the Civil and Temporal Heads of our Church XXIV He tells us that the Monks could not give away that which they had only for term of Life I know not how this comes to be delivered by our Author at a time when the surrender of so many Charters to the King hath been judged Legal though it was made by men who had no Title to these and who were so far from having a Right to them for Term of Life that they had only the Administration of them in an Annual Magistracy so that our Author had best consider how he advances such Positions lest he doth as much hurt one way as he thinks to do service another In a word our Author hath pleaded the Cause of the Monasteries and hath arraigned the Suppression of them severely tho as he said concerning the burning of Hereticks he would not be thought to plead for it in this place XXV He accuses King Henry for giving Dispensations in matters of Marriage against Ecclesiastical Canons and because he declared all Marriages to be lawful that were not against Gods Law Here if in any thing the perverseness of the Church of Rome appears or rather their design to oblige the World to have oft recourse to them to pay them well and to depend much on them they have prohibited Marriage in many degrees that were not forbid by the Law of God and to ballance this they have suffered Marriages to be contracted in the Degrees forbid by God for the Pope's Power of Dispensing is promoted both ways they have added a new Contrivance of Spiritual Kindred and as the Prohibitions that they have set up were unknown to the Ancient Church so the Degrees that they have declared dispensable were believed by the Ancient Church to be moral and indispensable And yet after all this corruption of Ecclesiastical Discipline they are in great wrath at the Reformers because they thought it was fit to return to the Degrees forbid by the Law of Moses and to cut off these superadded Prohibitions which were inventions to bring grist to that Mill where all things were to be had so men will come up to the Price There follow here a great many Instances in which King Henry exercised his Supremacy which our Author aggravates all he can But the Considerations that were proposed in the first Part seem fully to satisfie all the difficulties that can be thought to arise out of them XXVI He tells us that such of the Privy Council as complied not with the Changes made in King Edward's Days were turned out after some time and names Bishop Tonstal Wriothesly the Chancellor and the Earl of Arundel and he adds That the King had but one Parliament continued by Prorogation from Session to Session till at last it ended in the Death of the King. Here are Matters of no great Consequence I confess but these shew how careless our Author was in examining the Story of our Reformation and how easy he was to take up any Reports that might blast it It will not appear a very extraordinary thing to see Privy Counsellors turned out that do not concur with the Designs that prevail Some such things have possibly fallen out in our own Time and Men have no great cause to complain of a severe Administration when this is all the Rigour that is shewed to those who oppose themselves to the Tide But our Author was misinformed in all these Particulars Tonstal went along with all that was done and was contented to protest in Parliament against some Laws but as soon as they were made he gave a ready Obedience to them and continued to be still in the Council during the Duke of Somerset's Ministry Wriothesly was not turned out till after some time but immediately upon King Henry's Death he had past an illegal Patent upon which to prevent a severer Sentence he resign'd his Place but he continued still to be of the Privy Council And the Earl of Arundel continued to be of the Privy Council for many Years and long after fell to be in ill terms with the Duke of Northumberland and upon that an Enquiry was made into his Administration and he was fined 12000 Pounds But it is no wonder to find our Author mistaken in matters of this Nature when in so publick a thing as that King Edward had but one Parliament in his whole Reign he hath not been at the pains to turn over the Book of Statutes for there he would have found that King Edward's first Parliament was dissolved the 15th of April 1552 and a Second Parliament was called and opened the First of March following and was dissolved the last Day of that same Month. So that there were two Parliaments in this Reign and the Second was dissolved by an Act of the King 's and not by his Death I do confess these are not great Matters yet this may be drawn out of them that our Author who pretends to have examined the Transactions of that Time with so much exactness took things upon trust without giving himself the trouble to enquire into them so critically as was necessary for one that was resolved to pass a Judgment upon them XXVII He expostulates upon the Inhibition of preaching put upon the Bishops except in their own Cathedrals which agrees ill with the Censure that Fox passes upon them as Dumb Prelates And after this there was a general Inhibition on the whole Clergy hindring them to preach till a Uniform Order of Doctrine should be set out in which some Bishops and other Learned Men were then employed by the King's Order As for this Inhibition upon Bishops to preach except in their Cathedrals it is a Fiction of our Author's for which he can give no Voucher they were not so much as restrained from giving Licences to preach much less to preach themselves over their Diocess The second and general Restraint as it was but for a very short while so the Thing is very doubtful and stands only on Fuller's Credit who was too careless a Writer to be appealed to in any Matter of Consequence XXVIII Our Author cites here the Discourse of Communion in one kind which by all appearance is that lately writ by the Bishop of Meaux This shews that the Author and the Publisher is the same Person though others pretend that the Author is dead many Years ago But it seems the Publisher thought fit at least to add some new touches and since he did that he might have thought it worth the while to have examined at least the Records published by Dr. Burnet and his History it self might have been considered as well as Mr. Fullers and Dr. Heylins But since it seems our Author thought the Discourse of the Communion in one kind fit to be recommended by him I will take the liberty to recommend the Answer to it in French by Monsieur Larroque and that lately writ in English in which the disingenuity of the Discourse
well as their Goods and Chattels to the King. These were the true Motives of repealing those Bloody Laws which our Author ought to have mentioned if he had not designed to deceive his Reader but when he comes to examine the matter of Burning Hereticks he does it so softly that it is plain he would rather lay us asleep than quiet us First he begins with that trifling Answer That the Secular Laws and not the Ecclesiastical do both appoint and execute it but if the Secular Arm is threatned by the Ecclesiastical not only with lower Censures but even with Deposition and that by a Council which he acknowledges to be General in case they do not extirpate Hereticks then this Extirpation is still the Act of the Church enforced upon the Civil Power with a dreadful Sanction which the Church was Able to execute in those Ages of Superstition and thus the Guilt of all the Blood-shed upon the account of Heresie lies at the Door of that Church In the next place he reckons up several Instances of severe Executions against Hereticks both in England and elsewhere which were practiced not only in Henry the Eighth's time but also under Edward the Sixth's and were carried on chiefly by Cranmer's Authority Executions made under Queen Elizabeth and King Iames are also mentioned to which is added a Law made by King Iames adjudging men Traytors for being reconciled to the Pope or See of Rome which is putting men to Death for pretended Heresie and to a Death worse than Burning But to all this I will only say That the Reformation being a work of time as men did not all at once throw off all the Corruptions of the Church of Rome so this being the received Doctrine of the Western Church for many Ages that all Hereticks ought to be extirpated if our Reformers did not so soon as were to be wished throw of this Remnant of Popery it is rather to be excused and pitied in them than to be justified their Practice Cranmer did also soften the Notion of Heresie as much as he could by reducing it to a plain and wilful Opposition to some of the Articles of the Apostles Creed and if the constant Clamours that the men of the Church of Rome raised against the Reformation as a Subversion of the Christian Religion because some that had been among the Reformers advanced some monstrous Opinions if these I say carried our Reformers to such a way of justifying themselves of this Imputation by some publick Executions they who gave the occasion to this severity which I do not pretend to justifie ought not to reproach us for that to which they drove our Ancestors As for King Iames's Law I will not examine whether the Death of Traitors or the Burning of Hereticks is the more dreadful it is certain Fire especially when it is slow is the most terrible of all deaths and that which gives the most formidable Impression but if the Provocation given to the King and Parliament at that time by the Gun-powder Treason be considered it will not appear strange if the King and Parliament after they had escaped so narrowly the greatest of all dangers took a little more than ordinary Care to secure themselves against the like Attempts in time coming And if the severe Canons of the Council of Lateran against Hereticks had lain as so many dead Letters in the Body of the Laws of their Church as that Law hath done in our Book of Statutes they had had much less Blood to answer for and less guilt than lies upon them at present After these softnings our Author comes to pass his own Censure on the Burning of Hereticks but the common Rules of Prudence should have led him in the present juncture of Affairs to have condemned it roundly and so to have laid our apprehensions a little yet he saw so plainly that this was a practise so clearly authorized both by Law and Custom in their Church that he durst not disown it in express words and indeed he understands so little how a tender point ought to be touch'd that by all the Rules of Prudence he ought not to have medled with it His Discourse in this is an Original and because I 'le do him no wrong in the manner of Representing it I will set it down in his own Words But whether this Law in it self be just and again if just whether it may be justly extended to all those simple People put to death in Queen Maries days such as St. Austin calls Hereticis Credentes because they had so much Obstinacy as not to recant their Errors for which they saw their former Teachers sacrifice their Lives especially when they were prejudiced by the most common contrary Doctrine and Practice in the precedent Times of Edward the 6th and had lived in such a condition of Life as neither had means nor leasure nor capacity to examine the Churches Authority Councils or Fathers ordinarily such Persons being only to be reduced as they were perverted by the contrary fashion and course of the times and by Example and not by Argument either from Reason or from Authority and the same that I say of these Laity may perhaps also be said of some illiterate Clergy whether I say this Law may justly be extended to such and the highest suffering Death be inflicted especially where the Delinquents are so numerous rather than some lower Censures of pecuniary Mulcts or Imprisonment these things I meddle not with nor would be thought at all in this place to justifie Here is a long Period of 208 Words before the Verb comes to close it but there is small comfort in all this for even after our Author hath put the Case with all possible Abatements and as soft as may be of the ignorances the strong prejudices and the numbers of the Delinquents and intimated his merciful inclinations only towards the Laity and some of the illiterate Clergy and that only with relation to Death Fines and Imprisonments being left out of the Grace that he would shew us yet in conclusion he only tells us He will not meddle with this matter nor would he be thought at all to justifie it in this place for he is only concerned what we think of him and whether he justifies it or not he only tells us he would not be thought to do it and yet lest that seem too much he adds a further Qualification that he would not be thought to justifie it in this place So that he hath fully reserved all his Rights entire to a fitter opportunity and then he well may without the least Reproach justifie that in another place which he doth not think fit to do at present Yet it seems he hath a very narrow heart in matters of Grace for this same scanty measure of Favour that he had clogg'd with so many Reserves is yet retrenched considerably in the following Words Tho some among those unlearned Lay-people I confess to have
matter which is at this day practiced in most of all the States of Christendom Otherwise Civil Government were a very feeble thing if it could not preserve its Members from the arbitrary Proceedings of Ecclesiastical Courts And indeed if the Canons and Rules made by the Popes and such Synods as were absolutely at their disposal were the measures of Heresy so that Judgments ought to pass upon them and that States might not cover themselves from them by Laws we know where this must carry us and how many Bonfires must be quickly made in England But God be thanked it is not come to that I must also add one thing That if the Judgment of Heresy had carried with it nothing but the Ecclesiastical Censures of Excommunications and Anathema's the Church might have pretended that the State ought not to meddle too much in it But since Heresy not only drew after it an Infamy in Law but likewise a Writ de Heretico Comburendo according to another Canon acknowledged to be in force by our Author then a State ought to have made such Regulations in this matter as were necessary to protect its Members from such a Butchery For since the Civil Government is bound to secure the Subjects while they continue Innocent and Obedient from the Rage of all their Enemies our Legislators had betrayed their Trust if they had not put an effectual Stop to the Tyranny of the Clergy And thus it is plain That this Declaration made by the Parliament was nothing but a securing to the Subjects their Lives and Fortunes to which they had formerly a very doubtful Tenure since they held them only at the Discretion and Mercy of the Clergy IX But because our Writers have often alledged the Laws made in former times Chiefly the Statute of Premunire made by Richard the 2d against all Bulls and Provisions from the See of Rome Our Author answers this very weightily as he thinks by shewing us That those Laws related only to some special matters that were temporal Things such as the Titles to Benefices or the Translation of Bishops out of England without the Kings consent by which both the King might be deprived of their Counsel and the Treasure of the Kingdom carried away out of it But all this is trifling For a Contest being raised concerning the extent of the Popes Power the Pope claims a degree of Authority to be committed to him by Christ and that the whole Pastoral Work belonged to him Upon this the King and Parliament set bounds to it Now the Question arises out of this Whether the same Authority that warranted them to determine against the Pretensions of that Court in that one Point did not warrant them likewise to do it in other Points To a man of a clear understanding the Matter will appear to be past dispute For if in one Point a Parliament may contradict the Popes Declarations and Canons sure it may do it in another and the only Question then to be examined will be concerning the matter of such Laws For if the matter of those Laws is good the Authority is certainly good and if the matter is not good it is confessed that an Act of Parliament cannot change the nature of things But because this matter is better understood by some Breves printed by Dr. Burnet it will be worth the while to examine it a little more fully That vigorous Act of Parliament came out indeed in the Reign of a feeble Prince but the Popedom at that time was in a more feeble State and the adherence of England to the Pope who sat at Rome was in that time of Schism so valuable a support that those at Rome it seems thought it fit to take no notice of it But the Council of Constance had no sooner heal'd that Wound then the Popes were resolved to have that Law repealed and England falling again under a new Feebleness in Henry 6th Minority and Factions at Home and Losses in France having sunk the Reputation of the Government extreamly the Pope laid hold of that Conjuncture and in his Letters both to the Arch-Bishops and Clergy and to the King and Parliament he Annuls the Statute and requires the Clergy to give it no Obedience declaring all Persons that obey it to be ipso facto Excommunicated and they should not be relaxed by any but himself unless it were at the point of Death and he ordered the Clergy to Preach this Doctrine to all the People He required the Parliament under pain of Damnation to repeal it and he founds his right in the Commission that Christ gave to St. Peter to feed the Flock Here sure if ever the Pope speaks Ex Cathedra yet for all this the Parliament would neither repeal nor explain the former Statute By all which it is plain that our Parliament did not think themselves bound to be born down by big Words and high Pretensions In this Dispute then between the Spiritual and Temporal Power we see the Parliament judged the matter and by the same right that they judged one Point they may judg other Points and if the matter of their Judgment was good their Judgment was as valid under Henry the Eighth as under Richard the Second or Henry the Sixth For the Point being once yeilded that the Civil Authority may examine the Decisions of the Church then this may be certainly carried to other particulars or applied to a greater extent of matter as further discoveries of Truth and new Provocations may arise X. The Affinity of the matter leads me here to make a leap over several Particulars which I will afterwards review and to examine that which our Author hath thought fit to say concerning the burning of Hereticks only by the way I must take notice of the unfaithful Recital that he makes of the two Statutes made against Hereticks under Henry 4th and Henry 5th which he represents as if they had merely left the Judgment of Hereticks to the Ordinary or Diocesan without any thing else by which the Repeal of them must appear to be the taking away that Judgment from the Spiritual Courts but there were other and more important Clauses in those Acts which gave the Parliament just Reason to repeal them In the former the Civil Magistrates are required to be personally present at the giving of Sentence against Hereticks and after the Sentence was passed they were to receive them and there before the People in a high place to be brent Here was the poysonous Sting in that Act which our Author was not faithful enough to mention and in that past by Henry 5th all Magistrates were required to take an Oath when they entred upon their employments That they should use their whole Power and Diligence to destroy all Heresies and Errors called Lollards and to assist the Ordinaries and the Commissaries in their Proceedings against them and all convict of Lollardy were to forfeit all the Lands that they held in Fee-simple as