the not promoting of it to compell them to desert their Stations and abandon their livings in which their very vitality and livelihood consisted Fol. 127. Then which there could be nothing more uncharitably or untruly said This as he makes there the first project of exasperation which Archbishop Laud and his confederates of the same stamp pitched upon to let his professed Enemies feel the dint of his spirit so doth he call it in the King a profane Edict a maculating of his own honour and a sacrilegious robbing of God All which though afterwards left out declare his willingnesse to make both Prince and Prelates and the dependants of those Prelates the poor Doctor of Cosmography among the rest feel the dint of his spirit and pity 't was he was not suffered to go on in so good a purpose Our Author having intimated in the way of a scorn or jâ—ar that the Divinity of the Lords day was new Divinity at the Court was answered by the Observator that so it was by his leave in the Countrey too not known in England till the year 1595. c. The Observator said it then I shal prove it now and having proved it in the Thesis or proposition will after return answer to those objections which the Pamphleter hath brought against it And first it is to be observed that this new Divinity of the Lords day was unknown to those who suffered for Religion and the testimony of a good conscience under Henry 8. as appeareth by John Fryth who suffered in the year 1533 in a tract by him written about Baptism Our fore-fathers saith he which were in the beginning of the Church did abrogate the Sabbath to the intent that men might have an Ensample of Christian Liberty c. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be reserved in which the people should come together to hear the word of God they ordained in stead of the Sabbath which was Saturday the next day following which is Sunday And though they might have kept the Saturday with the Jew as a thing indifferent yet they did much better Next to him followeth Mr. Tyndall famous in those times for his translation of the Bible for which and for many of his Doctrines opposite to the Church of Rome condemned unto the flames annâ— 1536. in the same Kings reign who in his Answer to Sir Thomaâ— More hath resolved it thus As for the Sabbath we be Lords over the Sabbath and may yet change it into Munday or into any other day as we see need or may make every tenth day holiday only if we see cause why neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday but to put a difference between us and the Jewes neither need we any holy day at all if the people might be taught without it The same Doctrine publickly defended in the writings of Bishop Hooper advanced to the Miter by King Edward and by Queen Mary to the Crown the crown oâ— Martyrdome in a Treatise by him written on the Ten Commandements anno 1550. who resolves it thus We may not think saith he that God gave any more holinesse to the Sabbath then to the other daies For if ye consider Friday Saturday or Sunday in as much as they be daies and the work of God the one is no more holy then the other but that day is alwaies most holy in the which we most apply and give our selves unto Holy works No notice taken by these Martyrs of this new Divinity The first speaking of the observation of the Lords day no otherwise then as an institution grounded on their forefathers a constitution of the Church the second placing no more Morality in a seventh-day then in a tenth-day Sabbath and the third making all daies wholly alike the Sunday no otherwise then the rest As this Divinity was new to those godly Martyrs so was it also to those Prelates and other learned men who composed the first and second Liturgies in the reign of King Edward or afterwards reviewed the same in the first year of Queen Elizabeth anno 1558. in none of which there is more care taken of the Sunday then the other Holydaies no more divine offices performed or diligent attendance required by the old Lawes of this Land upon the one then on the other No notice taken of this new Divinity in the Articles of Religion as they were published anno 1552. or as they were revised and ratified in the tenth year after no order taken for such a strict observation of it as might entitle it unto any Divinity either in the Orders of 1561. or the Advertisements of 1565. or the Canons of 1571. or those which â—ollowed anno 1575. Nothing that doth so much as squint towardâ— this Divinity in the writings of any learned man of this Nation Protestant Papist Puritan of what sort soever till broached by Dr. Bound anno 1595. as formerly hath been affirmed by the Observator But because the same truth may possibly be more grateful to our Author from the mouth of another then from that of the ignorant Observator I would desire him to consult the new Church History writ by a man more sutable to his own affections and so more like to be believed About this time saith he throughout England began the more solemn and strict observation of the Lords Day hereafter both in writing and preaching commonly call'd the Sabbath occasioned by a book this year set forth by P. Bound Dr. in Divinity and enlarged with additions anno 1606. wherein the following opinions are maintained 1. That the Commandement of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is moral and perpetual 2. That whereas all other things in the Jewish Church were taken away Priesthood Sacrifices and Sacraments his Sabbath was so changed as it still remaineth 3. That there is a great reason why we Christians should take our selves as strictly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath it being one of the moral Commandements where all are of equall authority lib. 9. sect 20. After this he goeth on to tell us how much the learned men were divided in their judgements about these Sabbatarian Doctrines some embraced them as ancient truths consonant to Scripture long disused and neglected now seasonably revived for the increase of piety others conceived them grounded on a wrong bottome but because they tended to the manifest advance of Religion it was pity to oppose them seeing none have just reason to complain being deceived into their own good But a third sort flatly fell out with these positions as galling mens necks with a Jewish yoke against the Liberty of Christians That Christ as Lord of the Sabbath had removed the rigour thereof and allowed men lawful Recreations that his Doctrine put an unequal lustre on the Sunday on set purpose to eclipse all other Holy daies to the derogation of the authority of the Church that this strict
got that too But all this while the King is like to get nothing by it if our Author might be suffered to expound the Law against which he opposeth only the Authoritie of Sir Edward Coke A learned Lawyer I confess but not to be put in equal Ballance with the Law it self Well what saith he Now saith he tempora mutantur the times are changed and many a Yeoman purchaseth lands in Knights Service and yet non debet ought not for want of Gentry to be a Knight and a little after the Fine to the mark which is chiefly aimed at Fol. 20. And in these words taking the Citation as I find it I observe these things 1. That Sir Edward Cokes Non debet cannot bind the King who may as well make Leathern Knights as Leathern Lords as our Author phraseth it elsewhere the Sword of Knighthood taking away the blemishes of Vulgar birth and stating the receiver of it in the rank and capacitie of Gentry Were it not thus the Door of Preferment would be shut against well deservers and neither honour gained in War nor eminencies in Learning nor fidelity in Service nor any other Consideration in the way of merit would render any person capable of the Order of Knighthood for want of Gentry or being descended only from a House of Yeomanrie 2ly I observe that though he would not have such petsons honoured with the title of Knighthood lest else perhaps that honourable Order might grow Despicable were it made too common yet he confesseth that they were to Fine for it if I understand his meaning rightly at the Kings pleasure 3ly I observe how lamely and imperfectly the Pamphleter hath delivered the last words of his Author which makes me apt enough to think that he intended to say somewhat to the Kings advantage if he had been suffered to speak out And 4ly if Sir Edward Coke should resolve the Contrary and give sentence in this Case against the King yet I conceive it would have been reversible by a Writ of error that learned Lawyer having been a principal Stickler for the Petition of Right in the former Parliament and therfore not unwilling to lay such grounds whereby the King might be forced to cast himself on the Alms of his people As for the Sword and Surcoat affirmed to be delivered by the Lord High Chamberlain out of the Kings Wardrobe to such as were summoned to appear he still stands to that not thinking it agreeable to his Condition to yield the cause if not found against him by the Jury the point to be made good is this that such as were summoned to the Coronation were to have every man of them a Sword and a Surcoat delivered to him out of the Kings Wardrobe by the Lord High Chamberlain if the Kings service so required which he proves by these Infallible witnesses Gent. of the Jury stand together hear your evidence The first witness is an eminent Antiquary than whom none can be fitter to give Testimony to the point in hand but he alas is long since dead and it were pity to raise him from the Dust of the Grave as we have done the Clâ—ricus Parliamentorum and Mr. John Pym in another case for fear he put the Coutt into a greater fright than when the solemn Assizes was at Oxford Such a witness we had once before in the Case of the late Convocation a credible and a knowing person as the Pamphletet told us but nameless he for blameless he shall be quoth the gallant Sydney and here we have an eminent Antiquary but the man is dead dead as a door-nail quoth the Pamphleter in another place A nameless witness there a dead witness here let them go together The next witness is old Matthew of Westminster who though dead yet speaketh who tells us That King Edward the 1. sent forth a proclamation that all such persons who had possessions valued at a Knights Fee should appear at Westminster c. what to do he tells you presently admissuri singuli ornatum militarem ex Regia Garderoba to receive military accoutrements out of the Kings Wardrobe Fol. 20. This witness speaks indeed but he speaks not home The point in Issue is particularly of a Sword and a Surcoat the witness speaks in general of ornatus militaris only but whether it were a Sword a Surcoat or a pair of Spurs or whatsoever else it was that he telleth us not So the first witness speaking nothing and the second nothing to the purpose the Pamphleter desires to be Non-suited and so let him be He tels the Observator Fol. 36. that his Arguments are nothing ad rem and besides the Cushion But whatsoever his arguments were I hope these Answers are not only ad rem but ad Rhombum and Rhomboidem also and so I hope the Pamphleter will find them upon examination In the great Feast at Welbeck there is no such difference but may be easily reconciled That the Earl of Newcastle entertained the King at VVelbeck is granted by the Observator and that it was the most magnificent entertainment which had been given the King in his way toward Scotland shall be granted also Which notwithstanding it was truly said by the Observator that the Magnificent Feast so much talked of was not made at VVelbeck but at Balsover Castle nor this year but the year next after and not made to the King only but to the King and Queen In the first of which two entertainments the Earl had far exceeded all the rest of the Lords but in the second exceeded himself the first Feast estimated at 6000 l. to our Author at York but estimated on the unwarrantable Superfaetations of Fame which like a Snow-ball groweth by rowling crescit eundo saith the Poet or like the Lapwing makes most noise when it is farthest from the nest where the Birds are hatched The Observator took it on the place it self when the moâ—ths of men were filled with the talk and their stomacks not well cleared from the Surquedries of that Mighty Feast by whom it was generally affirmed that the last years entertainment though both magnificent and August in our Authors language held no Comparison with this So that the one Feast being great and the other greater the Observator is in the right and our Author was not much in the wrong More in the wrong he doth confess in the great entertainment given to the City by the King affirmed before to have been made at the Guild-hall but now acknowledged upon the reading of the Observations to have been made at Alderman Freemans Fol. 22. This he hath rectified in part in the new Edition and it is but in part neither For whereas he was told by the Observator that the entertainment which the City gave at that time to the King was at the House of Alderman Freeman then Lord Mayor situate in Cornhill near the Royall Exchange and the entertainment which the King gave unto the City by
power of Kings could do nothing lawfully but what they do with their assistance and by their consent What saith the Pamphleter to this marry he hopes for he still saves himself by hoping that no man of any ingenuity can so much as question but that his politique Descendents imply Statute Laws which no King of England hath power to make without Common consent in Parliament Fol. 7. and that the text may speak agreeably to the words of this comment he hath foisted the word Laws into it where before it was not as may appear to any man who will be pleased to compare the Editions 2ly The Historian had affirmed for certain that Sir Robert Mansell as Vice-Admirall had an unquestionoble right of the chief conduct of that enterprize against the Spaniard upon the Dukes default For which being contradicted by the Observator grounding himself on the authority and common practice of our Kings in granting those commands to any as they see cause for it The Pamphleter stands stil to his former errour upon this ground that many men of wisdome and experience hold it for a Rule not only in this particular but in all such as have vicariam potestatem Fol. 7. But yet to make sure work withall he hath thrust these words as they thought into the text of his History and thereby made his own position that Sir Robert Mansell had an unquestionable right to the chief comduct in that enterprize to be the opinion of those many men of wisdome and long experience whom the comment points too New if we ask what these men were who thought so of it we find them in some lines before to be the Mariners men I confesse of long experience but of no great wisdome and such as better understand the Jurisdiction of their Masters-place than of the Vice-admiral of England and what such men as these may hold touching the Powers and privileges of such as have vicarium potestatem is so inconsiderable that I shall not trouble my self to insist more on it 3ly The Historian had declared that for Armianism the informations were very pregnant c. For which being blamed in many things by the Observator he puts off the odium from himself to Mr. Pym and the Committee for Religion professing that he only recited what that Committee declared as the product of their enquiries and with this answer he conceiveth he might easily avoid no less than 25 pages of the Observation Fol. 15. So he and that it may be thought so by the Reader too he hath thrice foisted in these words they said into that part of his Narrative which concerns this business as Fol. 97. l. 27. for Arminianisn they said informations were very pregnant c. and Fol. 98. l. 12 13. the hazard conceived from Rome c. flowed they said partly from the uncontrouled publishing of severall points tending and working that way and ibidem â—ine 19 20. the greatest danger was from Popery direct and from this the danger they said appeared very great c. Here have we dicnnt ferunt aiunt these words they said no lesse than thrice in half a leaf foisted in the text to make it suitable to the Pamphlet And we had a praedicant in it too that you may see I have still some smattering of my Grammar an accusation of some men for their uncontrouled preaching of several points tending and warping towards Popery though now upon an admonition from the Observator he hath turned preaching into publishing as appears fol. 98 line 14. guided thereto by the illustration of his comment and a desire to do some right to Doctor Cozens which I thank him for whom he had formerly accused for preaching many things which warped towards Popery but now agreeth so far with the Observator as to excuse him from publishing and direct Popery in his Hours of Prayer 4. The Observator had declared that the Primate had conceived a displeasure against the Lord Deputy for abrogating the Articles of Religion established by the Church of Ireland and setling in their place the Articles of the Church of Enggland to which the Pampleter replyeth that the Articles of Religion established in the Church of Ireland were never abrogated though those of England were received and approved by that convocation Fol. 42. For proof whereof he hath produced a Certificate under the hands of Doctor Barnard and one Samuel Pullain whose title and degree I know and therefore am not to be blamed if I give none to him Whether this Superinduction of the Articles of the Church of England amount not to an abrogation of those of Ireland shall be considered of hereafter in that Chapter which concerns Armianism Now I shall only tell you this that whereas our Author had it thus in his first Edition Fol. 132 viz. that in the Synod assembled in Ireland the body of Articles formed by that Church Anno 1615. were repealed and in their places were substituted the thirty nine Articles of the Church of England Now to conform his text to the former Comment he hath left out the word repealed in his new Edition Fol. 137. and tells us a clean contrary story to that before which shall be looked upon in the place before mentioned as more proper for it And so I close this Chapter intended chiefly for the justication of the Observator and the retorting of some Foistings on the Authors head withall confuting many of the Pamphleters Answers which could not be so well considered of in an other place CHAP. III. The affairs of the two Kings considered Of the impowering or not impowering the Earl of Bristol by Letters of Proxie The Proxie granted to the King of Spain and Don Charles his Brother Our Author qualifieth the word ever to make it serve his turn and yet cannot do it The Letter of Philip the 3. to Olivarez nothing contained in it against the restoring of the Palanate but the contrary rather King James communicated not with the Parliament in the Breach with Spain our Author pleadeth a Demonstration but produceth none Our Authors nicety between taking Coach to and for White-hall and the vanity of it Some solid Grandure contributed to the throne of Kings in their Coronations His Catholick Majesty how concerned in our Authors scoffs That heretofore some Kings in Spain have been Crowned and anointed though of late those ceremonies be disused and upon what reasons The Pamphleters weak defences for our Authors mistake about taking the Great Seal from the Bishop of Lincoln and the Observator justified as to that particular Our Authors Annuating and Superannuating in his Temporalities His Superannuating or subtertriennuating rather in the â—ynod of Doâ—t how weakly justified and excused The Observators running leap made good and his Reasons for it A transition to the following Disputes about the Sabbath or Lords day WEE are now come to the main body of the Pamphlet in which we shall begin and good reason for it with such particulars
Rayâ—e to receive the Sacrament The 82. Canon explained and regulated by the Kings Declaration anno 1633. The Pamphleters Ipse dixit no sufficient ground for his London measure Our Author satisfied in placing the Communion Table Altar-wise and adoration toward the East the liberty granted by the Church in the last particular The Bishops charged with the undiscreet practise of some private persons The Gloria patri an Epitome of the Apostles Creed Why kneeling is required at the saying of Gloria in excelsis The Pamphleters c. Our Author miserably out in the meaning of the Statute 1. Eliz. c. 2. That Statute opened and expounded in the case alledged The Pamphleter in danger of the Statute by out-running Authority His excellent proof that standing at the Gloria patri had been obtruded by the Bishops anno 1628. because inquired into in Bishop Wrens visitation anno 1636. The Pamphleter confuted by our Author and our Authors Panegyrick by himself The Clergie freed from Doctrinal Popery by our Author himself The scandal since given unto the Church by Bishop Goodman FRom Episcopacy passe we to the Bishops where the first thing we meet with is the rectifying of a mistake about Archbishop Whitgift whom our Author had made the predecessor penultime or next predecessor but one to Archbishop Laud. This he confesseth for an error but puts it off not as a want of diligence he will by no means yeeld to that but a lapse of memory Fol. 35. A priviledge which if all other writers of History should pretend unto as frequently as our Author doth we should finde little truth among them and not much assurance of any thing upon which to rest This not being the first time in which our Author hath been forced to use this remedy as in these words as is beforesaid is here acknowledged We had the same excuse before in the mistake about Marriage of the one King and Funeral of the other as also in that Hysteron proteron in placing the Synod of Dort before that of Ireland so that by this time this defence must needs be worn as threed bare as the Observators coat Fol. 37. Of Dr. Abbot the immediate predecessor to Archbishop Laud the Historian telleth us that he was stifly disciplined in the Doctrine of St Augustine which they who understand it not call Calvinism Charged for this by the Observator and some points produced in which Calvinism and the Doctrine of St. Augustine do extremely differ he answereth that he makes them not to be all one in all concernments but only in opposition to the Massilian and Arminian Tenets Fol. 23. And this I look on as another of our Authors priviledges who when he hath given us any things in general termes thinks all is well if he can make it hold good in a few particulars Whereas if he had limited his proposition to those points alone and told us that he was stifly principled in that part of St. Augustines Doctrine which was in opposition to the tenets before remembred there had been no occasion given to the Observator to except against him But the best is that seeming to make a question of that which is out of Question viz. Whether St. Augustine and Calvin differ in the point of Episcopacy he telleth us that they differ in the point of the Sabbath or Lords day which is more then the Observator had observed and for which we thank him In the story of the Sequestration of Archbishop Abbot there are four mistakes noted by the Observator 1. That in the Commission granted to the 5 Bishops Bishop Laud is said to be of the Quorum 2. That the declared impulsive cause of it was a supposed irregularity 3. That this supposed irregularity was incurred upon the casual killing of the keeper of his the Archbishops game And 4. That the irregularity is said to be but supposed only and no more then so To this the Pamphleter first answereth in his usual way that he should keep his own supposititioâ—s foistings at home and that by the same art of jugling his own words into the Text he that made them four might have made them four hundred Fol. 10. Why so because saith he I never said that Bishop Laud was of the Quorum more then any other but only that he was of the Quorum meaning thereby that he was one of the five Auditum admisse risum teneatis amici Can any man hear this fine stuffe and abstain from laughter Such a ridiculous piece of intelligent non-sense as might make Heraclitus grin and put Democritus into tears producing contrary operations on their several humours I thought before I read this passage our Gent. had been one of the right Worshipful of the Bench in comission for the Peace at least if not one of the Quorum but I see now that he is not so well skilled at it as a Justices Clerk Did the man ever hear of any Commission in which five or more persons were nominated of which one or two are named to be of the Quorum and by that word understand with such an abundant want of understanding that nothing more was meant in it but that the said one or two were to be of the number Confident I am and I think may confidently say it that we have not had such a learned piece of ignorance since Jack Maior of Brackley being by his place a Justice of the Peace and one of the Quorum by the publick charter of that Town threatned to binde a poor countrey fellow who had carried himself somewhat sawcily to him not only to the Peace but to the Quorum too Passe we on to the next that followes And there or no where we shall finde one of those many supposititious Foistings which are charged upon the Observator The Historian having said that the Archbishop was sequestred from his Function and a Commission granted by the King to five Bishops Bishop Laud being of the Quorum to execute Episcopal jurisdiction within his Province addes presently in the very next words that the declared impulsive to it was a supposed irregularity in him by reason of a Homicide committed by him per infortunium c. Can any intelligent Reader understand otherwise by these woâ—ds but that the impulsive to this Sequestâ—ation whatsoever it was was declared or supposed to be declared in that Commission For who but the King that granted the Commission should declare the impulsive causes to it or whâ—râ— else should they be declared but in that Commission Yes saith the Pamphleter the King granted the Commission and common Fame our Author or I know not who declared the Impulsives to it What pity 't is our Author had not served seven years to the Clerk of the Crown before he undertook the History of a King of England that so being better versed in all kinde of Commissions he might the better have avoided these ridiculous errors which he falleth into And yet this is the only thing
namely that the irregularity or supposed irregularity of the said Archbishop was not touched upon in the Commission as the impulsive cause unto it for which not one alone but many no man knoweth how many supposititious foistings are charged with so much noise and clamour on the Observator Somewhat more modestly in the third but with as little thought of rectifying any thing as in those before Told by the Observator that the person whom this Archbishop so unfortunately killed was not the keeper of his own Game but a keeper of the Lord Zouches in Bramzill Park he acknowledgeth his error in it Fol. 44. and yet not only keeps it in the Text of his new impression as before it was but stands unto the truth of it in the very same Pamphlet Fol. 11. and this he stands to on the authority of Aulicus Câ—quinariae and Mr. Prynne Men elsewhere of no credit with him though here they be but both mistaken in this point on uncertain hearsay Confessed for an error in the Pamphlet because upon a further inquiry he could do no otherwise justified for no error in the very same Pamphlet because he must not yeeld as inconsistent with his credit to be out in any thing And finally retains still in the Text of the History because he loves not to walk single in those paths of error but must have many followers for the greater State The fourth thing noted by the Observator namely that some pioâ—s and learned men being nominated and elected Bishops refused to be consecrated by him in regard that they conceived that there was more incurred by that misadventure then a supposed irregularity only is by the Pamphleter passed over in place whereof he foists in another which he thinks may be more easily answered that is to say his vouching Bishop Andrewes for a vinâ—icator of the Archbishops Regularity Fol. 11. Might I not here fâ—ll foul upon the Pamphleter and pay him home in some of his own Billingsgate language for falsifying so boldly I will not say so impudently as you know who did the plain and manifest words of the Observator who is so far from vouching this amongst the rest of his errors that he affirmes it to be true that the learned Bishop Andrewes as our Author telleth us did do the Archbishop very great service in this businesse Here is no fair dealing in this to begin withall and far more sophistry then ingenuity in the rest that followes For though the whole scope of that Commission was to inquire into the matter of Fact and to resolve whether the Archbishop notwithstanding that mischance was regular or not regular as the Pamphleter tels us fol. 11. Yet Bishop Andrewes in the executing of that Commission might proceed with favour and was not bound to presse the point to the utmost extremity when he saw what further inconveniencies might ensue upon it That learned Bishop might do this and did really do it without drawing blame upon himself or being belied in it by the Observator as in the ordinary eloquence of the Pamphleter he is said to be But stay a while we have another impulsive found out for this irregularity and found out chiefly as it seems because the Observator so dislikes the other fol. 46. And yet I trow the Observator never manifested any such dislike as to the cause impulsive of his the Archbishops irregularity no such matter verily but only shewed that the unfortunate accident which our Author speaks of was not the declared impulsive cause in the commission for sequestring him from his Jurisdiction and granting it to the five Bishops which are therein named as indeed it was not The impulsive cause it might be though not there declared the Commission only saying in the general That the said Archbishop could not at that present in his own person attend those services which were otherwise proper for his Cognizance and Jurisdiction not rendring any certain impulsive cause whereby he was conceived uncapable of performing his office And now what new impulsive will he give us in exchange for the other marry he telleth us that though it was not publickly declared yet it was by knowing men in those affairs beheld as the reall and genuine cause of this commission that the Arch-Bishop had refused to license Dr. Sibthorps Book Fol. 47. The Book here meant was a Sermon preached at Noâ—thampton by that Doctâ—r before the Judges of Assize anno 1627 and after printed with the name of Apostolical obedience A Sermon made of such a temper that if our Author be in the right and Mr. Prynne be not in the wrong it hath pleased all parties Refused to be licensed by Archbishop Abbet as our Author telleth us though he doth not tell the reasons of it but if it were refused to be licensed by him it was because it had too much of the Court as tending partly to the justification of the generall Lâ—an which was then required of the the Subjects Not suffered to be licensed by Bishop Laud because it had too little of the Court till some passages which seemed offensive in it touching the profanation of the Sabbath and toleration of Popery as we are told by Mr. Prynne had been first expunged But whatsoever the Sermon was the Archbishops refusal to license it if it were brought to him to be licensed could be no such crime as to draw after it both his removing from the Court and sequestring from his Jurisdiction if other things of greater moment had not then concurred Passe we unto the next Archbishop of whom being then Bishop of London our Author telleth us that many had no fancy to the work the repairing of St. Pauls Church meerly because he was the promoter of it But the contrary being proved by the Observator most of the Clergy Nobility and Gentry contributing very largely to it because he promoted it he only answereth that many and most may be consistent and that many may be opposite to the major vote Fol. 21. but proveth not that any of those many did dislike it in respect of the the Bishop or that it was not rather disliked by them in regard of the work which was there proved from a base and scurrilous passage in Bastwicks Letany And to this last our very Author himself hath hinted somewhat in his History Fol. 124. where he affirmes that some did not forbear to cry what needs this cost to decore a superstitious Relique This the chief cause why the work went so slowly forward that at length the distempers of the State spoiled the temper of the mortar as our Author there Next look upon him as Archbishop in which capacity we shall finde him made by our Historian a principal occasion of the Scottish war Reproved by the Observator for calling the war against the Scots the Bishops war he now stands to it that it was and might be so called for these reasons following First because not the Covenanters only but many an
English Protestant did so call it also Fol. 30. Some English Protestants I beleeve not so The English Protestants were otherwise perswaded of it though the Puritans were not and 't was the English Puritan not the English Protestant who joyned with the Covenanters in Scotland in the main design and gave it consequently the name of the Bishops War He asketh us secondly If it were not a war undertaken at first for defence of their Hierarchy Which question being equivalent to an affirmation doth amount to this that the war was first undertaken in the Bishops quarrel and in defence of their Order This is well said indeed if it were well proved but this the Pamphleter doth not prove I am sure he cannot the King who best knew the reasons of his taking Armes and published a large Declaration of the proceedings of the Scots imputes the causes of the war to their continuing the Assembly at Glascow when by him dissolved ejecting such of the Clergy as had refused to subscribe to the Acts thereof then commanded to do suspended and repealed Lawes without his Authority putting the Subjects into Armes seizing upon his Forts and Castles and intercepting his Revenues All which or any one of which might have moved the King to undertake a war against them without consulting with our Author how to bring the poor Bishops into that engagement and make it rather seem their quarrell then the Kings own interesse which inforced him to it But he saith thirdly That one of that Order he means the late Archbishop of Canterbury was the main cause of that war by introducing the Liturgie amongst them and thereupon he doth conclude that the war which the Archbishop occasioned and which was entred into for maintaining that Hierarchy may he hopes without offence be called the Bishops war And now we are come to that we looked for a very pretty tale indeed and one of the finest he hath told us none of the Hundred merry Tales nor such a tale as made his Lordship wondrous merry which we had before but a new Canterbury Tale and the Esquires tale too Our Author a more modederate and sober Gent. then the Pamphleter is hath told us that the Kings demand of the Abby Lands in Scotland in the first year of his reign made by the Observator was the true cause of the war and the bug-words spoke by the Scottish Lords on that occasion first generated a mutuall and immortal distance between them which being in the unpublished sheets Fol. 18. is seconded in the Book now extant where we are told that those discontents upon which the war was after grounded did break out in Scotland anno 1633. four years before the Liturgie was commended to them that the next year after these discontents began to contract a little more confidence in his absence and to attempt his patience by a most malicious plot against his Fame as preambulatory to another against his person That the first work and operation in the method of Sedition being to leaven the masse of the peoples mindes with mischievous impressions they first whispered and instilled into them close intelligence of some terrible plot against their liberties and after sent abroad a venemous libel in which amongst other things they suggested formidable fictions of his tendency to the Romish Belief Fol. 133. And finally that for the Liturgie it self there was a purpose in King James to settle such an one amongst them as might hold conformity with that of England and that King Charles in pursuance of his Fathers purpose gave directions to the Archbishop of Canterbury the Bishop of Ely and to divers Bishops of that Kingdome to revise correct alter and change as they pleased the Liturgie compiled in his Fathers time and finally that the Book so altered was by the King sent by the Counsel of that Kingdome with order to proclaim the Reading of it upon next Easter day Fol. By this we see that sacriledge and rapine was the first ground of these discontents these discontents brake out into sedition and that sedition ended in an open war to which the introducing of the Liturgie could not be a cause though it might be made use of by those factious and rebellious spirits for a present occasion and so much is confessed by the Pamphleter himself in that there was no doubt but many of them had other then Religious designs as hoping to obtain that honour and wealth in a troubled State which they were confident they should never arrive at in a calm Fol. 31. Adeo veritas ab invitis etiam pectoribus erumpit said Lactantius truly By this it also doth appear that the Arch-bishop had not the sole hand in the Scotish Liturgie the Book being revised by many by the Kings directions and sent by him to the Lords of his Councell in that kingdome with order and command to see it executed accordingly But the best is that the Pamphleter hath not only his tale ready but his Tales master too fathering it on the ingenious Author of the Elenchus motuum in which he findes the Arch-bishop named for the main cause of introducing that Liturgie among the Scots and that he did it spe quidem laudabili eventu vero pessimo with a good intent but exceeding ill success fol. 30. I have as great an esteem for the Author of that Book whosoever he was as any Pamphleter can have of him but yet could tell him of some things in which he was as much mistaken as in this particular but since the Pamphleter hath made that Authors words his own and seems to approve of the intent though the success proved not answerable I shall only put him in mind of a saying in Ovid viz. Careat successibus opto Quisquis ab eventu facta notanda putat That is to say Ill may he prosper in his best intents That measures Counsels by their sad events But to satisfie both the Pamphleter and the ingenuous Author by him alleadged I shall say somewhat here of the business of the Scotish Liturgie which is not commonly observed and tends both to the justification of the King himself and of those whom he intrusted in it Know then that when the Scots required aid of Queen Elizabeth in the beginning of their Reformation to expell the French they bound themselves by the Subscription of their hands to embrace the form of worship other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England Religionis cultui ritibus cum Anglis communibus subscripserunt as Buchannan their own Historian and no friend unto the Anglican Church informs us of them But being cleared of the French Forces and able to stand on their own legs they broke their faith t is hard to say they ever kept it in this particular and fell on those extemporary undigested prayers which their own Fancies had directed or were thought most agreeable to Knoxes humour The confusion inconveniencies and sad effects whereof being well known to
King James he thought himself concerned I will not say obliged to bring them back again to that first subscription or to commend such a Liturgie to them as might hold some conformity with that of the Church of England To this end having restored the Bishops and setled the five Articles of Perth as necessarie introductions to it he gave order to the Bishops and the rest of the Clergy then assembled to compose a Liturgie for that Church desiring it might be as near the English forms as they could conveniently Wherin as he did little doubt of their ready obedience so questionless it had been finished by the sitting of the next Assembly if the long and dubious expectation of the match with Spain and the Kings death not long after had not layed it by So that King Char. had not only the general subscription of the nation never yet lawfully reversed but the order of King James registred in the Acts of the General Assembly to proceed upon and he proceeded on it accordingly as soon as by the Coronation and the ensuing Parliament he had given contentment to that people And therefore they who can conclude that the Liturgie first grounded on their own subscription designed by their own generall Assembly revised by their own Bishops and confirmed by their own naturall and native King was or could be the ground of their taking Armes for I must not say the Scots rebelled though the Irish did may by the same Logick conclude as well that the Doctrine of Luther was the cause of the Insurrections of the Boors in Germany or that Tenterden Steeple was the cause of Goodwins sands We left the late Arch-bishop acquitted as we hope from being a principal occasion of the Scotch war we must next free him and the rest of the Bishops from introducing Innovations Popery Arminianisme and I know not what And first our Author told us of him that be tampered to introduce some Ceremonies bordering up on superstition disused by us and abused by them that is to say by those of Rome And being told by the Observator that if they were disused only they were still in force as appeared by the case of Knighthood the Pamphleter answered thereunto the word disused doth not at all imply that those Ceremonies were in force but rather layed aside by the Reformators observing how much they were abused by the Church of Rome and therefore not fit to be retained fol. 33. A piece of Law like this we had in the former Chapter where the Pamphleter had broached this Doctrine that the discontinuance of the execution that is to say of the Declaration of King James about lawfull sports was a tacite suppressing and calling of it in To that we referre the Reader for an Answer to this I adde now only by the way and ex abundanti that many things may be in abejance as your Lawyers phrase it which are not utterly lost and irrecoverable but carry with them a hope or longing expectance that though for the present they be in no man yet be in the hope and expectation of him who is next to enjoy them For as the Civilians say of Haereditas jacens that goods and lands do Jacere whilst they want a possessor and yet not simply because they lately had one and may shortly have another so the common Lawyers do say that things in like estate are in Abejance Thus Dr. Cowell hath defined that word in his Interpreter And this I take to be the case of those antient Ceremonies which were reduced into the Church by the Arch-bish though a while disused and this may serve for answer to the last Objection of this Pamphleter in the present point viz. that things abused may be lawfully restored to the Primitive use but then it must be saith he by lawfull authority and in a lawfull manner Which Rule of his I hold to be undoubtedly true in the Proposition but of no use at all in the application the Arch-bishop having in himself a lawfull power of restoring such antient Rites and Ceremonies as had been formerly disused only and not also abrogated and what he had not in himself was made up by the Kings authority of which more anon But next our Author tells us of this Arch-bishop that he commanded in his metropoliticall visitation that the Communion-table which formerly stood in the midst of the Church or Chancell should be placed at the East end upon a graduated advance of ground with the ends inverted and a wooden traverse of Railes before it To which the Observator answereth that the King had given sufficient authority to it a year before the visitation which our Author speaks of in the determination of the case of St. Gregory Church November 3. 1633. The Pamphleter hereunto replyeth that by the Arch-bishops out-running Authority he intended not his placing the Communion Table Altar-wise at the East of the Chancell so then we have gained that point if nothing else but by enjoyning a wooden Traverse of Railes to be set before it and commanding all the Communicants to come to it to receive the Sacrament fol. 27. which said he makes a long discourse to prove that by the Queens Injunctions and the 82. Canon the Table is to be placed within the Church or Chancell that the Communicants may in greater numbers receive the Sacrament which is best done saith he when the Table is in the Body of the Church or Chancell And against this or in defence of setting Railes before the Table so as the Communicant should come up to those Railes to receive He is sure that there is no such thing in the Declaration not a syllable that tends that way These Colworts have been boyled already served in and set by the Bishop of Lincolne on his Holy Table so that there needs no other Answer then what we finde in the Antidotum Lincolniense Chap. 7. and therefore I referre him thither for his satisfaction But since he hath appealed to the Declaration to the Declaration he shall go In which it is expresly said That for asmuch as concerns the liberty given by the said Common Book or Canons for placing the Communion Table in any Church or Chappell with most conveniency that liberty is not so to be understood as if it were ever left to the discretion of the Parish much less to the particular fancy of any humorous person but to the Judgement of the Ordinary to whose place and function it doth properly belong to give direction in that point both for the thing it self and for the time when and how long as he may find cause So that his Majesties Declaration leaves it to the power of the Ordinary and the Archbishop as chief Ordinary enjoyneth the Table to be placed at the East end of the Chancell and the Communicants to come up to it to receive the Sacrament to which the adding of a Rail as a matter of decency and for keeping off disorders and profanations is
doth in weight his generall muster of mistakes many of which like Souldiers in a poor Foot Company are counted over and over again to increase the Captains pay and make up his numbers His Catalogue or his Comedy of Errors rather which â—ike the Gallypots and Boxes in the shop of a young Apothecary serve onely to make good the Shelves and create him some credit with the Vulgar For which and for how many of which the Observator stands accomptable before God and man or whether any of them may be charged on his score or not is left like that before to the Readers Judgement In the expostulation there is nothing which requireth an Answer But a complaint against the Observator for want of Christian yea Moral principles in the course and way of his proceedings with which had he been furnished in any measure or Proportion he should have hinted these mistakes either by Conference or by Letter as fit Considerations for a second Impression and this he doth the rather insist upon because of those many opportunities which the Observator had of conferring with him meeting together not only a hundred times in the same Shop but ten times after the Coming out of the History and thereupon it is concluded that it was not the information of the Author but some precious quarrel rather which was desired Fol. 44 45. To Answer first unto the last the Observator doth protest in his own behalf that he had no desire or thought of such precious quarrels as the Author conscious to himself of his own impatiencies doth accuse him of and that he aimed at nothing else in those Observations than the Illustration of the Story and Rectifying some mistakes in the course thereof as the title promiseth How often they have met in the same shop I am not able to say the Observator telling me that he never changed words with him above thrice and then took such a scant survey of his Stature Countenance and habit that he might meet him a hundred times since as the Author sayes he did in transitu or intermixt with other Company without taking any notice of him Nor doth the Obsertor please himself in these paper quarrels or would have took the least part of the pains he did if he had found himself concern'd in his own particular either in point of Fame or Fortunes but 't is a good Rule in St. Hierome In suspitione Haereseos se nolle queâ—quam Fore patientem And if patience may be counted for a dull stupidity in a mans own Case when himself is subjected to the guilt of such Suspitions it may deserve a far worse name when a whole National Clergy a Provincial Synod many great men of power and eminent degree shall be taxed and branded with tendencies to Papery and Arminianism unpardonable irregularities in their proceedings vitiousness even to Scandal in their lives and Actions and in â—eed what not which may expose them in this low Estate of their Affairs to the publique hatred If in these points and upon these Considerations the Observator thought himself obliged to right the Church disabuse the Reader and lay before the Historians eyes those many particulars in which either his Intelligence or diligence failed him or his judgement was not well informed or that he had been Byâ—ssed from the mark of truth by the exeesse and transport of his own Affections I hope that God himself will pardon and all good men excuse me in the undertaking In seconding which undertaking and justifying all the injured parties against the Recriminations of the Pamphleter if I have carried my Discourse with too quick a hand it is my hope that it will rather be imputed to his own indiscretions and the frequent provocations given than to any propensions in my self to deal ruggedly with him Medicum severum intemperans aeger facit The Patients Intemperancy doth many times occasion the Physician to be more severe than he would be otherwise For my part as I came not willingly to this employment but was necessitated and thrust on by those many Indignities which both the History and the Pamphlet had heaped on those whose memory and good name is most precious with me yet I despair not but that the honest zeal which hath moved me to it and the great pains I have taken in it may merit a pardon at the least if it gain not praise Hic interim liber professione Pietatis aut laudatns eri aut saltem excusatus in the words of Tacitus So God blesse us all AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER Concerning some ADDITIONS to the former WORK Good Reader AS well for thy fuller Satisfaction as for the taking away of all exception from the Pamphleter I have thought good to add some further passages to the Book foregoing which without further preamble I shall here present unto thee in this Order following Addend ad Page 29. line 25. The Dignity of his Function and the Civilitie of his breeding with other necessary qualifications required in him being well considered But that I may do that Reverend person the greater right I shall lay down the whole state of the Business as it passed indeed and not as taken up by our Author upon Vulgar Fame though Vulgar Fame be one of the best Authors he relyeth upon in the whole Course of his History One Captain Gunter as they called him having purchased the Advowzon of a Benefice in which one Mr. Brasgirdle was Incumbent resolved to make some present advantage by it and to that end Articled against Brasgirdle in the High Commission Brasgirdle was advised by his Counsel to a Recriminatioâ— in which he charged Gunter for sweating that he would spit in his face whensoever he met him and swearing afterward that he had spit in his Face accordingly as also that the Ordinary or Official meeting with Gunter at a time when the said Brasgirdle had preached at a General Meeting of the Clergy took the said Gunter to dinner with him and placed him at the head of the board above all the Ministers where the said Gunter spent the greatest part of the Meal in railing at and against the Preacher to the great scandal and offence of all the Company And to this Charge or Recrimination the Proofes came so home that though Gunter did deny the Fact as to his spitting in the Ministers Face yet it was proved sufficiently that he had sworn he would and did it as before is said The cause being pleaded on both sides and the Reverend Person above aimed at being then to passe censure on it he openly declared that he would proceed then as at other times secundum allegata probata according to the Proofes and Evidences which had been produced that it had been proved that the Minister had taken the degree of a Master of Arts and after of a Batchelor of Divinitie also and had lived 20. years and upwards in the place of his present dwelling without any discredit or