Dominions Witnesse the lawes of Ercombert Ina Withred Alfrede Edward Athelstan Edmond Edgar Athelred Canutus and Edward the Confessor among whose lawes one makes it the office of a King to govern the Church as the Vicar of God Another implyes a power in the King and his Judges to take cognisance of wrong done in Ecclesiastical Courts It was to this Holy King Edward the Confessor that Pope Nicholas the second by his bull for him and his Successours granted this ensuing priviledge to the Kings of England for ever Namely the Advocation and protection of all the Churches of England and power in his stead to make just Ecclesiastical constitutions with the advise of their Bishops and Abbats This grant is as full or fuller then that which Vrban the second made to Roger Earl of Sicily from whence the Kings of Spain at this day do not onely Challenge but enjoy in a manner all Ecclesiastical power in Sicily If the Pope had ever had any such right as he pretends this onely Bull were sufficient to justifie our Kings But they injoyed this very power from the beginning as an essential flower of their Crownes without any thanks to the Pope To make just Ecclesiasticall constitutions in the Popes stead saith the Bull. To govern the Church as the Vicar of God saith the law of the Land The Bishops of Rome have ever been very kind in granting those things which were none of their own and in making deputations and delegations to them who stood in no need of their help being lawfully invested before hand by another title in that power and dignity which the Popes pretended out of their goodnesse to confer upon them but in truth did it onely for the reputation of their See and for maintaining the opinion of their own Grandeur Whether the deputation were accepted or not they did not much trouble themselves So they dealt with 〈◊〉 president in the Councell of Nice So they dealt with the Patriarch of Iustiniana Prima so they served Good King Edward and many others This Legislative power in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiasticall persons the Norman Kings after the conquest did also exercise from time to time with the advice and consent of their Lords spiritual and temporal Hence all those Statutes concerning Benefices Tythes Advowsons Lands given in Mortmain prohibitions consultations praemunires quare Impedits priviledge of Clergy extortions of Ecclesiasticall courts or officers and regulating their due fees wages of Priests Mortuaries Sanctuaries Appropriations and in summe all things which did belong to the externall subsistence regiment and regulating of the Church and this in the raigns of our best Kings long and long before the reformation Othobone the Popes Legate under Vrban the fifth would have indowed Vicars upon appropriated Rectories but could not But our Kings by two Statutes or Acts of Parliament did easily effect it With us the Pope could not make a Spiritual corporation but the King The Pope could not exempt from the Jurisdiction of the ordinary but the King who by his charter could convert Seculars into Regulars The Pope could not grant the Priviledge of the Cistercians and other orders to be free from the payment of Tyths but the King The Pope could not appropriate Churches but the King we find eight Churches appropriated to the Abby of Crowland by the Saxon Kings three Churches appropriated to the Abby of Battell by the Conquerour and twenty by Henry the first to â—â—e Church of Sarisbury The King in his great Councel could make void the certificates of Ordinaries in cases of Ecclesiasticall cognisance and command them to absolve those persons who were judged by his authority to be unjustly excommunicated The Pope could not translate an Arch Bishoprick or a Bishoprick but the King The disposition of Ecclesiastical preferments upon lapse accrued not to the Pope but to the King a plain evidence that he was the Lord Paramount And the King onely could incurre no lapse Nullum tempus occurrit Regi because the law supposed that he was busied about the weightie affaires of the Kingdom The revenewes of a Bishoprick in the vacancy belonged not unto the Pope but to the King which he caused to be restored sometimes from the time of the first vacancy sometimes from the time of the filling of the Church with a new Incumbent according to his good pleasure The Canons of the Pope could not change the Ecclesiastical Lawes of England but the King whose lawes they were He had power in his great Councel to receive the canons if they were judged convenient or to reject them and abrogate them if they were judged inconvenient When some Bishops proposed in Parliament the reception of the Ecclesiastical Canon for the Legitimation of Children born before marriage without such a reception the Canon was of no force in England All the Peers of the Realm stood up and cryed out with one voice Nolumus leges Angliae mutari We will not have the lawes of England to be changed The King and Parliament made a Legislative exposition of the Canon of the Councel of Lyons concerning Bigamy which they would not have done unlesse they had conceived themselves to have power according to the fundamental constitutions of the kingdom either to receive it or reject it Ejus est legem interpretari cujus est condere He that hath authority to expound a law Legislatively hath power to make it The King and Parliament declared Pope Vrban to be the right Pope in a time of Schisme that is in relation to England their own Kingdom not by determining the titles of the Popes but by applying the matter to the one and substracting it from the other All these are so many evidences that when Popery was at the highest the Bishops of Rome had no such absolute Ecclesiasticall Soveraignty in the Church and Realm of England And that what power they exercised at any time more then this was by connivence or permission or violent usurpation And that our Primates had no forraign Superiour Legally established over them but onely the King as he was the Supream head of the whole body politick To see that every one did his duty and injoyed his due right Who would not suffer one of his Barons to be excommunicated from Rome without his privity and consent No Legate de latere was allowed by the law in England but the Archbishop of Canturbury And if any was admitted of courtesy he was to take his oath to do nothing derogatory to the King and his Crown If any man did denounce the Popes excommunication without the assent of the King by the law he forfeited all his goods Neither might any man appeale to Rome without the Kings License In the year 1420 the Pope translated the Bishop of Lincolne to York But the Dean and Chapter absolutely refused to admit him and justified their refusal by the Laws of the Land And
by King Iames in his triplici modo triplex cunâ—us print an 1609. p. 125. and Ireland Councel book of Ireland 32 33 34. of Henry 8th The pretended Crimes of Hen. 8. no blemish to the Reformation Holins in Hen. 8. p. 923. Hall 22. H. 8. p. 199. Our Lawes are not cruel against Roman Catholicks Apol. P. 153 In Artic. 37. p. 419 420 c. Though the first separaters were Schismaticks we are free Aug. Epist. 162. Psal. 19. 12. Protestants no authors of the separation from the Church of Rome Mr. Knot Inf. num p. 534. Bulla Pauli 3. apud Sander de Schism l. 1. p. 109. Eminent persons have great influence without any Iurisdictions The dignity of the Apostolical Churchâ—s â—â—de praeser advers haeres L. 4. Epis. 8. Novel 131. c. 3. et 4. It is no marvel that the Pope winded himself into England by degrees Mat. Paâ— an 1246. No Saxon English or Brittish King ever made any obliging submission to the Pope Bedâ—l 1. c. 25. Bed l. 1. ch 26. The Popes pâ—wer in England was of courtesy Wilfride the first great Appâ—llant Spâ—lm conc an 705. De elâ—ct polest c. 4. significasti c. Bar. An. 1102. nu 8. 〈◊〉 1. de Gest. Paul Angloâ— Hoved. in Hen. 2. Malm. ibid. Math. Par. an 1164. Rog. Hoved. in Hen. 2. Legations as rare as appeals Spelm. conc an 78. Saxon Kings made Ecclesiastical Laws Chap. 15. Chap. 5. Spelm. conc An. 1066. An old Artifice of the Roman Bishops Norman Kings injoyed the same power Cap. quon de Appâ—â—pr 15. R. 2. c. 64 H. 4. c. 12. 2. H. 4. c. 3 2. H 4. c. 4. 9. H. 6. c. 11. Coâ—k Râ—port Cawdries case Canon law of no more force in England then as it was received 20. H. 3. c. 9. 4. E. 1. c. 5. Bigamy 2. R. 2. c. 6. Aedmer in initio Placit an 1. H. 7. Pl. an 1. H 7. Pl. an 32. et 34. E. 1. Ant. Brit. 279. The statute of Mortmain justified Exod. 36. 6. 〈…〉 Nicet l. 7. Consid. p. 49 Oratio ad Paul 5. pro Rep. Veneta Mat. Paâ— an 1164. 35. E. 1. Statute of Carlile Malm. de Gest. Pont. Aug. p. 257. Id. l. 2. p. 45. p. 242. Id. l. 1. p. 204. Articuli cleri 25. E. 3. 25. E. 3. 16. R. 2. C. 5. 27. E. 3. c. 1. Act. and. mon. Pontif. veâ—us Pontif. novum Ex Regist. Craâ—m P. 4. Hall in Henrico 8. fol. 206. Occh. pâ—rt 2. c. 22. de fâ—ill reâ—udic The Soveraignty of our Kings in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiastical persons Antiqu. Brit. p. 325. King Henry 8. did no more then his predecessours The judgment of our English Lawyers Fitzherb Natu. brev 44. Lord Cook Cawdries â—ase The true differ Part 2. Cyp. de unit Ecclesiae Conc. Eph. in Epist. Synod ad Nâ—stor Ambr. et alij Bell de Pont. l. 4. â— C. 22. The supremacy in the whole Colledge of the Apostlâ—s Act. 1. Act. 6. â—ct 8. st 1â— Act. 11. Act. 11. Act 15. The other Apostles had Successors as well as S. Peter Why the Bishop of Rome S. Peters succâ—ssour rather then of Antioch Plat. in vita Sti. Peâ—ri The highest constitution of the Apostles exceeded not natâ—onal Primats Can. Apost 33. How some Primates came to be more respected in the Church then others Either by custom Con. Nic. Or from the Grandeur of the City Conc Chal. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Or by decrees of Councels Or by Edicts of Princes Many Prâ—mats subject to none of the five great Patriarchs Ruff. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 6. The case between the Patriarch of Antioch and Cyprian Bishops Conc. Ephes. part 1. Act. 7. Greg. L. 1. Ep. 24. The case of the Cyprian Bishops applyed The proof in this cause ought to rest upon our adversaries The Brittannique Church ancienter then the Roman Gild. de eâ—id et conqâ— Brit. Plat in vita Sancti Petri. Bar. an 44. The Brittannique Churches sided with the Eastern against the Roman British Bishops ordained at home Reg. Land apud Vsh. dâ—prim Eccl. Brit. p. 56. Plat. The answer of Dionothus Spelm. Conc. An. 601. Confirme by two British Synods Spel. eon an 601. Galt mon. l. 2. c. 12. Beda omnes alii Resp. Greg. ad 8. quest Bed l. 2. c. 2. Ant. Brit p. 48. Malm. prol ad lib. de gest pont Aug. Glos. juris C. Cleros dist 21. Soveraign Princes have power to alter whatsoever is of humane institution in Ecclesiastical discipline Append. de Schism Art 4. p. 526. Suar. l. 3. de prim summi Pontificis cap. 1. num 4. Morl. in Emp. jur p. 1. tit 2. Citati à Sanc. claâ— in Art 37. Append. de Schism p. 527. P. 528. Protestants in their reformation have altered no Articles of Religion nor sacred rites nor violated Charity p. 533. p. 528. p. 530. Augustine Nor swerved from the Law of nature or positive Lawes of God Ex Archivis Turris Londinensis citat author Antiquit. Acad. Cantab In cases doubtful we may not disobey the King and the Lawes Exod. 1. 17. 1 Sam. 22. 17. August Unjust commands may be justly obeyed Prâ—nces are obliged to protect their subjects from the â—yranny of Ecclesiastical Judges Paâ—s lait c. Citati a Sancta Clara in Art 37. p. 420. 421. Sancta Clara p. 146. 417. Kings may exercise exernal acts of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction by fit delegates The Emperours of old did the same Novel 83. Lib. 5. ca. pit Popes convented imprisâ—ned deposed by Emperouâ—s Platin. in Grâ—g 6. Plat. in Bon. 1. Plat. in Sym. P. 425. An. 1110 The Councel of Towers allowes to withdraw obedience from the Pope in certain cases Conc. Turon Râ—sp ad Art 3. Resp. ad Art 4. Resp. ad Art 8. In tract de potest Papae et Imperat Princes may reform new Canâ—ns by old Part. 2. Act. 6. C. 7. de resol fid l. 1. C. 8. P. 152. Patriaâ—â—hal power subject to Impâ—rial Lib. 2. Ep. 61. Emperours have changed Patriarchaâ—s Conc. Const can 3. Conc. Chalc. Can. 8. By their authority Novel 11. et Novel 131. English Kings as Soveraign â—s the Emperouâ—s Math. Paris Two sorts of grounds for sustraction of obedience Our first grouâ—d Chemnit Exa Conc. Fred. Mant. Dist. 100. C. 2. In Hâ—n 1. an 1103. Ant. Brit. pag. 326. Math. Paris an 1237. Math. Par in H. 3. an 1253. Idem An. 1254. Idem An. 1257. Id. An. 1258. Plowmans tale and else where Our second ground Episo Eleiensis Plat. in Greg. 7. Larg Exam p. 18. Admon to the Nobility by Card. Allen. 1. 8. Exam. Cathol p. 34. Math. Paris an 1244. Idem an 1253. Ro. Houed Annal. fol. 303. Ep. Card. Bell. ad G. Blackw Archpr. Supplic of souls p. 296. Hoveden Annal. p. 292. Idem Plat. in pasch 2. Math. Paris an 1212. Math. Paris an 1253. Hoops ad saecul 14. c. 5. Citat Sanct. Clara. Math. Paris in H. 3. An. 1245. Bern. L. 3. de consideratione The
swim in abundance were changed into a competent maintenance And lastly So as all opinion of satisfaction and supererogation were removed I do not see why monasteries might not agree well enough with reformed devotion So then Henry the eighth at the time of his secession from Rome and long after even so long as he lived was neither friend nor favourer of the ensuing reformation nor ordinarily of Protestants in their persons As may yet more manifestly appear by that cruel statute of the Six Articles which he made after all this in the one and thirtieth year of his raign as a trap to catch the Lives of the poore Protestants A Law both writ in blood and executed in blood But suppose that Henry the eighth had been a friend to Protestants what shall we say to all the Orders of the Kingdom what shall we say to the Synods to the Universities to the four and twenty Bishops and nine and twenty Abbats who consented to this Act were all these Schismaticks were Heath Bonner Tonstall Gardiner Stokesley Thurleby c. all Schismaticks If they were then Schismaticks were the greatest opposers of the reformation the greatest enemies of the Protestants and the greatest pillars and upholders of the Roman religion These were they that granted the Supremacy to King Henry the eighth Archbishop Warham told him it was his right to have it before the Pope These were they that preached up the Supremacy of the King at S. Paul's Crosse and defended his Supremacy in printed books These consented to the Acts of Parliament for his Supremacy and the extinguishing of the power of the Roman Bishop in England These were they who helped to make the oath of Supremacy and took it themselves and all others of any note throughout England except onely Fisher Bishop of Rochester and Sir Thomas Moor who were in prison before it was enacted for opposing the Kings Marriage and the succession of his Children to the Crown after it was ordained in Parliament And wise men have thought that the former had taken it if he had not been retarded by the expectation of a Cardinals hatt which was come as far as Calice Or rather what shall we say to the whole body of the Kingdome if we may believe the testimony of Stephen Gardiner Bishop of Winchester a learned person of very near relation to King Henry and in all other things a great Zelot of the Roman Catholick party in his book of true obedience published with a Preface to it made by Bishop Bonner Thus he No forrein Bishop hath authority among us All sorts of people are agreed with us upon this point with most stedfast consent that no manner of person bred or brought up in England hath ought to do with Rome A full confession of an able adversary to which I see not what can be excepted unlesse it be said of him as it was of Aeneas Sylvius Stephanus probavit Wintoniensis negavit Doctour Gardiner approved it but the Bishop of Winchester retracted it Admit it were so as it was indeed what is that to the stedfast unanimous consent of the whole Kingdome which appears not onely from hence but from Tonstal's Epistle to Cardinal Pool and Bekenshaws Commentary of the Soveraign and absolute power of Kings As likewise of the difference between Kingly and Ecclesiastical power And lastly and principally by a book set forth by the English Convocation called The Institution of a Christian man And to shew yet further that Ireland was unanimoâ—â—â—â—erein with England we find in the three and thirtieth year of Henry the eighth which was before all thoughts of reformation not the Irish only as the O Neales O Relies O Birnes O Carols c. but also the English Families as the Desmonds Barries Râ—ches Bourks whose posterities do still continue Zealous Romanists did make their submissions by Indenture to Sir Anthony Sellenger then chief Governour of that Kingdom wherein they acknowledged King Henry to be their Soveraign Lord and confessed the Kings Supremacy in all causes and utterly renounced the Iurisdiction of the Pope So the Bishop of Winchester might well say that there was an Universal and stedfast consent in the separation from Rome The second exception weighes so little that it scarce deserveth an Answer Admitting but not granting that any or all the calumnies of that party against Henry the eighth were true whereof divers by their impossibility and by the contradiction of their authors do carry their own condemnation written in their foreheads And although Henry the eighth had been our Reformer as he was not yet all this would signifie nothing as to this present question God doth often good works by ill agents Iehu's heart was not upright towards the Lord yet God used him as an Instrument to reform his Church and to punish the worshippers of Baal We have heard of late of an aggregative treason not known before in the world But never untill now of an aggregative Schisme The addition of twenty sins of another nature cannot make that to be Schisme which is not Schisme in it self We are sorry for his sins under a condition that is in case they were true which for part of them we have no great Reason to believe But we are absolutely without condition glad of our own liberty The truth is God Almighty did serve himself of a most unlawful dispensation granted by the Pope to King Henry the eighth to marry his brothers Wife as an occasion of this great work I say unlawful because it was after judged unlawful by the Universities of England France Italy after mature deliberation and some of them upon oath and by above an hundred forrein Doctours of principal reputation for learning The coales of the Kings suspicion were kindled in Spain France and Flanders no enemies to the Pope and blown by Cardinal Wolsey for sinister ends But it was Cranmer that struck the nail home And God disposed all things to his own glory To their third exception That to withhold obedience is Schismatical as well as to withdraw it I answer first that they cannot accuse us as accessaries to Schisme until they have first condemned their own great Patrons Champions and Confessours for the principal Schismaticks Did Roman Catholicks themselves find right and sufficient reason to turn the Pope out of England at the foredoor in fair daylight as an intruder and usurper And do they expect that Protestants who never had any relation to him should let him in again by stealth at the back-door Turpius ejicitur quam non admittitur hospes It is true Queen Mary afterwards gave him houseroom again in England for a short time But he raged so extreamly and made such bonefires of poor innocent Christians in every corner of the Kingdome that it is no marvail if they desired his room rather then his company I have often wondred how any rational man could satisfie himself so as to make
the severity of our Lawes or the rigour of our Princes since the reformation a motive to his revolt from our Church Surely the Inquisition was quite out of his mind but I meddle not with forrein affaires He might have considered that more Protestants suffered death in the short Raign of Queen Mary Men Women and Children then Roman Catholicks in all the longer Raignes of all our Princes since the Reformation put together The former by fire and faggot a cruel lingring torment ut sentirent se mori that they might feel themselves to die by degrees The other by the gibbet with some opprobious circumstances to render their sufferings more exemplary to others The former meerly and immediately for Religion because they would not be Roman Catholicks without any the least praetext of the violation of any political Law The latter not meerly and immediately for Religion because they were Roman Catholicks for many known Roman Catholicks in England have lived and dyed in greater plenty and power and reputation in every princes raign since the Reformation then an English Protestant could live among the Irish Roman Catholicks since their insurrection If a subject was taken at Masse it self in England which was very rare it was but a pecuniary mulct No stranger was ever questioned about his religion I may not here omit King Iames his affirmation That no man in his Raign or in the Raign of his predecessor Queen Elizabeth did suffer death for conscience sake or Religion But they suffered for the violation of civil Lawes as either for not acknowledging the political Supremacy of the King in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiastical persons which is all that we assert which the Roman Catholicks themselves in Henry the Eighth's daies did maintain as much or perhaps more then we We want not the consent of their own Schooles or the concurrent practise of Kings and Parliaments of their own communion As Sancta Clara doth confesse Valde multi doctores c. very many Doctours do hold that for the publick benefit of the Commonwealth Princes have Iurisdiction in many causes otherwise being of Ecclesiastical cognisance by positive Divine Law and by the Law of Nature And though himself seem rather to adhere to others who ascribe unto them meerly a Civil power yet he acknowledgeth with the stream of Schoolmen that by their Soveraign Office by accident and indirectly for the defence of the Common-wealth and the preservation of publick Justice and peace they have great power over Ecclesiastical persons in Ecclesiastical causes in many cases As they may command Bishops to dispose their spiritual affaires to the peace of the Common-wealth They may remove the froward from their offices They may defend the oppressed Clergy from the unjust oppressions of Ecclesiastical Iudges c. which he confesseth to be as much as our Article setteth forth What the practise of other Kings and Princes is herein we shall see more fully when I come to handle my fifth Proposition Or else for returning into the Kingdome so qualified with forbidden orders as the Lawes of the Land do not allow The State of Venice doth not the Kingdom of France hath not abhorred from the like Lawes Or lastly for attempting to seduce some of the Kings Subjects from the Religion established in the Land In all these cases besides religion there is something of Election He that loves Danger doth often perish in it The truth is this An hard Knott must have an heavy Mall Dangerous and bloody positions and practises produce severe lawes No Kingdom is destitute of necessary remedies for its own conservation If all were of my mind as I believe many are I could wish that all Seditious Opinions and over rigorous statutes with the memory of them were buried together in perpetual oblivion I hold him scarce a good Christian that would not cast on one spade full of earth towards their interrement Pardon this digression if it be one Cruelty is a Symptome of Schisme Secondly I answer that though the Romanists could be contented to brand their own friends for the principall Schismaticks yet they shall never be able to prove us accessaries or fasten the same Crime upon us who found the separation made to our hands who never had any thing to do with Rome who never ought them any Service but the reciprocall duty of love who never did any act to oblige us to them or to disoblige us from them indeed it were something if they could produce a patent from Heaven of the Popes Vicariate Generall under Christ over all Christians But that we know they can never do Or but so much as an old Canon of a generall Councel that did subject us to their Jurisdiction So as the same were neither lawfully revoked nor their power forfeited by abuse nor quitted by themselves untill then they may withdraw their charge of Schisme Nay yet more though they could justifie their pretended title yet we acting nothing but preserving all things in the same condition we found them are not censurable as formal Schismaticks whilest we erre invincibly or but probably and are implicitely prepared in our minds to obey all our just Superiours so far as by law we are bound whensoever we shall be able to understand their right There have been many Schismes in the Roman Church it self Sometimes two Popes sometimes three Popes at a time One Kingdome sâ—bmitted to one this to another that to a third every one believing him to whom he submitted to be the right Pope and every one ready to have submitted to the right Pope if they had known who he was Tell me were all those that submitted to Antipopes presently Schismaticks That were too hard a censure The Antipopes themselves were the Schismaticks and the Cardinals that Elected them and all these who supported them for avaritious or ambitious or uncharitable ends We may apply to this purpose that which St. Austin said concerning Haereticks Qui sententiam suam quamvis falsam atque perversam nulla pertinaci animosâ—â—ate defendit praesertim quam non audacia praesumptionis suae pepererit sed à seductis et in errorem lapsis parentibus accepit quaerit autem cauta solicitudine veritatem câ—rrigi paratus cum invenerit nâ—quaquam est inter haereticos deputandus He that defends not his false opinion with Pertinacious animosity having not invented it himself but learned it from his â—rring parents If he inquire carefully after the truth and be ready to embrace it and to correct his errors when he finds them he is not to be reputed an Heretick If this be true in the case of Heresie it holds much more strongly in the case of Schism especially that Schism which is grounded only upon Humane constitutions He that disobeys a Lawful Superiour through invincible ignorance whom he deserted not himself but found him cast off by his parents if he be careful to understand his duty and ready to submit so far
the time of his health and upon his death-bed for which he was stiled Romanorum malleus The hammer of the Romans whereby he so much irritated the Pope that he would have deposed him and accursed him in his life time if he had not been disswaded by his Cardinals in respect of the learning and holinesse and deserved reputation of the Bishop And after his death would have had his Corps disinterred and buried in a dunghill but that the Bishop appeared to him the night before and gave him or seemed to give him such a shrewd remembrance partly with words and partly with his crosier staffe that the Pope was much terrified and half dead so that he could neither eat nor drink the day following The Pope excommunicated Sewalus the Archbishop of York with Bell Book and Candle But non curavit voluntati papale relicto Iuris rigare muliebriter obedire Quapropter quantâ— magis praecipient Papa maledicebatur tanto plus a populo benedicebatur tacite tamen propter metum Romanorum He cared not to submit womanishly to the Popes will leaving the streight rule of the Law wherefore the more he was accused by the Popes command the more he was blessed of the People but secretly for fear of the Romans In his last sicknesse he summoned the Pope before the Tribunall of the high and incorruptible Judge and called Heaven and Earth to be his witnesses how unjustly the Pope had oppressed him Dixit Dominus Petro c. The Lord said unto St. Peter feed my sheep not clip them not flea them not unbowell them not devoure them They who desire to know what opinion the English had of the greedinesse and extortion of the Court of Rome may find them drawn out to the life by Chaucer in sundry places Such thriving Alchymists were never heard of in our daies nor in the daies of our fore-Fathers that with such ease and dexterity could change an ounce of lead into a pound of gold So they had great reason to say of England that it was a Well that could not be drawn dry And England had as much reason to whip these Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple This complaint is neither new nor particular as we shall see further in due place The second ground of our Ancestors separation of themselves from the Court of Rome were their most unjust usurpations and daily incroachments and intrenchments and extream violations of all sorts of rights civill and Ecclesiastical sacred and prophane They indeavoured to rob the King of the fairest flowers of his Crown As of his right to convocare Synods and to confirm Synods within his own dominions of his Legislative and judiciary power in Ecclesiasticall causes of his Politicall Jurisdiction over Ecclesiastical persons of his Ecclesiasticall Feuds and Investitures of Bishops of his just Patronages of Churches founded by his Ancestors and of the last appeals of his subjects And as if all this had been too little taking advantage of King Iohns troubles they attempted to make the royall Scâ—pter of England Feudotary and tributary to the Crosier staffe of Rome at the annuall rent of a thousand marks Neither is this the case of England alone seeing they make the like pretensions in matter of fact almost to all Europe To say nothing now of that Dominion which some of them have challenged indirectly others directly over Soveraign Princes Nos imperia regna principatus et quicquid habere mortales possunt auâ—erre et dare posse We have power to take away and to give Empires Kingdoms Principalities and whatsoever mortal men can have because I confesse that it is not generally received by the Roman Church Mr. Blackwell made Archpriest of England by Clement the eighth cites Cardinall Allen with much honour to his memorie but much scandalized at his doctrine that none can be admitted King of England without the Popes leave His words are these Without the approbation of the See Apostolique none can be lawfull King or Queen of England by reason of the ancient accord made between Alexander the third the year 1171. and Henry the second then King when he was absolved for the death of St. Thomas of Canterbury That no man might lawfully take that Crown nor be accounted as King till he were confirmed by the Soveraign Pastor of our souls which for the time should be This accord afterwards being renewed about the year 1210. by King Iohn who confirmed the same by oath to Pandulphus the Popes Legate at the speciall request and procurement of the Lords and Commons as a thing most necessary for preservation of the Realm from unjust usurpation of Tyrants and avoiding other inconveniences which they had proved and might easily fall again into by the disorder of some wicked King To which he adds with the like disapprobation a like testimony of Stanislaus Christa novic a Polonian author who infers upon the former ground that the Pope may depose the King of England as being but a tributary King his words are these Illud impie Legislatores per jusjurandum extorquent a Catholicis c. The law-makers do impiously by an oath extort this from Catholicks to deny that the King may be deposed by the Pope and his Kingdomes and Countries by him disposed of For if by an Honourable and pious grant the Kingdome hav become tributary to the Pope why may he not dispose of it Why may he not depose the Prince being refractory and disobedient Thus a bold stranger altogether ignorant of our histories and of our lawes shoots his bolt at all adventures upon the credit of a shamefull fiction but from whom did they learn this lesson even from the Pope himself Bishop Grosthead had been a little bold with the Pope for his extorting courses calling him Antichrist and murtherer of Souls and comparing the Court of Rome to Behemoth that putteth his mouth to the river Jordan thinking to drink it up and stiling the oppression of the English Nation an Aegiptian Bondage He had good reason for the Court of Rome in those daies was grown past shame rubore deposito and consequently past grace The Pope irritated with this usage breaks out into this passionate expression Nonne Rex Anglorum noster est Vasallus et ut plus dicam mancipium Is not the King of England our Vassal or rather our Slave Or rather are these fit guests to be entertained in a Kingdom that make no more of our Soveraign Princes then their Vassals and Slaves who can neither be admitted to the Crown without their leave nor hold it but by their grace This relation of Cardinal Allen brings to my remembrance the question of Neoptolemus to Vlisses when he should have taught him the Art of lying how it was possible for one to tell a lie without blushing The Arch-Priest is much more ingenuous affirming that the assertions touching both the said Kings for matter of fact
the reformation and the Church of England after the reformation are as much the same Church as a garden before it is weeded and after it is weeded is the same garden or a vine before it be pruned and after it is pruned and freed from the Luxuriant branches is one and the same vine yet because the Roman Catholiques do not object Schisme to the Popish Church of England but to the reformed Church Therefore in this question by the Church of England we understand that Church which was derived by lineal succession from the Brittish English and Scottish Bishops by mixt ordination as it was legally established in the daies of King Edward the sixth and flourished in the raigns of Queen Elizabeth King Iames and King Charles of blessed memory and now groanes under the heavy yoke of persecution whether this Church be Schismatical by reason of its secession and separation from the Church of Rome and the supposed withdrawing of its obedience from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop As for other aspersions of Schisme of lesser moment we shall meâ—â— with them in our answers to their Objections CHAP. III. That the separation from Rome was not made by Protestants but by Roman Catholicks themselves THis being the state of the Question I proceed to examine the first ground or proposition That the English Protestants were not the first authors of the separation but principall Roman Catholiques great Advocates in their dayes and Pillars of the Roman Church Whether the Act or Statute of Separation were operative or declarative creating new right or manifesting or restoring old right whether the power of the Roman Court in England was just or usurped absolute and immutable or conditional and changeable whether the possession thereof was certain and settled or controverted and unquiet though no man throughly versed in our Lawes and Histories can reasonably doubt of these things This is undeniably true that the secession and substraction of obedience was not made by our reformers or by any of their friends or favourers but by their capital Enemies and persecutors by Zelots of the Roman Religion And this was not done secretly in a corner but openly in the sight of the Sun disputed publickly and determined before-hand in both our Universities which after long deliberation and much disputation done with all diligence zeal and conscience made this final resolution and profession Tandem in hanc sententiam unanimiter convenimus ac concordes fuimus videlicet Romanum Episcopum majorem aliquam Iurisdictionem non habere sibi à deo collatam in sacra Scriptura in hoc Regno Angliae quam alium quemvis externum Episcopum That the Roman Bishop had no greater Iurisdiction within the Kingdome of England confeâ—red upon him by God in holy Scripture then any other forrein Bishop After this the same was voted and decreed in our National Synods and lastly after all this received and established in full Parliament by the free consent of all the Orders of the Kingdom with the concurrence and approbation of four and twenty Bishops and nine and twenty Abbats then and there present To passe by many other Statutes take the very words of one of the main Acts it self That England is an Empire and that the King as Head of the body politick consisting of the spirituality and temporalty hath plenary power to render final Iustice for all matters c. First England is that is originally not shall be by vertue of this Act what is it an Empire If it be an Empire then the Soveraignes thereof have the same priviledges and prerogatives within their own Dominions which the old Emperours had in theirs If the King be head of the body politick consisting of the spiâ—ituality and temporalty then in England the King is the political head of the Clergy as well as of the Laity So he ought to be and not he onely but all the Soveraign Princes throughout the World by the very Law of Nature What becomes now of that grand exception against Protestants for making their King the Head or Soveraign Governour for these two are convertible terms of the English Church or Clergy A title first introduced by Roman Catholicks and since waved and laid aside by Protestants not so much for any malignity that was in it as for the ill sounds sake because it seemed to intrench too much upon the just right of our Saviour and being subject to be misunderstood gave offence to many well affected Christians And what doth this Law say more then a great Cardinal said not long after One that was as near the Papacy as any that ever mist it and was thought to merit the Papacy as well as any that had it in his daies I mean Cardinal Pool in his Book de concilio Hoc munus Imperatoribus Christi fidem professis Deus ipse Pater assignavit at Christi filii dei vicaâ—ias partes gerant God the Father hath assigned this office to Christian Emperours that they should act the part of Christ the Son of God in General Councels And yet more fully in his answer to the next question Pontifex Romanus ut caput sacerdotale Vicarias Christi veri capitis partes gerit at Caesar ut caput regale c. The Pope as a Priestly head doth execute the Office of Christ the true Head but we may also truly say that the Emperour doth execute the office of Christ as a Kingly Head And so he concludeth Christ said of himself All power is given me both in heaven and earth In utraque ergo potestate c. Therefore we cannot doubt but Christ hath his Deputies for both these powers The Pope in the Church the Emperour in the Common-Wealth Thus writes the Popes own Legate to his Brother Legates in the Tridentine Councel when he desired to favour his Master as much as he could But I proceed to our Statute The King of England hath that is already in present by the fundamental constitution of the Monarchy not shall have from henceforth plenary power without the License or help or concurrence of any forrain Prelate or Potentate pleâ—ary not solitary To render final Iustice that is to receive the last appeales of his own Subjects without fear of any review from Rome or at Rome for all matters Ecclesiastical and temporal Ecclesiastical by his Bishops Temporal by his Judges There is great difference between a Kings administring Justice in Ecclesiastical causes by himself and by his Bishops Listen to the Canon of the Milevitan Councel It hath pleased the Synod that what Bishop soever shall request of the Emperour the cognisance of publick judgment in some cases he be deprived of his honour But if he petition to the Emperour foâ— Episcopal judgment that is to make Bishops his Deputies or Commissioners to hear it it should â—not prejudice him They forbid a Bishop of his own accord in these daies and in some cases to make his first
resolutely oppose so many Sentences and Messages from Rome and condemn him twice whom the Pope had absolved Consider that Wilfride was an Arch-Bishop not an inferiour Clerk And if an appeal from England to Rome had been proper or lawful in any case it had been so in his case But it was otherwise determined by those who were most concerned Malmesbury supposeth either by inspiration or upon his own head that the King and the â— Arch-Bishop Theodore were smitten with remorse before their deaths for the injury done to Wilfride and the slighting of the Popes Sentence Letter and Legates But the contrary is moâ—â— apparently true for first it was not King Alfrede alone but the great Councel of the Kingdom also nor Theodore alone but the main body of the Clergy that opposed the Popes Letter and the restitution of Wilfride in that manner as it was decreed at Rome Secondly after Alfrede and Theodoret were both dead we find the Popes sentence and Wilfrides restitution still opposed by the surviving Bishops in the Raign of Alfredes son To clear the matter past contradiction let us consider the ground of this long and bitter contention Wilfride the Archbishop was become a great pluralist and had ingrossed into his hands too many Ecclesiastical dignities The King and the Church of England thought fit to deprive him of some of them and to confer them upon others Wilfride appealed from their sentence unto Rome The Pope gave sentence after sentence in favour of Wilfride But for all his sentences he was not he could not be restored untill he had quitted two of his Monasteries which were in question Hongesthill deane and Ripon which of all others he loved most dearly and where he was afterwards interred This was not a conquest but a plain waving of his sentences from Rome and a yeelding of the question for those had been the chief causes of the controversie So the King and the Church after Alfredes death still made good his conclusion That it was against reason that a person twice condemned by the whole Councel of the English should be restored upon the Popes Bull. And as he did not so neither did they give any assent to the Popes Legation So unfortunate were appeales to Rome in those daies And as unfrequent as unfortunate for from that time untill Anselmes daies after the Norman Conquest in the Raign of Henry the first we do hardly meet with another appeal Then Pope Paschalis the second had devised a new Oath for Arch-Bishops when they received their Pall An oath much wondered at in all places as a strange innovation Significasti reges Regni majâ—res admiratione permotos c. You signified unto me that Kings and Nobles were moved with admiration that the Pâ—ll was offered unto you by our Ministers upon condition that you should take an oath which they brought you written from us c. This oath was that which animated Anselme to contest so hotly with the King The main controversie was about this very question of Appeales to Rome The King pleaded the fundamental Lawes and Customes of the Land consuetudo Regni mâ—i est à Patrâ— meo instituta ut nullius praeter licentiam Regis appelletur Papa Qui consuetudines regni tollit potestatem quoque coronam Regis violat c. It is a custome of my Kingdome instituted by my Father that no Pope may be appealed unto without â—the Kings License He that takes away the Customes of the Kingdome doth violence to the power and Crown of the King It is to be noted that the Lawes established by his Father that was William the Conquerour were no other then the Lawes of Edward the Confessor that is to say the old Saxon Lawes So he might justly say both that it was an ancient immemorial custome of the Kingdom and also that it was instituted or established by his Father So Hoveden tells us that at last he yeelded to the request of his Barons c. that was by his authority to confirm the Lawes of King Edward But the best was that though Anselme the Archbishop was obliged by oath to the Pope yet the Bishops were not so soon brought into the same bondage And therefore the former Authour tells us that In his exequendis omnes Episcopi Angliae Primati suo suffragium negarunt In the execution of these things all the Bishops of England did deny their suffrage to their Primate So unanimous were they in this point Which unanimity of the whole Realm both Clergy and Laity doth appear yet more evidently by the Statute of Clarendon made in the Raign of the grand-child of this King when all the Prelates and Peeres of the Realm did confirm the former ancient Brittish English custome not onely by their consents but by their oathes whereof we shall have occasion to speak more hereafter And upon this custome was that Law grounded which our Histories do make mention of Si quis inventus fuerit literas vel mandatum ferens Domini Papae c. capiatur et de eo sicut de Regis traditore regni sine dilatione fiat justitia If any one be found bringing in the Popes Letter or Mandate let him be apprehended and let justice passe upon him without delay as a traitor to the King and Kingdom And generally every man is interdicted or forbidden to appâ—al to the Pope And the Legations from Rome were almost as rare as appeals to Rome during the raigns of all the Brittish and Saxon Kings untill the Norman conquest As Gregory Bishop of Ostium the Popes own Legate did confess That he was the first Roman Priest that was sâ—nâ— into those parts of Bâ—iâ—tain from the time of S. Austin And those Legates were no others then ordinary messengers or Embassadors sent from one Neighbour to another Such a thing as a Legantine Court or a Nuncios Court was not known in the Brittish world in those ages and long after It is not enough to shew that one Roman Bishop did once send over one or two Doctors to help to propagate or confirm the faith or to lend their helping hands to Religion fainting This may well set forth their devotion and our obligation But further as to the present question it signifies just nothing Favours cease to be favours when they are done on purpose to deprive men of their ancient liberties The Brittish Bishops and English also have done as much for other Nations over whom they did never challenge any Jurisdiction The French Church sent over Germanus Lupus to help to root up the relicks of Pelagianisme in Brittain yet did never pretend thereby to any authority over the Brittaines Add to this that during all the time from St. Gregory to the conquest it was usual for the Brittish Saxon and Danish Kings with their Clergy or great Councel to make Ecclesiastical lawes and to regulate the external discipline of the Church within their
that â—aught them this lesson certainly their prudence to prevent dangers was very commendable A third custome was that the revenues of all Ecclesiastical dignities belonging to the Kings demeisne during the vacancy were to be received by the King as freely as the rents of his own demeisnes Tell me who was then the Patron and Political Head of the Church A fourth Custome was that when an Arch-Bishoprick Bishoprick Abbacy or Priory did fall void the election was to be made by such of the principal dignitaries or members of that respective Church which was to be filled as the King should call together for that purpose with the Kings consent in the Kings own Chappell And there the person elected was to do his homage and fealty to the King as to his Liege Lord. That later form of Dei Apostolicae sedis gratia had taken no root in England in those daies The rest are of the same nature as that Controversies concerning Advowsons ought to be determined in the Kings Court Benefices belonging to the Kings patronage could not be appropriated without his grant When a Clergy man was accused of any Delinquency the Kings Court ought to determine what part of his accusation was of Civil and what part of Ecclesiastical cognisance And the Kings Justice might send to the Ecclesiastical Court to see it ordered accordingly None of the Kings Servants or Tenants that held of him in capite might be excommunicated nor their Lands interdicted before the King was made acquainted When it was questioned whether a Tenement were of Ecclesiastick or Lay fee the Kings Justice was to determine it by the oathes of twelve men All Ecclesiasticall persons who held any possessions from the King in capite were to do suit and service for the same as other Barons did and to joyn with the Kings Barons in the Kings Judgments untill it came to sentence of death or diminution of member To this memorial all the Nobility and Clergy of the English Nation did swear firmly in the word of truth to keep all the customes therein contained and observe them faithfully to the King and his heires for ever Among the rest Thomas Becket the Archbishop of Canterbury himself was carried along with the crowd to take this Oath Though shortly after he fell from it and admitted the Popes absolution By the Statute of Carlile made in the daies of Edward the first it was declared That the holy Church of England was founded in the estate of Prelacy within the Realm of England by the Kings and Peeres thereof And that the several incroachments of the Bishop of Rome specified in that Act did tend to the annullation of the state of the Church the disinheriting of the King and the Peeres and the destruction of the Lawes and rights of the Realm contra formam collationis contrary to the disposition and will of the first founders Observe in the estate of Prelacy not of Papacy within the Realm not without it By the Kings not by the Popes of whose exorbitant and destructive usurpations as our Ancestors were most sensible so they wanted neither will nor power to remedy them To corroborate this Law by former presidents and thereby to shew that our Kings were ever accounted the right Patrons of the English Church King Edelwalk made Wilfride Bishop of the South Saxons now Chichester King Alfrede made Assertie Bishop of Sherburn And Oenewulphus Bishop of Winchester Edward the Confessor made Robert Archbishop whom before from a Monk he had made Bishop of London Thus the Saxon Kings in all ages bestowed Bishopricks without any contradiction The Norman Kings followed their example No sooner was Stigand dead but William the Conquerour elected Lanfrank Abbat of Saint Stephens in Caen to be Archbishop William Rufus upon his death-bed elected Anselme to be Archbishop of Canterbury And untill the daies of Henry the first the Popes never pretended any right nor laid any claim to the Patronage of the English Churches The Articles of the Clergy do prescribe that elections be free so as the Kings conge d'eslire or License to elect be first obtained and afterwards the election be made good â—y the Royal assent and confirmation And the Statute of provisors Our Soveraign Lord the King and his heires shall have and enjoy for the time the collations to the Archbishopricks and other dignities elective which be of his Advowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted Sith the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitors upon a certain form and condition as namely to demand License of the King to choose and after choise made to have his Royal assent Which condition not being kept the thing ought by reason to return to its first nature Further by the same Statute of provisors it is declaratively enacted That it is the right of the Crown of England and the Law of the Realm that upon such mischiefs and dammages happening to the Realm by the incroachments and oppressions of the Court of Rome mentioned in the body of that Law The King ought and is bound by his oath with the accord of his people in Paâ—liament to make remedy and Law for the removing of such mischiefs We find at least seven or eight such Statutes made in the Raigns of several Kings against Papal provisions reservations and collations and the mischiefs that flowed from thence Let us listen to another Law The Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been iâ— no earthly subjection but immediately subjected to God in all things touching its regality and to no other and ought not to be submitted to the Pope Observe these expressions free at all times free in all things in no earthly subjection immediately subjected to God not to be submitted to the Pope And all this in Ecclesiastical affaires for of that nature were all the grievances complained of in that Law as appears by the view of the Statute it self Then if the Kings of England and the representative body of the English Church do reform themselves according to the word of God and the purest Patterns of the primitive times they owe no account to any as of duty but to God alone By the same statute it is enacted That they who shall procure or prosecute any popish Bulls and excommunications in certain cases shall incurre the forfeiture of their estates or be banished or put out of the Kings protection By other statutes it is enacted That whosoever should draw any of the Kings Subjects out of the Realm to Rome in plea about any cause whereof the cognisance belongeth to the Kings Court or should sue in any forrain court to defeat any judgment given in the Kings court That is by appealing to Rome they should incur the same penalties The body of the Kingdom would not suffer Edward the first to be cited before the Pope Henry the sixth by the Councel of Humphry
imperandi innocentem subditum ordo serviendi The Prince may be unjust in his commands and yet the Subject innocent in his obedience Take the case at the worst it must be doubtful at the least the Popes Soveraignty and the Jurisdiction of the Roman Court being rejected by three parts of the Christian world and so unanimously shaken off by three Kingdoms And in such a case who is fittest to be Judge the Pope the People or the King Not the Pope he is the person accused And frustra expectatur cujuslibet authoritas contra seipsum It is in vain to expect that one should imploy his authority against himself Not the people would a Judge take it well that a Gaoler should detain the Prisoner from execution untill he were satisfied of the justice of his sentence Or a Pilot that he may not move his Rudder according to the alterable face of the heavens but at the discretion of the ordinary Marriners No whensoever any question hath been moved between any kingdom or Republick of what Communion soever and the Court of Rome concerning the liberties and priviledges of the one or the extortions and incroachments of the other they have evermore assumed the last Judicature to themselves as of right it doth belong unto them The Romanists themselves do acknowledge that Soveraign Princes by the Law of God and nature not only may but are in justice obliged to oppose the tyranny of Ecclesiastical Judges and to protect and free their subjects from their violence and oppression Parsons himself wondreth that any man should deny this power to Kings in their own kingdomes But we are fully satisfied and assured that that universal power which the Pope claimes by Divine right over all Christians and particularly over the Britannique Churches without their consents And much more that Jurisdiction which de facto he did or at least would have exercised there and lesse then which he would not go to the destruction of their natural and Christian liberties and priviledges was and is a tyrannical and oppressive yoak If all Christians were as well satisfied of the truth of this our assumption as we are this controversie were at an end And thus far all Roman Catholicks not interessed nor prepossessed with prejudice do accord fully with us that by whomsoever Papal power was given whether by Christ or his Apostles or the Fathers of the Church in succeeding ages it was given for edification not for destruction And that the Roman Court in later dayes hath sought to impose grievous oppressive and intolerable burthens upon their subjects which it is lawful for them to shake off without regarding their censure as we shall see in the next proposition But because all are not so well satisfied about the just extent of Papal authority and power we must search a little higher Secondly we do both agree that Soveraign Princes may by enabled and authorized either by concession or by prescription for time immemoriall perhaps it were more properly said by vertue of their Soveraign authority over the whole body politique whereof the Clergy are a part â—o exercise all external acts of Ecclesiastical coercive Jurisdiction by themselves or at least by fit delegates praecipiendo suis subditis Sacerdotibus ut excommunicent rebelles contumaces And this is asserted in the case of Abbesses which being women are lesse capable of any spiritual Jurisdiction The truth is that as all Ecclesiastical Courts and all Ecclesiastical coercive jurisdiction did flow at first either from the Bounty and goodnesse of Soveraign Princes to the Church or from their connivence or from the voluntary consent and free submission of Christians Volenti non fit injuria consent takes away errour I except alwayes that jurisdiction which is purely spiritual and an essential part of the power of the Keies whereof Emperours and Kings are not capable So whensoever the Weal-publick and the common safety of their people doth require it for advancement of publick peace and tranquillity and for the greater ease and convenience of the subject in general according to the Vicissitude and conversion of humane affairs and the change of Monarchies they may upon well grounded experience in a National Synod or Councel more advisedly retract what their predecessours had advisedly granted or permitted And alter the face and rules of the external discipline of the Church in all such things as are but of humane right when they become hurtful or impeditive of a greater good in which cases their subjects may with good conscience and are bound in duty to conforme themselves to their Lawes Otherwise Kingdoms and Societies should want necessary remedies for their own preservation which is granted by both parties to be an absurdity Weigh all the parts of Ecclesiastical discipline and consider what one there is which Christian Emperours of old did not either exercise by themselves or by their delegates or did not regulate by their Lawes or both concerning the priviledges and revenues of holy Church the calling of Councels the presiding in Councels the dissolving of Councels the confirming of Councels concerning holy Orders concerning the patronage of and nomination to Ecclesiastical benefices and dignities concerning the Jurisdiction the suspension deposition and ordering of Bishops and Priests and Monks and generally all Persons in holy orders concerning Appeales concerning Religion and the Rites and Ceremonies thereof concerning the Creeds or common Symbols of faith concerning Heresie Schisme Judaisme the suppression of Sects against Swearing Cursing Blaspheming Prophanenesse and Idolatry concerning Sacraments Sanctuaries Simony Marriages Divorces and generally all things which are of Ecclesiastical cognisance wherein he that desires satisfaction and particularly to see how the coercive power of Ecclesiastical Courts and Judges did flow from the gracious concessions of Christian Princes may if he be not too much possessed with prejudice resolve himself by reading the first Book of the Code the Authentiques or Novels of Iustinian the Emperour and the Capitulars of Charles the great and his successours Kings of France We have been requested said Iustinian by Menna the Archbishop of this City beloved of God and universal Patriarch to grant this priviledge to the most reverend Clerkes c. in pecuniary causes referring them first to the Bishop and if he could not compose or determine the difference then to the secular Judge And in criminal causes if the crime were civil to the civil Magistrate if Ecclesiastical to the Bishop By the Councel of our Bishops and Nobles said Charles the great we have Ordained Bishops throughout the Cities that is we have commanded and authorized it to be done And do decree to assemble a Synod every year that in our presence the Canonical decrees and Lawes of the Church may be restored I beseech you what did our King Henry and the Church of England more at the reformation It is true Soveraign Princes are not said properly to make Canons because they do not prescribe them
indowed being by provisions from Rome frequently conferred upon strangers which could not speak one word of English nor did ever tread upon English ground Insomuch that at one time there were so many Italians beneficed in England that they received more money yearly out of it then all the revenues of the Crown to the high disservice of Almighty God the great scandal of Religion the decay of hospitallity and the utter ruine of the English Church But the least share of their oppressions did not light upon the Bishops who by their dispensations and reservations of cases and of pensions and exemptions and inhibitions and visitations and tenths and first fruits and provisions and subsidiary helps were impoverished and disabled to do the duties of their function They take their aime much amisse who look upon Episcopacy as a branch of Popery or a device of the Bishop of Rome to advance his own greatnesse Whereas the contrary is most certain that the Pope is the greatest Impugner of Bishops and the Papacy it self sprung from the unjust usurpation of their just rights Let it be once admitted that Bishops are by divine right and instantly all his dispensations and reservations and exemptions and Indulgences and his Conclave of Cardinalls and the whole Court of Rome shrink to nothing This was clearly perceived by both parties in the ventilation of that famous question in the Councel of Trent concerning the divine right of Bishops proposed by the Almaines Polonians and Hungarians seconded bravely by the Spaniards prosecuted home by the French owned by the Archbishop of Paris as the doctrine of Sorbone and onely crossed by the Italian faction to preserve the glorie of their own country and the advantages which that nation doth reap from the Papacy By whose frowardnesse and prevarication in all probability the re-union of the Church and the universal peace of this part of Christendom in necessary Truths was hindred at that time I presume the case was not so very ill in forrain parts but yet ill enough Or otherwise St. Bernard would not have made so bold with Eugenius adding that if the daies were not evil he would speak many more things Why do you thrust your sickle into other mens harvest c. He complaines of the confusion of appeals how they were admitted contrary to law and right besides custom and order without any distinction of place or manner or time or cause or person He complaines further of the exemption of Abbats from their Bishops Bishops from their Archbishops Archbishops from their Primates And this he stiles Murmur communem querimoniam Ecclesiarum The murmuring and common complaint of the Churches Lastly they cheated and impoverished the people by their dispensations and commutations and pardons and indulgences and expeditions to recover the holy Land and Jubilees and pilgrimages and agnus Dei's and a thousand pecuniary Artifices So as no sort of men escaped their fingers The third ground of their separation from Rome was because they found by experience that such forreign Jurisdiction so exercised was destructive to the right ends of Ecclesiastical discipline which is in part to preserve publick peace and tranquillity to retein subjects in due obedience and to oblige people to do their duties more conscienciously Farre be it from any Christian to imagine that policy is the Spring-head of Religion There never was yet any one Nation so unpolitick and brutishly barbarous but they had some Religion or other they who obeyed no governors but their parents paid religious duties to some God they who wanted Clothes to their backs wanted not their sacred Ceremonies they who were without municipal Lawes were subject of themselves to the law of conscience But where Religion hath lost its influence and vigour by contempt and much more where the influence of Religion is malignant where Policy and Religion do not support one another but interfere one with another Societies are like Castles builded in the air without any firm foundation and cannot long endure like as that single Meteor Castor appearing without Pollux portends an unfortunate voyage Let us flatter our selves as much as we please said Tully to the Romans we have not overcome the Spaniards in Number nor the Galles in Force nor the Carthaginians in Craft nor the Grecians in Art nor the Italians in Vnderstanding but the advantage which we have gained over them was by Religious piâ—ty So great an influence hath Religion upon the body Politique Wherefore our Ancestors having seen by long and costly experience that the tyrannical Jurisdiction of the Roman Court instead of peace and tranquillity did produce disunion in the Realm factions and animosities between the Crown and the Miter intestine discord between the King and his Barons bad intelligence with Neighbour-Princes and forreign Wars Having seen a stranger solicited by the Pope either to destroy them by War or to subdue them to the obedience of the Roman Court. Having seen their native Country given away as a prey to a forreign Prince Philip of France And the Pope well near seated in the Royal Chair of Estate for him and his successours for ever to the endlesse dishonour of the English name and Nation by the cheating tricks of Pandolphus his Legate having seen English Rebels canonized at Rome and made Saints it was no marvel if they thought it high time to free themselves from such a chargable and dangerous guest Fourthly besides the former bad influence of forreign Jurisdiction upon the body Politique they found sundry other inconveniences that incited them to separate from Rome They must have been daily subject to have had new Creeds and new Articles of faith obtruded upon them They must have been daily exposed to manifold and manifest peril of Idolatry and sinning against God and their own consciences They must have forsaken the Communion of three parts of Christendom which are not Roman to joyn with the fourth They must have approved the Popes apparent rebellion against the supream Ecclesiastical power that is a general Councel And their Bishops must have sworn to maintain him in these his rebellious usurpations whether they should prefer their native and Christian liberty or give them up for nothing whether they should preserve their Communion with the Catholique Church or with the Court of Rome whether they should desert the Pope or involve themselves in Rebellion Schisme Sacriledge and Perjury the choice was soon made Lastly they see that the Popes had disclaimed all that just power which they had by humane right and challenged to themselves a spiritual Monarchy or Sovereignty by divine right whereby their sufferings which in themselves were unsupportable were made also irremediable from thence Wherefore they sought out a fit expedient for themselves being neither ignorant of their old Britannick exemption and liberties of the English Church nor yet of the weaknesse of the Roman pretences Our progenitors knew well enough that their authority extended not to take away
in England for sundry ages following that a Dean and Chapter were able to deal with them not onely to hold them at the swords point but to soile them Lastly King Henry the eighth himself had been long a suiter unto Clement the seventh to have his Predecessor Iulius the seconds dispensation for his marriage with his Brothers wife to be declared void But though the Popes own Doctors Universities had declared the dispensation to be unlawfull and invalide and although the Pope himself had once given forth a Bull privately to his Legate Cardinall Campeius for the revocation thereof wherein he declared the marriage to be null and that the King could not continue in it without sinne yet the King found so little respect either to the condition of his person or to the justice of his cause that after long delayes to try if he could be allured to the Popes will in the conclusion he received a flat deniall This was no great incouragement to him to make any more addresses to Rome So what was threatened and effected in part in the dayes of Henry the third and Edward the third was perfected in the reign of Henry the eighth when the Jurisdiction of the Court of Rome in England was abolished which makes the great distance between them and us Different opinions are often devised or defended on purpose to maintain faction if animosities were extinguished and the mindes of Christians free from prejudice other controversies might quickly be reconciled and reduced to primitive general truths The power Paramount of the Court of Rome hath ever been and still is that insana laurus which causeth brawling and contention not onely between us and them but between them and the Eastâ—rn Churches yea even between them and those of their own communion as we shall see in the next Chapter Yea the originall source true cause of all the Separations reformations made in the Church in these last ages As all the Estates of Castile did not forbear to tell the Pope himself not long since in a printed memoriall and the Kingdom of Portugall likewise To conclude this point These former Kings who reigned in England about the years 1200. and 1300. might properly be called the first Reformers and their Lawes of Proviso's and Prâ—munire's or more properly premoneres the beginning of the Reformation They laid the Foundation and Henry the Eighth builded upon it Now having seen the authority of our Reformers and the justice of their grounds in the last place let us observe their due moderation in the manner of their separation First they did not we do not deny the being of any Church whatsoever Roman or other nor possibility of salvation in them especially such as hold firmly the Apostles Creed and the faith of the four first Generall Councels Though their salvation be rendred much more difficult by humane inventions and obstructions And by this very sign did Saint Cyprian purge himself and the African Bishops from Schisme Neminem judicantes aut à jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoventes Iudging no man removing no man from our communion for difference in opinion We do indeed require subscription to our Articles but it is onely from them who are our own not from strangers nor yet of all our own but onely of those who seek to be initiated into holy orders or are to be admitted to some Ecclesiastical preferment So it is in every mans election whether he will put himself upon a necessity of subscription or not neither are our Articles penned with Anathema's or curses against all those even of our own who do not receive them but used only as an help or rule of unity among our selves Si quis diversum dixerit If any of our own shall speak or preach or write against them we question him But si quis diversum senserit if any man shall onely think otherwise in his private opinion and trouble not the peace of the Church we question him not We presume not to censure others to be out of the pale of the Church but leave them to stand or fall to their own Master We damne none for dissenting from us we do not separate our selves from other Churches unlesse they chase us away with their censures but onely from their errours For clear manifestation whereof observe the thirtieth Canon of our Church It was so far from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and reject the Churches of Italy France Spain Germany or any such like Churches in all things which they held and practised c. that it only departed from them in those particular points wherein they were fallen both from themselves in their aâ—cient integrity and from the Apostolical Churches which were their first founders So moderate are we towards all Christians whether forreigners or domesticks whether whole Churches or single persons But because the Roman Catholicks do lay hold upon this charitable assertion of ours as tending mainly to their advantage Behold say they Protestants do acknowledge a possibility of salvation in the Roman Church But Roman Catholicks deny all possibility of Salvation in the Protestant Churches Therefore the Religion of Roman Catholiques is much safer then that of Protestants Hence proceeded their Treatise of charity mistaken and sundry other discourses of that nature wherein there are mistakes enough but little charity For answer If this Objection were true I should love my Religion never the worse Where I find little charity I look for as little faith But it is not true for when the businesse is searched to the bottom they acknowledge the same possibility of salvation to us which we do to them that is to such of either Church respectively as do not erre wilfully but use their best endeavours to find out the truth Take two testimonies of the Bishop of Chalcedon If they that is the Protestants grant not salvation to such Papists as they count vincibly ignorant of Roman errours but onely to such as are invincibly ignorant of them they have no more charity then we for we grant Church saving faith and salvation to such Protestants as are invincibly ignorant of their errours And in his book of the distinction of fundamentals and not fundamentals he hath these words If Protestants allow not saving faith Church and salvation to such as sinfully erre in not fundamentals sufficiently prâ—posed they shew no more charity to erring Christians then Catholicks dâ— for we allow all to have saving faith to be in the Church in way of salvation for so much as belongeth to faith who hold the fundamental points and invincibly erre in not fundamentals because neither are these sufficiently proposed to them nor they in fault that they are not so proposed Secondly as our separation is from their errours not from their Churches so we do it with as much inward charity and moderation of our affections as we can possibly willingly indeed in
all ages affronted and curbed the Roman Court and reduced them to a right temper and constitution as often as they deviated from the Canons of the Fathers and incroached upon the liberties of the Gallicane Church Whereby the Popes jurisdiction in France came to be meerly discretionary at the pleasure of the King Hincmare had been condemned by three French Synods for a turbulent person and deposed Pope Adrian the second takes Cognisance of the cause at Rome and requires Carolus Calvus the King of France to send Hincmare thither with his accusers to receive justice The Kings apologetick answer will shew how he relished it Valde mirati sumus ubi hoc dictator Epistolae scriptum invenerit esse Apostolica authoritate praecipiendum ut Rex corrector iniquorum districtor reorum atque secundum leges Ecclesiasticas atque mundanas ultor criminum reum legaliter ac regulariter pro excessibus suis damnatum sua fretum potentia Roman dirigat We wondered much where he who dictated the Popes Letter hath found it written as commanded byâ— Apostolical authority that a King who is the Corrector of the unjust the punisher of guilty persons and according to all Lawes Ecclesiastical and Civill the revenger of crimes should send a guilty person legally and regularly condemned for his excesses to Rome He tells him that the Kings of France were reputed terrarum Domini not Episcoporum Vice-Domini or Villici Lords paramount within their Dominions not Licutenants or Bayliffes of Bishops Quis igitur hanc inversam legem infernus evomuit quis tartarus de suis abditis tenebrosis cuniculis eructavit What hell hath disgorged this disorderly law what bottomlesse depth hath belched it up out of its hidden and obscure holes The Kings of France have convented the Popes before them So Charles the Great dealt with Leo the third and Lotharius with Leo the fourth The Kings of France have appealed from Popes to Councels So Philip the 4th with the advise of all the orders of France and the whole Gallicane Church appealed from Boniface the eighth and commanded his appeal to be published in the great Church at Paris So Henry the great appealed from Gregory the 14th and caused his appeal to be affixed to the gates of Saint Peters Church in Rome So the School of Sorbone appealed from Boniface the eight Benedict the eleventh Pius the second and Leo the tenth The Kings of France have protested against the Popes decrees and sleighted them yea in the very face of the Councel of Trent Witnesse that protestation of the Ambassadour of France made in the Councel in the name of the King his Master We refuse to be subject to the commands and disposition of Pius the fourth we reject refuse and contemn all the judgements censures and decrees of the said Pius And although most holy Fathers your Religion Life and Learning was ever and ever shall be of great esteem with us Yet seeing indeed you do nothing but all things are done at Rome rather then at Trent And the things that are here published are rather the decrees of Pius the fourth then of the Councel of Trent we denounce and protest here before you all that whatsoever things are decreed and published in this Assembly by the meer will and pleasure of Pius neither the most Christian King will ever approve nor the French Church ever acknowledge to be decrees of a General Councel Besides this the King our Master commandeth all his Archbishops and Bishops and Abbats to leave this Assembly and presently to depart hence then to return again when there shall be hope of better and more orderly proceedings This was high and smart for the King and the Gallicane Church so publickly to reject refuse and contemn all Papal decrees and to challenge such an interest in and power over the French Archbishops and Bishops as not onely to license them but to command them to depart and leave the Councel whither they were summoned by the Pope The French Kings have made Lawes and constitutions from time to time to repress the insolencies and exorbitances of the Papal Court so often as they began to prejudice the liberties of the Gallicane Church with the unanimous consent of their Princes Nobles Clergy Lawyers and Commons As against their bestowing of Ecclesiastical dignities and benefices in France and their grosse Simony and extortions in that way against the payment of Annates and tenths to Rome and generally for all the liberties of the Church of France Against reservations and Apostolical graces and all other exactions of the Court of Rome Charlâ—s the seventh made the pragmatical Sanction to confirm all the Acts of the Councels of Constance and Basâ—l against the tyranny and usurpation of the Pope It is true that Lewis the eleventh by the flattering perswasion of Aeneas Sylvius then Pius the second did revoke this Sanction But the Kings Proctour and the Rectour of the University of Paris did oppose themselves formally to the Registring and Authorizing of this revocation Whereupon the King desired the advise of his Parliament in writing which they gave to this effect That the revocation of that Sanction tended to the confusioâ— of the whole Ecclesiastical order the depopulation of France the exhausting and impoverishment of the Kingdom and the total ruine of the French Church Hereupon the King changed his mind and made diverse declarations and edicts conformable to and in pursuance of the pragmatical Sanction After this the three Estates assembled at Towers made it their first and instant request to Charles the 8th that he would preserve inviolable the pragmatical Sanction which they reputed as the Palladium of France And in the National Councel assembled by Lewis the 12th in the same City it was again confirmed But the Pope stormed and thundered and excommunicated and interdicted Lewis the 12th Francis the first and the whole Realm and exposed it as a prey to the first that could take it And gave plenary Indulgence to every one that should kill a Frenchman King Francis fainted under such fulminations and came to a composition or accommodation with Leo the tenth which was called conventa or the concordate On the one side the Popes friends think he wronged himself and his title to a spiritual Sovereignty very much by descending to such an accommodation And exclude France out of the number of those Countries which they term pays d' obedience As if the French were not loyal obedient Subjects but Rebels to the Court of Rome On the other side the Prelates the Universities the Parliaments of France were as ill contented that the King should yeeld one inch and opposed the accord Insomuch as the University of Paris appealed from it to a future Councel and expedited Letters Patents sealed with the Universities Seal containing at large their grievances and the reasons of the appeal which after were published to the world in print I cannot here omit
the free and just speech of a French Bishop When Henry the fourth had in a manner ended the civill Wars of France by changing from the Protestant to the Roman Catholique Communion Yet the Pope who favoured the contrary party upon pretence of his dissimulation and great dangers that might ensue thereupon for a long time deferred his reconciliation untill the French Prelates by their own authority did first admit him into the bosome of the Church At which time one of them used this discourse Was France all on fire and had they not Rivers enough at home but they must run as far as Rome to Tybur to fetch water to quench it Since that in Cardinal Richlieu's daies it is well known what books were freely printed and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulnesse of erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallicane Church It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French affaires Take one instance more which happened very lately The Pope refused to admit any new Bishops in Portugal upon the nomination of the present King because he would not thereby seem to acknowledge or approve his title to the Crown in prejudice of the King of Spain whereby the Episcopal order in Portugal and the other Dominions belonging to that Crown was well near extinguished and scarcely so many Bishops were left alive or could not be drawn together as to make a Canonical Ordination The three Orders of Portugal did represent to the Pope that in the Kingdomes of Portugal and the Algarbians wherein ought to have been three Metropolitans and ten Suffragans there was but one left and he by the Popes dispensation non-Residenâ— And in all the Asâ—atique Provinces but one other and he both sickly and decrepit And in all the African and American Provinces and the Islands not one surviving But the Pope continued inexorable whereupon theyâ— present their request to their neighbours and friends the French Prelates beseeching them to mediate for them with his Holinesse And if he continue still obstinately deaf to their just petition to supply his defect themselves and to Ordain them Bishops in case of necessity The French did the Office of Neighbours and Christians The Synode of the French Clergy did write to the Pope on their behalf in April 1651. But that way not succeeding they sent one of their Bishops as an expresse Envoié to his Holinesse to let him know that if he still refused they cannot nor will be wanting to themselves to their neighbours but would supply his defect what the issue of it is since I have not yet heard But to leave matter of fact and to come to the fundamental Lawes and Customes of France Every one hath heard of the liberties of the French Church but every one understands not what those liberties are as being better known by their practice at home then by Books abroad I will onely select some of them out of their own authentique authorities And when the Reader hath considered well of them let him judge what authority the Pope hath in France more then discretionary at the good pleasure of the King or more then he might have had in other places if he could have contented himself with reason Protestants are not so undiscreet or uncharitable as to violate the peace of Christendom for a primacy or headship of order without superiority of power or for the name of his Holinesse Or for a Pall if the price were not too high Or for a few innocent formalities 1. The Pope cannot command or ordain any thing directly or indirectly concerning any temporal affairs within the dominions of the King of France 2. The spiritual authority and power of the Pope is not absolute in France but limited and restrained by the Canons and Rules of the ancient Councâ—ls of the Church received in that Kingdom Where observe first that the Pope can do nothing in France as a Sovereign Spiritual Prince with his non obstantes either against the Canons or besides the Canons Secondly that the Canons are no Canons in France except they be received This â—ame priviledge was anciently radicated in the fundamental Lawes of England This priviledge the Popes indeavoured to pluck up by the roots And the contentions about this priviledge were one principal occasion of the separation 3. No command whatsoever of the Pope can free the French Clergy from their obligation to obey the commands of their Sovereign 4. The most Christian King hath had power at all times according to the occurrence and exigence of affairs to assemble or cause to be assembled Synods Provincial or National and therein to treat not onely of such things as concern the conservation of the Civil estate but also of such things as concern Ecclesiastical order and discipline in his own dominions And therein to make Rules Chapters Lawes Ordinances and pragmatique sanctions in his own name by his own authority Many of which have been received among the decrees of the Catholick Church and some of them approved by general Councels 5. The Pope cannot send a Legate à latere into France with power to reform judge collate dispense or do such other things accustomed to be specified in the authoritative Bull of his Legation except it be upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King Neither can the said Legate execute his charge untill he hath promised the King in writing under his oath upon his holy orders not to make use of his Legantine power in the Kings Dominions longer then it shall please the King And that so soon as he shall be admonished of the Kings pleasure to forbid it he will give it over And that whilest he doth use it it shall be exercised conformably to the Kings will without attempting any thing to the prejudice of the decrees of Generall Councels or the liberties and priviledges of the Gallicane Church and the Universities of France 6. The Commissions and Bulls of the Popes Legates are to be seen examined and approved by the Court of Parliament And to be registred and published with such Cautions and modifications as that Court shall judge expedient for the good of the Kingdome and to be executed according to the said cautions and not otherwise 7. The Prelates of the French Church although commanded by the Pope for what cause soever it be may not depart out of the Kingdom without the Kings Commandment of License 8. The Pope can neither by himself nor by his Delegates judge of any thing which concerneth the state preheminence or priviledges of the Crown of France nor of any thing pertaining to it Nor can there be any question or processe about the state or pretensions of the King but in his own Courts 9. Papal Bulls Citations Sentences Excommunications and the like are not to be executed in France without the Kings
Thirdly the King of Spain when he pleaseth and when he sees his own time doth not onely pretend unto but assume in his other Dominions that self-same power or essential right of Sovereignty which I plead for in this treatise It is not unknown to the world how indulgent a Father Vrban the eighth was sometimes to the King and Kingdom of France and how passionately he affected the interest of that Crown And by consequence that his eares were deaf to the requests and remonstrances of the King of Spain The Catholique King resents this partiality very highly and threatens the Pope if he persist to provide a remedy for the grievances of his Subjects by his own power Accordingly to make good his word he called a general Assembly of all the Estates of the Kingdome of Castile to consider of the exorbitancies of the Court of Rome in relation to his Majesties Subjects and to consult of the proper remedies thereof They did meet and draw up a memoriall consisting of ten Articles containing the chiefest abuses and innovations and extortions of the Court of Rome in the Kingdom of Castile His Majestie sends it to the Pope by Friar Domingo Pimentell as his Ambassadour The Pope returned a smart answer by Senior Maraldo his Secretary The King replied as sharply All which was afterwards printed by the special command of his Catholick Majesty The summe of their complaint was first concerning the Popes imposing of pensions upon dignities and other benefices Ecclesiastical even those which had cure of soules in favour of strangers in an excessive proportion to the third part of the full value That although benefices were decayed in many places of Spain two third parts of the true value Yet the Court of Rome kept up the Pensions at the full height That it was contrived so that the Pensions did begin long before the beneficiaries entred upon their profits insomuch as they were indebted sometimes two years pensions before they themselves could taste of the fruits of their benefices And then the charge of censures and other proceedings in the Court of Rome fell so heavy upon them that they could never recover themselves And further that whereas all trade is driven in current silver onely the Court of Rome which neither toiles nor sweats nor hazards any thing will be paid onely in Duckates of Gold not after the current rates but according to the old value That to seek for a remedy of these abuses at Rome was such an insupportable charge by reason of three instances and three sentences necessary to be obtained that it was in vain to attempt any such thing This they cried out upon as a most grievous yoak They complained likewise of the Popes granting of Coad jutorships with future succession whereby Ecclesiastical preferments were made hereditary persons of parts and worth were excluded from all hopes and a large gap was opened to most grosse Simony They complained of the Popes admitting of resignations with reservation of the greatest part of the profits of the benefice insomuch that he left not above an hundred Duckats yearly to the Incumbent out of a great benefice They complained most bitterly of the extortions of the Roman Court in the case of dispensations That whereas no dispensation ought to be granted without just cause now there was no cause at all inquired after in the Court of Rome but onely the price That a great price supplied the want of a good cause That the gate was shut to no man that brought money That their dispensations had no limits but the Popes will That for a matrimonial dispensation under the second degree they took of great persons 8000. or 12000. or 14000 Duckats They complained that the Pope being but the Churches Steward and dispenser did take upon him as Lord and Master to dispose of all the rights of all Ecclesiastical persons That he withheld from Bishops being the true owners the sole disposing of all Ecclesiastical preferments for eight monthes in the year That he ought not to provide for his own profit and the necessities of his Court with so great prejudice to the right of Ordinaries and Confusion of the Ecclesiastical order whilest he suffers not Bishops to enjoy their own Patronages and Jurisdictions They cite St. Bernard where he tells Pope Eugenius that the Roman Church whereof he was made Governour by God was the Mother of other Churches but not the Lady or Mistris And that he himself was not the Lord or Master of other Bishops but one of them They complained that the Pope did challenge and usurpe to himself as his own at their deaths all Clergymens estates that were gained or raised out of the revenue of the Church That a rich Clergyman could no sooner fall sick but the Popes Collectors were gaping about him for his goods And guards set presently about his house That by this means Bishops have been deserted upon their deathbeds And famished for want of meat to eat That they have not had before they were dead a Cup left to drink in nor so much as a Candlestick of all their goods It is their own expression That by this means Creditors were defrauded processes in Law were multiplied and great estates wasted to nothing They complained that the Popes did usurp as their own all the revenues of Bishopricks during their vacancies sometimes for divers years together all which time the Churches were unrepaired the poor unrelieved not so much as one almes given And the wealth of Spain exported into a forreign Land which was richer then it self They wish the Pope to take it as an argument of their respect to the See of Rome that they do not go about forthwith to reform these abuses by their own authâ—â—ity in imitation of other Provinces So it was not the unwarrantablenesse of the act in it self but meerly their respect that did withhold them They complained of the great inconveniences and abuses in the exercise of the Nuncio's office That it is reckoned as a curse in holy Scripture to be governed by persons of a different language That for ten Crowns a man might purchase any thing of them That the fees of their office were so great that they alone were a sufficient punishment for a grievous crime They added that self-interest was the root of all these evils That such abuses as these gave occasion to all the Reformations and Schismes of the Church They added That these things did much trouble the mind of his Catholique Majestie And ought to be seriously pondered by all Sovereign Princes qui intra Ecclesiam potestatis adeptae Culmina tenent ut per eandem potestatem disciplinam Ecclesiasticam muniant Behold our Political Supremacy They proceeded that often the heavenly Kingdome is advantaged by the earthly That Church-men acting against faith and right discipline may be reformed by the rigour of Princes Let the Princes of this world know say they that they
communion of any particular Church whatsoever even the Roman it self so far forth as it is Catholick but onely from their errours wherein they had first separated themselves from their predecessours To this I adde that it was not we but the Court of Rome it self that first separated England from the communion of the Church of Rome by their unjust censures excommunications and interdictions which they thundered out against the Realm for denying their spiritual Sovereignty by Divine right before the Reformation made by Protestants Secondly we are charged with Schismatical contumacy and disobedience to the decrees and determinations of the General Councel of Trent But we believe that Convent of Trent to have been no General nor yet Patriarchal no free no lawfull Councel How was that General where there was not any one Bishop out of all the other Patriarchates or any Proctours or Commissioners from them either present or summoned to be present except peradventure some tltular Europaean Mock-Prelates without cures such as Olaus Magnus intituled Archbishop of Vpsala Or Sir Robert the Scottish-man intituled Archbishop of Armagh How was that Generall or so much as Patriarchal where so great a part of the West was absent wherein there were twice so many Episcopelles out of Italy the Popes professed Vassals and many of them his hungry Parasitical pensioners as there were out of all other Christian Kingdoms and Nations put together How was that general wherein there were not so many Bishops present at the determination of the weightiest controversies concerning the rule of faith and the exposition thereof as the King of England could have called together in his own Dominions at any one time upon a moneths warning How was that general which was not generally received by all Churches even some of the Roman Communion not admitting it We have seen heretofore how the French Ambassadour in the name of the King and Church of France protested against it And untill this day though they do not oppose it but acquiesce to avoid such disadvantages as must insue thereupon yet they did never admit it Let no man say that they rejected the determinations thereof onely in point of discipline not of doctrine for the same Canonical obedience is equally due to an acknowledged General Councell in point of discipline as in point of Doctrine And as it was not General so neither was it free nor lawfull Not free where the place could afford no security to the one party where the accuser was to be the Judge where any one that spake a free word had his mouth stopped or was turned out of the Councel where the few Protestants that adventured to come thither were not admitted to dispute where the Legates gave auricular Votes where the Fathers were noted to be guided by the spirit sent from Rome in a male where divers not only new Bishops but new Bishopricks were created during the sitting of the Convent to make the Papalins able to over-vote the Tramontains Nor yet lawfull in regard of the place which ought to have been in Germany Actor debet rei forum sequi A guilty person is to be judged in his Province And the cause to be pleaded where the crime was committed And likewise in regard of the Judge In every Judgment there ought to be four distinct persons The accuser the witnesse the guilty person and the Judge But in the Councel of Trent the Pope by himself or his Ministers acted all these parts himself He was the right guilty person and yet withall the accuser of the Protestants the witnesse against them and their Judge Lastly no man can be lawfully condemned before he be heard But in this Councel the Protestants were not allowed to propose their case much lesse to defend it by lawful disputation Thirdly it is objected and here they think they have us sure locked up that we cannot deny but that the Bishop of Rome was our Patriarch and that we have rebelled against him and cast off our Canonical obedience in our Reformation To this supposed killing argument I give three clear solutions First That the Bâ—itish Islands neither were nor ought to be subject to the Jurisdiction of the Roman Patriarch as hath been sufficiently demonstrated in my third conclusion For all Patriarchal Jurisdiction being of humane institution must proceed either from some Canon or Decree of a General Councel or of such a Provincial Councell as had power to oblige the Britons to obedience Or from the grant or concession of some of their Sovereign Princes or from the voluntary submission of a free people Or lastly from custom and prescription If they had any such Canon or Grant or submission they would quickly produce it but we know they cannot If they plead custome and prescription immemorial the burthen must rest upon them to prove it But when they have searched all the Authours over and over who have written of British affaires in those daies and all their Records and Registers they shall not be able to find any one Act or so much as any one footstep or the least sign of any Roman Patriarchal Jurisdiction in Britaigne or over the Britons for the first 600 years And for after-ages the Roman Bishops neither held their old Patriarchate nor gained any quiet settled possession of their new Monarchy Secondly I answer That Patriarchal power is not of Divine right but humane institution And therefore may either be quitted or forfeited or transferred And if ever the Bishops of Rome had any Patriarchal Jurisdiction in Britaigne yet they had both quitted it and forfeited it over and over again and it was lawfully transferred To separate from an Ecclesiastical authority which is disclaimed and disavowed by the pretenders to it and forfeited by abuse and rebellion and lawfully transferred is no Schisme First I say they quitted their pretended Patriarchal right when they assumed and usurped to themselves the name and thing of universal Bishops Spiritual Sovereigns and sole Monarchs of the Church and masters of all Christians To be a Patriarch and to be an universal Bishop in that sense are inconsistent and imply a contradiction in adjecto The one professeth humane the other challengeth divine institution The one hath a limited Jurisdiction over a certain Province the other pretendeth to an unlimited Jurisdiction over the whole World The one is subject to the Canons of the Fathers and a meer executour of them and can do nothing either against them or besides them The other challengeth an absolute Sovereignty above the Canons besides the Canons against the Canons to make them to abrogate them to suspend their influence by a non-obstaâ—te to dispence with them in such cases wherein the Canon gives no dispensative power at his own pleasure when he will where he will to whom he will Therefore to claime a power paramount and Sovereign Monarchical Royalty over the Church is implicitely and in effect to disclaime a Patriarchal
Aristocratical dignity So Non tellus cymbam tellurem cymba reliquit It was not we that deserted our pretended Patriarch but our pretended Patriarch deserted his Patriarchal office So long as the Popes contented themselves with Patriarchal rights they soared no higher then to be the executours of the Canons When Acacius complained that he was condemned by the sole authority of the Roman Bishop without a Synodal sentence Gelssius the Pope then pleaded for himself that Acacius was not the beginner of a new errour but the follower of an old And therefore it was not necessary that a new Synodal sentence should be given against him but that the old should be executed Therefore saith he I have onely put an old sentence in execution not promulged a nâ—w And as they had quitted their title so likewise they had forfeited it both by their Rebellion and by their exorbitant abuses First by their notorious rebellion against General Councels The authority of an inferiour ceaseth when he renounceth his loyalty to his superiour from whom he derives his power A General Councel is the Supreme Ecclesiastical power to which Patriarchal power was alwayes subordinate and subject General Councels with the consent of Sovereign Princes have exempted Cities and Provinces from Patriarchal Jurisdiction with the consent of Sovereign Princes they have erected new Patriarchates as at Hierusalem and Constantinople And made the Patriarch of Constantinople equal in all priviledges to the Patriarch of old Rome Against this Supreme Ecclesiastical power the Popes have not onely rebelled themselves but have compelled all Bishops under their Jurisdiction to take an oath to maintain their rebellious usurpations When a President of a Province shall rebell against his Sovereign Prince and seek to usurpe the whole Empire to himself and impose new oathes of allegiancc upon his fellow-subjects it is not Treason but Loyalty in them to thrust him by the head and shoulders out of the gates of their City When a Steward not imposed upon the family by the Master but chosen in trust by his fellow-servants during their Masters absence shall so far violate his trust that he will by force make himself the Master of the family and usuâ—pe a dominion not onely over his fellowes but over his Masters Wife and Children and oblige his fellow servants to acknowledge an independent Sovereign power in him it is not want of duty but fidelity to substract their obedience from him This is our case with the Roman Bishops They have sought to usurpe a dominion over the Catholick Church the spouse of Christ and all their fellow-servants Then ought not all good Christians to adhere to the Catholick Church and desert a schismatical Patriarch They have rebelled against the representative Church a general Councel should we involve our selves in their rebellion and perjury by swearing to maintain and make good their usurpations I confesse inferiours are not competent Judges of their Superiours But in this case of a subordinate Superiour and in a matter of Heresie or Schisme already defined by the Church the sentence of the Judge is not necessary the sentence of the Law and the notoreity of the fact are sufficient It is not we that judge him but the Councels of Constance and Basile Neither could our Ancestours hope to have a General Councel suddenly whilest so great a part of Christendom was under the Turk nor a free Occidental Councel whilest the usurper had all Ecclesiasticall power in his hands What remained then but to reform themselves According to the sage advice of Gerson I see that the Reformation of the Church will never be effected by a Councel without the presidence of a well affected wise and constant guide Let the Members therefore provide for themselves thâ—oughout the Kingdomes and Provinces when they shall be able and know hâ—w to compasse this work Moreover as they have forfeited their power by their Rebellion so they have most justly also by their rapine extortions and terrible and exorbitant abuses the most shamefull abuses that ever were committed by persons trusted To passe by the hundred grievances of Germany the complaints and protestations and pragmatical Sanctions of France the memorials of Castile the sobbes of Portugal and to confine my discourse to the sufferings of our own Nation which have been more particularly related already in this Treatise when I set down the grounds of our Reformation They robbed the King of his investitures of Bishops which Henry the first protested to the Pope himself by his Proctour that he would not lose for his Kingdome and added threatenings to his protestations Yet to gratifie Anselme who though otherwise most deserving was the first violater of the ancient customes of our Kingdome in that kind he waved his right But soon after resumed it made Rodolph Bishop of London Archbishop of Canterbury and invested him by a crosier and a ring The like he did to many others They robbed the King of his patronages by their collations and provisions and expectative graces Two or three or ten benefices were not accounted sufficient for a Roman Courtier in those daies but an hundred or two hundred or more They robbed him of the last appeales of his Subjects contrary to the ancient Lawes of England They fomented the rebellion of his own Subjects at home sometimes of his Barons sometimes of his Bishops playing fast and loose on both sides for advantage They dis-inherited him of his Crown They gave away his Kingdome for a prey to a forreign Prince They incited strangers to make war against him And they themselves by meer collusion and tricks had well near thrust him out of his Throne They robbed the Clergy in a manner of their whole Jurisdiction by their exemptions and reservations and visitations and suspensions and appeales and Legantine Courts and Nunciatures thrusting their sickles into every mans harvest They robbed them of their estates and livelihoods by their provisions and pensions by their coadjutorships and first-fruits and tenths by the vast charge of their investitures and palles and I know not how many other sorts of exactions and arbitrary impositions The most ancient of these was the pall whereof our King Canutus complained long since at Rome and had remedy promised They robbed the Nobility and Commonalty many waies as hath been formerly related If all these were not a sufficient cause of forfeiture certainly abuse did never forfeit office And though they had sometimes had a just Patriarchal power and had neither forfeited it by rebellion nor abuse Yet the King and the whole body of the Kingdome by their Legislative power substracting their obedience from them and erecting a new Patriarchate within their own Dominions it is a sufficient warrant for all English-men to suspend their obedience to the one and apply themselves to the other for the welfare and tranquillity of the whole body politick as hath before been declared Thirdly
and broiles between the Emperours with other Christian Princes and States and the Popes We have seen that from the excesses abuses innovations and extortions of that Court have sprung all the Schismes of the Eastern and Western Church and of the Occidentall Church within it self We have heard the confession of Pope Adrian that for some yeares by-past many things to be abominated had been in that holy See abuses in spiritual matters excesses in commands and all things out of order We have heard his promise to endeavour the Reformation of his own Court from whence peâ—adventure all the evil did spring that as corruption did flow from thence to the inferiour parts so might health and Reformation To which he accounted himself so much more obliged by how much he did see the whole world greedily desire a Reformation We have viewed the representation which nine selected Cardinals and Prelates did make upon their oathes to Paul the third That this lying flattering priâ—ciple that the Pope is the Lord of all benefices and therefore could not be Simoâ—iacall was the fountain from whence as from the Trojan horse so many abuses and so griâ—vou diseases had 〈…〉 into the Church and brought it to a desperate condition to the dâ—rision of Christian Religion and blaspâ—eming of the Name of Christ and that the cure must begin there from whencâ— the disease did spâ—ing We may remember the memorial of the King of Spain and the whole Kingdome of Castile That the abuses of the Court of Româ— gave occasion to all the Reformations and Schismeâ— of the Church And the complaint of the King and Kingdom of Portugal That for these reasons many Kingdomes had withdrawn their obedience and reverential respect from tâ—e Church of Rome These were no Protestants The first step to health is to know the true cause of our disease It hath been long debated whether the Protestant and Roman Churches be reconciliable or not Far be it from me to make my self a Judge of that Controversie Thus much I have observed that they who understand the sewest controversies make the most and the greatest If questions were truly stated by moderate persons both the number and the height would be much abated Many differences are grounded upon mistakes of one anothers sense Many are meer logomachies or contentions about words Many are meerly Scholastical above the capacity and apprehension of ordinary brains And many doubtlesse are real both in credendis and agendis both in doctrine and discipline But whether the distance be so great or how far any of these are necessary to salvation or do intrench upon the fundamentals of Religion requires a serious judicious and impartial consideration There is great difference between the reconciliation of the persons and the reconciliation of the opinions Men may vary in their judgments And yet preserve Christian unity and charity in their affections one towards another so as the errours be not destructive to fundamental Articles I determine nothing but onely crave leave to propose a question to all moderate Christians who love the peace of the Church and long for the re-union thereof In the first place if the Bishop of Rome were reduced from his universality of Sovereign Jurisdiction jure Divino to his principium unitatis and his Court regulated by the Canons of the Fathers which was the sense of the Councels of Constance and Basile and is desired by many Roman Catholicks as well as we Secondly if the Creed or necessary points of faith were reduced to what they were in the time of the four first Oecumenical Councels according to the decree of the third General Councel Conc. Eph Part. 2. Act. 6. c. 7. Who dare say that the faith of the primitive Fathers was insufficient Admitting no additional Articles bur onely necessary explications And those to be made by the authority of a General Councel or one so general as can be convocated And lastly supposing that some things from whence offences either given or taken which whether right or wrong do not weigh half so much as the unity of Christians were put out of divine offices which would not â—e refused if animosities were taken away and charity restored I say in case these three things were accorded which seem very reâ—sonable demands whether Christians might not live in an holy communion and joyn in the same publick worship of God free from all Schismatical separation of themselves one from another notwithstanding diversities of opinions which prevail even among the members of the same particular Chrches both with them and us FINIS Nothing more probably objected to the Church of England then Schisme But nothing more unjustly The method observed in this Discourse Every passionate heat not Schisme Acts 15. 〈◊〉 39. Ecclesiastical quarrels of long continuance not alwaies Schisme Hen Holden Append. de Schis Act. 1. pag 484. Infidelity unmasked Sect. 176. pag. 591. Idem pag. 516. The Separaters may be free from Schisme and the other party guilty Act. 19. 9. 1 Tim. 6. 5. Infid unmasked Ch. 7. Sect. 112. pag. 534. To withdraw obedience is not alwaies criminous Schisme Idem pag. 481. Theod. l. 4. c. 14. Cyril ep 18. ad Coelestinum Tâ—m 1. Conc. lib. Rom. Pâ—â—t in Anast. Libel ad mancit apud Bar. to 8. an 590. nu 39. 8. Syn. c. 10. What is single Schisme 1 Cor. 1. 10. 1 Cor. 3. 3 Wherein internal Communion doth consist Wherein External Communion doth consist External Communion may be suspended And withdrawn There is not the like necessity of communicating in all Externals Christian Communion â—mplies not unity in all opinions Reg. mor. tit pâ—aec decal lib. de A. P. Cons. 14. â—e unit eccl cons. 10. Lib. 2. de Rom. pont c. 29. Bar tom 10. an 878. Append. de Schismat Art 4. p. 516. The soâ—â—â— of Schisme What the Catholick Church signifies Collat. Carth. Col. 3. Each member of the Catholick Church is Catholick inclusively Schisme is changeable And for the most part complicated with heretical pravity Four waies to become heretical Who are Catholiques Aug. l. 2. cont casâ— Who are Schismaâ—cks What is understood by the Church of England Roman Catholicks first authors of the separation from Rome Act. and Mon p. 965. Râ—gist epist. Vni Oxon. ep 210. Sac. Syn. an 1530. et an 1532. 24 Hen. 8. c. 12. Romanists first gave the King the title of Head of the Church Resp. ad quaest 74. Râ—sp ad qu. 75. Conc. Mil. 2. Henry the 8th no friend to the Protestants Hist. Conc. Trid. 23. H. 8. 24. H. 8. 25. H. 8. 26. H. 8. 28. H. 8. The Authors opâ—nion of Monasteries Supplication of beggars Henry the 8th no friend to Protestants 31. Hen. 8. Much lesse those who joyned with him in the separation from Rome Act. Mon. an 1510. Conc. Tonst et Longlands Hist. aliquot mart et edit an 1550. Apol. sac Reg. pro jur fidel p. 125. England unanimous in casting out the Pope de verâ—â— obed Câ—ted
by the favour of the country carried the cause So as the Pope was forced to Recall him to Lincolne Having mentioned the statutes of Mortmain I cannot but do my native country and the Church of England that right to clear it from an heavy accusaâ—ion framed against it upon mistaken grounds That the English protestants had made a Law to maintain and patronize Sacriledge that no man how penitent soever could restore any thing to the Church which had been formerly taken from it God forbid First the statutes of Mortmain were not made by Protestants but in the daies of Henry the third Edward the first and Richard the second between the last of which and Henry the eighth there raigned six Kings successively That is one great mistake Secondly the Statutes of Mortmain did not at all concern the restitution of any thing that had been taken away There was no use for that in those daies The onely scope of those Lawes was to restrain the first donation of Lands to the Church without royal assent That is another mistake Thirdly these very Lawes of Mortmain are not so incredible nor so hard to be believed nor so altogether destitute of presidents and examples as that authour doth imagine so as posterity should scarcely believe that ever any such Law had been made He might have remembred the Proclamation of Moses when the people had already offered abundantly for the adorning of the Sanctuary Let neither man nor woman make any more work for the offering of the Sanctuary So the people were restrained from bringing He might have called to mind a like law of Theodosius a godly Emperour and propitious to the Church to moderate the peoples bounty and the Clergies covetousness Which Law Saint Ambrose and Saint Hierome do so much complain of not against the Emperour who made the Law but against the Clergy who deserved to have such a Law made against them He might have found the like Law made by Nicephorus Phocas and afterwards revived by Emanuel Comenus He might have remembred that the troubles between the Pope and the Venetians did spring partly from such a Law Briefly with a little search he might have found like Lawes in Germany Poland France Spain Italy Sicily And if he will trust Padre Paâ—lo in the Papacy it self The Prince cannot wrong his Subject that is an owner or possessour of Lands or haereditaments in a well ordered State Then why should it be in the power of a Subject that is an owner to wrong his Prince and his Country But by such alienations of Lands to the Church in an excessive and unproportionable measure the Prince loseth his right that is both his tribute and his military service and fines upon change of Tenants The Common-Wealth loseth its supportation and due protection Therefore they were called the Lawes of Mortmain because Lands so aliâ—nated to the Church were put into a dead hand from whence they never returned And so in time the whole Signioury should be the Churches as it is elegantly expressed by the Venetian Oratour to Paul the fifth Nè fortunis omnibus exuantur ne quicquid sub coelo Veneto homines arant ferunt aedificant omnia veluti quodam oceano Ecclesiae absorbeantur â—ihilque sibi reliqui fiat unde Rempublicam patriam tecta templa aras focos sepultura majorum defendere possint Lest the Citizens should be turned out of their estates lest all which men plow sow build under the Vâ—netian heaven should be swallowed up into the Ocean of the Church And nothing be left where with to defend the Common-Wealth their Country their houses their temples their altars their fires and the sepulchers of their Ancestors To prevent this great inconvenience the Lawes of Mortmain were devised prudently to ballance the spiritualty and the temporalty that the one do not swallow up the other to which all wise Legislators have ever had ought to have a special regard In France no man can build a new Church without the Kings License verified in Parliament A new Monastery builded in Genua without License is to be confiscated In Spain without License Royal no new Religions can enter into the Kingdome The Fathers of Saint Francis de Paula began to build a Church in Madrid upon their own heads but they were stopped So aequitable so necessary hath this Law of Mortmain been thought to all Nations But to leave this digression and to come up closer to the direct point without any consequences In the Reign of King Henry the second some controversies being likely to arise between the Crown and Thomas Bâ—cket Archbishop of Canterbury The King called a general Assembly of his Archbishops Bishops Abbats Priors and Peers of the Realm at Clarendon where there was made an acknowledgment or memorial cujusdam partis consuetudinum libertatum Antecessorum suorum Regis videlicet Henrici avi sui aliorum quaeobservari debebant in Regno ab omnibus teneri of a certain part of the Customes and Liberties of his predecessors that is to say his Grand-father Henry the first son of the Conquerour and other Kings A parte but ex ungue Leonem from the view of this part we may conclude of what nature the rest were of the customes The customes of England are the Common Law of the Land of his predecessors that is to say the Saxon Danish and Norman Kings successively And therefore no marveil if they ought to be observed of all This part of their ancient customes or liberties they reduced into sixteen Chapters or Articles To which all the Archbishops Bishops and other Ecclesiasticks with all the Peeres and Nobles of the Realm did not onely give their acknowledgment and consent but also their oathes for the due observation of them It would be tedious and impertinent to relate them all I will onely cull out some of them One was that all appeales in England must proceed regularly from the Arch-Deacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop and if the Archbishop failed to do justice the last complaint must be to the King to give order for redresse that is by fit Delegates But there might be no further or other Appeales without the consent of the King whereby the Nunciatureâ— and Legantine Court and the Court of Rome it self are all at the Kings mercy Wherein did the Popes great strength lie in those dayes when his hands were fast tied both at home and abroad Another Custome was that no Ecclesiasticall person might depart out of the Kingdome without the Kings License no not though he were summoned by the Bishop of Rome And if the King permitted them to go yet if he required it they must give caution or security to act nothing hurtful or prejudicial to the King or Kingdome in their going thither abiding there aâ—d returning home You see our Ancestors were jealous of Rome in those daies Whether it was their providence or their experience