incidere poterant idque in sacris ordinibus he makes this reply viz. Papa aliquando dispensat nimium papaliter sed non perinde Elizabetha Suas tantum leges RELAXAVIT Cum transgressionibus contra leges suas DISPENSAVIT Quod Deus fixit nunquam refigere aut rescindere est molita And there afterward to the objection si dicatur Reginam sufficientem dispensandi cum illis potestatem habuisse proferatur aliquod illius potestatis fundamentum â—…i non ex scripturâ sacrâ saltem ex Conciliis aut patribus aut uno aliquo approbato exemplo in toto mille quingentorum annorum curricuâ—…o the reply is Nonne Principis est legum suarum râ—…gorem res ubi postulat emollire Non magno opinor opus est mâ—…limine ad hoc probandum and as to what was objected against a Prince's dispensing with an ecclesiastical Canon he saith Canonum quatenus sunt leges Principis ecclesiasticoe summum jus rigorem duritiem moderari spectat ad officium principis And then he judiciously confutes Sanders his reproaching our Bishops in his book of Schism with the term of Parliamentarii episcopi and he referrs to the words in the Statute of 8 o Eliz. that I have mention'd to you and saith of them Omnino liquido ostendunt Comitia Parliamentaria non consecrasse ordinasse vel constituisse episcopos aut ministros sed jam secundum leges ecclesioe LEGITIME Consecraâ—…os ritè ordinatos ac Constitutos pro talibus habendos esse DECLARASSE c. And so I doubt not but you mind the words in that Act relating to the Queen's Letters Patents viz. shall be by authority of the Parliament not made good for they were so before but declared judged and deem'd good A. I apprehend you B. But to return to the Consideration of what you are on the whole matter obliged to by virtue of the Oath of Supremacy in the Case now before you and herein I find that by Virtue of the Queens interpretation of that Oath and the Parliaments Approbation thereof that when in the Assertory part of the Oath you do utterly testify and declare in your Conscience that the King's Highness is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal you have as in the Presence of God solemnly given your cordial Assent to and made your most Religious acknowledgment that the SOLE Supreme Government or Soveraignty and Rule under God over all manner of Persons born within these Realms is in the King and you are obliged to judge that tho the Oath speaks of all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical THINGS or Causes and the interpretation of all manner of Persons of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be yet there is no inconsistence between the Oath and the Interpretation for that as a Learned man in his Comment on that Oath hath well observ'd there is no Opposition between these two Persons and Causes the Principal object of a Law is a Person and a Person with respect to his Actions a Person morally Consider'd and he there quotes Suarez de Legibus l. 1. c. 8. saying Ad leges per se requiritur potestas in personam secundario in Res alias and for that the Assertory clause in the Oath declaring the King the only Supreme Governor of this Realm doth necessarily imply his being the only Supreme Governor of all Persons in it A. But perhaps you did not take notice that probably one reason why Queen Elizabeth was willing that her Interpretation that related to the Assertory part of the Oath I mean as to her Power over all the Persons of her Subjects and which was Publish'd in the Admonition after her Injunctions should in the aforesaid Act in the 5th year of her Reign be approved in Parliament might be to satisfie the scrupulousness of some mens Tender
Fra. Walsingham And what sense the House of Commons had in the beginning of the Reign of King Iames the First of the Disabling of several of the Nonconformist Divines being a Gravamen to the Realm appears by the Petition of that House to the King Anno 1610. as I find it in Mr. Nye's Beams of former Light p. 103. viz. Whereas divers painful and learned Pastors that have long time travell'd in the work of the Ministry with good Fruit and Blessing of their Labour have been removed from Ecclesiastical livings being their free-hold and from all means of maintenance to the great grief of sundry your Majesty's well-affected Subjects we therefore humbly beseech your Majesty would be graciously pleas'd that such deprived and silenced Ministers living quietly and peaceably may be restored c. But in short if you consider that the great Cause that excited the Loyal Zeal express'd in the Statute of the First of Queen Elizabeth and whereby so many Statutes of Harry the 8th against the Papal â—…pations were revived was that the King and Kingdom might not be disabled by Clergy-mens not being Subjects to the Crown through Papal Exemptions and that the Crown might Cum effectu be restored to its Government over them i. e. of the whole Realm and that our Monarchs should by means of such Exemption be no more disabled from being Governors only IN their Realm and not OF it and as when the Right of two Persons claiming to be Princes of Tuscany was before the Pope's Arbitrage he determin'd that one of them should be A Prince IN Tuscany and the other Oâ—… it you will find that this Supreme Power over all Persons as inherent in the King is the very Lapis Angularis on which your Abjuration of foreign Iurisdiction and on which the whole Promissory part of your Oath are built For when you have first declared in your Oath that the King is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal and then what followeth upon that viz. That no foreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm you say And THEREFORE I do â—…tterly renounce and forsake aâ—…l foreign Iurisdictions c. And do promise that from henceforth I shall bear Faith and true Allegiance to the King's Highness c. and to my Power shall assist and defend all Iurisdictions c. granted or belonging to the King's Highness c. or united and annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Thus then the Reason why you abjure foreign Jurisdiction for you ABIURE when you swear to quit and forsake as Mr. Nye in his Observations on that Oath tells us and why you promise to assist and defend all Iurisdictions granted or belonging to the King whose Subject you are is resolved into the Kings being the only Supreme Governor of this Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal I am here further to tell you that when by your Oath you have renounced the Pope's Dispensative Power you have asserted and have obliged your self to defend the Jurisdiction of the King 's Dispensative Power in the room of it and the defence of which was the great design and drift of the entire Statute of 1 o. Eliz. and of your Oath therein and no collateral thing A. I have been and am pleas'd with that Prospect you have given me into the Region of the Dispensative Power used by the Crown in the Interpretation of my Oath a Region that was before to me like the terra Australis Borealis incognita but to deal frankly with you I am yet to seek out the meaning of this notion last â—…rted by you that the drift and design of the Statute of 1 o. Elizabethae and the Oath was to prop up the King 's Dispensative Power I doubt not but you are perfectly sensible that he who speaks to that tender thing call'd Conscience and about an Oath ought to be tender of any point he urgeth to it and not to wyre-draw any thing by forced Consequences that is to be offered to it as Obligatory B. I assure you I go by those very measures in giving you my Judgment of the design and drift of that Statute as I have done and that he must put the Statute on the wrack that will make it speak any other meaning Consider what the Prefatory part as the key of it mentions viz. That divers good Laws and Statutes that were made in Henry the Eighth's time as well for the utter extinguishment and putting away of all Usurped and Foreign Power c. as also for the restoring and uniting to the Imperial Crown of this Realm the ancient Iurisdictions c. to the same of Right belonging by reason whereof we your most humble and obedient Subjects from the 25th year of the Reign of your said dear Father were continually kept in good order and were disburden'd of divers great and intolerable Charges and Exactions before that time unlawfully taken and exacted by such Foreign Power and Authority as before that was usurped until such time as all the said good Laws and Statutes by one Act of Parliament made in the first and second years of the Reigns of the late King Philip and Queen Mary c. were repeai'â—… by reason whereof they then further mention how they were then brought under an Usurped Foreign Authority to their intolerable Charges and they thereupon desire the Repealing of that Act. Here we are given to see by their dating the aera of their being well govern'd and disburthen'd of divers great intolerable Charges and Exactions taken and exacted by Foreign Power from the 25th of Henry the 8th and had their eye on the Statute of the 25th of Henry the 8th c. 21. entituled No Imposition shall be paid to the Bishop of Rome which sets forth how the Subjects of this Realm were impoverish'd by intolerable Exactions of great Sums of Money taken out of this Realm by the Bishop of Rome as well in Pensions Censes Suits for Provisions and Expeditions of Bulls c. and also for Dispensations Licences Faculties Grants Relaxations Writs call'd Perinde valere Rehabilitations Abolitions and other infinite sorts of Bulls Breves and Instruments of sundry Natures c. wherein the Bishop of Rome hath been not only to be blamed for his Usurpation in the Premisses but also for his abusing and beguiling your Subjects pretending and persuading them that he hath Power to Dispense with all Humane Laws Uses and Customs of all Realms in all Causes which be call'd Spiritual which matter hath been usurped and practised by him and his Predecessors by many years in great deâ—…gation of your Imperial Crown and Authority Royal contrary to Right and Conscience For where this your Graces Realm recognizing no Superior under God but only your Grace hath been and
Vice-gerent for ecclesiastical Causes and however incapacitated by some positive humane Laws to make that figure he did but uti Iure suo And I shall tell you as to the subject of the weight of one Man or the consequences of disabling one Man that we were upon if you consider how much the excesses of the Papal Usurpations and the over-ballance of the Monastic Revenue in the Nation were removed by the parts and endowments of Cromwel the Vice-gerent in Matters Ecclesiastical you may easily imagine that if the measures of the Canon-Law and Canonists and the long receiv'd customs or any humane Law had then prevail'd for the disabling of Cromwel cum effectu from bearing Office or intermedling in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as the Kings Vice-gerent what a Church of England we should have at this time enjoy'd You may well imagine how much the Disabling of Lay-men from intermedling in ecclesiastical Iurisdiction had passed for a general Custom here when Bishop Downham in the Defence of his Consecration Sermon p. 185. saith that as for lay-Chancellors or Commissaries the Bishops in the times of S. Austin and S. Ambrose had none and that not so much as the Steward of a Church might be a Lay-man and when the Puritan Writers did still upbraid our Discipline on the account of the incapacity of Lay-men to be Bishops Chancellors as adjudged by the ancient Canons and with the Canon of indecorum est laicum esse vicarium episcopi c. and by which Canon the Bishop who made a Lay-man his Vicar was declared to be contemptor Canonum But it was the Regal Power of Dispensing with the Canons and Customs that disabled Lay-men from intermedling in ecclesiastical Jurisdiction that laid the foundation of the Reformation in Harry the 8th's time as it was the same Power of dispensing with the Canons and Customs that disabled Clergy-men from intermedling in saecular Employments that perfected the superstructure of it in the reign of Edward the 6th that young Iosias as was before mention'd Fuller tells us in his Church-history that Harry the 8th's making a Lay-man his Vicar-general was the greatest instance of his ecclesiastical Power that ever was given And my Lord Herbert in his Harry the 8th doth seem to reflect on Cromwel's not being thought capable of that Office for his words on his being made the King's Vicegerent are It was thought strange by the People because there was no Example of any Kings of Israel the lawfully in their own Persons enjoying the mixt Power of the Temporal and Spiritual or of the Pope's having deputed Ecclesiastical Power to a Lay-man But as to his saying that there was no Example of the Pope's deputing Ecclesiastical Power to Lay-men I shall observe that his Lordship had not consider'd that according to the Glosse in C. bene quidem Distin. 96. Laicus potest excommunicare ex Papae delegatione and that tho a Bishop cannot by the Canon-Law delegate his Power to a Lay-man for that a Bishop is not above the Ius Commune Positivum of the Pope yet the Canonists hold that the Pope by the Plenitude of his Power may dispense with his own Laws and by so doing delegate the Power of Excommunicating to Abbesses altho jure Communi as not having the Power of the Keys they are disabled from so doing and that Pope Urban the Second constituted a Lay-man Roger Earl of Sicily and his Heirs his Legates a latere in that Kingdom by way of Inheritance for ever and that our Henry the Second writing to the Pope to recall Beâ—…ket's Legatine Power and to confer it on the Archbishop of York the Pope refused so to do but offer'd the Legatine Power to the King himself and sent Letters to the King for that purpose but which the King in scorn threw away The Legatine Powers are de jure Communi as the Canonists tell us very great and allow the Legates to visit or cause to be visited by such as they shall think fit all Churches Monasteries Colleges Universities Hospitals and do authorize them to make new Statutes and Orders and not only to receive Appeals from ordinary Judges and Delegates but to judge and decide all Ecclesiastical Civil and Criminal Causes and that summarily and sine formâ figurâ Iudicii to make Prisoners of Bishops and send them in Custody to the Pope to bestow Benefices that were vacant to unite Churches to interpret the Mandates of the Pope and if the Pope hath entrusted any thing to be done by them yet to entrust the doing thereof to others to execute all their Jurisdiction in Places exempt as well as not exempt and to dispense in all Cases wherein they are not Prohibited and to exercise the Iurisdiction of granting Indulgences and to dispense with pluralists and with the incapacity of Sons immediately succeeding their Fathers in Church-Livings and to give Absolution to the Excommunicate in many Cases reserv'd to the Apostolick See and likewise in many Causes inflictive of Excommunication ipso jure and in many Cases to restore such as are deposed and degraded and to rehabilitate them even by restoring them to Fame All these Branches of Authority with many others not named here were it seems offer'd by the Pope to our King but which he holding as Vicegerent to the King of Kings and by his Word might well refuse their tenure from the servus servorum and by his Bulls All our Roman-Catholick Princes having made an inroad on the Papal incapacitating Canons by way of Dispensation when they made their Lay-Judges Super-Intendents over their Bishops and who were by Lay-men required to Absolve such who were disabled by Excommunication and to receive their bounds and measures in Ecclesiastical Proceedings by Writs of Prohibition and Consultation and Attachment issued out by Lay-men the exercise of the Regal Power in Ecclesiasticks distributed and dispers'd among so many Lay hands did not seem so powerful nor invidious as when the united Beams of Ecclesiastical Vice-gerence met in the Ministry of one Lay Person and dazled the Eyes of the whole Kingdom and when according to the Power that was 37 o. H. 8. declared by the Parliament to be given to the King by Holy Scripture he made Cromwel his Vice-gerent for the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction But as that Statute intimating that the Councils and Constitutions Provincial that ordain'd that no Lay-man should exercise or occupy any Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical did stand and remain in their effect not abolish'd by his Grace's Laws and did sound to appear to make greatly for the usurped Power of the Bishop of Rome and to he directly repugnant to his Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church and Pretogative Royal his Grace being a Lay-man altho such Decrees Ordinances and Constitutions were by the Statute made in the 25th year of his Reign intended to be utterly abolish'd frustrate c. but yet that the contrary thereunto being not used by Archbishops Bishops c. i. e. that they had not all that
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
Numb 35. 33. A. But by the way do you think then that Sovereign Princes offend the Law of God in Pardoning Murther B. I do observe that many presume to censure Kings for so doing and are superstitiously misguided by thinking that those two places of Scripture referr'd to by my Lord Coke do necessarily make it a sin in Princes to Pardon Murther But I shall when we meet again shew you the mistake of such therein and shall shew you that David at that time when the Law of God and the lex terrae was the same thing and who had Sworn and would perform it that he would keep God's righteous Iudgments was not to be censured to have sinned either in the reprieve of Ioab who had murthered Amasa and Abner and in delaying the Execution of the Law and leaving it to Solomon his Son or in the Pardon of Absolon who had slain his Brother Ammon and that when the Law faith in Numb 35. The Murtherer shall surely be put to death our best Commentators and out of the Rabbins say that this is spoken to the Iudges before whom such Causes regularly came and under the Supreme Power and by authority thereof judged those Causes and that tho the Iudges who were subordinate to the Supreme Power were to take no Satisfaction for the life of a Murtherer but were by that Law to Condemn him yet that it followeth not that the Supreme Power who made them Iudges might not in some Cases Reprieve and Pardon some whom they had Condemned A. I shall be glad to hear you discourse of this and the rather for that 't is so Customary to many when they find the Prince exercising this Prerogative of Pardoning to be apt too much to busy their heads with those two places in the Old Testament to their neglect of others there viz. Exod. 22. 28. Prov. 24. 21. Eccles. 10. 20. and of Acts 23. 5. in the New and likewise there of Rom. 13. 2. 5. 1. St. Peter 2. 17. and from whence they might Collect their moral offices of not doing or speaking or thinking dishonourably of the Lord 's annointed and of paying honour and obedience to his Sovereign Power and that for Conscience sake But in the mean time give me leave à propos to ask you if ever you heard of any one of the Iudges of the Realm in the Reign of our former Princes that gave his judgment for the allowance of the King's Pardon of disability Shew me but that and I shall not be affrighted with my Lord Ch. Justice Vaughan's Simoniacal Dead man. B. I shall tell you of a Case that was well enough known to him and which you may find in Croke 3d p. 55. Sir Iohn Bennet v. Dr. Easedale where you may see that Sir Iohn Bennet being fined 20000 l. for Bribery by the Star-Chamber and Censured to be Imprison'd and made uncapable of any Office of Iudicature and that he having a Pardon from the King reciting the Bribery and Offences mention'd in the Decree and all Penalties and Punishments by reason thereof and all Disabilities and Incapacities and all things concerning the said Sentence except the Fine of 20000 l. and the Court of Star-Chamber having the advice of all the Iudges relating to the Decree and Pardon it was resolv'd by them all that this Pardon hath taken away all force of the Sentence in the Star-Chamber except for the Fine of 20000 l. and all Disabilities are discharged thereby That Lord Chief Iustice knew that as it was set down in that Chapter of Pardons Inst. 3. the King's Pardon extends to all Suits in the Star-Chamber and he knew of what was mention'd Inst. 4. Chap. 1. Of the High Court of Parliament viz. Of a Pardon to the Lord Latimer of a Iudgment in Parliament and he knew that by his own and other Iustices of Assize going into their own Countrys in the Execution of their Offices by vertue of the King 's Non-obstante to the Statutes of 8. R. 2. c. 2. 3. H. 8. c. 24. himself and as many as went Iudges of Assize so into their own Countrys gave Judgment by so doing for the Prerogative of dispensing with such Acts of Parliament and he likewise knew that as it is well express'd in Theâ—… Answer of King Charles the First to the Declaration of both Houses of Parliament concerning the Commission of array A. 1642. An Act of Parliament in any Matter tho mistaken being assented to by the King and his two Houses is equally binding as having equal Authority with an Act introductive of a new Law and that therefore Acts of Parliament having so particularly declared the justness of the Prerogative's dispensing with disability no magna nomina of any particular Sages of the Law in otherwise opining can expect any deference And if you will consider what my Lord Coke in that Chapter of Pardons hath mention'd of the operation of Prerogative over the dead in Law and consider the President he refers to viz. Pasch. 22. E. 3. tit Cor. 239. Coram Rege Quidam indictatus de Felonia inde Culp dicit quod Rex eum Conduxit inde producit Chartam quod Rex eum Conduxit in Vasc. in exercitu dicta Charta allocata fuit per Curiam and there see his opinion grounded on it that if a man be Indicted of Felony and found Guilty and being in Prison the King may under the Great Seal reciting the Offence c. retain him to serve in his Wars on this side or beyond the Seas this Charter he may Plead and the Court ought to allow it I believe you will be of Opinion that any one who will desire any more Presidents for the Commanding the services of dead men ought to be sent for one to the REHEARSAL viz. that of Arise you dead Men and get ye about your business A. Well Sir As for this objected Dead-man requiescat in Pace I have done with him and since from some things you have said I gather that the dispensing with disability by Roman Emperors and Popes of Rome did never by any ferment disturb their Governments and moreover since no men of sense here have ever troubled themselves or the Government with any vexatious Question about the King's Power in discharging a man from a Praemunire but not from a Penal disability incurr'd whereas by a Praemunire as my Lord Coke shews us Inst. 3. c. 54. men are put out of the Protection of the King and DISABLED to have any Action or Remedy by the King's Law or the Kings Writs and exposed to many other dreadful Punishments I do now begin to wonder whence it is that the mistake in some mens Minds hath come about a Penal disability being so unremoveable And thus I think too one might wonder how such as will allow the King's Pardon to discharge one from an Excommunicatio minor or major do look on disability as such an anathematizing thing as is not to be touch'd or that cannot be
Harry the 8th's Oath or Queen Elizabeth's in the words of no foreign Prelates having here any Iurisdiction c. any Power the Pope could justly claim as a Successor to the Apostles was impeachâ—…d And no doubt but Harry the 8th being by that Statute declared to be but a Lay-man no men of sense construed that Statute to give him the exercise of any Iurisdiction or Power of the Keys in foro interno as a Successor of the Apostles The old Distinction of Bracton l. 1. c. 8. that King's cannot Excommunicate ministerialiter because they are Lay-men but may do it authoritativè by appointing others to do it gave Satisfaction in Harry the 8th's time and might had it been thought of in Queen Elizabeth's Reign have sav'd the labour of the Interpretation in the Admonition in removing the ferment that the Oath occasion'd among Protestant Scruplers But tho the Preamble of the Admonition referrs to some Protestant Clergy-men as the Scruplers yet the following words viz. That her Majesty would that all her loving Subjects should understand that nothing was is or shall be meant or intended by the same Oath c. shew her Pious design of Complaisance as to the Consciences of her Catholick as well as Protestant Subjects and whose freedom from Imposition of ambiguous or otherwise unlawful Oaths she knew was purchased for both of them alike by the Blood of Christ. And you know I referr'd you to Sir Iohn Winter's Observations on the Oath of Supremacy as representing the Oath by the help of Queen Elizabeth's Interpretation in the Admonition and of the Enacting of that Interpretation in Parliament and of the Interpretation in the 37th Article as lawful to be taken tho possibly inexpedient on the account of Scandal and likewise to another Roman-Catholick Writer who on the account of those Interpretations thought it might both lawfully and without Scandal be taken And you and others who think that Oath of importance for the securing the Peace of the Government may thank the Prerogative of Regal Interpretation for supplying the Lamp of it with the Oil that hath made it last so long and which otherwise would soon have gone out in a snuff as I shew'd you by the offence that was taken at it at home and abroad when it was first set up and which now may perhaps help to illuminate the English World in the measures of Loyalty so long as the Sun and Moon endure that is if you suppose that the use of Oaths would endure so long But Dii meliora And it here coming into my mind that you in your somewhat airy way of discoursing of the Oath resembled it to a tender-sided Ship girdled with so many interpretations I shall take occasion further to impress it on your thoughts that it is still THE SAME OATH tho partaking of all those Interpretations and as we say of eadem navis toties refecta and the several interpretations are not by you to be resembled to girdlings but to its main inward beams and timbers that are become parts oâ—… it Moreover you know that a girdled Ship by reason of the incompactness of its adventitious parts with the other cannot last the fourth part of the time that another will. But you see how long this Oath hath continued and riding triumphantly in the Sea of time hath too carried out all its Guns in Stormy weather and made the Usurp'd Power of the Court of Rome strike Sail to our Princes Yet I shall here take occasion from my having just now minded you of the Interpretations of the Oath inclining Sir Iohn Winter and the other Roman-Catholick to judge of it as they did to tell you that I have often wish'd that in the times of the three last Reigns the Power of Interpretation had further exerted it self in the further clearing of any thing in that Oath and in the Oath of Allegiance at which offence was by so many taken however by the Oaths not given and that such Interpretations had been approved in Parliament and particularly that the Interpretation of the word HERETICAL in the Oath of Allegiance as being meant of Contrary to the Word of God had brought all our Roman-Catholick Brethren to the taking of that Oath as I told you that F. Cressy thought it would have done and who said that he believed that that was the sense intended by King Iames in the word heretical And I shall be glad if those Interpretations relating to the Oath of Supremacy which succeeded those that Sir Iohn Winter and the other Roman-Catholick took notice of may in the event Conduce to render it more acceptable to others of them and the rather for that it is apparent that all the Interpretations are Consistent with the Oath and with one another as from what I have spoken you may Collect. But by so many other Pious and Learned Roman-Catholicks appearing not to be of the opinion that the Interpretations of the Oath mention'd by those two Writers may legitimate the taking of it I have long wish'd to the Oath all the additional clearness that Law could give it and that they would wish given who were required to take it And as one Doctor 's opinion for the justness of a Litigants Cause hath on his being cast in it been allow'd to save him from being as a Calumnious and rash litigator condemned in Expences thus so great a Master in our Israel and Vindicator of our Church from Schism as Archbishop Bramhal having given his Opinion about the Oath as I told you namely as to what related to the King's Power in Spirituals and to no foreign Prelate having any Spiritual Iurisdiction here viz. This might have been express'd in words less liable to Exception I shall censure no man as a Caâ—…umniator of the Oath who shall wish that any lawful Interpretation may make those words less liable to Exception Sir Iohn Winter as I told you having mention'd the Explanations not being known to all and their intricacy and the constant tendring of the Oath for â—…o many years without the aforesaid Explanation as likely to give just cause of Scandal c. I must tell you I like not his words of the GIVING just cause of Scandal but what I have shew'd you of many passages about the Explanations which were not observ'd by him and particularly of the 37th Article affording only to the Clergy a more favourable interpretation and which was enacted as to them in 13 o Eliz and of the Canons of King Iames first extending the benefit of that Interpretation to the Layety and of the Canons of King Charles the First further explaining the 37th Article may justly incline you to wish that the sense of the Oath did Primâ facie appear as liquid to all as it now doth to us two And I shall here take occasion for the propping up the interpretation relating to the Oath made by those two Princes in their Canons to tell you that as you accounted King Iames his