time that he could not do it for it was to be read the Day after And what can be rationally interpreted from it but that they had been all that while numbring the People to see whither the Party were strong enough And I am the rather inclin'd to it for that since the time of the first Declaration the Doctrin of Non-Resistance has not been so much in Vogue as it was formerly it would keep cold for another time and to have pressed it now who knows but the People might have believ'd it In short Nathan Zadoc c. had some pretence for opposing Adoniah Me thy Servant and Zadoc the Priest he hath not called So Core Dathan and Abiram were Ecclesiastical Princes and thought they might have as much right to Govern as Moses But when the Church of England founded on the Law of England acknowledges the King Supreme in all Causes Themselves infra aetatem in custodia Domini Regis when the King by his Declaration has secur'd them in their Religion Possessons and Properties and by vertue of his Royal Prerogative and for the Quiet of the Nation only indulg'd it to others yet making no doubt of the Parliaments concurrence in it is it just that Their Eye be evil because the King 's is good or must the Kingdom of Heaven be confin'd to a Party I never heard that Disobedience was any Qualification for it and therefore if they will not enter themselves why do they shut it against others that would enter But perhaps the Petition if yet there can be any reason for the breach of a Duty may give us the reason of it The Title says In behalf of themselves and others of their absent Brethren and of the Clergy of their respective Dioceses Which makes good what I before hinted that instead of Distributing and Publishing His Majesty's Declaration to be read in their respective Dioceses as in bounden Duty to their Supreme Ordinary the King they ought to have done and the Clergy in respect of their Canonical Obedience to them must have obey'd under the pain of Suspension and in case of Contumacy of Deprivation they had been feeling the Pulse of their Clergy and finding little return from them but speak Lord for thy Servant heareth they concluded the Flock would follow the Shepherd and consequently if the Party were not strong enough the Multitude of the Offenders might make it dispunishable whereas it has been seen that a Ferry-boat's taking in too many Passengers to increase the Fare has been often the occasion of sinking all together And if the Loyalty of the Church of England receive any blemish by it what can she say but that she was wounded in the House of her Friends For by the same Reason that a Metropolitan refuses the Injunctions of his Supreme Ordinary the King by the same Reason may a Diocesan refuse his Metropolitan and every inferior Clergy man his Diocesan and when the Chain is once broken you may dispose the Links as you please But the Petition says It was neither from any want of Duty and Obedience to His Majesty No Then why was it not comply'd with Shew me thy Faith by thy Works saith St. James nor will it be possible to clear that Son of Disobedience that said I go but went not A Bishop as before is not bound to obey any Mandate but the King 's which Exception proves the Rule and that he is inexcusably oblig'd to obey the King's For all Bishops are subject to the Imperial Power who is to be obey'd against the will of the Bishop Mauritius the Emperor says Bishop Taylor commanded St. Gregory to hand an unlawful Edict to the Churches the Bishop advis'd the Prince that what he went about was a sin did what he could to have hinder'd it and yet obey'd It was the Case of Saul and Samuel The King desires Samuel to joyn with him in the Service of the Lord He with the liberty of a Prophet refus'd at first but afterwards joyn'd with him Whereupon the said Bishop in the same place further says That even the Vnlawful Edicts of a Lawful Prince may be published by the Clergy How much more then those that are Lawful And that this Declaration is such I shall shew presently when I come to speak to their word Illegal In short the Archbishop of Canterbury is Ordinary of the Court and a Bishop's private Opinion may be warrant enough for him to speak when he is requir'd but not to reprove a Prince upon pretence of Duty Our Holy Mother the Church of England being both in her Principles and constant Practises unquestionably Loyal Nor have they hitherto appear'd other and if not Religion moral Gratitude must have oblig'd them to it All the Bishoprics of England but Sodor in Man which was instituted by Pope Gregory the Fourth are of the Foundation of the Kings of England and those in Wales of the Prince of Wales Nor is it less than reason that they look up to the hand that fed them Or to whom more justly ought they have paid the Tribute of Obedience than to Him that took them from the Flock and sate them among Princes In a word the late War was Bellum Episcopale and if King Charles the First would have confirm'd the Sale of Church Lands he had sav'd Himself And why then do they reproach the King His Son with their Loyalty when they instance the contrary in so small a trial of that Obedience especially when were the matter doubtful the Presumption were for Obedience and even unjust Commands may be justly obey'd For as we fear the thing is unjust so have we reason to fear the evil of Disobedience for we are sure that is evil and therefore we are to change the Speculative Doubt into a Practical Resolution and of two Doubts take the surest part and that is to obey because in such Cases Reumfacit Superiorem iniquitas Imperandi innocentem Subditum ordo serviendi The Evil if there be any is imputed to him that Commands not him that Obeys who is not his Prince's Judge but Servant and they that are under Authority are to Obey not Dispute nor shall any thing done by vertue thereof be said to be contra pacem David commanded Joab to put Vriah in the Head of the Battle to the end that he might fall by the Enemy Joab obeys Vriah is kill'd and yet not Joab who might have prevented it but David who commanded it is charg'd with the Murther In a word to pretend Loyalty for a common Principle and yet make Disputing and Disobedience the Practice of it what is it but a drawing near with the Mouth when the Heart is farthest from it The Voice perhaps may be the Voice of Jacob but the Hands are the Hands of Esau And having to her great Honor been more than once publickly acknowledg'd to be so by your Majesty And do's his Majesty less than acknowledge it in
AN ANSWER To a PAPER importing a PETITION OF THE Archbishop of CANTERBURY AND Six other BISHOPS TO His Majesty Touching their not Distributing and Publishing THE LATE DECLARATION FOR Liberty of Conscience Vide utrum Tunica filii tui sit an non Quam cum cognovisset pater ait Tunica filii mei est fera pessima comedit eum Gen. xxxvii Ver. 32 33. With Allowance London Printed by Henry Hills Printer to the Kings Most Excellent Majesty for His Houshold and Chappel And are to be sold at his Printing-house on the Ditch-side in Black-Friers 1688. AN ANSWER TO A Paper importing a Petition of the Archbishop of Canterbury and Six other Bishops to His Majesty c. NOT to amuse my Reader with any Reasons or Excuse for this Undertaking let this suffice for both That several Copies of this Paper instead of distributing His Majesty's Declaration for Liberty of Conscience having been privately dispers'd thro' most Counties of England I thought it every man's Duty and among the rest mine to undeceive them who have not the same Brains but more Honesty and Loyalty than those that sent it and bestow some Ink upon the Tetter that it spread no further In order to which and that every man may at once see the Whole before him and thereby come to the truer Conclusion I shall take my Rise from the Occasion of this Paper and thence proceed to the Matter of it Now the Occasion was thus His Majesty finding it had been the frequent endeavors of the four last Reigns to reduce this Kingdom to an exact Conformity in Religion and how little the Success had answer'd the Design but rather destroy'd Trade depopulated the Country and discourag'd Strangers and being resolv'd to establish His Government on such a Foundation as might make His Subjects happy and unite them to Him by Inclination as well as Duty on the 4th of April 1687. issued His most Gracious Declaration for Liberty of Conscience thereby declaring That He will Protect and Maintain His Archbishops Bishops and Clergy and all other His Subjects of the Church of England in the free Exercise of their Religion and full Enjoyment of their Possessions and Properties as now Established by Law without any Molestation c. That all Execution of Penal Laws for matters Ecclesiastical as Nonconformity c. shall be and are thereby suspended That all His Subjects have leave to Meet and Worship God in their own way without disturbance And forasmuch as the benefit of the Service of His Subjects is by the Law of Nature inseparably annex'd to and inherent in His Royal Person and that no one for the future may be under any Discouragement or Disability by reason of some Oaths or Tests usually administred That no such Oaths or Tests shall be hereafter required of them And that He would dispense with them c. And because several Endeavors had been made to abuse the easiness of the People as if He might be persuaded out of what He had so solemnly declared His Majesty as well to stop the mouth of Gainsayers as to shew his Intentions were not changed since the said 4th of April by a second Declaration of the 27th of April last past enforces and confirms the said former Declaration conjures His loving Subjects to lay aside all private Animosities and groundless Jealousies and to choose such Members of Parliament as may do their part to finish what he has begun for the Advantage of the Monarchy over which God hath plac'd Him as being resolv'd to call a Parliament that shall meet in November next at furthest This Declaration was forthwith printed and by Order of Council required to be distributed published and read in the respective Churches thro' the Kingdom And in that it was not enjoyn'd to be read in any the Congregations thereby permitted what greater Evidence can there be of His Majesty's real Intentions to the Church of England when however He suffer'd others He own'd not yet any Establish'd National Church but the Church of England Upon this the ensuing Paper was on the 18th of May following between the hours of Nine and Ten at night presented to His Majesty by the Six Bishops the Subscribers To the King 's most Excellent Majesty The humble Petition of William Archbishop of Canterbury and of divers of the Suffragan Bishops of the Province now present with him in behalf of themselves and others of their absent Brethren and of the Clergy of their respective Dioceses Humbly sheweth THat their great Averseness they find in themselves to the Distribution and Publication in all their Churches of your Majesties late Declaration for Liberty of Conscience proceedeth neither from any want of Duty and Obedience to your Majesty our Holy Mother the Church of England being both in her Principles and constant Practices unquestionably Loyal and having to her great Honor been more than once publickly acknowledg'd to be so by your Majesty nor yet from any want of due tenderness to Dissenters In relation to whom they are willing to come to such a Temper as shall be thought fit when that Matter shall be Consider'd and Setled in Parliament and Convocation But among many other Considerations from this especially because the Declaration is founded upon such a Dispensing Power as has been often declar'd Illegal in Parliament and particularly in the Years 1662 1672 and in the beginning of your Majesties Reign and is a Matter of so great Moment and Consequence to the whole Nation both in Church and State that your Petitioners cannot in Prudence Honor and Conscience so far make themselves Parties to it as the Distribution of it all over the Nation and Reading it even in God's House and in the time of his Divine Service must amount to in common and reasonable Construction your Petitioners therefore most humbly and earnestly beseech your Majesty that you will be Graciously pleas'd not to insist upon the Distribution and Reading your Majesties Declaration Canterbury St. Asaph Bath and Wells Chichester Peterborough Ely. Bristol And here also for Methods sake and before I come to the Matter of it I hold it requisite that I speak somewhat to the Persons the Subscribers and the Time of their Presenting it As to the First the Holy Scripture styles Bishops The Angels of their Churches And by the Common Law of England the Archibishop of Canterbury is Primus Par Angl. The Bishops Lords Ecclesiastical Secular and Sit in Parliament Jure Episcopatus which they hold per Baroniam The Statute pro Clero calls them Peers of the Realm That of Queen Elizabeth One of the greatest States of the Realm They have Jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical Causes and are not bound to obey any Mandate but the King's And by reason of all this presum'd to have a more than ordinary Influence upon the People Our Saviour calls his Disciples The Salt and Light of the World. And why But that they should season others with their Doctrin and
Third's time been commanded by the King 's Writ That as they love their Baronies which they hold of the King That they intermeddle with nothing that concern'd the King's Laws of the Land his Crown and Dignity his Person or his State or the State of his Council or Kingdom Scituri pro certo quod si fecerint Rex inde se capiet ad Baronias suas willing them to know for certain That if they did the King would seize their Baronies And by the Statute of Henry the Eighth it is provided That no Canons or Constitutions should be made or put in Execution by their Authority which were contrariant or repugnant to the King's Prerogative the Laws Customs or Statutes of the Realm In a word the King has commanded they have disobey'd and by their ill Example perverted others and are yet very uncondescending for so the People word it themselves And what would Henry the Eighth have done in such a Case made use of his last Argument or thrown up the Game for a few cross Cards But among many other Considerations from this especially because the Declaration is founded upon such a Dispensing Power as has been often declared Illegal in Parliament And what were those Considerations If a Man should put an ill Construction upon them it may be said their Lordships never intended it and if they intended not to amuse the People why did they not speak plain English and specifie those Considerations inasmuch as all Petitions ought to contain Certainty and Particularity so as a direct Answer may be given to them which could not be here For whatever the King's Answer might have been somewhat more also might have been hook'd in from the words And Alexander would have given it a short Answer Aut Ligna inferte aut Thus. Either made it a Chimney or an Altar But it seems it mov'd in sundry places tho' the best Scripture for this pretended Illegality be a Declaration in Parliament Their Lordships instance nothing beyond their own time but I conceive it not impossible to bring them those of elder times that have been so far from doubting the King's Dispensing Power that they held it unquestionable The Stat. 1. H. 4. cap. 6. says The King is contented to be concluded by the Wise Men of his Realm touching the Estate of Him and his Realm saving always the King's Liberty i. e. His Prerogative of varying from that Law as he should see cause In the Parliament-Roll 1 H. 5. N. 22. the Statutes against Provisors are confirm'd and that the King shall not give any Protection or Grant against the Execution of them Saving to the King his Prerogative And what was meant by that may appear by a prior Roll of the same year N. 15. where the Commons ' pray That the Statutes for the putting Aliens out of the Kingdom may be held and executed The King consents saving his Prerogative and that he dispense with such as he shall please Upon which the Commons answer That their intention was no other and by the help of God never shall be Queen Elizabeth had dispens'd with the ancient Form and Manner of Investing and Consecrating of Bishops and the Parliament of the 8th of her Reign cap. 1. declares it Lawful as being done by her Inherent Prerogative And when by the same Prerogative or Privilege and Royal Authority for so it is worded she dispens'd with the Universities c. so Popish a thing as Latin Prayers and which their Lordships the Bishops still use in Convocations though it be directly contrary to the Statute 1 Eliz. c. 1. for using the Common-Prayer in the Vulgar Tongue only what is meant by it but that the Queen might lawfully dispense with that Statute for if otherwise there is no Ecclesiastical Person in the Kingdom but would have found the Temporal Censures too heavy for him when it had been too late to have ask'd a Parliamentary Consideration whether Legal or not And in particular in the years 1662 and 1672 and in the beginning of Your Majesty's Reign As to the first of which matter of Fact stands thus King Charles the Second by his Declaration from Breda had declar'd Liberty for tender Consciences and that no man should be disquieted for difference in Opinion in matters of Religion which did not disturb the Peace of the Kingdom And in his Declaration of the 26th of December following stood firm to it but that no such Bill had been yet offer'd him While it thus lay an Act of Indempnity and one other of Uniformity were pass'd The first regenerated Themselves and the second with the old Ingredient The Growth of Popery was a probable way to exclude Others The 25th and 26th of February the Commons come to some Resolves against That and Dissenters which with the Reasons of them wherein yet they declare not the Declaration Illegal they present His Majesty on the 28th in the Banquetting House The King complies and it was too soon after a Rebellion to have done otherwise However if they had declar'd it Illegal it was but the single Opinion of the Commons wherein the Lords made no concurrence And therefore to say This Dispensing Power was in the Parliament of 1662 declar'd Illegal when in common and reasonable Construction a Declaration in Parliament is intended of both Houses of Parliament why may it not be as well urg'd That those other Votes and Resolves of the Commons touching the Bill of Exclusion were a Legal Declaration in Parliament when yet the Lords swept their House of it Then for that other of 1672 the King in the Interval of Parliament was engag'd in a War with the Dutch and to secure Peace at home while he had War abroad had put forth a Declaration for Indulgence to Dissenters The Parliament meet grant a Supply of Twelve hundred thirty eight thousand seven hundred and fifty thousand Pounds and without charging the Declaration with Illegality pray His Majesty to recall it The Argument prevail'd and the King did it Which shews that it was in the King's Option not to have done it or done it And lastly for that other in the beginning of His Majesty's Reign That also without declaring it Illegal was but some Heats of the Commons There were at that time two open Rebellions the King who is sole Judge of the danger of the Kingdom and how to avoid it had granted Commissions to certain persons not qualified according to the Statute 25 Car. 2. The Commons offer to bring in a Bill for the Indempnifying those persons The King knew his own Authority and ended the Dispute And if any man doubts the Legality of the King 's dispensing with that Statute a subsequent Judgment in the Case of Sir Edward Hayles has determin'd the Point And that the Power of dispensing with Penal Laws upon Necessity or urgent Occasions of which the King is sole Judge is an inseparable Prerogative in the King not given Him in Trust or