Case or to the quite contrary in More 542. Armiger's Case I shall most consult the ease of your thoughts by directing them to what interpretation my Lord Coke in Cawdrys Case gives as to the words of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. and where he saith that that Act doth not annex any Iurisdiction to the Crown but what was of right or ought to be by the Ancient Laws of this Realm parcel of the King's Iurisdiction c. and which lawfully had been or might be exercised within the Realm The end of which Iurisdiction and of all the Proceedings thereupon that all things might be done in Causes Ecclesiastical to the Pleasure of Almighty God encrease of Vertue and the Conservation of the Peace and Unity of the Realm as by divers places of the Act appears And therefore by this Act no pretended Iurisdiction exercised within this Realm being ungodly or repugnant to the ancient Law of the Crown was or could be restored to the Crown according to the ancient Right and Law of the same And here I may tell you that as the Pope did often dispense with incapacity incurr'd by his Positive Laws and that even in the use of the Power of the Keys as by his delegating the Power of Excommunication to Lay-men and to Abbesses as aforesaid so our Kings d d anciently by their Letters Patents and Charters grant Power to those who were no Bishops Ordinaries or Ecclesiastical Iudges or Officers to inflict Ecclesiastical Censures of the greater Excommunication on Offenders and that for Causes not merely Spiritual or Ecclesiastical with Power to Certify them into Chancery and thereupon to obtain Writs de Excommunicato Capiendo as Mr. Prynne tells us in his Animadversions on the Fourth part of the Institutes and there cites the President of Edward the Third thus empow'ring the Chancellor of the University of Oxford tho a Lay-man so to do and so to Punish Breakers of the Peace Offenders against the Statutes Privileges and Customs of the University and all Forestallers and Regraters and Sellers of corrupt Meat and Wine and to Excommunicate such who refused to cleanse the Streets from filth and to Pave them before their Doors and this he saith was confirm'd by sundry succeeding Statutes of our Princes In what particulars it is by this Statute of the 25. of H. the 8th warranted that the King his Heirs and Successors may dispense with Persons and in Causes that the Papacy was never accustomed to dispense in I shall not trouble you or my self to enquire but shall tell you that Mr. Nye in his Book call'd Two Acts of Parliament and wherein are contain'd his Observations on the Oath of Supremacy doth in p. 164. cite this Statute of 25. H. 8. c. 21. and thereupon say the King's Majesty may dispense with any of those Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws meaning the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws indulge the Omission of what is enjoyn'd by them make void the Crime and remove the Penalty incurred by breach of them yea and give faculty to do and practice otherwise any Synodal Establishment or long usage to the Contrary notwithstanding in what offends not the Holy Scripture and Laws of GOD. And therefore when our Soveraign in the course of his Ecclesiastical Supremacy doth only dispense with incapacity we are sure he goes not to the height of the Dispensative Power justify'd in him by that Statute nothing having been more customary to the Papacy then rehabilitation It was upon the Revival of this Statute of Harry the 8th by that first of Queen Eliz. c. 1. that she according to the Papal custom of dispensing with the Commutation of Penance did in her Articles in the Synod began at London A. D. 1548. establish one De moderandâ solennis Poenitentioe Commutatione whereby she orders that such Commutation shall be but seldom and for weighty Causes and when it shall appear to the Bishop that that way is the safer to reform the guilty Person and that the Commutation-Money be employ'd to Pious uses And then follows the Title De Moderandis quibusdam Indulgentus pro Celebratione Matrimonii absque trinundinâ denunciatione quam bannos vocant Matrimoniales where you will find she makes Faculties and Indulgences all one And as I have shew'd you how she thought it necessary for the safety of her Subjects Consciences to exercise her Dispensative Power of interpreting and of relaxing disabilities occasion'd by the very first Statute of her Reign and how soon she put the Dispensative Power of those kinds in practice which by that Statute were restored and united to her Imperial Crown so I may observe to you that shortly after the making of the Second Statute in her Reign viz. That for Uniformity of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments which punisheth with Premunire Sequestration and Deprivation and Excommunication which while it is depending is so variously inclusive of disability the not using the Book of Common-Prayer as Publish'd in English she by her Letters Patents dated the 6th of April in the Second year of her Reign and A. 1560. alloweth the use of Latine Prayers to the Colleges of both Universities and to Eaton and Winchester Colleges with a particular Non-obstante to that Statute a Copy of which Letters Patents may be seen in Bishop Sparrow's Collection of Articles c. And I have before acquainted you in general how in her Letters Patents for the Consecrating new Bishops she expresly dispens'd with incapacity But what may perhaps seem to you as a new Indication of her being the better able to dispense with it is an Instance I shall give you of her making incapacity by her Supreme Ecclesiastical Power The instance of her thus making incapacity is a thing that Mr. Nye in his Beams of former Light reflects on as strange for he there in p. 201. referring to Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions A. 1559. Injunct 29. viz. It is thought very necessary that no manner of Priest or Deacon shall hereafter take to his Wife any manner of Woman without the Advice and Allowance first had by the Bishop of the Diocese and two Iustices of the Peace next to the place of her abode c. and if any shall do otherwise they shall not be permitted to Preach the Word or give Sacraments nor be Capable of any Ecclesiastical Benefice saith then Doth this seem strange now It seem'd very necessary in the judgment of our Governors then A. I must acknowledge that you have spoke that which is very much for my Satisfaction concerning the Dispensative Power and the Oath thus supporting one another But I wonder that I have not in any of our celebrated Writers of the Church of England read that the Contents of the Assertory and Promissory parts of this Oath and our abjuring foreign Iurisdictions Powers Superiorities and Authorities in the Oath i. e. those of the Papacy were intended in order to the statuminating our Prince's Dispensative Power pursuant to the Statutes of 25. H. 8th and 1
the other c. that the Wisdom of that House in acting as it hath done in many Conjunctures hath put an end to many ferments accidentally occasion'd by others mistakes about Prerogative and whereby that august Assembly did sometimes Cunctando restituere rem and by its forbearing out of tenderâ—…ess for Prerogative to give judgment about it hath often to the Satisfaction both of the Prince and People left the Regal Rights in their ancient quiet Estate I shall for this purpose observe to you that I once reading to the late Earl of Anglesy when he was Lord Privy Seal what I had in a Manuscript of mine set down as the Fact of what had passed between the late King and the House of Commons concerning his Declaration of Indulgence on March the 15th 1671. and the Penal Laws being thereby suspended and the suspension of which the Commons then urged could not be but by Act of Parliament and whereupon they apply'd to the King for the Vacating that Declaration his Lordship did dictate to me in order to my Compleating the state of that Fact and which I writ from his Mouth as followeth viz. But it is to be observ'd upon this whole Transaction between the King and the House of Commons that the Lords had no hand in the Address to the King about this great Point altho it be uncontroverted that the Lords are the only Iudicatory that can determine any controverted Point without an Act of Parliament and either the King or the Commons might in a particular Case have had this Point brought by Appeal to the Lords if they had pleas'd and consequently might have effected the judicial decision of the same A. In your State of that part of the Fact that concern'd the Commons did they Address against the Dispensing with Acts of Parliament B. No but only against the Suspending them which are things of a different Nature The same House of Commons by having Iuly the 10th 1663. resolved That His Majesty be humbly desired to issue forth his Proclamation for the punctual and effectual Execution and Observance of the Act of Navigation without any Dispensation whatsoever whereby the Act may be in the least violated and to recal such Dispensations as are already granted c. did virtually shew a Deference to His Majesty's right of Dispensing Nay let me tell you that the very many Acts of Parliaments which expresly provide against the Crown 's dispensing by Non-obstante in some particular Cases may all be cited as Presidents or Iudgments of Parliaments for the propping up the Dispensative Power and of Parliaments having admitted that Power in our Kings the exercise of which they provide against and desire to take away in such particular Cases But by referring to the Fact of the entercourse between the late King and the House of Commons about the suspending the Penal Laws I have took occasion to point out to you the Wisdom of the Government in then passing that affair over without a judicial decision And I can give you an instance of the Prudential measures formerly observ'd by Persons who made a great figure in the Administration of the Ecclesiastical Government of the Church of England and who at the Consecration of Bishop Manwaring when on the usual Process at Consecrations to call all Persons to appear to shew cause why the Elect should not be Confirm'd some then appear'd objected against him that upon his being Impeached 3 o Car. 1. by the Commons the Lords had given Iudgment against him to disable him from all Preferment in the Church forbore to consider the merits of the Exception and throwing them off by a Pretence of their being defective in some Formalities of Law went on in the Confirmation And which is more I can tell you that long afterward viz. A. 1640. the Lords highly resenting both the Pardon and Bishoprick he had obtain'd and calling to mind the Sentence they had pronounced against him did on the 18th of April that year refer the Consideration thereof to their Grand Committee for Privileges it being also moved that what can be alledged on the Lord Bishop of St. David ' s part either by Pardon Licence or otherwise may be produced and seen at the Sitting of the Lords Committees for their full and clear understanding and better expedition in the business and on the 21st of April that year order'd that on the following Monday the Records be brought into the House that the House might determine the Cause and on the 27th of April following order'd the Cause to be heard the next day and upon which day some such fatal Sentence being expected against the Bishop as And his Bishoprick let another man take by reason of his having been judicially disabled His Majesty commanded that Bishop not to Sit in Parliament nor send any Proxy thither and the serment of the debate went off without any Iudgment given by the Lords that might touch Prerogative in the Point And if in the year 1640. when the air of mens fancies was so much infected with the Pestilence of Faction so much tenderness was shewn to Prerogative and that too in the Case of a Criminal whom the Commons had for so many years made the great object of their anger as one whom they look'd on as a Proditor or Betrayer of his Country and Betrayer of their Properties the Loyal may well say quid non speremus as to any future ferment that can rise in Parliament being allay'd without Prejudice to the Crown The Iournals of Parliament in the Beginning of the Reign of King Charles the First do tell us of the great ferment about the Pardon of Bishop Montague whom the Commons had impeach'd before the Lords and who after the Parliament was Prorogued to the 4th year of the reign of that Prince had obtain'd his Pardon in the time of the Prorogation and that such Pardon was by the Commons question'd and that such questioning soon evaporated But according to that Great Saying of Sir Harry Martin in his Speech at a Conference between both Houses as you will find it in Râ—…shworth after he had mention'd the inconvenience of nice debates about the Original Latitude and Bounds of Sovereign Power viz. I have ever been of opinion that it is then best with Sovereign Power when it is had in tacit veneration and not when it is prophaned by Publick Hearings and Examinations you will find that it hath been the usual Practice of our great Loyal Patriots in many Critical Conjunctures of time to prevent the popular Criticising on Controverted Points of Prerogative and to provide for the ease both of Prince and People by giving no other rule in the Cause then the putting it off in longissimum diem A. I suppose that excellent Political remark of Sir Harry Martin's was so made by him in the Conjuncture of the Petition of Right I have read of the great ferment the Petition of Right made in the beginning of the Reign
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
THE OBLIGATION Resulting from the OATH of SUPREMACY To Assist and Defend the Pre-eminence or Prerogative OF THE Dispensative Power BELONGING To the KING his Heirs and Successors In the asserting of that Power various Historical Passages occurring in the Usurpation after the Year 1641. are occasionally mentioned And an Account is given at large of the Progress of the Power of Dispensing as to Acts of Parliament about Religion since the Reformation and of divers Judgments of Parliaments declaring their Approbation of the Exercise of such Power and particularly in what concerns the Punishment of Disability or Incapacity Princes are Supreme over Persons not over Things This is the Supreme Power of Princes which we teach that they be Gods Ministers in their own Dominions bearing the Sword and freely to permit and publickly to Defend that which God commandeth in Faith and good Manners c. Princes may Command the Bodies of all their Subjects in time both of War and Peace c. Out of all Question where Princes may by God's Law Command all Men must obey them c. The Prince may discharge the Servant but no Man can discharge the Subject The Word of God teacheth you to obey Princes the words of men cannot loose you BISHOP BILSON of the SUPREMACY LONDON Printed for Thomas Dring at the Harrow at Chancery-Lane End in Fleetstreet William Crook at the Green Dragon without Temple-Bar and William Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street 1687. To the Right Honorable JOHN Earl of MELFORT Viscount of Forth Lord Drummond of Rickartone c. His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Kingdom of Scotland and one of His Majesty's most Honorable Privy Council in both Kingdoms of England and Scotland c. MY LORD AS the Historian hath told us of Ireland that long ago while the Arts and Sciences were generally banish'd from the Christian World they were enthroned in Ireland and that Men were sent thither from other Parts of Christendom to be improved in Learning so I have elsewhere observ'd that in some late Conjunctures and particularly during the turbid Interval of the Exclusion men might well be sent to Scotland to learn Loyalty And I having taken occasion in the first Part of this Discourse to shew my self a just honourer of that Country and as I may say somewhat like a Benefactor to it by sending thither the notices of some pass'd great Transactions that might possibly there give more light and life to the Moral Offices of Natural Allegiance or Obedience did hold my self obliged in Common Justice to address this Part of my Work to your Lordship For as your Station here qualifies you beyond other Subjects to receive what Tribute is offer'd to your Country so your handing it thither will necessarily make it there the more acceptable And when I consider with what an incomparable Tenderness for the Monarchy and its Rights so many of the Statutes of Scotland since the Year 1660. have been adorn'd I am apt to think that any matter of Presidents or Records by me recover'd out of the Sea of time where they lay so long useless and neglected and now happening to be serviceable to those Moral Offices before-mention'd would by the so many in that Kingdom devoted to consummate Obedience and Loyalty be more valued then if I could have imported into that Realm another such Treasure as that which lay so long buried in the Ocean near the Bahama Islands and that whoever Contributed to your Loyal Country any Substantial Notions that might enrich it in the discharge of the Duties of the born and sworn Allegiance would be esteem'd there as some way sharing in the honour of Arauna in giving like a King to a King. Long may your great Master live happy in the Enjoyment of the faithful Services of so vigilant a Minister as your Lordship who by the universality of your Knowledge accompany'd with universal Charity for all Mankind have appear'd to be born as I may say for the time of his most glorious Reign the time chosen by Heaven for Mercies Triumph on Earth Nothing vulgar was to be expected from a Person of your Lordship's extraordinary intellectual and moral Endowments and in whom the Loyalty and other Virtues of your many noble Ancestors have as it were lived extraduce And the World would be unjust to you if it acknowledged not its great Expectation answer'd by your greater Performances and particularly by your having been so eminently Ministerial in the Easing both the Cares of your Prince and of all his Subjects too by the Figure you have made in promoting the Ease of his People's Consciences and in further ennobling and endearing the Name of DRUMMOND by your Lordship's Prosecuting that by the Bravery of Action which the HISTORIAN of that your Name did by Words when he transmitted to Posterity the most Christian and Statesman-like Speech of Liberty of Conscience I know extant and as spoke by a Roman-Catholick Councellor in Scotland to King Iames the Fifth I most humbly kiss your Lordship's Hands and am My Lord Your Lordships most Obedient Servant P. P. THE OBLIGATION Resulting from the Oath of Supremacy To Assist and Defend the Pre-eminence or Prerogative OF THE Dispensative Power Belonging to the KING his Heirs and Successors c. PART I A. IN this Kingdom of England so naturally of old addicted to Religion and vehemence in it as to give a Bishop of Rome cause to complain he had more trouble given him by Applications from England about it then from all the World beside and afterward to make Geneva wonder at the Sabbatarians here exceeding the Iewish strictness and to cause Barclay in his Euphoâ—…mio to say of the English Nec quicqúam in numinis cultu modicum possunt and that our several Sects thought unos se Coelestium rerum participes exortes coeteros omnes esse did you ever observe hear or read of the style of Tenderness of Conscience so much used as in the year 41. and sometime afterward B. I have not From the Date of King Charles the First 's Declaration to all His loving Subjects about that time wherein he speaks of his Care for Exemption of Tender Consciences till the Date of King Charles the Second's Declaration from Breda wherein the Liberty of Tender Consciences is Provided for the clause of easing Tender Consciences ran through the Messages Addresses and Answers that passed between King and Parliament almost as much as the Clause of proponentibus legatis did run through the Councel of Trent A. But were not their Consciences extremely erroneous who thought themselves bound then to advance Religion by War B. Aâ—… and by a Civil War as you might have added against a Prince of the tenderest Conscience imaginable for that Character he had from an Arch-bishop in his Speech in the Parliament of 40 who said Our Sovereign is I will not say above other Princes but above all Christian men that ever I knew
or heard of a man of most upright dainty and scrupulous Conscience and afraid to look upon some Actions which other Princes abroad do usually swallow and he might have added a Prince the real Tenderness of whoâ—…e Conscience had so often favour'd the nominal tenderness of others who instead of being Tender-hearted Christians were Stiff-necked Iews and who might justly apprehend that it was only duritia cordis instead of Tenderness of Conscience he dispens'd with and as when God dispens'd with the Iews in Polygamy For since Tenderness of Conscience doth necessarily render a man abstemious from things lawful and to be of a gentle submissive temper not only to his Equals but Inferiors and to be merciful even to brute Creatures and not only averse from suing any one about Penal Lawes but ready to remit somewhat of his Right rather then to go to Law with a Stranger and much less with ones Father the Pater Patrioe seeing any men outraging the Lawes and the quiet of the whole Realm by that wilde brutish thing call'd War for ferinum quiddam bellum est might well judge them utterly devoid of all Tenderness of Conscience I shall therefore frankly tell you that no doubt but their Consciences were extremely erroneous or rather seaâ—…ed Our great Writer of Conscience Bishop Sanderson in his Sermon on Rom. 14. 13. discussing the Causes from which mens doubtfulness of mind may spring and saying that sometimes it proceeds from Tenderness of Conscience which yet is indeed a very blessed and a gracious thing doth very well add but yet as tender things may sooner miscarry very obnoxious through Satan's diligence and subtlety to be wrought upon to dangerous inconveniences And if we Consider that a Civil War cannot be lawful on both Sides however a foreign one may we may well account that any deluded melancholy People who were tempted to raise a Civil War out of a blind Zeal for Religion and to assault the Thirteenth of the Romans out of the Apocalypse had hard Spleens instead of tender Consciences and that they have soft Heads instead of tender Hearts who try to make Religion a gainer by War. But indeed the Project of planting Religion and Propagating the Church by War that is described to be Status humanoe Societatis dissolutoe and that so presently opens to all mens view the horrid Scene of Contempta Religio Rapta profana Sacra profanata is so vain that the old Proverbial Impiety of such who did castra sequi how victorious soever hath naturally help'd to make Conquering Nations embrace the very Religion of the Conquered a thing exemplify'd in the Conquests of the Danes and Saâ—…ns in England of the Gothes in Italy and France and Spain and of the Moors in Spain and in the Turks having overcome the Saracens embracing the Saracens Religion And the Vanity of Reforming the World by War that Profound and Conscientious Statesman Cardinal D'Ossat in his Third Book 86th Letter and to Villeroy A. 1597. hath well taught us and where he mentions how he urged to the Pope the reasonableness of Harry the 4th's so religiously observing the great Edict of Pacification and that the many Wars made again and again by Hereticks serv'd for nothing but in many places to abolish the Catholick Religion and in a manner all Ecclesiastical Discipline Iustice and Order and to introduce Atheism with the Sequel of all sorts of Sacrileges Parricides Rapes Treasons and Cruelties and other sorts of wickedness c. and afterward that on the making War all the Malecontents all People indebted and neâ—…ssitous all Debauchees and Vagabonds all Thieves and other Criminals whose Lives were become forfeited to the Law of what Religion or Opinion soever they were were wont to joyn with the Hugonots and did more harm to the Church and Religion and good manners in one day of War then they could in a hundred days of Peace Thus â—…e who â—…its in the Heavens had them here in derision while they in effect thus presumed to transprose Scripture and to say Glory to God in the highest and on Earth War and ill will towards men and while according to that Saying in Arch-bishop Lâ—…d's famous Star-Chamber-Speech viz. No Nation hath ever appear'd more jealous of Religion then the People of England have ever been they were under such Transports of misguided Zeal as to adore that their jealousie and to offer Sacrifices to it with as much Contempt of Heaven and Cruelty to Mankind as ever were offer'd to the image of Iealousie referr'd to by Ezekiel and to which the tenderest of their Relations were not thought too costly Victims and to which their truly Tender-Conscienced King who like Moses with Tenderness carried them in his Bosome as a Nursing-Father beareth the sucking Child and who sometimes out of Tenderness to several of his Complaining Children Sacrificed the rigour of his Penal Lawes and to whom they should have been subject for that Tender thing Conscience sake was himself at last Sacrificed How did that Pious Prince sometimes in relation to his Heterodox Protestant Subjects imitate the Father of the Prodigal who when his Son was yet afar off ran to meet him fell on his neck and kiss'd him a thing acknowledg'd by an Eminent learned Divine Mr. Iohn Ley in his Book call'd Defensive Doubts Hopes and Reasons Printed in the year 1641. and where in p. 123. urging the Bishops to procure the Revocation of a late Canon of the Church and having said wherein if they appear and prevail they need not fear any disparagement to their Prudence by withdrawing that they have decreed since the wisest Statesmen and greatest Governors have used many times to comply so far with popular Dispositions as to vary their own Acts with relation to their liking as the Pilot doth his Soils to comply with the wind he addeth And you cannot have a more authentic Example both to induce you to this and to defend you in it from all Imputations then that of our Sacred Sovereign who rather then he would give any Colour of Complaint for aggrievances to his People was pleas'd to DISPENSE with the five Articles of PERTH's Assembly and to discharge all Persons from urging the Practice thereof upon any either Laick or Ecclesiastical Person whatsoever and to free all his Subjects from all Censures and Pains whether Ecclesiastical or Secular for not urging practising and obeying any of them tho they were esâ—…ablish'd both by a General Assembly and by Act of Parliament King Charles his large Declaration of the â—…umults in Scotland p 370. p. 389. And for his OWN Acts for these Articles of Perth were propounded and ratify'd in the Reign of his Royal Father he imposed the Service Book the Book of Canons and high Commission upon his Subjects in Scotland and upon their humble Supplication was content graciously to grant a Discharge from them passing his Princely Promise that he would neither then nor afterwards press the Practice of them nor any
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
insignificant as did the old Politicks I shall refer you to in the Sacred Story and when the whole Earth was of one Language and of one Speech and the Vogue was Let us build a City and Tower whose top may reach to Heaven and let us make us a Name least we be scatter'd abroad on the face of the whole Earth But Heaven confounded their Language and their City was call'd Babel and their feared Dissipation was their Punishment They were so diffident of the Divine Promise whose garranty they had that they were resolv'd by their own hands to provide against all Dangers of a future Deluge and having built their Tower with Brick they thought 't would defend them from the Power of Fire concerning which they had heard the Tradition that a general Destruction of the World should proceed from the fury of that Element and they vainly endeavour'd to secure themselves against the anger of Heaven rather by a lofty Pile then by lowly Minds A. That wretched vulgar Error you referr'd to did shew that the line of Confusion was stretch'd forth on Men's understandings as well as on the Realm in that Conjuncture and I have observ'd that that vulgar Error did last to the very time of the ferment about the Exclusion and long before which time as well as then some have talk'd and writ at this rate viz. That the Oath of Supremacy was expresly made as the title of it shews to shut out the Usurpation of foreign Powers and Potentates and was not meant to provide against any popular Usurpations or Diminutions of the King 's Supreme Authority B. O God! But to speak or write at that rate to Conscience is Chicanerie And I have elsewhere mention'd what one whom I cannot too often mention to be as fair a dealer with Conscience as any the Age hath had told us in his sixth Lecture of Oaths about the Oath of Supremacy binding in this Case You know I mean Bishop Sanderson who there shews that tho Popes Usurpations or arrogating to themselves the Supreme Iurisdiction in spiritualibus throughout this Kingdom was the Cause of the Oath of Supremacy yet the Oath is obligatory according to the express words in the Utmost Latitude the reason is that the intention of a Law is general to provide against all future inconveniences of the like kind or nature Moreover the words in Queen Elizabeth's Admonition referring to the Persons call'd to Ecclesiastical Ministry in the Church as the doubters and the tenour of all the subsequent Interpretations as speaking them principally occasion'd by the doubters in the Church of England do further shew the Vanity of that Objection And if you will more particularly think of the Queen 's Authentick Interpretation of that Oath and approved in Parliament you will find the Oath of Supremacy to be an Oath of Allegiance and that it may be so-likewise properly termed For in the beginning of the Admonition you will thus find it viz. The Queen's Majesty being inform'd that in certain places of this Realm sundry of her native Subjects being call'd to Ministry in the Church be by sinister Perswasion and perverse Construction induced to find some scruple in the form of an Oath which by an Act of the last Parliament is prescribed to be required of divers Persons for the recognition of their ALLEGIANCE to her Majesty c. A. As one may perceive by what the Queen's Interpretation in the Admonition refers to that there was a great ferment in the Kingdom about the sense of the Oath so suitably to what you mention'd of the Prudence of our Ancestors that caus'd various ferments to go off so insensibly the next Parliament in approving her Interpretation without troubling themselves to question the Authentickness of it doth corroborate your observation of the Excellence of the English understandings B. It doth so The fermentation in the minds of the People you speak of had been Epidemical And tho one might fancy by the Proem of the Admonition that the Interpretation as well as the Dispensing with Disability had an eye but on an inconsiderable number of People there referr'd to in the foremention'd words of sundry of her Majesty's Native Subjects in certain places of this Realm c. yet any one who knoweth the History of those times will find the Interpretation and Dispensation as I may say Calculated for the Meridian of all England and the Interpretation having an eye on all Christendom There was then in the Morning of that Queen's Reign and of the restoration of the Reform'd Religion such a thick mist of causeless Fears and Iealousies that had generally o'erspread the minds of Protestants and Papists shortly after the Birth of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. c. 1 o. that nothing but the Supremacy both of Power and Reason that shone in her authentick Interpretation of that Statute could disperse and that too not suddenly For as Mr. Nye in his Book of Two Acts of Parliament or Observations on that Oath tells us It is mention'd in the Admonition that the Queen 's Ecclesiastical Power is the same that was challenged and used by Henry the 8th c. which is supposed by some to be the same that was in the Pope the Person only and not the Power changed so that our Princes are but secular Popes This Objection was strengthen'd by the subtlety of Gardiner abroad and at home by a Sermon Preach'd at Paul's Cross in the year 1588. by Dr. Bancroft who calls Q. Eliz. a Petty Pope and tells us her Ecclesiastical Authority is the same which the Pope's was formerly and in the Margin opposite to what he had said of the subtlety of Gardiner strengthening the Objection abroad hath these words viz. Whom Calvin terms Imposterille And Mr. Nye afterward goes on to shew how the 37th Article did remove the Objection sufficiently The Author of The true Grounds of Ecclesiastical Regiment Printed in London A. 1641. doth in p. 53. mention some mens objecting it against the Ecclesiastical Supremacy of our Monarchs that it may descend to Infants under Age as it did to King Edward the 6th or to Women as to Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth and that whatsoever we may allow to men such as Henry the 8th yet it seems unreasonable to allow it Women and Children The Papists think this Objection of great moment and therefore Bellarmine in great disdain casts it out that in England they had a certain Woman for their Bishop meaning Queen Elizabeth and she knowing what an odium that word would draw on her both among Papists and many Protestants also Consults her Bishops about it and by their advice sets forth a Declaration certifying the World thereby that she claim'd no other Headship in the Church but such as might exclude all dependency on foreign Headships and secure her from all danger of being deposed c. The Bishops in this did as warily provide for their own Claim as the Queen 's And the Roman-Catholick Author
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
I shall refer you to King Iames his Proclamation of Iune the 10th in the year 1606. and where having mentioned the Religion of the Roman-Catholicks he saith We deâ—…ïre still to make it appear in the whole Course of of our Government that we are far from accounting all those Subjects Disâ—…oyal that are that way affected and that we do DISTINGUISH of such as be carry'd only with blind zeal and such as sin out of Presumption c. and therefore as after times must give us tryal of ALL mens behaviour so must all men expect that their own deserts must be the only measure of their Fortunes at our hands either one way or other and having before spoke of the Gun-Powder Treason and the Doctrines of some Priests that might encourage it and said that thereby there is sufficient Cause to justifie the Proceedings of us and our said Parliament in the making and execution of these last and all other former Statutes tending to the same end it followeth nevertheless seeing the Soveraign Care appertains to us who have the Soveraign Power of Iustice in our hand and the Supreme Dispensation of Clemency and Moderation of the Severity of our Laws is likewise as proper to us to use whensoever we shall find it reasonable the same deserving to be no less allow'd in us being in our Dominions God's Lieutenant then it is prais'd in him among whose highest titles it is that his Mercy is above all his Works c. The King in the beginning of his Proclamation having profess'd his Zeal for the Religion of the Church of England by Law Establish'd and his constant Resolution for the maintenance and defence thereof said Of which our purpose and determination beside all other our former proceedings since our Entry into this Kingdom we have given a new and certain Demonstration by such two Acts as have been passed in this Session of our Parliament both tending to prevent the Dangers and diminish the number of those who adhering to the Profession of the Church of Rome are blindly led together with the Superstition of their Religion both into some points of Doctrine which cannot consist with the Loyalty of Subjects toward their Prince and oft-times into direct actions of Conspiracies and Conjurations against the State wherein they live as hath most notoriously appear'd by the late most horrible and almost incredible Conjuration c. The two Acts there referr'd to are those that you will find in your Statute-Book Anno tertio Jacobi Regis cap. 4. An Act for the Discovering and repressing Popish Recusants and in which the Oath of Allegiance is contain'd and Cap. 5. An Act to prevent and avoid dangers by Popish Recusants and whereby Popish Recusants Convict are disabled from bearing Office. But here you see how that wise Prince so soon after so horrid a real Plot did by distinguishing in his Proclamation between the Principles of some Roman-Catholicks and others as to Loyalty and alluring the Loyal by the avow'd Dispensative Power of his Mercy and hiding them under the wings of his Mercy from the terror of his Laws and affording to all his Subjects who should afterward behave themselves well a Tabula post naufragium as to the expectance of making up their fortunes think himself obliged then to cause his Moderation to be known to all men And you may hence take occasion when you think of the many Acts in terrorem in the Statute-Book and where there is no Proportion between the Crime and the Punishment and in some that seem inflictive of Punishments in the Case where men cannot be to any but the Searcher of hearts known to be Criminal at all as for example in their owning some Problematick Points of the Christian Religion to consider that most probably the Wisdom of the Government would not have pass'd them but on the Suppoâ—…ition of the Regal Power of dispensing therein expresly or tacitly You see how the Laws commonly call'd Sangâ—…inary have been tacitly suspended and I may tell you that tho I desire to live no longer then I shall be a maintainet of the internal Communion due from all Christians to all Christians as a part of that Holiness without which no man shall see God yet I should soon withdraw from the external Communion of the Church of England if it own'd the justness of such Laws otherwise then as in terroremâ—… and if it owned the lawfulness of putting men to Death for the Profession of any Religionary Principles their liberty to prosess which was purchased for them by the Blood of their Redeemer But I need not say more now about cautioning you or any one against the taking offence at any of our Laws Laws through want of considering which of them were designedly made for terror I might here likewise as to many Acts about Trade that swell the Statute-Book apply the Consideration of the Regal Power of dispensing therein having encouraged our Ancestors to perpetuate them as Laws A. The truth is you now put me in mind how I having long ago spent much time in considering the Trade and Traffick of our Country and of other Parts of Christendom and finding that shortly after His late Majesty's Restoration one of his Ministers had in a Publick Speech intimated it to the Parliament that His Majesty had setled a Councel of Trade consisting of some of the Lords of his Privy Councel and of some Gentlemen of Quality and Experience and of some Principal Merchants of the Principal Companies I had the curiosity to look over their Iournals and their Advices and Reports to the King and there I found somewhat of the same notion with yours in one of their Reports to His Majesty For there in one of their Papers of Advice addressed to the King taking notice that what they conceived fit to be done for the advancement of the Trade of the Realm was Prohibited by divers ancient Statutes they make them imply that the thing might be done by the King's licence or dispensing and whereupon they thus go on And therefore finding this Dispensation to be your Majesty's Prerogative preserv'd entire to the Crown through so many of your Royal Progenitors we have not thought fit to touch further upon this Matter as being humbly confident that your Majesty's Subjects shall upon all occasions be indulged the like if not more ready relief and accommodation for their Trade from your Majesty's Royal Grace and Bounty only because the Observation was obvious that perhaps all former Parliaments purposely left this door open to the People by the Grace of the King to be reliev'd with those dispensations as foreseeing how difficult if not impossible or how inconvenient at least it might be altogether to restrain what those Statutes prohibited we could not omit the same in this place c. B. And you have put me in mind how a very Loyal and judicious Gentleman of that Councel of Trade and whom I look on to be as deeply study'd in the
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