Realm Apud eund p. 219. Thus do we read that Egbert who first united the seven Kingdoms of the Saxons under the name of England did cause to be convened at London his Bishops and the Peers of the highest rank pro consilio capiendo adversus Danicos Piratas Charta Whitlafii Merciorum Regis ap Ingulf to advise upon some course against the Danish Pirates who infested the Sea coasts of England Another Parliament or Council call it which you will called at Kingsbury Anno 855. in the time of Ethelwolph the Son of Egbert pro negotiis regni to treat of the affairs of the Kingdom Chart. Bertulfi Merc. Regis ap Ingulf Ingulfi Croyland hist the Acts whereof are ratified and subscribed by the Bishops Abbots and other great men of the Realm The same King Ethelwolph in a Parliament or Assembly of his States at Winchester Anno 855. Cum consilio Episcoporum principum by the advice and counsel of the Bishops and Nobility confirmed unto the Clergy the tenth part of all mens goods and ordered that the Tithe so confirmed unto them should be free ab omnibus secularibus servitutibus from all secular services and impositions In the Reign of Edred we find this Anno 948. In Festo igitur nativitatis B. Mariae cum universi Magnates regni per Regium edictum summoniti tam Archiepiscopi Episcopi ac Abbates quam caeteri totius Regni proceres optimates Londoniis convenissent ad tractandum de negotiis publicis totius Regni Id ibid. p. 49. edit Lond. viz. That in the Feast of the Nativity of the blessed Virgin the great men of the Realm that is to say Archbishops Bishops Abbots Nobles Peers were summoned by the Kings Writ to appear at London to handle and conclude about the publick affairs of the Kingdom Mention of this Assembly is made again at the foundation and endowment of the Abbie of Crowland Id. p. 500. and afterwards a confirmation of the same by Edgar Anno 966. praesentibus Archiepiscopis Espiscopi Abbatibus Optimatibus Regni in the presence of the Archbishops Bishops Id. pag. 501. 502. Abbots and Peers of the Kingdom Like convention of Estates we find to have been called by Canutus after the death of Edmund Ironside for the setling of the Crown on his own head of which thus the Author Rog. Hoveden Annal. pars prior p. 250. Cujus post mortem Rex Canutus omnes Episcopos Duces necnon principes cunctosque optimates gentis Angliae Londoniae congregari jussit Where still we find the Bishops to be called to Parliament as well as the Dukes Princes and the rest of the Nobility and to be ranked and marshalled first which clearly shews that they were always reckoned for the first Estate before the greatest and most eminent of the secular Peers And so we find it also in a Charter of King Edward the Confessor the last King of the Saxon race by which he granted certain Lands and priviledges to the Church of Westminster Anno 1066. Cum consilio decreto Archiepiscoporum Episcoporum Comitum aliorumque Optimatum Ap. H. Spelman in Concil p. 630. with the Council and decree of the Archbishops Bishops Earls and others of his Nobles And all this while the Bishops and other Prelates of the Church did hold their Lands by no other Tenure than in pura perpetua eleemosyna or Frank almoigne Cambden in Brit. as our Lawyers call it and therefore sat in Parliament in no other capacity than as spiritual persons meerly who by their extraordinary knowledg in the Word of God and in such other parts of Learning as the World then knew were thought best able to direct and advise their Princes in points of judgment In which capacity and no other the Priors of the Cathedral Churches of Canterbury Ely Winchester Coventry Bath Worcester Norwich and Durham the Deans of Exeter York Wells Salisbury and Lincoln the Official of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Dean of the Arches the Guardian of the Spiritualties of any Bishoprick when the See was vacant Selden Titles of hon part 2. c. 5. and the Vicars general of such Bishops as were absent beyond the Seas had sometimes place and suffrage in the house of Lords in the Ages following But when the Norman Conqueror had possest the State then the case was altered the Prelates of the Church were no longer suffered to hold their Lands in Frankalmoigne as before they did or to be free from secular services and commands as before they were Although they kept their Lands yet they changed their Tenure and by the Conqueror Mat. Paris in Will 1. Auno 1.70 were ordained to hold their Lands sub militari servitute either in Capite or by Baronage or some such military hold and thereby were compâ—â—lable to aid the Kings in all times of War with Men Arms and Horses as the Lay subjects of the same Tenures were required to do Which though it were conceived to be a great Disfranchisement at the first and an heavy burden to the Prelacy yet it conduced at last to their greater honour in giving them a further Title to their place in Parliament than that which formerly they could pretend to Before they claimed a place therein ratione Officii only by reason of their Offices or spiritual Dignities but after this by reason also of those ancient Baronies which were annexed unto their Dignities Stamfords Pleas l. 3. c. 1. en respect de lour possessions l'antient Baronies annexes a lour dignities as our Lawyers have it From this time forwards we must look upon them in the House of Parliament not as Bishops only but as Peers and Barons of the Realm also and so themselves affirmed to the Temporal Lords in the Parliament holden at Northamptâ—n under Henry 2. Non sedimus hic Episcopi sed Barones nos Barones vos Barones Ap. Selden Titles of hon p. 2. c. 5. Pares hic sumus We fit not here say they as Bishops only but as Barons We are Barons and you are Barons here we sit as Peers Which last is also verified in terminis by the words of a Statute or Act of Parliament wherein the Bishops are acknowledged to be Peers of the Land Stat. 25 Edw. 3. c. 5. Now that the Bishops are a fundamental and essential part of the Parliament of England I shall endeavour to make good by two manner of proofs whereof the one shall be de jure and the other de facto And first we shall begin with the proofs de jure and therein first with that which doth occur in the Laws of King Athelstan amongst the which there is a Chapter it is Cap. 11. entituled De officio Episcopi quid pertinet ad officium ejus and therein it is thus declared Spelm. concil p. 402. Episcopo jure pertinet omnem rectitudinem promovere Dei scilicet seculi
regulated by the three Estates 6. Of what Authority they have been antiently in the Parliaments of Scotland 7. The King of England always accounted heretofore for an absolute Monarch 8. No part of Sovereignty invested legally in the English Parliaments 9. The three Estates assembled in the Parment of England subordinate unto the King not co-ordinate with him 10. The Legislative power of Parliaments is properly and legally in the King alone 11. In what particulars the power of the English Parliament doth consist especially 12. The Kings of England ordinarily over-rule their Parliaments by themselves their Council and their Judges 13. Objections answered touching the power and practice of some former Parliaments and the testimonies given unto them 14. No such Authority given by God in Holy Scripture to any such Popular Magistrates as Calvin dreams of and pretends 15. The Application and Conclusion of the whole discourse I Have been purposely more copious in the former Chapter because I thought it necessary to declare and manifest who made the three Estates in each several Kingdom which are pretended by our Author to have such power of regulating the Authority and censuring the actions and the persons of their Sovereign Princes And this the rather in regard it is thought of late and more than thought presented to the world in some publick writings especially as it relates to the Realm of England that the King the Lords and Commons make the three Estates which brings the King into an equal rank with the other two in reference to the business and affairs of Parliament A fancy by what accident soever it was broached and published which hath no consistence either with truth or ordinary observation or with the practice of this Realm or of any other For the proof of this my position that the King is none of the three Estates as is now pretended if all proofs else should fail I have one from Calvin whose judgment in this point amongst many of us will be instar omnium Calvin instit 4. cap. ult For where he saith in singulis Regnis tres esse Ordines that there are three Estates in each several Kingdom and that these three Estates convened in Parliament or by what other name soever they call their meeting are furnished with a power Regum lididinem moderandi of moderating the licentiousness of Kings and Princes and that they become guilty of perfidious dissimulation si Regibus impotenter grassantibus c. If they connive at Kings when they play the Tyrants or wantonly insult on the common people I trow it cannot be conceived that the King is any one of the three Estates who are here trusted or at least supposed to be intrusted with sufficient power as well to regulate his authority as to control his actions If Calvin be allowed to have common sense and to have wit and words enough to express his meaning as even his greatest Adversaries do confess he had it must be granted that he did not take the King of what Realm soever to be any of the three Estates or if he did he would have thought of other means to restrain his insolencies than by leaving him in his own hands to his own correction Either then Calvin is mistaken in the three Estates and if he be mistaken in designing the men he aims at may he not be mistaken in the power he gives them or else the King is none and indeed can be none of the three Estates qui primarios conventus peragunt who usually convene in Parliament for those ends and purposes before remembred But not to trust to him alone though questionless he be ideoneus testis in the present case Let us behold the Assembly of the three Estates or Conventus Ordinum in France from whence it is conceived that all Assemblies of this kind had their first Original and we shall find a very full description of them in the Assembly des Estats at Bloys under Henry III. Anno 1577. of which thus Thuanus Rex in sublimi loco sub uranisco sedebat Thanus in histor sci temp l. 63. c. The King saith he sate on an high erected Throne under the Canopy of State the Queen-Mother and the Queen his Wife and all the Cardinals Princes Peers upon either hand And then it followeth Transtris infra dispositis ad dextram suam sacri Ordinis Delegati ad laevam Nobilitas infra plebetus ordo sedebat that on some lower forms there sate the Delegates of the Clergy towards the right hand of the King the Nobility towards the left and the Commissioners for the Commons in the space below We may conjecture at the rest by the view of this Of those in Spain by those Conventions of the States which before we spake of at Burgos Monson Toledo and in other places in which the King is always mentioned as a different person who called them and dissolved them as he saw occasion For Scotland it is ordinary in the stile of Parliaments to say the King and the Estates do ordain and constitute for which I do refer you to the Book of Statutes which clearly makes the King to be a different person from the Estates of that Kingdom And as for England Statutes of Scotland besides what may be gathered from the former Chapter we read in the History of Titus Livius touching the Reign and Acts of King Henry V. that when his Funerals were ended the three Estates of the Realm of England did assemble together and declared his Son King Henry VI. being an Infant of eight months old to be their Sovereign Lord Tit. Liv. M. S. in Bibl. Bodl. as his Heir and Successor And in the Parliament Rolls of King Richard III. there is mention of a Bill or Parchment presented to that Prince being then Duke of Glocester on the behalf and in the name of the three Estates of this Realm of England that is to wit of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and of the Commons by name which forasmuch as neither the said three Estates nor the persons which delivered it on their behalf were then Assembled in form of Parliament was afterwards in the first Parliament of that King by the same three Estates Assembled in this present Parliament I speak the very words of the Act it self and by Authority of the same enrolled Ap. Speed in K. Rich. 3. recorded and approved And at the request and by the assent of three Estates of this Realm that is to say the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of this Land Assembled in this present Parliament and by Authority of the same it be pronounced decreed and declared that our said Sovereign Lord the King was and is the very and undoubted Heir of this Realm of England 1 Eliz. cap. 3. c. And so it is acknowledged in a Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 3. where the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in that Parliament assembled being said
one is fundamental and held by the two Houses on no worse a title than a fundamental Constitution which is as much as any reasonable Parliamentarian need desire to have Therefore in Answer to the Fuller not taking notice of his foolish and seditious inferences we will clear those points 1. That the two Houses of Parliament are not co ordinate with the King but subordinate to him And 2. That the power of making Laws is properly and legally in the King alone As for the first we had before a Recognition made by Act of Parliament by which the Kingdom of England is acknowledged to be an Empire governed by one supream Head and King to whom all sorts and degrees of people ought to bear next to God a natural and humble obedience 24 H. 8. c. 12. which certainly the Lords and Commons had not made to the dethroning of themselves their Heirs and Successors from this co-ordinative part of Sovereignty if any such co-ordination had been then believed Or if it be supposed to excuse the matter that King Henry VIII being a severe and terrible Prince did wrest this Recognition from them which yet will hardly serve for a good defence what shall we say to the like recognition made in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign 1 Eliz. c. 1. when she was green in State and her power unsetled and so less apt to work upon her people by threats and terrors Assuredly had the Houses dream't in those broken times of that co-ordinative Sovereignty which is now pretended they might have easily regained it and made up that breach which by the violent assaults of King Henry VIII had been made upon them which was a point they never aimed at Besides if this co-ordinative Majesty might be once admitted it must needs follow that though the King hath no Superiour he hath many Equals and where there is equality there is no subjection But Bracton tells us in plain terms not only that the King hath no Superiour in his Realm except God Almighty but no Equal neither and the reason which he gives is exceeding strong Quia sic amitteret praeceptum cum par in Parem non habeat potestatem Beacton de leg Angl. l. 1. c. 8. because he could not have an Equal but with the loss of his Authority and Regal Dignity considering that one Equal hath no power to command another Now lest the Fuller should object as perhaps he may that this is spoken of the King out of times of Parliament and of the Members of the Houses seorsim taken severally as particular persons but when they are convened in Parliament then they are Sovereigns and no Subjects first he must know that by the Statute of Queen Elizabeth all of the House of Commons are to take the Oath before remembred for the defending of all preheminences and authorities united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm and for bearing faith and true allegiance to the King his Heirs and lawful Successors and that if any of them do refuse this Oath Stat. 5. Eliz. 1. he is to have no voice in Parliament 2. He cannot choose but know that even sedente Parliamento both the Lords and Commons use to address themselves to his Sacred Majesty in the way of supplication and petition and certainly it is not the course for men of equal rank to send Petitions unto one another and that in those Petitions they do stile themselves his Majesties most humble and obedient Subjects Which is not only used as the common Complement which the hypocrisie of these times hath taken up though possibly it might be no otherwise meant in some late addresses but is the very phrase in some Acts of Parliament 25 Hen. 8. c. 22. c. as in the Acts at large doth at full appear 3. They may be pleased to know how happy a thing it was for the Realm of England that this Fuller did not live in former times For had he broached this Doctrine some Ages since he would have made an end of Parliaments Princes are very jealous of the smallest points of Sovereignty and love to Reign alone without any Rivals their Souls being equally made up of Pompeys and Caesars and can as little brook an Equal as endure a Superiour And lastly I must let him know what Bodinus saith who telleth us this Legum ac edictorum probatio aut publicatio quae in Curia vel Senatu fieri solet Bedin de Rep. l. 1. c. 8. non arguit imperii majestatem in Senatu vel Curia inesse viz. That the publishing and approbation of Laws and Edicts which is made ordinarily in the Court or Parliament proves not the Majesty of the State to be in the said Court or Parliament And therefore if the power of confirmation or rejecting be of a greater trust and more high concernment than that of consulting and consenting as no doubt it is the power of consulting and consenting which the Fuller doth ascribe to the two Houses of Parliament will give them but a sorry title to Co-ordinative Sovereignty This leads me on unto the Power of making Laws which as before I said is properly and legally in the King alone tanquam in proprio Subjecto as in the true and adequate subject of that Power And for the proof thereof I shall thus proceed When the Norman Conqueror first came in as he won the Kingdom by the Sword so did he govern it by his Power His Sword was then the Scepter and his Will the Law There was no need on his part of an Act of Parliament much less of calling all the Estates together to know of them after what Form and by what Laws they would be governed It might as well be said of him as in the flourish and best times of the Roman Emperors Justin Institut l. 1. c. Quod Principi placuerit legis babet vigorem that whatsoever the King willed it did pass for Law This King and some of his Successors being then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and having a despotical power on the lives and fortunes of their Subjects which they disposed of for the benefit of their Friends and followers Normans French and Flemings as to them seemed best But as the Subjects found the Yoke to be too heavy and insupportable so they addressed themselves in their Petitions to the Kings their Sovereigns to have that Yoke made easier and the burden lighter especially in such particulars of which they were most sensible at the present time By this means they obtained first to have the Laws of Edward the Confessor contain'd for the most part in the Great Charter afterwards and by this means that is to say by pouring out their prayers and desires unto them did they obtain most of the Laws and Statutes which are now remaining of the time of King Henry the 3d and King Edward the first Many of which as they were issued at the first either in Form
came out in some years succeeding for the taking away of Images and Reliques with all the Ornaments of the same and all the Monumens and writings of feigned Miracles and for restraint of offering or setting up Lights in any Churches but only to the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar in which he was directed chiefly by Arch-Bishop Cranmer as also those for eating of white meats in the time of Lent the abolishing the Fast on St. Marks day and the ridiculous but superstitious sports accustomably used on the days of St. Clement St. Katherine and St. Nicholas All which and more was done in the said Kings Reign without help of Parliament For which I shall refer you to the Acts and Mon. fol. 1385 1425 1441. The like may also be affirmed of the Injunctions published in the name of K. E. 6. An. 1547. and printed also then for the Use of the Subjects And of the several Letters missive which went forth in his Name prohibiting the bearing of Candles on Candlemas-day of Ashes in Lent and of Palms on Palm-sunday for the taking down of all the Images throughout the Kingdom for administring the Communion in both kinds dated March 13 1548. for abrogating of private Masses June 24 1549. for bringing in all Missals Graduals Processionals Legends and Ordinals about the latter end of December of the same year for taking down of Altars and setting up Tables instead thereof An. 1550. and the like to these All which particulars you have in Foxes Book of Acts and Mon. in King Edwards life which whether they were done of the Kings meer motion or by advice of his Council or by consultation with his Bishops for there is little left upon Record of the Convocations of that time more than the Articles of the year 1552 certain I am that there was nothing done nor yet pretended to be done in all these particulars by the Authority of Parliament Thus also in Q. Elizabeths time before the new Bishops were well settled and the Queen assured of the affections of her Clergy she went that way to work in the Reformation which not only her two Predecessors but all the Godly Kings and Princes in the Jewish State and many of the Christian Emperours in the Primitive times had done before her in the well ordering of the Church and People committed to their care and government by Almighty God and to that end she published her Injunctions An. 1559. A Book of Orders An. 1561. Another of Advertisements An. 1562. All tending unto Reformation unto the building up of the new Jerusalem with the advice and counsel of the Metropolitan and some other Godly Prelates who were then a-about her by whom they were agreed on and subscribed unto before they were presented to her without the least concurrence of her Court of Parliament But when the times were better settled and the first difficulties of her Reign passed over she left Church-work to the disposing of Church-men who by their place and calling were most proper for it and they being met in Convocation and thereto Authorised as the Laws required did make and publish several Books of Canons as viz. 1571. An. 1584. An. 1597. Which being confirmed by the Queen under the broad Seal of England were in force of Laws to all intents and purposes which they were first made but being confirmed without those formal words Her Heirs and Successors are not binding now but expired together with the Queen No Act of Parliament required to confirm them then nor never required ever since on the like occasion A fuller evidence whereof we cannot have than in the Canons of year 1603. being the first year of King James made by the Clergy only in the Convocation and confirmed only by the King for though the old Canons were in force which had been made before the submission of the Clergy as before I shewed you which served in all these wavering and unsettled times for the perpetual standing rule of the Churches Government yet many new emergent cases did require new rules and whilst there is a possibility of Mali mores there will be a necessity of bonae Leges Now in the confirmation of these Canons we shall find it thus That the Clergy being met in their Convocation according to the Tenour and effect of his Majesties Writ his Majesty was pleased by virtue of his Prerogative Royal and Supream Authority in causes Ecclesiastical to give and grant unto them by his Letters Patents dated April 12. and June 25. full free and lawful liberty licence power and authority to convene treat debate consider consult and agree upon such Canons Orders Ordinances and Constitutions as they should think necessary fit and convenient for the honour and service of Almighty God the good and quiet of the Church and the better government thereof from time to time c. to be kept by all persons within this Realm as far as lawfully being members of the Church it may concern them which being agreed on by the Clergy and by them presented to the King humbly requiring him to give his Royal assent unto them according to the Statute made in the 25 of K. H. 8. and by his Majesties Prerogative and Supream Authority in Ecclesiastical causes to ratifie and confirm the same his Majesty was graciously pleased to confirm and ratifie them by his Letters Patents for himself his Heirs and lawful Successors straightly commanding and requiring all his loving Subjects diligently to observe execute and keep the same in all points wherein they do or may concern all or any of them No running to the Parliament to confirm these Canons nor any question made till this present by temperate and knowing men that there wanted any Act for their confirmation which the law could give them 7. An Answer to the main Objections of either Party BUT against this all which hath been said before it will be objected That being the Bishops of the Church are fully and wholly Parliamentarian and have no more Authority and Jurisdiction nisi à Parliamentis derivatum but that which is conferred upon them by the power of Parliaments as both Sanders and Schultingius do expresly say whatsoever they shall do or conclude upon either in Convocation or in more private conferences may be called Parliamentarian also And this last calumny they build on the several Statutes 24 H. 8. c. 12. touching the manner of Electing and Consecrating Arch-Bishops and Bishops that of the 1 E. 6. c. 2. appointing how they shall be chosen and what Seals they shall use these of 3 and 4 Ed. 6. c. 12. 5. 6 E. 6. for Authorizing of the Book of Ordination But chiefly that of the 8 Eliz. c. 1. for making good all Acts since 1 Eliz. in Consecrating any Arch Bishop or bishop within this Realm To give a general answer to each several cavil you may please to know that the Bishops as they now stand in the Church of England derive their Calling together with
prescribed by the Church of England shewed plainly their dislike of those Sabbath Doctrines which had been lately set on foot to the dithonour of the Church and diminution of her authority in destinating other days to the service of God than their new Saint-Sabbath Yet did not this the Churches care either so satisfie their desires or restrain the follies of those men who had embraced the New Sabbath Doctrines but that they still went forwards to advance that business which was now made a part of the common cause no book being published by that party either by way of Catechism or Comment on the Ten Commandments or moral Piety or systematical Divinity of all which these last times have produced too many wherein the Sabbath was not pressed upon the consciences of Gods people with as much violence as formerly with authority upon the Jews And hereunto they were encouraged a great deal the rather because in Ireland what time his Majesties Commissioners were employed about the setling of that Church Anno 1615. there passed an Article which much confirmed them in their Courses and hath been often since alledged to justifie both them and their proceedings Art 56. The Article is this The first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore we are bound therein to rest from our common and daily business and to bestow that leisure upon holy Exercises both private and publick What moved his Majesties Commissioners to this strict austcrity that I cannot say but sure I am that till that time the Lords day never had attained such credit as to be thought an Article of the Faith though of some mens fancies Nor was it like to be of long continuance it was so violently followed the whole Book being now called in and in the place thereof the Articles of the Church of England confirmed by Parliament in that Kingdom Anno 1634. Nor was this all the fruit neither of such dangerous Doctrines that the Lords day was grown into the reputation of the Jewish Sabbath but some that built on their foundations and ploughed with no other than their Heifers endeavoured to bring back again the Jewish Sabbath as that which is expresly mentioned in the fourth Commandment and abrogate the Lords day for altogether as having no foundation in it nor warrant by it Of these one Thraske declared himself for such in King James his time and therewithal took up another Jewish Doctrine about Meats and Drinks as in the time of our dread Soveraign now being Theophilus Braborne grounding himself on the so much applauded Doctrine of the morality of the Sabbath maintained that the Jewish Sabbath ought to be observed and wrote a large Book in defence thereof which came into the World 1632. For which their Jewish doctrines the first received his censure in the Star-Chamber and what became of him I know not the other had his doom in the High-Commission and hath since altered his opinion being misguided only by the principles of some noted men to which he thought he might have trusted Of these I have here spoken together because the ground of their opinions so far as it concerned the Sabbath were the very same they only make the conclusions which of necessity must follow from the former premisses just as the Brownists did befoe when they abominated on the Communion of the Church of England on the Puritan principles But to proceed This of it self had been sufficient to bring all to ruin but this was not all Not only Judaism did begin but Popery took great occasion of increase by the preciseness of some Magistrates and Ministers in several places of this Kingdom in bindring people from their Recreations on the Sunday the Papists in this Realm being thereby persuaded that no honest Mirth or Recreation was tolerable in our Religion Which being noted by King James in his progress through Lancashire King James's Declarat it pleased his Majesty to set out his Declaration May 24. Anno 1618. the Court being then at Greenwich to this effect that for his good peoples lawful Recreations his pleasure was that after the end of Divine Service they should not be disturbed letted or discouraged from any lawful Recreations such as Dancing either Men or Women Archery for Men Leaping Vaulting or any other such harmless Recreations nor from having of May-games Whitsun-Ales or Morrice-dances and setting up of May-poles or other sports therewith used so as the same be had in due and cenvenient time without impediment or let of Divine Service and that Women should have leave to carry Rushes to the Church for the decoring of it atcording to their old custom withal prohibiting all unlawful Games to be used on the Sundays only as Bear-baiting Bull-baiting Enterludes and at all times in the meaner sort of people by Law prohibited Bowling A Declaration which occasioned much noise and clamour and many scandals spread abroad as if these Counsels had been put into that Princes head by some great Prelates which were then of most power about him But in that point they might have satisfied themselves that this was no Court-doctrine no New-divinity which that learned Prince had been taught in England He had declared himself before when he was King of the Scots only to the self-same purpose as may appear in his Basilicon Doron published Anno 1598. This was the first Blow in effect which had been given in all his time to the new Lords day Sabbath then so much applauded For howsoever as I said those who had entertained these Sabbatarian Principles spared neither care nor pains to advance the business by being instant in season and out of season by publick Writings private Preachings and clandestine insinuations or whatsoever other means might tend to the promotion of this Catholick Cause yet find we none that did oppose it in a publick way though there were many that disliked it only one Mr. Loe of the Church of Exeter declared himself in his Effigiatio veri Sabbatismi Anno 1606. to be of different judgment from them and did lay down indeed the truest and most justifiable Doctrine of the Sabbath of any Writer in that time But being written in the Latin Tongue it came not to the peoples hands many of those which understood it never meaning to let the people know the Contents thereof And whereas in the year 1603 at the Commencement held in Cambridg this Thesis or Proposition Dies Dominicus nititur Verbo Dei was publickly maintained by a Doctor there and by the then Vice-Chancellour so determined neither the following Doctors there or any in the other University that I can hear of did ever put up any Antithesis in opposition thereunto At last some four years after his Majesties Declaration before remembred Anno 1622. Doctor Prideaux his Majesties Professour for the University of Oxon did in the publick Act declare his judgment in this point de Sabbato
that day and wheresoever Divine service was done that day as in Towns which have always Morning and Evening Prayers they were perceived to resort in greater numbers on that day than on any other to the Church As for King James of happy memory he did not only keep the said great Festivals from his youth as there is said but wished them to be kept by all his Subjects yet without abuse and in his Basilicon Doron published Anno 1598. thus declares himself that without superstition Plays and unlawful Games may be used in May and good Cheer at Christmas Now on the other side as they had quite put down those days which had been dedicated by the Church to Religious Meetings so they appointed others of their own authority For in their Book of Discipline before remembred it was thus decreed viz. That in every notable Town a day besides the Sunday should be appointed weekly for Sermons that during the time of Sermon the day should be kept free from all exercise of labour as well by the Master as by the Servant as also that every day in the said great Towns there be either Sermon or Prayers with reading of the Scriptures So that it seemeth they only were afraid of the name of Holy days and were contented well enough with the thing it self As for the Lords day in that Kingdom I find not that it had attained unto the name or nature of a Sabbath day until that Doctrine had been set on foot amongst us in England For in the Book of Discipline set out as formerly was said in 560. they call it by no other name than Sunday ordaining that upon four Sundays in the year which are therein specified the Sacrament of the Lords Supper should be administred to the people and in the year 1592. an Act of King James the third about the Saturday and other Vigills to be kept holy from Evensong to Evensong was annulled and abrogated Which plainly shews that then they thought not of a Sabbath But when the Sabbath doctrine had been raised in England Anno 1595 as before was said it found a present entertainment with the Brethren there who had before professed in their publick Writings to our Puritans here Davison p. 20. that both their causes were most nearly linked together and thereupon they both took up the name of Sabbath and imposed the rigour yet so that they esteem it lawful to hold Fasts thereon quod saepissime in Ecclesia nostra Scoticana factum est and use it often in that Church which is quite contrary unto the nature of a Sabbath And on the other side they deny it to be the weekly Festival of the Resurrection Non sunt dies Dominici festa Resurrectionis as they have resolved it Altare Damasc p. 669. which shews as plainly that they build not the translation of their Sabbath on the same grounds as our men have done Id. 696. In brief by making up a mixture of a Lords day Sabbath they neither keep it as the Lords day nor as the Sabbath And in this state things stood until the year 1618. what time some of the Ancient holy days were revived again in the Assembly held at Perth in which moving some other Rites of the Church of England which were then admitted it was thus determined viz. As we abhor the superstitious observation of festival days by the Papists and detest all licentious and prophane abuse thereof by the common sort of Professors so we think that the inestimable benefits received from God by our Lord Jesus Christ his Birth Passion Resurrection Ascension and sending down of the Holy Ghost was commendably and godly remembred at certain particular days and times by the whole Church of the world and may be also now Therefore the Assembly ordains that every Minister shall upon these days have the Commemoration of the foresaid inestimable benefits and make choice of several and pertinent Texts of Scripture and frame their Doctrine and Exhortation thereunto and rebuke all superstitious observation and licentious prophanation thereof A thing which much displeased some men of contrary persuasion first out of fear that this was but a Preamble to make way for all the other Holy days observed in England And secondly because it seemed that these five days were in all points to be observed as the Lords day was both in the times of the Assembly and after the dissolving of the same But pleased or dispeased so it was decreed and so still it stands But to return again to England It pleased his Majesty now Reigning whom God long preserve upon information of many notable misdemeanors on this day committed 1 Carol. 1. in his first Parliament to Enact That from thence-forwards there should be no Meetings Assemblies or concourse of people out of their Parishes on the Lords day for any sports or pastimes whatsoever nor any Bear-baitings Bull-baitings common Plays Enterludes or any other unlawful Exercises or Pastimes used by any person or persons in their own Parishes every offence to be punished by the forfeiture of 3 s. 4 d. This being a Probation Law was to continue till the end of the first Session of the next Parliament And in the next Parliament it was continued till the end of the first Session of the next 3 Carol. 1. which was then to come So also was another Act made in the said last Session wherein it was enacted That no Carrier Waggoner Wain-man Carman or Drover travel thence-forwards on the Lords day on pain that every person and persons so offending shall lose and forfeit 20 s. for every such offence And that no Butcher either by himself or any other by his privity and consent do kill or sell any Victual on the said day upon the forfeiture and loss of 6 s. 8 d. Which Statutes being still in force by reason that there hath not been any Session of Parliament since they were enacted many both Magistrates and Ministers either not rightly understanding or wilfully mistaking the intent and meaning of the first brought Dancing and some other lawful Recreations under the compass of unlawful Pastimes in that Act prohibited and thereupon disturbed and punished many of the Kings obedient people only for using of such Sports as had been authorized by his Majesties Father of blessed memory Nay which is more it was so publickly avowed and printed by one who had no calling to interpret Laws except the provocation of his own ill spirit That Dancing on the Lords day was an unlawful Pastime punishable by the Statute 1. Carol. 1. which intended so he saith to suppress Dancing on the Lords day as well as Bear-baiting Bull-baiting Enterludes and common Plays which were not then so rife and common as Dancing when this Law was made Things being at this height King Charles Declarat it pleased his excellent Majesty Observing as he saith himself how much his people were debarred of Recreation and finding in some
did absent themselves of their own accord so many things have been transacted in the Parliament excluso Clero when the Clergy have been excluded or put out of the House by some Act or Ordinance A precedent for this hath been found and published by such as envied that poor remnant of the Churches honour though possibly they will find themselves deceived in their greatest hope and that the evidence will not serve to evince the cause The Author of the Pamphlet entituled The Prerogative and practice of Parliaments first laying down his Tenet that many good Acts of Parliament may be made though the Arch-bishops and Bishops should not consent unto them which is a point no man doubts of Printed at London 16.8 p. 37. consideriong how easily their Negative may be over-ruled by the far greater number in the House of Peers adds that at a Parliament holden at St. Edmundsbury 1196. in th reign of Edw. 1. a Statute was made by the King the Barons and the Commons Excluso Clero and for the proof hereof refers us unto Bishop Jewel Now Bishop Jewel saith indeed that in a Parliament solemnly holden at St. Edmundsbury by King Edward 1. An 1296. the Arch-bishops and Bishops were quite shut forth and yet the Parliament held on and good and wholesome Laws were there enacted the departing or absence of the Lords Spiritual notwithstanding In the Records whereof it is written thus Defence of the Apolog. pt 5. c. 2. §. 1. Habito Rex cum Baronibus suis Parliamento Clergo excluso statutum est c. the King keeping the Parliament with his Barons the Clergy that is to say the Arch-bishops and Bishops being shut forth it was enacted c. Wherein who doth not see if he hath any eyes that by this reason if the proof be good many good Acts of Parliament may be made though the Commons either out of absence or opposition should not consent unto them of whose consent unto that Statute whatsoever it was there is as little to be found in that Record as the concurrence of the Bishops But for Answer unto so much of this Record so often spoken of and applauded as concerns the Bishops we say that this if truly senced as I think it be not was the particular Act of an angry and offended King against his Clergy not to be drawn into Example as a proof or Argument against a most clear known and undoubted right The case stood thus A Constitution had been made by Boniface the 8th Ne aliqua collecta ex Ecclesiasticis proventibus Regi aut cuivis alii Principi concedatur Matth. Westm in Edw. 1. that Clergy-men should not pay any Tax or Tallage unto Kings or Princes our of their Spiritual preferments without the leave of the Pope under pretence whereof the Clergy at this Parliament at St. Edmundsbury refused to be contributory to the Kings occasions when the Lay-Members of the House had been forwards in it The King being herewith much offended gives them a further day to consider of it adjourning the Parliament to London there to begin on the morrow after St. Hilaries day and in the mean time commanded all their Barns to be fast sealed up The day being come and the Clergy still persisting in their former obstinacy excluso è Parlamento Clero Concilium Rex cum solis Baronibus c populo habuit totumq Antiq. Brit. in R. Winchelsey statim Clerum protectione sua privavit the King saith the Historian excluding the Clergy out of the Parliament advised with his Barons and his people only what was best to be done by whose advice he put the Clergy out of his protection and thereby forced them to conform to his will and pleasure This is the summa totalis of the business and comes unto no more but this that a particular course was advised in Parliament on a particular displeasure taken by the King against the body of his Clergy then convened together for their particular refusal to contribute to his wants and Wars the better to reduce them to their natural duty Which makes not any thing at all against the right of Bishops in the House of Peers or for excluding them that House or for the validity of such Acts as are made in Parliament during the time of such exclusion especially considering that the King shortly after called his States together Wlsingh in Edw. 1. Anno 1297. and did excuse himself for many extravagant Acts whch he had committed against the liberties of the Subject whereof this was one laying the blame thereof on his great occasions and the necessities which the Wars which he had abroad did impose upon him And so much as in answer unto that Record supposing that the words thereof be rightly senced as I think they are not and that by Clerus there we are to understand Arch-bishops and Bishops as I think we be not there being no Record I dare boldly say it either of History of Law in which the word Clerus serve to signifie the Arch-bishops and Bishops exclusive of the other Clergy or any writing whatsoever wherein it doth not either signifie the whole Clergy generally or ther inferiour Clergy only exclusive of the Arch-bishops Bishops and other Prelates Therefore in answer unto that so much applauded Cavil of Excluso Clero from what Record soever it either hath been hitherto or shall hereafter be produced I shall propose it to the consideration of the sober Reader whether by Clerus in that place or in any other of that kind and time we must not understand the inferiour Clergy as they stand distinguished in the Laws from my Lords the Bishops For howsoever it be true that Clerus in the Ecclesiastical notion of the word doth signifie the whole Clergy generally Arch-bishops Bishops Priests and Deacons yet in the legal notion of it it stands distinguished from the Prelates and signifieth only the inferiour Clergy Thus do we find the Ecclesiasticks of this Realm divided into Prelates men of Religion and other Clerks 3. Edw. 1. c. 1. the Seculars either into Prelates and Clerks 9 Edw. 2. c. 3. 1 Rich. 2. c. 3. or Prelates and Clerks Beneficed 18 Edw. 3. c. 2. or generally into the Prelates and the Clergy 9 Edw. 2. c. 15. 14 Edw. 3. c. 1. 3. 18 Edw. 3. 2.7 25 Edw. 3.2.4 8 Hen. 6. c. 1. and in all acts and grants of Subsidies made by the Clergy to the Kings or Queens of England since the 32 of Henry 8. when the Clergy Subsidies first began to be confirmed by Act of Parliament So also in the Latin ideom Regist Warham Regist Cranmer Statut. ◠Eliz c. 17. ever since Stat. 1. Phil. Mar. c. 8. which comes nearest home Nos Praelati Clerus in the submission of the Clergy to King Henry VIII and in the sentence of divorce against Anne of Cleve and in the instrument of the grant of the grant of the
Successors of John of Gaunt cast many a longing eye on the Church revenues and hardly were persuaded to abstain from that height of sacriledg which Henry the 8. did after come to And this I am induced to believe the rather in regard that in the confirmation of the Churches rights so solemnly confirmed and ratified in all former Parliaments there was a clog put to or added in these times which shaked the Fabrick the confirmation being first of such rights and liberties as were not repealed 3 Hen. 5. cap. 1. 4 Hen. 5. cap. 1. and afterwards of such as by the Common Law were not repealable 2 Hen. 6. cap. 1. which might go very far indeed And secondly I find that in the 8. of Henry the 6. an Act of Parliament was passed that all the Clergy called to Convocation by the Kings Writ and their servants and Family shall for ever hereafter fully use and enjoy such liberty and defence in coming tarrying and returning as the great men and Commonalty of the Realm of England called to the Kings Parliament do enjoy 8 Hen. 6. cap. 1. c. Which being an unnecessary care or caution when the Clergy had their Voice in Parliament and very necessary to be taken formerly if they had never had such Voice makes me conceive that it was much about this time that they lost that priviledg But this I leave as a conjecture and no more than so For answer to the second Argument that if they had been called of old ad consentiendum we should have found more frequent mention of their consent unto the Acts and Statutes of the former times besides that it is a Negative proof and so non concludent it strikes as much against the presence and consent of the Knights and Burgesses in the elder Parliaments as it can do against the Clergy For in the elder Parliaments under King Henry 3. and K. Edward the first there is no mention of the Commons made at all either as preent or consenting nor much almost in all the Parliaments till King Henry 7. but that they did petition for redress of grievance and that upon their special instance and request several Laws were made for the behoof and benefit of the Common-wealth In the Proem to the severall Sessions which part the Clergy also acted in some former Parliaments as before was shewed So that this negative Argument must conclude against both or neither But secondly I answer that in these elder times in which the Proctors for the Clergy had their place in Parliament they are included generally in the name of the Commons And this I say on the Authority of the old modus tenendi Parliamentum in which the Commons are divided in the Spiritualty and the Temporalty and where it is expresly said that the Proctors for the Clergy the Knights the Citizens and the Burgesses did represent the whole commonalty of the Realm of England Cap. ult And this holds good in Law for ought I find unto the contrary to this very day Certain I am that Crompton in his book of the Jurisdiction of Courts where he speaks of Parliaments doth tell us that the Knights Citizens Burgesses and Barons of the Cinque-ports ove le Clergie qu' eux assemble au Pawles Crompton Jurisd des Courts Car. represent le corps de tout le Comminalty Dengliterre together with the Clergy which assembled at S. Pauls do represent the body of the whole Commonalty of England So then the Clergy were not only called but were present also according to that clause in the Writ of Summons which before I spake of directed to their several and respective Bishops as the Kings spiritual Sheriffs if I may so say enabled by the Laws to that end and purpose Which some endeavouring to avoid have at last found out that the clause before recited out of the Writ to the Bishops is not a calling of the Clergy to attend in Parliament but to command them to attend in the Convocation which I have heard much pressed by those who pretend unto some knowledg in the course of things Which though it be a gross mistake and inconsistent with the words and circumstances of the Writ it self which relates meerly to the Parliament and business of a Parliamentarie nature yet for the clearing of the point and undeceiving such as have been deceived they may please to know thta besides this Writ by which the Clergy are commanded to appear in Parliament there is another Writ and another Form of calling them unto the service of the Convocation which is briefly this The King sends out his Writ or Mandat to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury requiring him super quibusdam arduis urgentibus negotiis Regist Warham c. for divers great and weighty reasons cocnerning the Kings Honour the Churches safety and the publick peace of his Dominions to summon all the Bishops Deans and Chapters Arch-deacons and the whole Clergy of his Province to meet in Convocation at a day and place appointed On the reception of which Writ thge Arch-bishop sendeth out his Monitory to the Bishop of London who by his place in Dean of the Episcopal Colledg Antiqu. Britan. in initio and to disperse the Mandates of the Metropolitan requiring him to appear himself in person and to send out his Warrant unto every Bishop of the Province to appear there also and to take order that the Deans of the Cathedrals and Arch-decaons personally the Chapter of one Procurator the Clergy of the Diocese by two whom we usually call Clerks of the Convocation do attend that service Which coming to the hands of each several Bishop the do accordingly give intimation to their Deans and Chapters Regist Warham and to their Arch-deacons and the Clergy and they accordingly prepare themselves to obey the Monitory and to return certificate of their doings in it The like proceeding is observed also for the Province of York So that the calling of the Clergy to the Convocation being by a different Writ and another Form which hath no reference to nor dependance on the Writs directed by the King to each several Bishop for their attendance in the Parliament it must needs be as I conceive it that by that clause remaining in the Writs aforesaid the Clergy have good right and Title to a Voice in Parliament though they have lost their jus in re the benefit the use and possession of it But I speak this as once the Apostle said in another case not by commandment but by permission For I persaude my self the Clergy do not aim so high at the recovery of a right so long antiquated and disused but would be well enough content with the restitution of the Bishops to their Vote in Parliament of which they stood possessed by so strong a Title as the very constitution of the Parliament and the fundamental Laws of the English Government could confer upon them For though the Bishops sat in
or if the King dislikes of any thing in it when they shew it to him it either is razed out or mended before it be prefented to the publick view King James of blessed memory who very well understood his own power and the Forms of that Parliament describes it much to the same purpose in his Speech made at Whitehall March 31. Anno 1609. About twenty days saith he before the Parliament Proclamation is made throughout the Kingdom to deliver unto the Kings Clerk of Register all Bills to be exhibited that Session before a certain day Then are they brought unto the King and perused and considered by him and only such as he alloweth of are put into the Chancellors hands to be propounded to the Parliament and none others And if any other man in Parliament speak of any other matter than is in this sort first allowed by the King the Chancellor telleth him that the King hath allowed of no such Bill Besides when they have passed them for Laws they are presented to the King and he with his Scepter put into his hands by the Chancellor must say I ratifie and approve all things done in this present Parliament And if there be any thing that he disliketh it is razed out before So the eldest Parliament-man as he said himself at that time in Scotland This was the Form of holding Parliaments in Scotland which whosoever doth consider with a serious eye may perceive most plainly that it is wholly in the Kings power to frame the Parliament to his own will or at the least to hinder it from doing any thing to the prejudice of his Royal Crown and Dignity in that the nominating of the Lords of the Articles did in a manner totally depend on him Which being observed by the Scots they took the opportunity when they were in Arms to pass an Act during the Presidency of the Lord Burley Anno 1640. for the abolition of this Order Acts of Parliaments 16 Carol and for reducing of that Parliament to the Forms of England as being thought more advantagious to their purposes than the former was So that the violent disloyalty of the Scotish Subjects their Insurrections against their Kings and murdering them sometimes when their heels were up which makes that Nation so ill spoken of in the Stories of Christendom are not to be imputed to the three Estates convened in Parliament or to any power or Act of theirs Rivet cont tenuit but only prae fervido Scotorum ingenio as one pleads it for them unto the natural disposition of that fierce and head-strong people yet easilier made subject unto Rule and Government The three Estates assembled in the Court of Parliament when in the judgment of our Author they are most fit to undertake the business have for the most part had no hand in those desperate courses And now at last we are come to England where since we came no sooner we will stay the longer and here we shall behold the King established in an absolute Monarchy from whom the meeting of the three Estates in Parliament detracteth nothing of his Power and Authority Royal. Bodin as great a Politick as any of his time in the Realm of France hath ranked our Kings amongst the absolute Monarchs of these Western parts And Cambden as renowned an Antiquary as any of the Age he lived in Bodin de Rep. l. 1. c. 8. hath told us of the King of England supremam potestatem merum imperium habere Cambden in Britan. descript That he hath supream power and absolute command in his Dominions and that he neither holds his Crown in vassalage nor receiveth his investiture of any other nor acknowledgeth any Superiour but God alone To prove this last he cites these memorable words from Bracton an old English Lawyer omnis quidem sub Rege ipse sub nullo sed tantum sub Deo that every man is under the King but the King under none saving only God But Bracton tells us more than this and affirms expresly that the King hath supream power and jurisdiction over all causes and persons in this his Majesties Realm of England that all Jurisdictions are vested in him and are issued from him and that he hath jus gladii or the right of the Sword for the better governance of his people This is the substance of his words but the words are these Bracton de leg Angl. l. 2. c 24. Sciendum est saith he quod ipse Dominus Rex ordinariam habet jurisdictionem dignitatem potestatem super omnes qui in regno suo sunt Habet enim omnia jura in manu sua quae ad coronam laicalem pertinent potestatem materialem gladium qui pertinet ad Regni gubernandum c. He adds yet further Habet item in potestate sua leges constitutiones that the Laws and Constitutions of the Realm Id. l. 2. c. 16. are in the power of the King by which words whether he meaneth that the Legislative power is in the King and whether the Legislative power be in him and in him alone we shall see anon But sure I am that he ascribes unto the King the power of interpreting the Law in all doubtful cases in dubiis obscuris Domini Regis expectanda interpretatio voluntas which is plain enough For though he speaketh only de chartis Regis expectanda interpretatio voluntas which is plain enough For though he speaketh only de chartis Regiis factis Regum of the Kings Deeds and Charters only as the words seem to import yet considering the times in which he lived being Chief Justice in the time of King Henry the 3d. wherein there was but little written Law more than what was comprehended in the Kings Grants and Charters he may be understood of all Laws whatever And so much is collected out of Bractons words by the Lord Chancellor Egerton of whom it may be said without envy that he was as grave and learned a Lawyer as ever sat upon that Bench. Who gathereth out of Bracton that all cases not determined for want of foresight are in the King to whom belongs the right of interpretation not in plain and evident cases but only in new questions and emergent doubts and that the King hath as much right by the constitutions of this Kingdom as the Civil Law gave the Roman Emperors where it is said Rex solus judicat de causa à jure non desinita Case of the Post-nati p. 107 108. And though the Kings make not any Laws without the counsel and consent of his Lords and Commons whereof we shall speak more in the following Section yet in such cases where the Laws do provide no remedy and in such matters as concern the politick administration of his Kingdoms he may and doth take order by his Proclamations He also hath Authority by his Prerogative Royal to dispense with the rigour of the Laws and
sometimes to pass by a Statute with a non obstante as in the Statute 1 Hen. IV. cap. VI. touching the value to be specified of such Lands Offices or Annuities c. as by the King are granted in his Letters patents But these will better come within the compas of those jura Majestatis Cambden in Brit. or rights of Sovereignty which our Lawyers call sacra individua Sacred by reason they are not to be pried into with irreverent eyes and individual or inseparable because they cannot be communicated unto any other Of which kind are the levying of Arms Case of our Affairs p. suppressing of tumults and rebellions providing for the present safety of his Kingdom against sudden dangers convoking of Parliaments and dissolving them making of Peers granting liberty of sending Burgesses to Towns and Cities treating with forein States making War Leagues and Peace granting safe conduct and protection Indenizing giving of Honour Rewarding Pardoning Coyning Printing and the like to these But what need these particulars have been looked into to prove the absoluteness and sovereignty of the Kings of England when the whole body of the Realm hath affirmed the same and solemnly declared it in their Acts of Parliament 16 Rich. 2. c. 5. In one of which is affirmed that the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no earthly subjection but immediatly to God in all things touching the regality of the said Crown and to none other And in another Act that the Realm of England is an Empire governed by one Supream Head and King having the Dignity and Royal Estate of the Imperial Crown of the same unto whom a Body politick compact of all sorts and degrees of people divided in terms and by names of Spiritualty and Temporalty be bounden and ought to bear next to God a natural and bumble obedience 24 Hen. 8. c. 12. And more than so That the King being the supream Head of this Body Politick is instituted and furnished by the goodness and sufferance of Almighty God with plenary whole and entire power preheminence authority prerogative and jurisdiction to render and yield justice and final determination to all manner of Subjects within this Realm and in all causes whatsoever Nor was this any new Opinion invented only to comply with the Princes humour but such as is declared to have been fortified by sundry Laws and Ordinances made in former Parliaments Ibid. and such as hath been since confirmed by a solemn Oath taken and to be taken by most of the Subjects of this Kingdom Which Oath consisting of two parts the one Declaratory and the other Promissory in the Declaratory part the man thus taketh it he doth declare and testifie in his conscience that the Kings Highness is the only supream Governour of this Realm and of all other his Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal c. And in the Promissory part 1 Eliz. c. 1. they make Oath and swear that to their power they will assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminencies and Authorities granted or belonging to the Kings Highness his Heirs and Successors or united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Put all which hath been said together and it will appear that if to have merum imperium a full and absolute command and all the jura majestatis which belong to Sovereignty if to be so Supream as to hold immediatly of God to have all persons under him none but God above him if to have all authority and jurisdiction to be vested in him and proceeding from him and the material sword at his sole disposal for the correcting of offenders and the well ordering of his people if to have whole and entire power of rendring justice and final determination of all causes to all manner of Subjects as also to interpret and dispence with Laws and all this ratified and confirmed unto him by the solemn Oath of his Subjects in the Court of Parliament be enough to make an absolute Monarch the Kings of England are more absolute Monarchs than either of their Neighbours of France or Spain If any thing may be said to detract from this it is the new device so much pressed of late of placing the chief Sovereignty or some part thereof in the two Houses of Parliament concerning which Mr. Pryn published a discourse entituled The supreme power of Parliaments and Kingdoms and others in their Pamphlets upon that Argument have made the Parliament so absolute and the King so limited that of the two the Members of the Houses are the greater Monarchs But this is but a new device not heard of in our former Monuments and Records of Law nor proved or to be proved indeed by any other Medium than the Rebellions of Cade Tiler Straw Kett Mackerel Prynns book of Parl. c. pt 3. and the rest of that rascal rabble or the seditious Parliaments in the time of King Henry III. King Edward II. and King Richard II. when civil war and faction carried all before it For neither have the Houses or either of them enjoyed such Sovereignty de facto in times well setled and Parliaments lawfully assembled nor ever could pretend to the same de jure Or if they do as many have been apt enough to raise false pretences it would much trouble them to determine whether this Sovereignty be conferred upon them by the King or the People whether it be in either of the Houses severally or in both united If they can challenge this pretended Sovereignty in neither of these capacities nor by none of these titles it may be warrantably concluded that there is no such Sovereignty as they do pretend to And first there is no part nor branch of Sovereignty conferred upon them by the King The Writs of Summons which the Deelaration of the Lords and Commons assembled at Oxon. 1643. doth most truly call the foundation of all power in Parliament Declaration of the Trtaty p. 15. tell us no such matter The Writ directed to the Lords doth enable them only to confer and treat with one another consilium vestrum impendere and to advise the King in such weighty matters as concern the safety of the Kingdom But they are only to advise not compel the King to counsel him but not controll him and to advise and counsel are no marks of Sovereignty but rather works of service and subordination Nor can they come to give this Counsel without he invite them and being invited by his Writ cannot choose but come except he excuse them which are sure notes of duty and subjection but verry sorry signs of power and sovereignty 'T is true that being come together they may and sometimes do on a Writ of Error examin and reverse or affirm such judgments as have been given in the Kings Bench and from their sentence in the case there is
Submission brought down the Convocation to the same Level with the Houses of Parliament yet being made unto the King in his single person and not as in conjunction with his House of Parliament it neither brought the Convocation under the command of Parliaments nor rendred them obnoxious to the power thereof That which they did in former times of their self-authority in matters which concerned the Church without the Kings consent co-operating and concurring with them the same they did and might do in the times succeeding the Kings Authority and Consent being superadded without the help and midwifery of an Act of Parliament though sometimes that Authority was made Use of also for binding of the subject under Temporal and Legal penalties to yield obedience and conformity to the Churches Orders Which being the true state of the present business it makes the clamour of the Papists the more unreasonable but then withal it makes it the more easily answered Temporal punishments inflicted on the refractory and disobedient in a Temporal Court may add some strength unto the Decrees and Constitutions of the Church but hey take none from it Or if they did the Religion of the Church of Rome the whole Mass of Popery as it was received and settled here in Qu. Maries Reign would have a sorry crutch to stand upon and might as justly bear the name of a Parliament-Faith as the reformed Religion of the Church of England It is true indeed that had those Convocations which were active in that Reformation being either called or summoned by the King in Parliament or by the Houses separately or convenedly without the King Or had the Members of the same been nominated and impowered by the House alone and intermixt with a considerable number of the Lords and Commons which being by the way the Case of this New Assembly I do not see how any thing which they agree on can bind the Clergy otherwise than imposed by a strong hand and against their privileges Or finally had the conclusions or results thereof been of no effect but as reported to and confirmed in Parliament the Papists might have had some ground for so gross a calumny in calling the Religion which is now established by the name of a Parliament-Religion and a Parliament-Gospel But so it is not in the Case which is now before us the said Submission notwithstanding For being the Body being still the same privileged with the same freedom of debate and determination and which is more the Procurators of the Clergy invested with the same power and Trust which before they had There was no alteration made by the said Submission in the whole constitution and composure of it but only the addition of a greater and more excellent power Nor was there any thing done here in that Reformation but either by the Clergy in their Convocations and in their Convocations rightly called and Canonically constituted or with the councel and advice of the Heads thereof in more private conferences the Parliaments of these times contributing very little towards it but acquiescing in the Wisdom of the Sovereign Prince and in the piety and zeal of the Ghostly Fathers This is the ground-work or foundation of the following Building I now time I should proceed to the Superstructures beginning first with the Ejection of the Pope and vesting the Supremacy in the Regal Crown 2. Of the Ejection of the Pope and vesting the Supremacy in the Regal Crown AND first beginning with the Ejection of the Pope and his Authority that led the way unto the Reformation of Religion which did after follow It was first voted and decreed in the Convocation before ever it became the subject of an Act of Parliament For in the year 1530. 22 Hen. 8. the Clergy being caught in a premunire were willing to redeem their danger by a sum of money and to that end the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury bestowed upon the King the sum of 100000 l. to be paid by equal portions in the same year following but the King would not so be satisfied unless they would acknowledge him for the supream Head on earth for the Church of England which though it was hard meat and would not easily down amongst amongst them yet it passed at last For being throughly debated in a Synodical way both in the upper and lower Houses of Convocation they did in sine agree upon this expression Cujus Ecclesiae sc Anglicanae Singularem protectorem unicum Supremum Dominum quantum per Christi leges licet Supremum caput ipsius Majestatem recognoscimus To this they all consented and subscribed their Hands and afterwards incorporated it into the publik Act or Instrument which was presented to the King in the Name of his Clergy for the redeeming of their errour and the grant of their money which as it doth at large appear in the Records and Acts of the Convocation so it is touched upon in a Historical way in the Antiq. Britan. Mason de Minist Anglic. and other Authors by whom it also doth appear that what was thus concluded on by the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury was also ratified and confirmed by the Convocation of the Province of York according to the usual custom save that they did not buy their pardon at so dear a rate This was the leading Card to the Game that followed For on this ground were built the Statutes prohibiting all Appeals to Rome and for determining all Ecclesiastical suits and controversies within the Kingdoms 24 H. 8. c. 12. That for the manner of electing and consecrating of Arch-Bishops and Bishops 25 H. 8. c. 20. and the prohibiting the payment of all Impositions to the Court of Rome and for obtaining all such dispensations from the See of Canterbury which formerly were procured from the Popes of Rome 25 H. 8. c. 21. Which last is builkt expresly upon this foundation That the King is the only supream Head of the Church of England and was so recognized by the Prelates and Clergy representing the said Church in their Convocation And on the very same foundation was the Statute raised 26 H. 8. c. 1. wherein the King is declared to be the supream Head of the Church of England and to have all honour and preheminences which were annexed unto that Title as by the Act it self doth at full appear Which Act being made I speak it from the Act it self only for corroboration and confirmation of that which had been done in the Convocation did afterwards draw on the Statute for the Tenths and first fruits as the point incident to the Headship or supream Authority 26 H. 8. c. 3. The second step to the Ejection of the Pope was the submission of the Clergy to the said King Henry whom they had recognizanced for their supream Head And this was first concluded on in the Convocation before it was proposed or agitated in the Houses of Parliament and was commended only to the care of the
Parliament that is might have the force of a Law by a civil Sanction The whole debate with all the Traverses and emergent difficulties which appeared therein are specified at large in the Records of Convocation Anno 1532. But being you have not opportunity to consult those Records I shall prove it by the Act of Parliament called commonly The Act of submission of the Clergy but bearing this Title in the Abridgment of the Statutes set out by Poulton That the Clergy in their Convocations shall enact no constitutions without the Kings assent In which it is premised for granted that the Clergy of the Realm of England had not only acknowledged according to the truth that the Convocation of the same Celrgy is always hath been and ought to be assembled always by the Kings Writ but also submitting themselves to the Kings Majesty had promised in verbo Sacerdotis That they would never from henceforth presume to attempt alleadge claim or put in ure enact promulge or execute any new Canons Constitutions Ordinances provincial or other or by whatsoever other name they shall be called in the Convocation unless the Kings most Royal Assent may to them be had to make promulge and execute the same and that his Majesty do giv his most Royal Assent and Authority in that behalf Upon which ground-work of the Clergies the Parliament shortly after built this superstructure to the same effect viz. That none of the said Clergy from henceforth should presume to attempt alleadge claim or put in ure any Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial or Synodals or any other Canons norshall enact promulge or execute any such Canons Constitutions or Ordinances Provincial by whatsoever names or names they may be called in their Convocations in time coming which always shall be assembled by the Kings Writ unless the same Clergy may have the Kings most Royal Assent and Licence to make promulge and execute such Canons Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial or Synodical upon pain of every one of the said Clergy doing the contrary to this Act and thereof convicted to suffer Imprisonment and make Fine at the Kings Will 25 H. 8. c. 19. So that the Statute in effect is no more than this An Act to bind the Clergy to perform their promise to keep them fast unto their word for the time to come that no new Canon should be made in the times succeeding in the favour of the Pope or by his Authority or to the diminution of the Kings Royal Prerogative or contrary to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm of England as many Papal Constitutions were in the former Ages Which Statute I desire you nto take notice of because it is the Rule and Measure of the Churches power in making Canons Constitutions or whatsoever else you shall please to call them in their Convocations The third and final Act conducing to the Popes Ejection was an Act of Parliament 28 H. 8 c. 10. entituled An Act extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome By which it was enacted That if any person should extol the Authority of the Bishop of Rome he should incur the penalty of a preamunire that every Officer both Ecclesiastioal and Lay should be Sworn to renounce the said Bishop and his Authority and to resist it to his power and to repute any Oath formerly taken in maintenance of the said Bishop or his Authority to be void and finally that the refusal of the said Oath should be judged High Treason But this was also usher'd in by the determination first and after by the practice of all the Clergy For in the year 1534. which was two years before the passing of this Act the King had sent this Proposition to be agitated in both Vniversities and in the greatest and most famous Monasteries of the Kingdom that is to say An aliquid authoritatis in hoc Regno Angliae Pontifici Romano de jure competat plusquam alii cuicunque Episcopo extero By whom it was determined Negatively that the Bishop of Rome had no more power of Right in the Kingdom of England than any other forreign Bishop Which being testified returned under the hands and seals respectively the Originals whereof are still remaining in the Library of Sr. Robert Cotton was a good preamble to the Bishops and the rest of the Clergy assembled in their Convocation to conclude the like And so accordingly they did and made an Instrument thereof subscribed by the hands of all the Bishops and others of the Clergy and afterwards confirmed the same by their corporal Oaths The copies of which Oaths and Instrument you shall find in Foxes Acts and Monumets Vol. 2. fol. 1203. and fol. 1210 1211. of the Edition of John Day Anno 1570. And this was semblably the ground of a following Statute 35 H. 8. c. 1. wherein another Oath was devised and ratified to be imposed upon the Subject for the more clear asserting of the Kings Supremacy and the utter exclusion fo the Popes for ever which Statutes though they were all repealed by an Act of Parliament 1 and 2 d. of Phil. and Mary c. 1. yet were they all revived in 1 Elize save that the name of supream Head was changed unto that of the supream Governour and certain clauses altered in the Oath of Supremacy Where by the way you must take notice that the Statutes which concern the Kings Supremacy are not introductory of any new Right that was not in the Crown before but only declaratory of an old as our best Lawyers tell us and the Statute of the 26 of H. 8. c. 1. doth clearly intimate So that in the Ejection of the Pope of Rome which was the firt and greatest steptowards the work of Reformation the Parliament did nothing for ought it appears but what was done before in the Convocation and did no more than fortifie the Results of Holy Church by the addition and corroboration of the Secular Power 3. Of the Translation of the Scriptures and permitting them to be read in the English Tongue THE second step towards the work of Reformation and indeed one of the most especial parts thereof was the Translation of the Bible into the English Tongue and the permitting all sorts of people to peruse the same as that which visibly did tend to the discovery of the errours and corruptions in the Church of Rome and the intolerable pride and tyranny of the Roman Prelates upon which grounds it had been formerly translated into English by the hand of Wickliff and after on the spreading of Luthers Doctrine by the pains of Tindal a stout and active man in K. Henries days but not so well befriended as the work deserved especially considering that it hapned in such a time when many Printed Pamphlets did disturb the State and some of them of Tindals making which seemed to tend unto sedition and the change of Government Which being remonstrated to the King he caused divers of his Bishops together with sundry of the Learned'st and
in their Convocations as well by the common assent as by subscriptions of their hands 5 6. Edw. 6. chap. 12. And for the time of Q. Elizabeth it is most manifest that they had no other body of Doctrine in the first part of her Reign then only the said Articles of K. Edward's Book and that which was delivered in the Book of Homilies of the said Kings time In which the Parliament had as little to do as you have seen they had in the Book of Articles But in the Convocation of the year 1562. being the fifth of the Q. Reign the Bishops and Clergy taking into consideration the said book of Articles and altering what they thought most fitting to make it more conducible to the use of the Church and the edification of the people presented it unto the Queen who caused it to be published with this Name and Title viz. Articles whereupon it was agreed by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London Anno 1562. for the avoiding of diversity of Opinions and for the establishing of Consent touching true Religion put forth by the Queens Authority Of any thing done or pretended to be done by the power of the Parliament either in the way of Approbation or of Confirmation not one word occurs either in any of the Printed Books or the Publick Registers At last indeed in the 13th of the said Queens Reign which was 8 years full after the passing of those Articles comes out a Statute for the Redressing of disorders in the Ministers of holy Church In which it was enacted That all such as were Ordained Priests or Ministers of God's Word and Sacraments after any other form then that appointed to be used in the Church of England all such as were to be Ordained or permitted to Preach or to be instituted into any Benefice with Cure of souls should publickly subscribe to the said Articles and testifie their assent unto them Which shews if you observe it well that though the Parliament did well allow of and approve the said Book of Articles yet the said Book owes neither confirmation nor authority to the Act of Parliament So that the wonder is the greater that that most insolent scoff which is put upon us by the Church of Rome in calling our Religion by the name Parliamentaria-Religio should pass so long without controle unless perhaps it was in reference to our Forms of Worship of which I am to speak in the next place But first we must make answer unto some Objections which are made against us both from Law and Practice For Practice first it is alledged by some out of Bishop Jewel in his Answer to the Cavil of Dr. Harding to be no strange matter to see Ecclesiastical Causes debated in Parliament and that it is apparent by the Laws of King Ina King Alfred King Edward c. That our Godly Fore-fathers the Princes and Peers of this Realm never vouchsafed to treat of matters touching the Common State before all Controversies of Religion and Causes Ecclesiastical had been concluded Def. of the Apol. part 6. chap. 2. sect 1. But the answer unto this is easie For first if our Religion may be called Parliamentarian because it hath received confirmation and debate in Parliament then the Religion of our Fore-fathers even Papistry it self concerning which so many Acts of Parliament were made in K. Hen. 8. and Q. Maries time must be called Parliamentarian also And secondly it is most certain that in the Parliaments or Common-Councils call them which you will both of King Inas time and the rest of the Saxon Kings which B. Jewel speaks of not only Bishops Abbots and the higher part of the Clergy but the whole Body of the Clergy generally had their Votes and Suffrages either in person or by proxie Concerning which take this for the leading Case That in the Parliament or Common-Council in K. Ethelberts time who first of all the Saxon Kings received the Gospel the Clergy were convened in as full a manner as the Lay-Subjects of that Prince Convocati Communi Concilio tam Cleri quam Populi saith Sir H. Spelman in his Collection of the Councils Anno 605. p. 118. And for the Parliament of King Ina which leads the way in Bishop Jewel it was saith the same Sr. H. Spelman p. 630. Communi Concilium Episcoporum Procerum Comitum nec non omnium Sapientum Seniorum Populorumque totius Regni Where doubtless Sapientes and Seniores and you know what Seniores signifieth in the Ecclesiastical notion must be some body else then those which after are expressed by the name of Populi which shews the falshood and absurdity of the collection made by Mr. Pryn in the Epistle to his Book against Dr. Cousins viz. That the Parliament as it is now constituted hath an ancient genuine just and lawful Prerogative to establish true Religion in our Church and to abolish and suppress all false new and counterfeit Doctrines whatsoever Unless he means upon the post fact after the Church hath done her part in determining what was true what false what new what ancient and finally what Doctrines might be counted counterfeit and what sincere And as for Law 't is true indeed that by the Statute 1 Eliz. cap. 1. The Court of Parliament hath power to determine and judge of Heresie which at first sight seems somewhat strange but on the second view you will easily find that this relates only to new and emergent Heresies not formerly declared for such in any of the first four General Councils nor in any other General Cuncil adjudging by express words of holy Scripture as also that in such new Heresies the following words restrain this power to the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation as being best able to instruct the Parliament what they are to do and where they are to make use of the secular sword for cutting off a desperate Heretick from the Church of CHRIST or rather from the Body of all Christian people 5. Of the Reformation of the Church of England in the Forms of Worship and the Times appointed thereunto THIS Rub removed we now proceed unto a view of such Forms of Worships as have been setled in this Church since the first dawning of the day of Reformation in which our Parliaments have indeed done somewhat though it be not much The first point which was altered in the publick Liturgies was that the Creed the Pater-noster and the Ten Commandements were ordered to be said in the English Tongue to the intent the people might be perfect in them and learn them without book as our Phrase is The next the setting forth and using of the English Letany on such days and times in which it was accustomably to be read as a part of the Service But neither of these two was done by Parliament nay to say truth the Parliament did nothing in them All which was done in either of them
was only by the King's Authority by vertue of the Headship or Supremacy which by way of recognition was vested in him by the Clergy either co-operating and concurring with them in their Convocations or else directed and assisted by such learned Prelates with whom he did advise in matters which concerned the Church and did relate to Reformation By virtue of which Headship or Supremacy he ordained the first and to that end caused certain Articles or Injunctions to be published by the Lord Cromwel then his Viear General Anno 1536. And by the same did he give order for the second I mean for the saying of the Letany in the English Tongue by his own Royal Proclamation Anno 1545. For which consult the Acts and Monuments fol. 1248 1312. But these were only preparations to a greater work which was reserved unto the times of K. Edw. 6. In the beginning of whose Reign there passed a Statute for the administring the Sacrament in both kinds to any person that should devoutly and humbly desire the same 1 E. 6. c. 1. In which it is to be observed that though the Statute do declare that the ministring of the same in both kinds to the people was more agreeable to the first Institution of the said Sacrament and to the common usage of the primitive Times Yet Mr. Fox assures us and we may take his word that they did build that Declaration and consequently the Act which was raised upon it upon the judgment and opinion of the best learned men whose resolution and advice they followed in it fol. 1489. And for the Form by which the said most blessed Sacrament was to be delivered to the common people it was commended to the care of the most grave and learned Bishops and others assemby the King at His Castle of Windsor who upon long wise learned and deliberate advice did finally agree saith Fox upon one godly and uniform zOrder for receiving of the same according to the right rule of Scriptures and the first use of the primitive Church fol. 1491. Which Order as it was set forth in Print Anno 1548. with a Proclamation in the name of the King to give Authority thereunto amongst the people so was it recommended by special Letters writ unto every Bishop severally from the Lords of the Council to see the same put in execution A copy of which Letters you may find in Fox fol. 1491. as afore is said Hitherto nothing done by Parliament in the Forms of Worship but in the following year there was For the Protector and the rest of the Kings Council being fully bent for a Reformation thought it expedient that one uniform quiet and godly Order should be had throughout the Realm for Officiating God's divine Service And to that end I use the words of the Act it self appointed the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and certain of the most learned and discreet Bishops and other learned men of the Realm to meet together requiring them that having as well eye and respect to the most pure and sincere Christian Religion taught in Scriptures as to the usages in the Primitive Church they should draw and make one convenient and meet Order Rite and fashion of Common Prayer and Administration of Sacraments to be had and used in this his Majesties Realm of England Well what did they being thus assembled that the Statute tells us Where it is said that by the aid of the Holy Ghost I pray you mark this well and with one uniform agreement they did conclude upon and set forth an Order which they delivered to the Kings Highness in a Book entituled The Book of Common-Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church after the use of the Church of England All this was done before the Parliament did any thing But what was done by them at at last Why first considering the most godly travel of the King's Highness and the Lord Protector and others of his Highness Council in gathering together the said B. and learned men Secondly The Godly Prayers Orders Rites and Ceremonies in the said Book mentioned Thirdly The motive and inducements which inclined the aforesaid learned men to alter those things which were altered and to retain those things which were retained And finally taking into consideration the honour of God and the great quietness which by the grace of God would ensue upon it they gave his Majesty most hearty and lowly thanks for the same and most humbly prayed him that it might be ordained by his Majesty with the assent of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament and by Authority of the same that the said Form of Common-Prayer and no other after the Feast of Pentecost next following should be used in all his Majesties Dominions with several penalties to such as either should deprave or neglect the same 2 and 3. E. 6. cap. 1. So far the very words of the Act it self By which it evidently appeareth that the two Houses of Parliament did nothing in the present business but impose that Form upon the people which by the learned and religious Clergy-men whom the K. appointed thereunto was agreed upon and made it penal unto such as either should deprave the same or neglect to use it And thus doth Poulton no mean Lawyer understand the Statute who therefore gives no other title to it in his Abridgement publish'd in the year 1612. than this The penalty for not using uniformity of Service and Ministration of the Sacrament So then the making of one uniform Order of celebrating divine Service was the work of the Clergy the making of the Penalties was the work of the Parliament Where let me tell yu by the way that the men who were employed in this weighty business whose names deserve to be continued in perpetual memory were Thomas Cranmer Arch-Bishop of Canterbury George Day Bishop of Chichester Thomas Goodrich B. of Ely and Lord Chancellour John Ship Bishop of Hereford Henry Holbeck Bishop of Lincoln Nicholas Ridley Bishop of Rochester translated afterwards to London Thomas Thirlby Bishop of Westminster Dr. May Dean of St. Pauls Dr. Taylor then Dean afterwards Bishop of Lincoln Dr. Hains Dean of Exeter Dr. Robertson afterwards Dean of Durham Dr. Redman Master of Trinity Colledge in Cambridge and Dr. Cox then Almoner to the King afterward Dean of Westminster and at last Bishop of Ely men famous in their generations and the honour of the Age they lived in And so much for the first Liturgy of King Edwards Reign in which you see how little was done by Authority or power of Parliament so little that if it had been less it had been just nothing But some exceptions being taken against the Liturgy by some of the preciser sort at home and by Calvin abroad the Book was brought under a review And though it had been framed at first if the Parliament which said so erred not by the ayd of the Holy Ghost himself yet to comply with
the curiosity of the Ministers and mistakes of the people rather than for any other weighty cause As the Statutes 5 and 6 Ed. 6. cap. 1. it was thought expedient by the King with the assent of the Lords and Commons in Parliament Assembled that the said Order of Common Service should be faithfully and godly perused explained and made fully perfect Perused and explained by whom Why questionless by those who made it or else by those if they were not the same men who were appointed by the King to draw up and compose a Form of Ordination for the Use of the Church And this Assent of theirs for it was no more was the only part that was ever acted by the Parliament in matter of this present nature save that a Statute passed in the former Parliament 3 and 4 Ed. 6. c. 12. unto this effect that such form and manner of making and consecrating Arch-Bishops Bishops Priests Deacons and other Ministers of the Church which before I spake of as by six Prelates and six other men of this Realm learned in Gods Laws by the King to be appointed and assigned shall be devised to that purpose and set forth under the great Seal shall be lawfully used and exercised and none other Where note that the King only was to nominate and appoint the men the Bishops and other learned men were to make the Book and that the Parliament in a blind obedience or at the least upon a charitable confidence in the integrity of the men so nominated did confirm that Book before any of their Members had ever seen it though afterwards indeed in the following Parliament this Book together with the Book of Common-prayer so Printed and explained obtained a more formal confirmation as to the use thereof throughout the Kingdom but in no other respect for which see the Statute 5 and 6 Ed. 6. c. 1. As for the time of Q. Elizabeth when the Common-prayer book now in use being the same almost with the last of King Edward was to be brought again into the Church from whence it was cast out in Queen Maries Reign it was committed to the care of some learned men that is to say to M. Whitehead once Chaplain to Q. Anne Bullen Dr. Parker after Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Dr. Grindal after Bishop of London Dr. Cox after Bishop of Ely Dr. Pilkington after Bishop of Durham Dr. May Dean of Saint Pauls Dr. Bill Provost of Eaton after Dean of Westminster and Sir Tho. Smith By whom being altered in some few passages which the Statute points to 1 Eliz. c. 21. it was presented to the Parliament and by the Parliament received and established without more ado or troubling any Committee of both or either Houses to consider of it for ought appears in their Records All that the Parliament did in it being to put it into the condition in which it stood before in Kings Edwards Reign partly by repealing the Repeal of King Edw. Statutes made in the first of Q. Mary c. 2. and partly by the adding of some farther penalties on such as did deprave the Book or neglect to use it or wilfully did absent themselves from their Parish-Churches And for the Alterations made in King James his time being small in the Rubrick only and for the additions of the Thanksgivings at the end of the Letany the Prayer for the Queen and the Royal Issue and the Doctrine of the Sacraments at the end of the Catechisme which were not in the Book before they were never referred unto the Parliament but were done only by Authority of the Kings Commission and stand in force by virtue only of His Proclamation which you may find before the Book the charge of buying the said Book so explained and altered being laid upon the several and respective Parishes by no other Authority than that of the eightieth Canon made in Convocation Anno 1603. The like may also be affirmed of the Forms of Prayer for the Inauguration-day of our Kings and Queens the Prayer-books for the fifth of November and the fifth of August and those which have been used in all publick Fasts All which without the help of Parliaments have been composed by the Bishops and imposed by the King Now unto this discourse of the Forms of Worship I shall subjoyn a word or two of the times of Worship that is to say the Holy-days observed in the Church of England and so observed that they do owe that observation chiefly to the Churches power For whereas it was found in the former times that the number of the Holy-days was grown so great that they became a burthen to the common people and a great hinderance to the thrift and manufactures of the Kingdom there was a Canon made in the Convocation An. 1536. For cutting off of many superstitious and superfluous Holy-days and the reducing them into the number in which they now stand save that St. George's day and Mary Magdalens day and all the Festivals of the blessed Virgin had their place amongst them according to which Canon there went out a Monitory from the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury to all the Suffragans of his Province respectively to see the same observed in their several Diocesses which is still extant on Record But being the Authority of the Church was then in the wane it was thought necessary to confirm their Acts and see execution done upon it by the Kings Injunction which did accordingly come forth with this Form or preamble That the abolishing of the said Holy-days was decreed ordained and established by the Kings Highness Authority as Supream Head in Earth of the Church of England with the common consent and assent of the Prelates and Clergy of this his Realm in Convocation lawfully Assembled and Congregate Of which see Fox his Acts and Monuments fol. 1246 1247. Afterwards in the year 1541. the King perceiving with what difficulty the people were induced to leave off those Holy-days to which they had been so long accustomed published his Proclamation of the twenty-third of July for the abolishing of such Holy-days amongst other things as were prohibited before by his Injunctions both built upon the same foundation namely the resolution of the Clergy in their Convocation And so it stood until the Reign of King E. 6. at which time the Reformation of the publick Liturgie drew after it by consequence an alteration in the present business no days being to be kept or accounted Holy but those for which the Church had set apart a peculiar office and not all those neither For whereas there are several and peculiar offices for the day of the Conversion of St. Paul and the day of St. Barnabas the Apostles neither of these are kept as Holy-days nor reckoned or esteemed as such in the Act of Parliament wherein the names and number of the Holy-days is precisely specified which makes some think the Act of Parliament to have had an over-ruling power on the Common-prayer-Book but it is not so
there being a specification of the Holy-days in the Book it self with this direction These to be observed for Holy-days and none other in which the Feasts of the Conversion of St. Paul and the Apostle Barnabas are omitted plainly and upon which specification the Stat. 5 6. Ed. 6. cap. 3. which concerns the Holy-days seems most expresly to be built And for the Offices on those days in the Common-prayer Book you may please to know that every Holy-day consisteth of two special parts that is to say rest or cessation from bodily labour and celebration of Divine or Religious duties and that the days before remembred are so far kept holy as to have still their proper and peculiar Offices which is observed in all the Cathedrals of this Kingdom and the Chappels Royal where the Service is read every day and in most Parish Churches also as oft as either of them falls upon a Sunday though the people be not in those days injoined to rest from bodily labour no more than on the Coronation-day or the Fifth of November which yet are reckoned by the people for a kind of Holy-days Put all which hath been said together and the sum is this That the proceedings of this Church in the Reformation were not meerly Regal as it is objected by some Puritans much less that they were Parliamentarian in so great a work as the Papists falsly charge upon us the Parliaments for the most part doing little in it but that they were directed in a justifiable way the work being done Synodically by the Clergy only according to the usage of the Primitive times the King concurring with them and corroborating what they had resolved on either by his own single Act in his letters Patent Proclamations and Injunctions or by some publick Act of State as in times and by Acts of Parliament 6. Of the power of making Canons for the well ordering of the Clergy and the directing of the People in the publick Duties of Religion WE are now come to the last part of this design unto the power of making Canons in which the Parliament of England have had less to do than in either of the other which are gone before Concerning which I must desire you to remember that the Clergy who had power before to make such Canons and Constitutions in their Convocation as to them seemed meet promised the King in verbo Sacerdotij not to Enact or Execute and new Canons but by his Majesties Royal Assent and by his Authority first obtained in that behalf which is thus briefly touched upon in the Ant. Brit. in the life of William Warham Arch Bishop of Canterbury Clerus in verbe Sacerdotij sidem Regi dedit ne ullas deinceps in Synodo ferrent Ecclesiasticas leges nisi Synodus authoritate Regia congregata constitutiones in Synodis publicatae eadem authoritate ratae essent Upon which ground I doubt not but I might securely raise this proposition That whatsoever the Clergy did or might do lawfully before the act of Submission in their Convocation of their own power without the Kings Authority and consent concurring the same they can and may do still since the act of their Submission the Kings Authority and consent co-operating with them in their Councils and giving confirmation to their Constitutions as was said before Further it doth appear by the asoresaid Act 25 H. 8. c. 19. That all such Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals Provincial as were made before the said Submission which be not contrary or repugnant to the Laws Statutes and Customs of this Realm nor to the damage or hurt of the Kings Prerogative Royal were to be used and executed as in former times And by the Statute 26 H. 8. c. 1. of the Kings Supremacy that according to the Recognition made in Convocation our said Soveraign Lord his Heirs and Successors Kings of this Realm shall have full power and authority from time to time to visit repress reform order correct c. all such Errours Heresies Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever they be .c as may be most to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of virtue in Christs Religion and for the peace unity and tranquillity of this Realm and the confirmation of the same So that you see these several ways of ordering matters for the publick weal and governance of the Church First by such ancient Canons and Constitutions as being made in former times are still in force Secondly by such new Canons as are or shall be made in Convocation with and by the Kings consent And thirdly By the Authority of the Sovereign Prince according to the Precedents laid down in the Book of God and the best ages of the Church concerning which you must remember what was said before viz. That the Statutes which concern the Kings Supremacy are Declaratory of an old power only not Introductory of a new which said we shall the better see whether the Parliament have had any thing to do either in making Canons or prescribing Orders for the regulating of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical matters and unto whom the same doth of right belong according to the Laws of the Realm of England And first King Henry being restored to his Headship of Supremacy call it which you will did not conceive himself so absolute in it though at the first much enamoured of it as not sometimes to take his Convocation with him but at all times to be advised by his Prelates when he had any thing to do that concerned the Church for which there had been no provision made by the ancient Canons grounding most times his Edicts and Injunctions Royal upon their advice and resolution For on this ground I mean the judgement and conclusions of his Convocation did he set out the Injunctions of the year 1536. for the abolishing of superstitious Holy-days the exterminating of the Popes Authority the publishing of the Book of Articles which before we spake of num 8. by all Parsons Vicars and Curates for preaching down the use of Images Reliques Pilgrimages and superstitious Miracles for rehearsing openly in the Church in the English tongue the Creed the Pater noster and the Ten Commandments for the due and reverend ministring of the Sacraments and Sacramentals for providing English Bibles to be set in every Church for the use of the people for the regular and sober life of Clergy-men and the relief of the poor And on the other side the King proceeded sometimes only by the advice of his Prelates as in the injunctions of the year 1538. for quarterly Sermons in each Parish for admitting none to Preach but men sufficiently Licenced for keeping a Register-book of Christnings Weddings and Burials for the due paying of Tythes as had been accustomed for the abolishing of the commemoration of St. Thomas Becket for singing a Parce nobis Domine instead of Ora pro nobis and the like to these And of this sort were the Injunctions which
their Authority and power in Spiritual matters from no other hands than those of Christ and his Apostles their Temporal honours and possessions from the bounty and affection only of our Kings and Princes their Ecclesiastical jurisdiction in causes Matrimonial Testamentary and the like for which no action lieth at the common Law from continual usage and prescription and ratified and continued unto them in the Magna Charta of this Realm and owe no more unto the Parliament than all sort of Subjects do besides whose Fortunes and Estates have been occasionally and collaterally confirmed in Parliament And as for the particular Statutes which are touched upon that of the 24 H. 8. doth only constitute and ordain a way by which they might be chose and consecrated without recourse to Tome for a confirmation which formerly had put the Prelates to great charge and trouble but for the form and manner of their Consecration the Statute leaves it to those Rites and Ceremonies wherewith before it was performed and therefore Sanders doth not stick to affirm that all the Bishops which were made in King Henries days were Lawfully and Canonically ordained and consecrated the Bishops of that time not only being acknowledged in Queen Maries days for lawful and Canonical Bishops but called on to assist at the Consecration of such other Bishops Cardinal Pool himself for one as were promoted in her Reign whereof see Masons Book de Minist Ang. l. c. Next for the Statute 1 E. 6. cap. 2. besides that it is satisfied in part by the former Answer as it relates to their Canonical Consecrations it was repealed in Terminis in the first of Queen Maries Reign and never stood in force nor practice to this day That of the Authorizing of the Book of Ordination in two several Parliaments of that King the one à parte ante and the other à parte post as before I told you might indeed seem somewhat to the purpose if any thing were wanting in it which had been used in the formula's of the Primitive times or if the Book had been composed in Parliament or by Parliament-men or otherwise received more Authority from them then that it might be lawfully used and exercised throughout the Kingdom But it is plain that none of these things were objected in Queen Maries days when the Papists stood most upon their points the Ordinal being not called in because it had too much of the Parliament but because it had too little of the Pope and relished too strongly of the Primitive piety And for the Statute of 8 of Q. Elizabeth which is chiefly stood on all that was done therein was no more than this and on this occasion A question had been made by captious and unquiet men and amongst the rest by Dr. Bonner sometimes Bishop of London whether the Bishops of those times were lawfully ordained or not the reason of the doubt being this which I marvel Mason did not see because the book of Ordination which was annulled and abrogated in the first of Queen Mary had not been yet restored and revived by any legal Act of Queen Elizabeths time which Cause being brought before the Parliament in the 8th year of her Reign the Parliament took notice first that their not restoring of that Book to the former power in terms significant and express was but Casus omissus and then declare that by the Statute 5 and 6 E. 6. it had been added to the Book of Common-prayer and Administration of the Sacraments as a member of it at least as an Appendant to it and therefore by the Statute 1 Eliz. c. 2. was restored again together with the said Book of Common-prayer intentionally at the least if not in Terminis But being the words in the said Statute were not clear enough to remove all doubts they therefore did revive now and did accordingly Enact That whatsoever had been done by virtue of that Ordination should be good in Law This is the total of the Statute and this shews rather in my judgment that the Bishops of the Queens first times had too little of the Parliament in them than that they were conceived to have had too much And so I come to your last Objection which concerns the Parliament whose entertaining all occasions to manisest their power in Ecclesiastical matters doth seem to you to make that groundless slander of the Papists the more fair and plausible 'T is true indeed that many Members of both Houses in these latter Times have been very ready to embrace all businesses which are offered to them out of a probable hope of drawing the managery of all Affairs as well Ecclesiastical as Civil into their own hands And some there are who being they cannot hope to have their sancies Authorized in a regular way do put them upon such designs as neither can consist with the nature of Parliaments nor the Authority of the King nor with the privileges of the Clergy nor to say truth with the esteem and reputation of the Church of Christ And this hath been a practice even as old as Wickliffe who in the time of K. R. 2. addressed his Petition to the Parliament as we read in Walsingham for the Reformation of the Clergy the rooting out of many false and erroneous Tenets and for establishing of his own Doctrines who though he had some Wheat had more Tears by odds in the Church of England And lest he might be thought to have gone a way as dangerous and unjustifiable as it was strange and new he laid it down for a position That the Parliament or Temporal Lords where by the way this ascribes no Authority or power at all to the House of Commons might lawfully examine and reform the Disorders and Corruptions of the Church and a discovery of the errors and corruptions of it devest her of all Tithes and Temporal endowments till she were reformed But for all this and more than this for all he was so strongly backed by the Duke of Lancaster neither his Petition nor his Position found any welcome in the Parliament further than that it made them cast many a longing eye on the Churches patrimony or produced any other effect towards the work of Reformation which he chiefly aimed at than that it hath since served for a precedent to Penry Pryn and such like troublesome and unquiet spirits to disturb the Church and set on foot those dreams and dotages which otherwise they durst not publish And to say truth as long as the Clergy were in power and had Authority in Convocation to do what they would in matters which concerned Religion those of the Parliament conceived it neither safe nor fitting to intermeddle in such business as concerned the Clergy for fear of being questioned for it at the Churches Bar. But when that Power was lessened though it were not lost by the submission of the Clergy to K. H. 8. and by the Act of the Supremacy which ensued upon it then did the Parliaments
use of a Liturgy surther than to be an help in the want or to the weakness of a Minister and thereupon it is inferred with contempt enough that if any Minister appear insufficient to discharge the duty of conceived Prayer it may be imposed on him as a punishment to use set forms and no other If these two Propositions did proceed from the same one spirit as no doubt they did the extream falshood of the last doth prove sufficiently that neither of them did proceed from the Spirit of Truth King Edward VI. the Lord Protector then being and the learned Prelates of that time were our first Reformers the two first approving and confirming the last labouring and acting in that weighty business but all contributing to the passing of an Act of Parliament for uniformity of Service and Administration of the Sacraments 2 and 3. Ed. 6. cap. 1. and in that Act it is said expresly That all Ministers in any Cathedral or Parish Church or other place within this Realm of England Wales and other the Kings Dominions shall from and after the Feast of Pentecost next coming be bounden to say and use all Mattens Evensong Celebration of the Lords Supper commonly called the Mass and Administration of each of the Sacraments and their common and open Prayer in such order and form as is mentioned in the same Book and none other or otherwise Which clause continued still in being notwithstanding the alteration of the Liturgie till K. Edward's death and was revived again in the Act of Parliament 1 Eliz. cap. 2. By which the second Liturgie was confirmed and ratified Assuredly they that are bound to officiate by a Form prescribed to use no other Form but that and to use that Form no otherwise than the Law requireth and requireth under several penalties contained in it cannot be said to be at liberty to use or not to use it as they list themselves nor can pretend in any reason nor with common sense That the first Reformers of Religion did never intend the use of a Liturgy further than to be an help in the want or to the weakness of a Minister What the Reformers did in other Countreys was no Rule to ours who in the modelling of that great work had not only an eye and respect as the forementioned Statute telleth us to the most sincere and pure Christian Religion taught by the Scripture as probably the others had but also to the usages in the Primitive Church which certainly the others had not So that the second Position which the proud Inference thence deducted being blown aside the whole weight of the cause must wholly rest upon the first which whether it be of strength enough to support the same is the main disquisition and enquiry which we have in hand For when this Proposition was first vented and the point had been somewhat ventilated betwixt the humble Remonstrant on the one part and the Smectymnians on the other I was required by those who had Authority to command me to try what I could do in drawing down the Pedegree and the descent of Liturgies from the first use and institution of them amongst the Jews till they were setled and established also amongst the Christians For since the Smectymnians had appealed to the ancient practice of the Jews and Christians affirming positively that no such Liturgies that is to say no stinted and prescribed Forms of Administration were anciently used by either of them it is most fit and just they should be tryed by the Records and practice of those elder times to which they have Appealed for their justification So that the point between us being matter of Fact I shall pursue it in the way of an Historical Narration in which the Affirmative being made good by sufficient evidence it will be very difficult if not impossible to prove the Negative And for the better making good of the Affirmative I have taken in the Jewish Rabbins and other Antiquaries of that people of most faith and credit the holy Fathers and other Ecclesiastical Authors since the times of Christ to testifie unto the truth of what here is said either by way of explication of such Texts of Scripture which do relate unto this cause or in the way of declaration as laying down the practice of the Jews or Christians in their several times And that it may be seen that Liturgies or Set Forms of worship were of general usage I have made diligent search into the best and most unquestioned monuments of the ancient Gentiles and traced out many of their Forms of prayer and sacrifice used by them in the most religious acts of those performances and placed that search betwixt the practice of the Jews and that of the Christians And I have placed it in that order to the end that it may appear that the Christians had not only some ground of Scripture Tradition Apostolical and the best judgments of their own times to direct this business but that they were also guided in it by the light of Nature the Word of God amongst the Jews and the constant practice of that people in the times precedent Nor have I only took this pains in tracing out the constant practice of all people in respect of Liturgies but also with relation unto the necessary adjuncts and concomitants of them Set Forms of Worship require set times and places to perform them in which gives occasion to insert some notes or observations touching the Festivals or days of Religious offices taken up by the Authority of the Church in several Ages according as the commemoration of some signal benefits or Gods special mercies toward them might invite them to it The like I have done also in the erecting and dedicating of those sacred places which have been destinated in all times to Religious offices from the first Consecrating of the Tabernacle by Gods own appointment till the last dedication of the Temple in the time of Herod and from the first deputing of some places by the Lords Apostles for the divine performances and administrations of the Christian Faith till calmer times permitted the erecting of those stately Fabricks which the Gentiles looked upon with envy and admiration Some other things are intermingled touching the Habit of the Priests or Ministers under either Testament in the time or act of their officiating as also of the Gestures used both by Priests and People according to the several offices and acts of worship And this I have drawn down unto the time of S. Austin's death when neither Superstition in point of worship nor Heterodoxie in point of Doctrine had gotten any predominancy in the Church of Christ which was then come unto her height both for peace and purity By which the Reader may perceive how warrantably this Church proceeded in her Reformation as to this particular how strict an eye was had therein as well to the most sincere and pure Christian Religion taught by the Scripture as to the usages
Judaic l. 12. as Josephus hath it which cometh to seventy two in all But both the seventy two Elders are generally called the Seventy as the Translators of the Bible are called the Septuagint both of them ad rotundationem numeri even as the Magistrates in Rome were called Centumviri though being three for every Tribe they came unto an hundred and five in all Calvin in harm Evang. ut supra And this is that which Calvin hath observed in the present business viz. that the Consistory of the Jewish Judges to which the number of the Disciples is by him proportioned consisted of no less than 72 though for the most part ut fieri solet in talibus numeris they are called the Seventy So then to reconcile the Latin with the Greek Original there were in all 72 Disciples according to the truth of the calculation and yet but seventy in account according to the estimation which was then in use And therefore possibly the Church of England the better to comply with both computations though it have seventy in the new Translations yet still retains the number of seventy two in the Gospel appointed for Saint Lukes day in the book of Common-prayer confirmed by Parliament This being the number of the Disciples it will then fall out that as there were six Elders for every Tribes so here will be six Presbyters or Elders for every one of the Apostles For those which have compared the Church of Christ which was first planted by the Apostles with that which was first founded by the Lord himself resemble the Bishops in the Church to the twelve Apostles the Presbyters or Priests unto the Seventy Which parallel how well it holdeth and whether it will hold or not we shall see hereafter Mean while it cannot be denied but that the Apostles were superiour to these Seventy both in place and power The Fathers have so generally affirmed the same that he must needs run cross unto all antiquity that makes question of it The Council of Neocaesarea which was convened some years before that of Nice Leo Ep. 88. declareth that the Chorepiscopi which were but Presbyters in fact though in Title Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Neocasar 1. Can. 13. were instituted according to the pattern of the Seventy Saint Hierom in his Tractate ad Fabiolam speaking of the twelve fountains of Elim and the seventy Psalms that grew thereby doth resolve it thus Nec dubium quin de duodeeim Apostolis sermo sit c. It is not to be doubted but that the Scripture speaketh here of the twelve Apostles the waters issuing from whose fountains have moistned the barren driness of the whole World and that the seventy Psalms that grew thereby are the Teachers of the second rank or order Luca testante duodecim fuisse Apostolos septuaginta Discipulos minoris gradus Saint Luke affirming that there were twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples of a lower order whom the Lord sent two and two before him In this conceit Saint Ambrose led the way before him likening unto those Psalms the Seventy qui secundo ab Apostolis gradu who in a second rank from the Apostles were by the Lord sent forth for the salvation of mankind Serm. 24. Damasus their co-temporary doth affirm as much viz. non amplius quam duos ordines Epist 5. that there were but two Orders amongst the Disciples of Christ viz. that of the twelve Apostles and the Seventy Theophylact concurrs with Hierom in his conceit about the twelve Fountains and the seventy Palm-trees and then concludes Theoph. in Luc. 10. that howsoever they were chosen by Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet were they inferiour to the twelve and afterwards their followers and Scholars Add hereunto the testimony and consent of Calvin who giving the preheminence unto the Apostles Calvin in Institut l. 4. c. 3. § 4. as the chief builders of the Church adds in the next place the Evangelists such as were Timothy and Titus fortassis etiam septuaginta Discipuli quos secundo ab Apostolis loco Dominus designavit and peradventure also the seventy Disciples whom Christ appointed in the second place after his Apostles Besides S. Hierom giveth it for a Maxim Qui provehitur Ep. ad Oceanum de minore ad majus provehitur that he which is promoted is promoted from a lower rank unto an higher Matthias therefore having been formerly of the Seventy and afterwards advanced into the rank and number of the Twelve in the place of Judas it must needs follow that the twelve Apostles shined in an higher sphere than these lesser luminaries Now that Matthias had before been one of the seventy appeareth by the concurrent testimonies of Euseb l. 1. Eccles Hist c. 12. l. 2. cap. 1. and of Epiphanius contr haeres 20. n. 4. to whom for brevity sake I refer the Reader And this the rather because the Scripture is so full and pregnant in it it being a condition or qualification if you will required by S. Peter in those that were the Candidates for so high a Dignity Acts 1. v. 21. that they accompanied the Apostles all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out amongst them And that we know none did but the Seventy only So then it is most clear and manifest both by authority of Scripture and consent of Fathers that our Saviour instituted in his Church two ranks of Ministers the one subordinate unto the other and consequently laid the first foundations of it in such a Fatherly and moderate imparity as bound all following times and ages that would not willingly oppose so Divine an Ordinance to observe the like And yet it is not to be thought that this superiority thus by him established doth contradict those other passages of holy Scripture wherein he doth prohibit all dominion over one another They much mistake the business who conceive it so The Jews in general and all the followers of Christ particularly expected that the promised Messiah should come with power restore again the lustre of the Jewish Kingdom and free them from that yoke and bondage which by the Romans had been laid upon them We thought said Cleophas that this had been he that should have delivered Israel Acts 24.21 And what he thought was solemnly expected by all the rest Acts 1.6 Domine si in tempore hoc restitues regnum Israel Lord say they even in the very moment of his Ascension wilt thou at this time restore again the Kingdom unto Israel Upon which fancy and imagination no marvail if they harboured some ambitious thought every one hoping for the nearest places both of power and trust about his person This was the greatness which they aimed at and this our Saviour laboured to divery them from by interdicting all such power and Empire as Princes and the favourites of Princes have upon their Vassals Ye know saith he that the Princes of the
the honour of giving Confirmation hath always been reserved to this very day Another thing which followed upon this setting forth of Parishes by Dionysius was the institution of a new Order in the Church betwixt the Bishop and the Presbyter being neither of the two but both Those they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Rural Bishops Of which being that there were two sorts according to the times and Ages when they were imployed we must distinguish them accordingly Now of these Chorepiscopi or Countrey Bishops some in the point and power of Order were no more than Presbyters having received no higher Ordination than to that function in the Ministery but were inabled by the Bishop under whom they served to exercise some parts of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction as much as was thought fit to commit unto them for the better reiglement of the Church And these I take it were more ancient than the present times appointed as the Bishops Visitors to go abroad into the Countrey to parts more remote to oversee such Presbyters as had been sent forth for the instruction of the people in small Towns and Villages and to perform such further Offices which the ordinary Presbyter for want of the like latitude of Jurisdiction was defective in Con. Neo-Caesaviens Can. 13. These I conceive to be of the same nature with our Rural Deans in some parts of England And these are they which in the Council of Neo-Caesarea are said to be ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the manner of the Seventy and if no more than so then but simply Presbyters in the power of Order though ranked above them in regard of their Jurisdiction To which Pope Damasus agreeth also affirming quod ipsi iidem sunt qui Presbyteri Damas Ep. 5. ap Bin. Concil T. 1. Bellarm. de Clericis l. 1. c. 17. that they are the very same with Presbyters being first ordained ad exemplum Septuaginta after the example of the Seventy Others there were whom we find furnished with a further power qui verè Episcopalem consecrationem acceperant which really and truly had received Episcopal Consecration and yet were called Chorepiscopi because they had no Church nor Diocess of their own sed in aliena Ecclesia ministrabant but executed their authority in anothers charge And these saith Bellarmine are such as we now call Titular or Suffragan Bishops such as those heretofore admitted in the Church of England whereof consult the Act of Parliament 26 H. 8. cap. 14. Now that they had Episcopal consecration appeareth evidently by the Council of Antioch where it is said expresly of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they had received the Ordination of Bishops Conc. Anti. cap. 10. and so by vertue of their Ordination might execute all manner of Episcopal Acts which the Bishop of the City might perform And to this Power they were admitted on two special reasons whereof the first was to supply the absence of the Bishop who being intent upon the business of the City where his charge was greatest could not so well attend the business of the Countrey or see how well the Presbyters behaved themselves in their several Parishes to which upon the late division they were sent abroad And this is called in the said Council of Antioch Id. Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the looking to the Administration of the Churches under their authority The other was to content such of the Novatian Bishops who rather would continue in their schism and faction than return unto the Catholick Church with the loss of the honour and calling which they had before whom they thought fit if they were willing to return to the Church again to suffer in the state of a Chorepiscopus And this is that which was so prudently resolved on in the Council of Nice in which fifteen of those which assembled there were of this Order or Estate viz. Conc. Nicen. can 8. That if any of them did return to the Catholick Church either in City or Village wherein there was a Bishop or a Presbyter before provided 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he should enjoy the place and honour of a Presbyter but if that pleased him not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he should be fitted with the Office of a Chorepiscopus Which being the true condition of those Chorepiscopi it seems to me a plain and evident mistake that the Chorepiscopus who was but a Presbyter Smectymn pag. 36. should be affirmed to have power to impose hands and to ordain within his Precincts with the Bishops licence For certainly it is apparent by the Council of Antioch that the Chorepiscopi which had power of conferring Orders had to that end received Episcopal consecration and consequently could not but be more than Presbyters though at the first indeed they medled not therewith without the leave and licence of the Bishop whose Suffragans and Substitutes they were But when they had forgot their ancient modesty and did not keep themselves within the bounds and limits appointed to them which was to make two Bishops in one Diocess contrary to the ancient Canons the Church thought fitting to reduce them to their first condition And thereupon it was decreed in the Council of Ancyra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conc. Ancyran can 13. that it should no more be lawful for them to ordain either Presbyters or Deacons that is to say as it was afterwards explained in the Council of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conc. Antio can 10. without the liking of the Bishop under whom he served Howsoever that they might have somewhat of the Bishop in them they were permitted by that Canon to ordain Sub-Deacons Exorcists and Readers with which they were required to rest contented as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to send abroad their Letters unto other Bishops Ibid. can 8. which they called Literas Formatas Communicatorias as before was noted as those that had the full authority and power of Bishops did use of old to do at their Ordinations A point of honour denied unto the ordinary Presbyters in that very Canon Now to proceed The next Successor unto Dionysius in the See of Rome Ibid. Sept. 18. is called Felix but no more happy in some things than his Predecessour the Heresie of Paulus Samosatenus taking beginning in the time or Government in the one that of the Manichees commencing almost with the other Hujus tempore Manes quidam gente Persa vita moribus barbarus c. During his time saith Platina arose one Manes Platina in vita Felicis by birth a Persian in life and manners a Barbarian who took upon him to be Christ gathering unto him Twelve Disciples for the dispersing of his frenzies In this he differed amongst many things from Samosatenus he making Christ to be no better than a man and Manes making a vile sinful man to be the Christ I know Baronius doth place the rising of this Manicbean Heresie
as well upon the Saturday as upon the Sunday it is now time we turned our course and set sail for England where we shall find as little of it as in other places until that forty years ago no more some men began to introduce a Sabbath thereunto in hope thereby to countenance and advance their other projects CHAP. VII In what estate the Lords day stood in this Isle of Brittain from the first Planting of Religion to the Reformation 1. What doth occur about the Lords day and the other Festivals amongst the Churches of the Brittains 2. Of the estate of the Lords day and the other Holy-days in the Saxon Heptarchy 3. The honours done unto the Sunday and the other Holy-days by the Saxon Monarchs 4. Of the publick actions Civil Ecclesiastical mixt and Military done on the Lords day under the first six Norman Kings 5. New Sabbath Doctrins broached in England in King Johns Reign and the miraculous original of the same 6. The prosecution of the former story and ill success therein of the undertakers 7. Restraint of worldly business on the Lords day and the other Holy-days admitted in those times in Scotland 8. Restraint of certain servile works on Sundays Holy-days and the Wakes concluded in the Council of Oxon under Henry III. 9. Husbandry and Legal process prohibited on the Lords day first in the Reign of Edward III. 10. Selling of Wools on the Lords day and the solemn Feasts forbidden first by the said King Edward as after Fairs and Markets generally by King Henry VI. 11. The Cordwainers of London restrained from selling their Wares on the Lords day and some other Festivals by King Edward IV. and the repealing of that Act by King Henry VIII 12. In what estate the Lords day stood both for the doctrine and the practice in the beginning of the Reign of the said King Henry AND now at last we are for England that we may see what hath been done amongst our selves in this particular and thereby be the better lessoned what we are to do For as before I noted the Canons of particular Churches and Edicts of particular Princes though they sufficiently declare both what their practice and opinion was in the present point yet are no general rule nor prescript to others which lived not in the compass of their Authority Nor can they further bind us as was then observed than as they have been since admitted into our Church or State either by adding them unto the body of our Canon or imitating them in the composition of our Acts and Statutes Only the Decretals of the Popes the body of their Canon Law is to be excepted which being made for the direction and reiglement of the Church in general were by degrees admitted and obeyed in these parts of Christendome and are by Act of Parliament so far still in force as they oppose not the Prerogative Royal or the municipal Laws and Statutes of this Realm of England Now that we may the better see how it hath been adjudged of here and what hath been decreed ordome touching the Lords day and the other Holy-days we will ascend as high as possibly we can even to the Church and Empire of the Brittains Of them indeed we find not much and that delivered in as little it being said of them by Beda Hist l. 1. c. 8. that in the time of Constantine they did dies festos celebrare observe those Holy-days which were then in use which as before we said were Easter Whitsontide the Feasts of Christs Nativity and his Incarnation every year together with the Lords day weekly And yet it may be thought that in those times the Lords day was not here of any great account in that they kept the Feast of Easter after the fashion of the Churches in the Eastern parts decima quarta luna on what day of the week soever which certainly they had not done had the Lords day obtained amongst them that esteem which generally it had found in the Western Churches And howsoever a late writer of Ecclesiastical History endeavour to acquit the Brittains of these first Ages from the erroneous observation of that Feast Brought hist l. 4. c. 13. and make them therein followers of the Church of Rome yet I conceive not that his proofs come home to make good his purpose For where it is his purpose to prove by computation that that erroneous observation came not in amongst the Brittains till 30 years before the entrance of S. Austin and his associates into this Island and for that end hath brought a passage out of Beda touching the continuance of that custom It 's plain that Beda speaks not of the Brittish but the Scottish Christians Permansit autem apud eos the Scottish-Irish Christians as himself confesseth hujusmodi observantia Paschalis tempore non pauco hoc est usque ad annum Domini 717. per annos 150. which was as he computes it somewhat near the point but 30 years before the entrance of that Austin Now for the Scots it is apparent that they received not the faith till the year of Christ 430 not to say any thing of the time wherein they first set footing in this Island which was not very long before and probably might about that time of which Beda speaks receive the custom of keeping Easter from the Brittains who were next neighbours to them and a long time lived mingled with them But for the Brittains it is most certain that they had longer been accustomed to that observation though for the time thereof whether it came in with the first plantation of the Gospel here we will not contend as not pertaining to the business which we have in hand Suffice it that the Brittains anciently were observant of those publick Festivals which had been generally entertained in the Church of God though for the time of celebrating the Feast of Easter they might adhere more unto one Church than unto another As for the Canon of the Council of Nice Anno 198. which is there alledged Baronius rightly hath observed out of Athanasius that notwithstaning both the Canon and the Emperours Edicts thereupon tamen etiam postea Syros Cilices Mesopotamios in eodem errore permansisse the Syrians Cilicians and Mesopotamians continued in their former errours And why not then the Brittains which lay farther off as well as those that dwelt so near the then Regal City Proceed we next unto the Saxons who as they first received the faith from the Church of Rome so did they therewithal receive such institutions as were at that time generally entertained in the Roman Church the celebration of the Lords day and the other Festivals which were allowed of and observed when Gregory the Great attained the Popedom And here to take things as they lie in order we must begin with a narration concerning Westminster which for the prettiness of the story I will here insert Sebert the first Christian King of the East Saxons
Christ came to be a Lamb without spot who by the Sacrifice of himself once made should take away the sins of the world Than which there can be nothing more conducible to the point in hand And to this purpose also when Christ our Saviour was pleased to Authorize his Holy Apostles to preach the good Tidings of Salvations he gave them both a Command and a Commission To go unto all the World and preach the Gospel to every Creature Mark 16.15 So that there was no part of the World nor any Creature in the same that is to say no rational Creature which seems to be excluded from a Possibility of obtaining Salvation by the Preaching of the Gospel to them if with a faith unfeigned they believe the same which the Church further teacheth us in this following Prayer appointed to be used in the Ordering of such as are called to the Office of the holy Priesthood viz. Almighty God and Heavenly Father which of thine Infinite Love and Goodness toward us hast given to us thy only and most Dear Beloved Son Jesus Christ to be our Redeemer and Author of Everlasting Life who after he had made perfect our Redemption by his Death and was ascended into Heaven sent forth abroad into the world his Apostles Prophets Evangelists Doctors and Pastors by whose labour and Ministry he gathered together a great Flock in all the parts of the World to set forth the Eternal Praise of his Holy Name For these so great Benefits of thy Eternal Goodness and for that thou hast vouchsafed to call thy Servant here present to the same Office and Ministry of Salvation of Mankind we render unto thee most hearty thanks and we worship and praise thee and we humbly beseech thee by the same thy Son to grant unto all which either here or elsewhere call upon thy Name that we may shew our selves thankful to thee for these and all other thy benefits and that we may daily increase and go forward in the knowledg and faith of thee and thy Son by the Holy Spirit So that as well by these thy Ministers as by them to whom they shall be appointed Ministers thy Holy Name may be always glorified and thy Blessed Kingdom enlarged through the same thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ who liveth and reigneth with thee in the Vnity of the same Holy Spirit world without end Amen Which Form in Ordering and Consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons I note this only by the way being drawn up by those which had the making of the first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth and confirmed by Act of Parliament in the fifth and sixth of the said King was afterwards also ratified by Act of Parliament in the eighth year of Queen Elizabeth and ever since hath had its place amongst the publick Monuments and Records of the Church of England To these I shall only add one single testimony out of the Writings of each of the three godly Martyrs before remembred the point being so clearly stated by some of our Divines commonly called Calvinists though not by the Outlandish also that any longer insisting on it may be thought unnecessary First then Bishop Cranmer tells us in the Preface to his Book against Gardiner of Winchester aforementioned That our Saviour Christ according to the will of his Eternal Father when the time thereof was fully accomplished taking our Nature upon him came into this World from the high Throne of his Father to declare unto miserable Sinners the Goodness c. To shew that the time of Grace and Mercy was come to give light to them that were in darkness and in the shadow of death and to preach and give Pardon and full Remission of sin to all his Elected And to perform the same he made a Sacrifice and Oblation of his body upon the Cross which was a full Redemption Satisfaction and Propitiation for the sins of the whole World More briefly Bishop Latimer thus The Evangelist saith When Jesus was born c. Serm. 1. Sund. after Epiph. What is Jesus Jesus is an Hebrew word which signifieth in our English Tongue a Saviour and Redeemer of all Mankind born into the World This Title and Name To save appertaineth properly and principally unto him for he saved us else had we been lost for ever Bishop Hooper in more words to the same effect That as the sins of Adam Pref. to the ten Commandments without Priviledg or Exemption extended and appertained unto all and every of Adams Posterity so did this Promise of Grace generally appertain as well to every and singular of Adams Posterity as to Adam as it is more plainly expressed where God promiseth to bless in the seed of Abraham all the people of the World Next for the point of Vniversal Vocation and the extent of the Promises touching life Eternal besides what was observed before from the Publick Liturgy we find some Testimonies and Authorities also in the Book of Homilies In one whereof it is declared That God received the learned and unlearned and casteth away none Hom. of Holy Scrip. p. 5. but is indifferent unto all And in another place more largely that the imperfection or natural sickness taken in Adam excludeth not that person from the promise of God in Christ except we transgress the limits and bounds of this Original sin by our own folly and malice If we have Christ then have we with him Hom. against fear of death p. 62. and by him all good things whatsoever we can in our hearts wish or desire as Victory over death sin hell c. The truth hereof is more clearly evidenced in the Writings of the godly Martyrs so often mentioned as first of Bishop Latimer who discourseth thus We learn saith he by this sentence that multi sunt vocati that many are called c. that the preaching of the Gospel is universal that it appertaineth to all mankind Serm. Septure that it is written in omnem terram exivit sonus eorum through the whole world their sound is heard Now seeing that the Gospel is universal it appeareth that he would have all mankind be saved that the fault is not in him if they be damned for it is written thus Deus vult omnes homines salvos fieri God would have all mankind saved his salvation is sufficient to save all mankind Thus also in another place That the promises of Christ our Saviour are general they appertain to all mankind He made a general Proclamation saying Qui credit in me 1 Serm Lincol habet vitam aeternam Whosoever believeth me hath eternal life And not long after in the same Sermon That we must consider wisely what he saith with his own mouth Venite and me omnes Hook pres to Commo c. Mark here he saith mark here he saith Come all ye wherefore should any body despair or shut out himself from the promises of Christ which be general and appertain to the whole
absolute will and pleasure yet he is fain to have recourse to some certain condition telling us that though the mercy of God his Grace Election Vocation and other precedent Causes do justifie us yet this is upon condition of believing in Christ And finally it is to be observed also that after all his pains taken in defending such a personal and eternal Election as the Calvinians now contend for he adviseth us to wrap up our selves wholly both body and soul under Gods general promise and not to cumber our heads with any further speculations knowing that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish c. And so I take my leave of our Martyrologist the publishing of those discourse I look on as the first great battery which was made on the Bulwarks of this Church in point of doctrine by any member of her own after the setling of the Articles by the Queens Authority Ann. 1562. the brables raised by Crowley in his Book against Campneys though it came out after the said Articles were confirmed and published being but as hail-shot in comparison of this great piece of Ordnance Not that the Arguments were so strong as to make any great breach in the publick Doctrine had it been published in a time less capable of innovations or rather if the great esteem which many had of that man and the universal reception which his Book found with all sorts of People had not gained more authority unto his discourse than the merit or solidness of it could deserve The inconveniencies whereof as also the many marginal Notes and other passages visibly tending to faction and sedition in most parts of that Book were either not observed at first or winked at in regard of the great animosities which were ingendred by it in all sorts of People as well against the persons of the Papists as against the doctrine Insomuch that in the Convocation of the year 1571. there passed some Canons requiring that not only the Deans of all Cathedrals should take a special care that the said Book should be so conveniently placed in their several Churches that people of all conditions might resort unto it but also that all and every Arch-Bishop Bishops Deans Residentiaries and Arch-Deacons should choose the same to be placed in some convenient publick room of their several houses not only for the entertainment and instruction of their menial servants but of such strangers also as occasionally repaired unto them If it be hereupon inferred that Fox his doctrine was approved by that Convocation and therefore that it is agreeable to the true intent and meaning of the Articles of the Church of England besides what hath been said already by Anticipation it may as logically be inferred that the Convocation approved all his marginal Notes all the factious and seditious passages and more particularly the scorn which he puts upon the Episcopal habit and other Ceremonies of the Church Touching which last for the other are too many to be here recited let us behold how he describes the difference which hapned between Hooper Bishop of Glocester on the one side Cranmer and Ridley on the other about the ordinary habit and attire then used by the Bishops of this Church we shall find it thus viz. Acts and Mon. so 1366 1367. For notwithstanding the godly reformation of Religion that was begun in the Church of England besides other ceremonies that were more ambitious than profitable or tended to edification they used to wear such garments and apparel as the Romish Bishops were wont to do First a Chimere and under that a white Rocket then a Mathematical cap with four Angles dividing the whole world into four parts These trifles being more for superstition than otherwise as he could never abide so in no wise could he be persuaded to wear them But in conclusion this Theological contestation came to this end that the Bishops having the upper hand Mr. Hooper was fain to agree to this condition that sometimes he should in his Sermon shew himself apparalled as the Bishops were Wherefore appointed to preach before the King as a new Player in a strange apparel he cometh forth on the stage His upper garment was a long skarlet Chimere down to the foot and under that a white linnen Rocket that covered all his shoulders upon his head he had a Geometrical that is a square cap albeit that his head was round What case of shame the strangeness hereof was that day to the good Preacher every man may easily judge But this private contumely and reproach in respect of the publick profit of the Church which he only sought he bare and suffered patiently Here have we the Episcopal habit affirmed to be a contumely and reproach to that godly man slighted contemptuously by the name of trifles and condemned in the marginal Note for a Popish attire the other ceremonies of the Church being censured as more ambitious than profitable and tending more to superstition than to edification which as no man of sense or reason can believe to be approved and allowed of by that Convocation so neither is it to be believed that they allowed of his opinion in the present point For a counterballance whereunto there was another Canon passed in this Convocation by which all Preachers were enjoyned to take special care â—ne quid unquam doceant pro concione quod à populo religiose teneri credi velint nisi quod consentaneum sit doctrinae veteris aut novi testamenti quodque ex'illa ipsa doctrina Cathotici Patres veteres Episcopi Collegerint that is to say that they should maintain no other doctrine in their publicki Sermons to be believed of the People but that which was agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Testament and had from thence been gathered by the Catholick or Orthodox Fathers and ancient Bishops of the Church To which rule if they held themselves as they ought to do no countenance could be given to Calvines Doctrines or Fox his judgment in these points maintained by one of the Catholick Fathers and ancient Bishops of the Church but St. Augustine only who though he were a godly man and a learned Prelate yet was he but one Bishop not Bishops in the plural number but one father and not all the fathers and therefore his opinion not to be maintained against all the rest CHAP. XX. Of the great Innovation made by Perkins in the publick Doctrine the stirs arising thence in Cambridge and Mr. Barrets carriage in them 1. Of Mr. Perkins and his Doctrine of Predestination which his recital of the four opinions which were then maintained about the same 2. The sum and substance of his Doctrine according to the Supralapsarian or Supra-creatarian way 3. The several censures past upon it both by Papists and Protestants by none more sharply than by Dr. Rob. Abbots after Bishop of Sarum 4. Of Dr. Baroe the Lady Margarets Professor in the Vniversity and his Doctrine
And hereof the first Author seems to be so confident that he doth not only tell us that this Recantation was made accordingly but that it was not made with that Humility and Remorse which was expected it being said that after the reading thereof he concluded thus Haec dixi intimating thereby that he consented not in his heart to that which he had delivered by his tongue This is the total of the business concerning Barret in the Anti-Arminianism in which there is somewhat to be doubted and somewhat more to be denied And first it is to be doubted whether any such Recautation consisting of so many Articles and every Article having his abjuration or Recantation subjoined unto it was ever enjoined to be made for though the Author of the book affirmeth in one place that the whole Recantation in the same manner and form as there we find it was exemplified and sent unto him under the hand of the Register of the University pag. 62. yet he contesseth within few lines after that no such matter could be found when the heads of Houses were required by an Order from the House of Commons in the last Session of Parliament Anno 1628. to make certificate to them of all such Recantations as were recorded in their University Register and of this Recantation in particular And though it be hereupon inferred that this Precantation was imbezilled and razed out of the Records of the University by some of the Arminian party the better to suppress the memory of so great a foil yet it may rather be believed that many false Copies of it were dispersed abroad by those of the Calvinian faction to make the man more odious and his Opinions more offensive than might stand with Truth The truth is that a Recantation was enjoyned and delivered to him though not the same nor in the same form and manner as before laid down Barret confessing in his Letters of which more anon that a Recantation was imposed on him and expected from him But then it is to be denied as a thing most false that he never published the Recantation whatsoever it was which the Heads enjoyned and required at his last Convention For first It is acknowledged in the Authors own Transcript of the Acts that though he did confess the Propositions wherewith he was charged to be contained in his Sermon yet he would never grant them to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and therefore was not likely to retract the same Secondly It is plain by Barrets said Letters the one to Dr. Goad Master of Kings the other to Mr. Chadderton Master of Emanuel Colledg that neither flattery nor threatnings nor the fear of losing his subsistence in the University should ever work him to the publishing of the Recantation required of him And thirdly It appears by the Letters from the heads above mentioned to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh that Barret had not made the Recantation on the 8th of March which was full ten months after the time appointed for the publishing of it And on these terms this business sheweth the Author his Errour to affirm with all confidence for if the one doth the other must that Barret made this Recantation in St. Maries Church on the tenth of May Anno 1595. Barret declaring in his Letter to Dr. Goad about nine months after that he would never make it And the Heads signified to the Lord Treasurer Burleigh on the eighth of March heing ten months after that at that time he had not made And who should believe in the present case Barret that saith he would never do it and the Heads who say he had not done it on the eighth of March or that they say upon the credit of a false and malitious Copy purposely spread abroad by the Puritan faction to defame the man that he had published it on the 10th of May ten months before I find also in the Title to this Recantation as it stands in the Anti-Arminianism p. 46. that Mr. Harsnet of Pembrook Hall is there affirmed to have maintained the supposed Errours for which Barret was condemned to a Recantation and 't is strange that Harsnet should stand charged in the Title of another mans sentence for holding and maintaining any such points as had been raked out of the dunghil of Popery and Pelagianism as was there affirmed for which he either was to be questioned in his own person or not to have been condemned to the Title of a sentence passed on another man Which circumstance as it discredits the Title so the Title doth as much discredit the reality of the Recantation adeo mendaciorum natura est ut cohaerere non possint saith Lactantius truly The rest of Barrets story shall be told by himself according as I find it in a Letter of his to Dr. Goad then being Vice-Chancellour written about nine months after the time of his first conventing as by the Letter doth appear which is this that followeth A copy of Mr. Barret's Letter to Dr. Goad MY Duty remembred to your Worship c. Sir according to your appointment I have conferred with Mr. Overald and Mr. Chadderton Mr. Overald after once Conference refused to talk of these points any more saying it needed not For Mr. Chadderton he is a learned man and one whom I do much reverence yet he hath not satisfied me in this point For I required proof but of these two things at his hands viz. That una fides did differre specie ab alia and that it was aliud donum ab alio but he did neither But for the first whereas he should have proved it did differre specie he proved it did differre numero and that but out of the Master of the Sentences whose Authority notwithstanding I do not impugn And for the other that it should be Aliud donum he proveth out of St. Augustine that fides daemonum is not alia à fide Christianorum which no man ever denied for fides Daemonum is not Donum at all so that it cometh not in Question so that I being here unsatisfied of one party meaning Mr. Chadderton and rather confirmed of the other party I do hold my Positions as before And for the Retractation I purpose not to perform it Yet that the peace of the University and the Church may be preserved I do solemnly promise to keep my Opinion to my self so that in this regard my humble suit unto your Worship and hearty prayer to God is this that you would suffer me to continue in the University without molestation though I live but in disgrace amongst you yet I regard it not so I may be quiet For my intent is to live privately at my Book until such times as by continual Conference with those that are of contrary Judgment I may learn the truth of your Assertions which when I have learned I promise before God and your Worship not to conceal But if you and the rest of your
darling Doctrine of this present time so is it very eagerly pursued by Buchannan who affirms expresly Quicquid juris populus alicui dederit Buchann de jure Regni idem justis de causis posse reposcere that whatsoever power the people give unto their King or Supream Magistrate they may resume again upon just occasions Their Power they make so small and inconsiderable that they afford them very little even in matters of Temporal and no Authority at all in things Spiritual Calvin professeth for himself that he was very much agrieved to hear that King Henry the eighth had took unto himself the Title of Supream Head of the Church of England accuseth them of inconsiderate zeal nay blasphemy who conferred it on him and though he be content at last to allow Kings a Ministerial power in matters which concern the Reformation of Gods Publick Worship yet he condemns them as before of great inconsiderateness Calvin in Amos cap. 7. Qui facerent eos nimis spirituales who did ascribe unto them any great authority in spiritual matters The designation of all those who bear publick Office in the Church the calling of Councils or Assemblies the Presidency in those Councils Ordaining publick Fasts and appointing Festivals which anciently belonged unto Christian Princes as the chief branches of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction which is vested in them are utterly denied to Kings and Princes in their Books of Discipline Insomuch that when the Citizens of Embden did expel their Earl they did it chiefly for this reason Thuan. hist l. 114. Quod se negotiis Ecclesiasticis Consistorialibus praeter jus aequitatem immisceret that he had intermedled more than they thought fit in Ecclesiastical causes and intrenched too much upon their Consistory As for their power in Temporal or civil Causes by that time Knoxes Peers and Buchannans Judges Paraeus his inferiour Magistrates and Calvins popular Officers have performed their parts in keeping them within the compass of the Laws arraigning them for their offences if they should transgress opposing them by force of Arms if any thing be done unto the prejudice of the Church or State and finally in regulating their Authority after the manner of the Spartan Ephori and the Roman Tribunes all that is left will be by much too little for a Royd'Ivitot or for a King of Clouts as we English phrase it Last of all for their persons which God held so sacred that he gave it for a Law to his people Israel not to speak evil of their Princes saying Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy people Let us but look upon these men and we shall find the basest attributes too good for the greatest Kings Calvin calls Mary Queen of England by the name of Proserpine Calvin in Amos cap. 7. and saith that she did superare omnes Diabolos that all the Devils of Hell were not half so mischievous Beza affords Queen Mary of Scotland no better Titles than those of Medea and Athaliah Beza in Epist ad Jo. of which the last was most infamous in divine the other no less scandalous in humane stories the one a Sorceress and a Witch the other a Tyrant and Usurper The Author of the Altare Damascenum whosoever he was can find no better attribute for King James of most blessed memory than infensissimus Evangelii hostis Didoclaviuâ— in Epistola ad â—â—ctor the greatest and deadly Enemy of the Gospel of Christ And Queen Elizabeth her self did not scape so clear but that the zealous Brethren were too bold sometimes with her Name and Honour though some of them paid dearly for it and were hanged for their labour How that seditious Hugonot the Author of the lewd and unworthy Dialogue entituled Eusebius Philadelphus hath dealt with three great Princes of the House of France and what reproachful names he gives them I had rather you should look for in the Author than expect from me being loath to wade too far in these dirty puddles save that I shall be bold to add this general Character which Didoclavius gives to all Kings in general viz. Naturâ insitum est in omnibus Regibus Christi odium that all Kings naturally hate Christ which may serve for all This is enough to let us see how irreconcileable an hatred these of the Calvinian faction bear against Kings and Princes how well they play the part of the very Antichrist in exalting themselves against whatsoever is called God and that the special reason why they affect so much to be called the Saints is out of a strong probable hope to see the day in which they shall bind Kings in chains and all the Princes of the earth in fetters of iron Finally such is their disaffection unto sacred Monarchy which they have sucked out of the grounds and principles here laid down by Calvin that we may justly say of them what was most truely said of the ancient Romans quasi nefas esset Regem aliquem prope eorum terminos esse Jâ—stin hist l. 29. they have bestirred themselves so bravely in defiance of the Regal Government as if they did account it an unpardonable sin to suffer any King though most good and gracious to border near them Which lest they should not be of power to compass by their popular Magistrates or by the Judges or the Peers or the People severally which make the main Battel for this Combat let us next look on the Reserve and see what hopes they have to effect the business by the three Estates conjoyned in Parliament or by what other name soever we shall call their meeting which Calvin in the last place doth reflect upon but cautiously with a qua forte or a peradventure as in that before CHAP. V. What are the three Estates in each several Kingdom in which CALVIN speaks and what particularly in the Realm of England 1. Of the division of a People into three Estates and that the Priests or Clergy have been always one 2. The Priests employed in Civil matters and affairs of State by the Egyptians and the Persians the Greeks Gauls and Romans 3. The Priests and Levites exercised in affairs of Civil Government by Gods own appointment 4. The Prelates versed in Civil matters and affairs of State in the best and happiest times of Christianity 5. The Clergy make the third Estate in Germany France Spain and the Northern Kingdoms 6. That antiently in the Saxon times the Ecclesiasticks of this Realm were called to all publick Councils 7. The Prelates an essential fundamental part of the English Parliament 8. Objections answered and that the word Clerus in the Legal notion doth not extend unto the Prelates 9. That the inferior Clergy of the Realm of England had anciently their Votes in Parliament to all intents and purposes as the Commons had 10. Objections answered and that the calling of the Clergy to Parliaments and Convocations were after different maners and by several Writs
c. convenit ut per consilium testimonium ejus omne legis scitum Burgi mensura omne pondus sit secundum dictionem ejus institutum that is to say it belongeth of right unto the Bishop to promote Justifice in matters which concern both the Church and State and unto him it appertaineth that by his counsel and award all Laws and Weights and Measures be ordained throughout the Kingdom 2. Next we will have recourse to the old Record entituled Modus tenendi Parliamentum In which it is affirmed ad Parliamentum summoneri venire debere Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Priores alios majores cleri qui tenent per Comitatum aut Baroniam ratione hujusmodi tenurae Modus tenendi Parliament that all the Archbishops Bishops Abbats Priors and other Prelates of the Church who hold their Lands either by an Earls fee or a Barons fee were to be summoned and to come to Parliament in regard of their Tenure 3. Next look we on the chartularies of King Henry the first recognized in full Parliament at Clarendon under Henry the 2d where they are called avitas consuetudines which declare it thus Archiepiscopi Episcopi universae personae qui de Rege tenent in Capite habeant possessiones suas de Rege sicut Baroniam c. sicut caeteri Barones debent interesse juditiis Curiae Regis cum Baronibus quousque perveniatur ad diminutionem membrorum vel ad mortem Matth. Paris in Hen. 2. The meaning is in brief that Archbishops Bishops and all other Ecclesiastical persons which hold in Capite of the King are to have and hold their Lands in Barony and that they ought as Barons to be present in all Judgments with the other Barons in the Court of Parliament until the very sentence of death or mutilation which was very common in those times was to be pronounced And then they commonly did use to withdraw themselves not out of any incapacity supposed to be in them by the Law of England but out of a restraint imposed upon them by the Canons of the Church of Rome 4. In the great Charter made by King John in the last of his Reign we have the Form of summoning a Parliament and calling those together who have Votes therein thus expressed at large Ad habendum commune consilium Regni de auxilio assidendo c. de scutagiis assidendis faciemus summoneri Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Comites Majores Barones Regni sigillatim per literas nostras Et praeterea summoneri faciemus in generali per Vice Comites Ballivos nostros omnes alios qui in Capite tenent ad certum diem Id. in Joh. sc ad terminum 40. dierum ad minus ad certum locum c. In which we have not only a most evident proof that the Bishops are of right to be called to Parliament for granting Subsidies and Escuago and treating of the great Affairs which concern the Kingdom but that they are to be summoned by particular Letters as well as the Earls and Barons or either of them A Form or copy of which summons issued in the time of the said King John is extant on Record and put in print of late in the Titles of Honour Pr. 2. c. 5. And we have here I note this only by the way a brief intimation touching the Form of summoning the Commons to attend in Parliament and the time of 40 days expresly specified to intervene between the summons and the beginning of the Parliament Which Commons being such as anciently did hold in Capite and either having a Knights fee or the degree of Knighthood did first promiscuously attend in these publick meetings and after were reduced to four quatuor discretos milites de Comitatu tuo Id. ibid. as the Writ ran unto the Sheriff and at last to two as they continue to this day 5. We have it thus in the Magna Charta of King Henry the 3d. the birth-right of the English Subject according as it stands translated in the book of Statutes First we have granted to God and by this our present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs for ever that the Church of England shall be free Magna Charta ca. 1. and shall enjoy all her whole Rights and Liberties inviolable But it was a known Right and Liberty of the Church of England that all the Bishops and many of the greater Clergy and peradventure also the inferiour Clergy whereof more anon had their Votes in Parliament and therefore is to be preserved inviolable by the Kings of England their heirs and Successors for ever Which Charter as it was confirmed by a solemn Curse denounced on all the Infringers of it by Boniface Archbishop of Canterbury Matth. Paris in Henr. 3. and ratified in no fewer than 30 succeeding Parliaments so was it enacted in the reign of Edward the first that it should be sent under the great Seal of England to all the Cathedral Churches of the Kingdom to be read twice a year before the people 25 Edw. 1. c. 2. 28 Edw. 1. c. 1. 25 Edw. 1. c. 3. that they should be read four times every year in a full County-Court and finally that all judgments given against it should be void 6. We have the Protestation of John Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury in the time of King Edward the 3d. who being in disfavour with the King and denied entrance into the House of Peers â—â—llenged his place and suffrage there as the first Peer of the Realm and one that ought to have the first Voice in Parliament in right of his See But hear him speak his own words which are these that follow Amici for he spake to those who took witness of it Rex me ad hoc Parliamentum scripto suo vocavit ego tanquam major Par Regni post Regem primam vocem habere debens in Parliamento jura Ecclesiae meae Cantuariensis vendico Antiqu. Britan. in Joh. Stratford ideo ingressum in Parliamentum peto which is full and plain 7. And lastly there is the Protestation on Record of all the Bishops in the reign of King Richard the 2d at what time William Courtney was Arch-bishop of Canterbury who being to withdraw themselves from the House of Peers at the pronouncing of the sentence of death on some guilty Lords first made their Procurators to supply their rooms and then put up their Protestation to preserve their Rights the sum whereof for as much as doth concern this business in their own words thus De jure consuetudine regni Angliae ad Archiepiscopum Cantuariensem qui pro tempore fuerit necnon caeteros Suffraganeos confratres compatres Abbates Priores aliosque Prelatos quoscunque per Baroniam de domino Rege tenentes pertinet in Parliamentis Regis quibuscunque ut Pares regni praedicti personaliter interesse ibidemque de
c. The King is the Head Modus tenendi Parl. Ms. c. 12. the beginning and end of the Parliament and so he hath not any equal in the first degree the second is of Arch-bishop Bishops and Priors and Abbots holding by Barony the third is of Procurators of the Clergy the fourth of Earls Barons and other Nobles the fifth is of Knights of the Shire the sixth of Citizens and Burgesses and so the whole Parliament is made up of these six degrees But the said Modus tells us more and goeth more particularly to work than so For in the ninth Chapter speaking of the course which was observ'd in canvassing hard and difficult matters it telleth us that they used to choose 25 out of all degrees like a grand Committee to whose consideration they referred the point that is to say two Bishops and three Proctors for the Cleergy two Earls three Barons fire Knights five Citizens and as many Burgesses And in the 12th that on the fourth day of the Parliament the Lord High Steward the Lord Constable and the Lord Marshal were to call the House every degree or rank of men in its several Order and that if any of the Proctors of the Clergy did not make appearance the Bishop of the Diocess was to be fined 100 l. and in the 23d Chapter it is said expresly that as the Knights Citizens and Burgesses in things which do concern the Commons have more Authority than all the Lords so the Proctors for the Clergy in things which do concern the Clergy have more Authority than all the Bishops Preface to the 9th part of Reports Which Modus if it be as antient as the Norman Conqueror as both Sir Edward Coke conceiveth and the title signifieth it sheweth the Clergies claim to a place in Parliament to be more antient than the Commons can pretend unto but if no older than the Reign of King Edward III. as confidently is affirmed in the Titles of Honour Titles of hon pt 2. c. 5. it sheweth that in the usage of those latter times the Procurators of the Clergy had a right and place there as well as Citizens and Burgesses or the Knights of the Shires And this is further proved by the Writs of Summons directed to the Arch-bishops and Bishops for their own coming to the Parliament in the end whereof there is a clause for warning the Dean and Chapter of their Cathedrals and the Arch-deacons with the whole Clergy to be present at it that is to say the Deans and Arch-deacons personally the Chapter and Clergy in their Proctours then and there to consent to such Acts and Ordinances as shall be made by the Common Council of the Kingdom The whole clause word for word is this Praemunientes Priorem Capitulum or decanum Capitulum Extant ibid. pt 2. c. 5. as the case might vary Ecclesiae vestrae N. ac Archidiacanos totumque Clerum vestrae Dioceseos quod iidem Decanus Archidiaconi in propriis personis suis ac dictum Capitulum per unum idemque Clerus per duos Procuratores idoneos plenam sufficientem potestatem ab ipsis Capitulo Clero habentes praedicto die loco personaliter intersint ad consentiendum iis quae tunc ibidem de communi consilio ipsius Regni nostri divina favente clementia contigerit ordinari Which clause being in the Writs of King Edward I. and for the most part of the Reign of his next Successors till the middle of King Richard the second at which time it began to be fixt and formal hath still continued in those Writs without any difference almost between the Syllables to this very day Id. ibid. Now that this clause was more than Verbal and that the Proctors of the Clergy did attend in Parliament is evident by the Acts and Statutes of King Richard the second the passages whereof I shall cite at large the better to conclude what I have in hand The Duke of Glocester and the Earl of Arundel having gotten the mastery of the King obtained a Commission directed to themselves and others of their nomination Statut. 21 R. 2. c. 2. to have the rule of the King and his Realm and having their Commission confirmed by Parliament in the 11. year of his reign did execute divers of his Friends and Ministers and seized on their Estates as forfeited But having gotten the better of his head-strong and rebellious Lords in the one and twentieth of his reign he calls a Parliament in the Acts whereof it is declared That on the Petition of the Commons of the assent of all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and of the Proctors of the Clergy Ibid. c. 2. he repealed the said Statute and Commission and with the assent of the said Lords and Commons did ordain and establish that no such Commission nor the like be henceforth purchased pursued or made This done the Heirs of such as had been condemned by vertue of the said Commision demanded restitution of their Lands and Honours And thereupon the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Procurators of the Clergy the Commons having prayed to the King before as the Appellants prayed severally examined did assent expresly that the said Parliament and all the Statutes Ibid. c. 12. c. and restitution made as afore is said And also the Lords Spiritual and Temporal the Procurators of the Clergy and the said Commons were severally examined of the Questions proposed at Nottingham and of the Answer which the Judges made unto the same which being read as well before the King and the Lords as before the Commons it was demanded of all the States of the Parliament what they thought of the Answers and they said that they were lawfully and duly made c. And then it followeth whereupon the King by the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Procurators of the Clergy and the said Commons and by the advice of the Justices and Sergeants aforesaid who had been asked their Opinion in point of Law ordained and established that the said Parliament should be annulled and held for none Add unto this that passage in the 9 of Edward 2. where it is said that many Articles containing divers grievances committed against the Church of England the Prelates and Clergy were propounded by the Prelates and Clerks of our Realm in Parliament and great instance made that convenient remedy might be appointed therein Proem ad articalos Cleri that of the complaints made to the King in Parliament by the Prelates and Clergy of this Realm 50 Ed. 3.5 8 Rich. 2. c. 13. and that of the Petition delivered to the King in the Parliament by the Clergy of England Selden hist of Tithes c. 8.33 4 Hen. 4. c. 2. And finally that memorable passage in the Parliament 51 Edw. 3. which in brief was this The Commons finding themselves agrieved as well with certain Constitutions made by the Clergy in
Parliament in their own personal capacities and not as the representative body of the Clergy yet the poor Clergy found it some respect unto them to be thus honoured in their Heads and were the more obliged to obey such Acts as were established in that Court wherein these heads ha dopportunity of interceding if perhaps any thing were propounded which might be grievous to the Clergy and many times a power of hindring and divertring if not by Voice and Numbers yet by strength of reasons They were not altogether Slaves and Bond-men whilest the Church held that remnant of her ancient Rights for whilest the Heads retained that Honour the body could not chuse but rejoyce in it and be cherished by it But since they have been stripped of that by what unworthy Arts the World knows too well they are become of such condition that the most despicable Tradesman in a Corporate Town is more considerable in the eye of the State and hath a greater interesse in the affairs thereof than the greatest Prelate and to say truth than all the Clergy of the Realm For being there are three Ingredients which make up a Freeman as Sir Francis Bacon well observed in his speech concerning the Post-nati that is to say 1. jus Civitatis which did inable a man to buy and sell and to take Inheritances 2. jus suffragii a Voice in the passing of Laws and Election of Officers and 3. jus honoris a capability of such Offices and Honours as the State could give him the Clergy by this means are limited to the first right only and utterly excluded from the other two and thereby put into a worse condition than the meanest Freeman in the Kingdom Insomuch that whereas every needy Artizan if he be free of any Corporate Town or City every Cottager that dwelleth in an ancient Burrough and every Clown which can lay claim to forty shillings per Annum of Freehold either for life or of Inheritance hath a Voice in Parliament either in person or by Proxy and is not bound by any Law but what himself consents to in his Representatives the Clergy only of this Realm as the case now stands being out of the greatest States of this Kingdom as is acknowledged expresly in terminis by Act of Parliament 8 Eliz. c. 1. are neither capable of place there in their personal capacities nor suffered to be there in their Procurators as of old they were nor have so much as any Voice in chusing of the Knights and Burgesses which represent the body of the people generally I know it hath been said in reply to this that the Clergy may give Voices at the Election of the Knights and Burgesses and that it is their own neglect if they do it not But I know too that this is only yielded unto such of the Clergy as are possessed of Lands and Houses in those several places where such Elections are to be made and not then neither in most places except it be to make a party for particular ends especially where some good man or the main cause it self it concerned therein which as it totally excludeth the greatest part of the Clergy from having any Voice at all in these Elections the greatest part of the Clergy the more the pity having neither Lands nor Houses to such a value in fee simple so it gives no more power unto those that have than what of necessity must serve I am sure occasionally it may to their own undoing For to say truth those that give out that the Clergy may give Voice at such Elections use it but as a shift for the present turn intending nothing less indeed as hath oft been seen than that the Clergy should be capable of so great a trust The reason is because there is not any Freeman of a City or a Corporate Town who hath a Voice in the Election of a Citizen to serve in Parliament nor almost any Cottager or Free-holder who hath a Voice in the Election either of a Knight or Burgess but is directly eligible to the place himself Of Citizens and Burgesses Elected from the very meanest of the people we have many instances and shall have more according as they find their strength and have received a taste of the sweets of Government And for the chusing of the Knights of the several Shires it is determined by the Statutes that as 40 s. Land of Free-hold per Annum 8 Hen. 6. c. 7. is enough to qualifie a Clown for giving a Voice at the Election so the same Clown if he have 20 l. Land per Annum is capable of being chosen for a Knight of the Shire as appears plainly and expresly by the Statute Law For though the Writ directed to the several and respective Sheriffs prescribe a choice of dues milites gladio cinctos yet we know well that by the Statute of King Henry 6. which is explanatory in this case of the Common Law such notable Esquires or Gentlemen 23 Hen. 6.15 born of the same Counties as shall be able to the Knights are made as capable as a dubbed Knight to attend that service and he that hath no more than 20 l. per Annum either in Capite or Socage is not only able by the Law to be made a Knight 1 Ed. 2. c. 1. but was compelled thereunto even by the Statute-Law it self until the Law was lately altered in that point 17 Carol. c. 1. And on the other side it is clera enough for there have been of late some experiments of it that though a Clergy-man be born an Esquire or Gentleman for they are not all born ex fece Plebis as the late Lord Brook forgetting his own poor Extraction hath been pleased to say and though he be possessed of a fair Estate descended to him from his Ancestors L. Brook against Episcopacy or otherwise possessed of some Lands or Houses in Town Burrough or City whereby he stands as eligible in the eye of the Law as any Lady-Gentleman of them all yet either he is held uncapable and so pretermitted or if returned rejected at the House it self to his soul reproach It is a Fundamental constitution of the Realm of England that every Freeman hath a Voice in the Legislative power of Parliament And so acknowledged in a Writ of Summons of K. Edw. 1. and it is a Rule in Politicks quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet Which being now denied to the English Clergy reduceth them to that condition which St. Paul complains of and makes them no otherwise accounted of by the common people than as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the filth and off-scouring of the world to this very day This tempts me to a brief dicussion of a Question exceeding weighty in it self but not so much as thought of in this great Disfranchisement the slavery obtruded lately on the English Clergy that is to say whether that any two of the three Estates conspiring or agreeing
expresly and in terminis to represent the three Estates of the Realm of England did recognize the Queens Majesty to be their true lawful and undoubted Sovereign Liege Lady and Queen This makes it evident that the King was not accounted in the times before for one of the three Estates of Parliament nor can be so accounted the present times For considering that the Lords and Commons do most confessedly make two of the three Estates and that the Clergy in another Act of Parliament of the said Queens time are confessed to be one of the greatest States of the Realm which Statute being still in force Statut. 8. Eliz. cap. 1. doth clearly make the Clergy to be the third either there must be more than three Estates in this Kingdom which is against the Doctrine of the present times or else the King is none of the Estates as indeed he is not which was the matter to be proved But I spend too much time in confuting that which hath so little ground to stand on more than the dangerous consequences which are covered under it For if the King be granted once to be no more than one of the three Estates how can it choose but follow from so sad a principle that he is of no more power and consideration in the time of Parliament than the House of Peers which sometimes hath consisted of three Lords no more or than the House of Commons only which hath many times consisted of no more than eighty or an hundred Gentlemen but of far less consideration to all intents and purposes in the Law whatever than both the Houses joyned together What else can follow hereupon but that the King must be co-ordinate with his two Honses of Parliament and if co-ordinate then to be over-ruled by their joynt concurrence bound to conform unto their Acts and confirm their Ordinances or upon case of inconformity and non-compliance to see them put in execution against his liking and consent to his foul reproach And what at last will be the issue of this dangerous consequence but that the Lords content themselves to come down to the Commons and the King be no otherwise esteemed of than the chief of the Lords the Princeps Senatus if you will or the Duke of Venice at the best no more which if Sir Edward Dering may be credited as I think he may in this particular seems to have been the main design of some of the most popular and powerful Members then sitting with him for which I do refer the Reader to his book of Speeches Which dangerous consequents whether they were observed at first by these who first ventured on the expression or were improvidently looked over I can hardly say Certain I am it gave too manifest an advantage to the Antimonarchical party in this Kingdom and hardned them in their proceeding against their King whom they were taught to look on and esteem no otherwise than as a Joint-tenant of the Sovereignty with the Lords and Commons And if Kings have partners in the Sovereignty they are then no King such being the nature and Law of Monarchy that si divisionem capiat interitum capiat necesse est Laciant Institut Div. l. 1. c. if it be once divided and the authorities thereof imparted it is soon destroyed Such is the dangerous consequence of this new Expression that it seemeth utterly to deprive the Bishops and in them the Clergy of this Land of all future hopes of being restored again to their place in Parliament For being the Parliament can consist but of three Estates if the King fall so low as to pass for one either the Bishops or the Commons or the Temporal Lords must desert their claim the better to make way for this new pretension and in all probability the Commons being grown so potent and the Nobility so numerous and united in bloud and marriages will not quit their interesse and therefore the poor Clergy must be no Estate because less able as the World now goeth with them to maintain their Title I have often read that Constantine did use to call himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop or superintendent of his Bishops Euseb de vita Constant and I have often heard our Lawyers say that the King is the general Ordinary of the Kingdom but never heard nor read till within these few years that ever any King did possess himself of the Bishops place or Vote in Parliament or sat there as the first of the three Estates as anciently the Bishops did to supply their absence By which device whether the Clergy or the King be the greater losers though it be partly seen already future times will shew This Rub removed we next proceed to the examination of that power which by our Author is conferred on the three Estates which we shall find on search and tryal to be very different according to the constitution of the Kingdom in which they are For where the Kings are absolute Monarchs as in England Scotland France and Spain Bod in de Repuô l. 1. c. the three Estates have properly and legally little more Authority than to advise their King as they see occasion to present unto his view their common grievances and to propose such remedies for redress thereof as to them seem meetest to canvass and review such erroneous judgments as formerly have passed in inferiour Courts and finally to consult about and prepare such Laws as are expedient for the publick In other Countreys where the Kings are more conditional and hold their Crowns by compact and agreement between them and their Subjects the reputation and authority of the three Estates is more high and eminent as in Polonia Denmark and some others of the Northern Kingdoms where the Estates lay claim to more than a directive power and think it not enough to advise their King unless they may dispose of the Kingdom also or at least make their King no better than a Royal Slave Thus and no otherwise it is with the German Emperors who are obnoxious to the Laws Thuan. hist sui temp l. 2. and for their Government accomptable to the Estates of the Empire insomuch that if the Princes of the Empire be persuaded in their consciences that he is likely by his mal-administration to destroy the Empire and that he will not hearken to advice and counsel ab Electorum Collegio Caesaria potestate privari potest Anonym Script ap Philip. Paraeum in Append ad Rom. 13. he may be deprived by the Electors and a more fit and able man elected to supply the place And to this purpose in a Constitution made by the Emperor Jodocus about the year 1410. there is a clause that if he or any of his Successors do any thing unto the contrary thereof the Electors and other States of the Empire sine rebellionis vel infidelitatis crimine libertatem babeant Goldast Constit Imperial Tom. 3. p. 424. should be at liberty
we that the Majesty of this Kingdom was first originally in the people and by them devolved upon the King by their joynt consent yet having given away that power by their said consent and setled it upon the King by an Act of State confirmed by Oaths and all Solemnities which that Act requires they cannot so retract that grant or make void that gift as to pass a new conveyance of it and settle it upon their Representees in the House of Commons Or if they could yet this would utterly exclude all the Lords from having the least share or portion in this new found Sovereignty in that they represent not the common people but sit there only in their own personal capacities and therefore must submit at last to these new made Sovereigns who carry both the Purse and Sword at their own girdles So then the people cannot give the Sovereignty and if they have no power to give it the Lords and Commons have no claim thereunto de jure See we next therefore how much of this Sovereignty they or their Predecessors rather have enjoyed de facto in peaceable and regular times fit to be drawn into example in the Ages following The chief particulars in which the Sovereignty consists we have seen before and will now see whether that any of them have been exercised and injoyed in peaceable and regular times by both or either of the two Houses of Parliament And first for calling and dissolving Parliaments making of Peers granting of liberty to Towns and Cities to make choice of Burgesses which antiently had no such liberty treating with forein States denouncing War or making Leagues or Peace after War commenced granting safe conduct and protection indenizing of Aliens giving of honours unto eminent and deserving persons Rewarding Pardoning Coyning Printing making of Corporations and dispensing with the Laws in force they are such points which never Parliament did pretend to till these later times wherein every thing almost is lawful I am sure more lawful than to fear God and honour the King Nor do I find that Mr. Prynn hath laboured to entitle them to these particulars For levying of Arms and the command of the Militia besides that the Kings of England have ever been in possession of it and that possession never disturbed or interrupted by any claim of right made in the behalf of the two Houses which is as sure a title as the Law can make the Houses have declared by an Act of Parliament Stat. 7. Ed. 1. Cap. 1. that of right it belongs unto the King streightly to defend that is prohibit all force of Arms and that the Parliament is bound to aid him in that prohibition Touching the Royal Navy and the Ports and Forts the Kings prescription to them is so strong and binding 3. Edw. 3. that in the 3d. of Edward III. the House of Commons did disclaim the having cognisance of such matters as the guarding of the Seas and marches of the Kingdom which certainly they had not done had they pretended any title to the Ports and Navy As for suppressing tumults and providing for the safety of the Kingdom against sudden danger the Law commits it solely to the care of the King 11 Henr. 7. c. 18. obliging every Subject by the duty of his allegeance to aid and assist him at all seasons when need shall require And for their power of declaring Law in the House of Peers wherein they deliver their opinion in the point before them in true propriety of speech they have none at all Case of our Affairs p. 4. And this is that which was affirmed by his Majesty at the end of the Parliament Anno 1628. saying that it belonged only to the Judges under him to interpret Laws and that none of the Houses of Parliament joynt or separate what new Doctrine soever might be raised had any power either to make or declare Law without his consent 3 Car. And if it be done with his consent it is not so properly the declaring and interpreting of an old Law as the making rather of a new saith a learned Gentleman Case of our Affairs p. 5. Others have found out a new way to invest the Parliament with the Robes of Sovereignty not as superior to the King but co-ordinate with him and this say they appears sufficiently in that the two Houses of Parliament have not only a power of consulting but of consenting and that too in the highest office of the Monarchy whereof they are a Co-ordinative part the making of Laws Fuller Answer to D.F. p. 2. Which dangerous doctrine as it was built at first on that former error which makes the King to be one of the three Estates in Parliament so it is super-structed with some necessary consequents whether more treasonable or ridiculous it is hard to say For on these grounds the Author of the Fuller Answers hath presented us with these trim devises Id. pag. 1. viz. that England is not a simple subordinate and absolute but a co-ordinative and mixt Monarchy that this mixt Monarchy is compounded of three co-ordinate Estates a King and two Houses of Parliament that these three make but one supream but that one is a mixt one or else the Monarchy were not mixt and finally which needs must follow from the premises that although every Member of the Houses seorsim taken severally may be called a Subject yet all collective in their Houses are no Subjects Auditum admissi risum teneatis Can any man hear these serious follies and abstain from laughter or think a fellow who pretends both to wit and learning should talk thus of a Monarchy which every one that knoweth any thing in Greek know to imply the supream government of one compounded of three to-ordinate Estates and those co-ordinate Estates consisting of no fewer than 600 persons Or that a man who can pretend but to so much use of reason as to distinguish him from a beast cauld fall on such a senseless dotage as to make the same man at the same time to be a Subject and no Subject a Subject in the Streets and in his private House no Subject when he sits in Haberdashers Hall for advance of moneys or in either of the two Houses of Parliament And yet this senseless doctrine is become so dangerous because so universally admired and hearkened to that the beginning and continuance of our long disturbances may chiefly be ascribed unto this opinion to which they have seduced the poor ignorant people The rather in regard that some who have undertaken the confutation of these brainless follies have most improvidently granted not only that the two Houses of Parliament are in a sort co-ordinate with the King ad aliquid to some Act or exercising of the supream power As in the book called Conscience satisfied that is to the making of Laws but that this co-ordination of the three Estates of which the King is yielded every where for
way of a Petition to the Kings most excellent Majesty in which the Lords and Commons do most humbly pray as their Rights and Liberties that no such things as they complained of might be done hereafter that his Majesty would vouchsafe to declare that the Awards doings and proceedings to the prejudice of his people in any of the premises shall not be drawn hereafter into consequence or example and that he would be pleased to declare his Royal pleasure that in the point aforesaid all his Offieers and Ministers should serve him according to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm To which although the King returned a fair general Answer assuring them that his Subjects should have no cause for the time to come to complain of any wrong or oppressions contrary to their just Rights and Liberties yet this gave little fatisfaction till he came in person and causing the Petition to be distinctly read by the Clerk of the Crown Ibid. returned his Answer in these words Soit droit fait come est desire that is to say let right be done as is desired Which being the very formal words by which the said Petition and every clause and Article therein contained became to be a Law and to have the force of an Act of Parliament and being there is nothing spoken of the concurrent Authority of the Lords and Commons for the enacting of the same may serve instead of many Arguments for the proof of this that the Legislative power as we phrase it now is wholly and solely in the King although restrained in the exercise and use thereof by constant custom Smith de Rep. Angl. unto the counsel and consent of the Lords and Commons Le Roy veult or the King will have it so is the imperative phrase by which the Propositions of the Lords and Commons are made Acts of Parliament And let the Lords and Commons agitate and propound what Laws they please for their ease and benefit as generally all Laws and Statutes are more for the ease and benefit of the Subject than the advantage of the King yet as well now as formerly in the times of the Roman Emperors Quod Principi placuerit legis habet vigorem nothing but that which the King pleaseth to allow of is to pass for Law the Laws not taking their coercive force as judicious Hooker well observeth from the quality of such as devise them but from the Power which giveth them the strength of Laws Pooker Ecclesiast Pol. I shut up this Discourse with this expression and comparison of a late Learned Gentleman viz That as in a Copyhold Estate the Copyholder of a meer Tenant at will comes by custom to gain an Inheritance and so to limit and restrain the will and power of the Lord that he cannot make any determination of the Copyholders Estate otherwise than according to the custom of the Mannour and yet doth not deprive the Lord of his Lordship in the Copyhold nor participate with him in it neither yet devest the Fee and Franktenement out of the Lord Case of our Affairs p. 6. but that they still remain in him and are ever parcel of his Demesn so in the restraining of the Kings Legislative power to the concurrence of the Peers and Commons though the custom of the Kingdom hath so fixed and setled the restraint as that the King cannot in that point use his Sovereign power without the concurrence of the Peers and Commons according to the custom of the Kingdom yet still the Sovereignty and with it the inseparable Legislative power doth reside solely in the King If any hereupon demand to what end serve Parliaments and what benefit can redound to the Subject by them I say in the Apostles words much every way Rom. 3.2 Many vexations oftentimes do befall the Subjects without the knowledg of the King and against his will to which his Ears are open in a time of Parliament The King at other times useth the Eyes and Ears of such as have place about him who may perhaps be guilty of the wrongs which are done the people but in a Parliament he seeth with his own Eyes and heareth with his own Ears and so is in a better way to redress the mischief than he could be otherwise Nor do the people by the opportunity of these Parliamentary meetings obtain upon their Prayers and Petitions a redress of grievances only but many times the King is overcome by their importunity to abate so much of his Power to grant such points and pass such Laws and Statutes for their ease and benefit as otherwise he would not yield to For certainly it is as true in making our approaches and Petitions to our Lord the King as in the pouring out of our Prayers and supplications to the Lord our God the more multitudinous and united the Petitioners are the more like to speed And therefore said Bodinus truly Principem plaeraque universis concedere quae singulis denegarentur Bodin de Rep. l. 1. c. 8. that Kings do many times grant those favours to the whole body of their people which would be absolutely denied or not so readily yielded to particular persons There are moreover many things of greater concernment besides the abrogating of old Laws and making new which having been formerly recommended by the Kings of England to the care and counsel of their people convened in Parliament are not now regularly dispatched but in such Conventions as are altering the Tenure of Lands confirming the Rights Titles and possessions of private men naturalizing Aliens legitimating Bastards adding sometimes the secular Authority to such points of Doctrine and Forms of Worship as the Clergy have agreed upon in their Convocations if it be required changing the publick weights and measures throughout the Kingdom defining of such doubtful cases as are not easily resolved in the Courts of Law raising of Subsidies and Taxes attainting such as either are too potent to be caught or too hard to be found and so not triable in the ordinary Courts of Justice restoring to their Bloud and Honours such or the Heirs of such as have been formerly attainted granting of free and general Pardons with divers others of this nature In all and each of these the Lords and Commons do co-operate to the publick good Sir Tho. Smith de Rep. Angl. Cambden in Brit. Crompt of Courts c. in the way of means and preparation but their co operation would be lost and fruitless did not the King by his Concomitant or subsequent grace produce their good intentions into perfect Acts and being Acts either of special Grace and Favour or else of ordinary Right and Justice no way derogatory to the Prerogative Royal are usually confirmed by the Royal assent without stop or hesitancy But then some other things there are of great importance and advantage to the Common-wealth in which the Houses usually do proceed even to final sentence the Commons in the way of
inquisition or Impeachment the Lords in that of Judicature and determination with the consent and approbation of the King though many times without his personal assent and presence The King may be abused in his Grants and Patents to the oppression of the people or the dilapidation and destruction of the Royal Patrimony Judges and other the great Officers of Law and Equity are subject to corruptions and may smell of gifts whereby the passages of Justices do become obstructed The Ministers of inferiour Courts as well Ecclesiastical as Civil either exhaust the miserable Subject by Extortions or else consume him by delays Erroneous judgments may be given through fear or favour to the undoing of a man and his whole posterity in which his Majesties Justices of either Bench can afford no remedy The great Ones of the State may become too insolent and the poor too miserable and many other ways there are by which the Fabrick of the State may be out of Order for the removing of which mischiefs the rectifying of which abuses the Lords and Commons in their several ways before remembred are of special use yet so that if the King's Grants do come in question or any of his Officers are called to a reckoning they used heretofore to signifie unto his Majesty what they found therein and he accordingly either revoked his Grants or displaced his Servants or by some other means gave way unto their contentment the Kings consent being always necessary and received as a part of the final sentence if they went so far So that we may conclude this point with these words of Bodin who being well acquainted with the Government of this State and Nation partly by way of Conference with Dr. Dale the Queens Ambassadour in France and partly in the way of observation when he was in England doth give this resolution of the point in Controversie Bodin de Repub l. 1. o. 8. Habere quidem Ordines Anglorum authoritatem quandam jura vero majestatis imperii summam in unius Principis arbitrio versari The States saith he of England have a kind of Authority but all the Rights of Sovereignty and command in chief are at the will and pleasure of the Prince alone And to say truth although the Lords and Commons met in Parliament are of great Authority especially as they have improved it in these later times yet were they never of such power but that the Kings have for the most part over-ruled them and made them pliant and conformable to their own desires and this not only by themselves but sometimes also by their Judges by their Council often For such was the great care and wisdom of our former Kings as not to venture single on that numerous Body of the two Houses of Parliament whereby the Sovereignty might be so easily over-matched but to take with them for Affistants as well the Lords of their Privy Council with whom they might advise in matters which concerned them in their Sovereign Rights as their learned Council as they call them consisting of the Judges and most eminent Lawyers from whom they might receive instruction as the case required and neither do nor suffer wrong in point of Law and by both these as well as by the power and awe of their personal presence have they not only regulated but restrained their Parliaments And this is easily demonstrable by continual practice 4 Ed. 1. For in the Statute of Bigamie made in the fourth year of King Edward I. it is said expresly That in the prefence of certain Reverend Fathers Bishops of England and others of the Kings Council the Constitutions under-written were recited and after published before the King his Council forasmuch as all the Kings Council as well Justices as others did agree that they should be put in writing and observed In the Articuli super Chartas when the Great Charter was confirmed at the request of the Prelates 28 Ed. 1. c. 2. Earls and Barons we find these two claufes the one in the beginning thus Nevertheless the King and his Council do not intend by reason of this Statute Ibid. c. 20. to diminish the Kings right c. The other in the clofe of all in these following words And notwithstanding all these things mentioned or any part of them both the King and his Council and all they which were present at the making of this Ordinance do will and intend that the Right and Prerogative of his Crown shall be saved in all things In the 27th of King Edward the 3d. The Commons presenting a Petition to the King 27 Ed. 3. which the Kings Council did mislike were content thereupon to mend and explain their Petition the Form of which Petition is in these words following To their most redoubted Sovereign Lord the King praying the Commons that whereas they have prayed him to be discharged of all manner of Articles of the Lyre c. which Petition seemeth to his Council to be prejudicial unto him and in disherison of his Crown if it were so generally granted his said Commons not willing not desiring to demand things of him which should fall in disherison of him or of his Crown perpetually as of Escheats c. but of Trespasses Misprifions Negligences and Ignorances c. In the 13th of the reign of King Richard the 2d when the Commons did pray that upon pain of forfeiture the Chancellor or Council of the King should not after the end of the Parliament make any Ordinance against the Common Law 13 Rich. 2. the King by the advice of his Council answered Let it be used as it hath been used before this time so as the Regality of the King be saved for the King will save his Regalities 4 Hen. 4. as his Predecessors have done In the 4th year of King Henry IV. when the Commons complained against Sub-poenae's and other Writs grounded upon false suggestions the King upon the same advice returned this Answer that he would give in charge to his Officers that they should abstain more than before time they had to send for his Subjects in that manner But yet saith he it is not our intention that our Officers shall so abstain that they may not send for our Subjects in matters and causes necessary as it hath been used in the time of our good Progenitors Finally not to bring forth more particulars in a case so clear it was the constant custom in all Parliaments till the Reign of King Henry V. that when any Bill had passed both Houses Henr. 5. and was presented to the King for his Royal Assent the King by the abvice of his Privy Council or his Council learned in the Laws or sometimes of both did use to cross out and obliterate as much or as little of it as he pleased to leave out what he liked not and confirmed the rest that only which the King confirmed being held for Law And though in the succeeding
times the Kings did graciously vouchsafe to pass the whole Bill in that Form which the Houses gave it or to reject it wholly as they saw occasion yet still the Privy Council and the Judges and the Council learned in the Laws have and enjoy their place in the House of Peers as well for preservation of the Kings Rights and Royalties as for direction to the Lords in a point of Law if any case of difficulty be brought before them on which occasions the Lords are to demand the Opinion of the Judges and upon their Opinions to ground their Judgment As for Example In the Parliament 28 of Hen. VI. The Commons made suit that William de la Pole Duke of Suffolk should be committed to Prison for many Treasons and other Crimes and thereupon the Lords demanded the Opinion of the Judges 28 Hen. 6. whether he should be committed to Prison or not whose Answer was that he ought not to be committed in regard the Commons had not charged him with any particular offence but with generals only which Opinion was allowed and followed In another Parliament of the said King held by Prorogation one Thomas Thorpe the Speaker of the House of Cemmons was in the Prorogation-time condemned in 1000 l. damages upon an Action of Trespass at the suit of Richard Duke of York and was committed to Prison for execution of the same The Parliament being reassembled the Commons made suit to the King and Lords to have their Speaker delivered to them according to the Privilege of Parliaments The priviled of the Barons p. 15. the Lords demanded the Opinion of the Judges in it and upon their Answer did conclude that the Speaker should stilll remain in Prison according to Law notwithstanding the privilege of Parliament and according to this resolution the Commons were commanded in the Kings name to chuse one Tho. Carleton for their Speaker which was done accordingly Other Examples of this kind are exceeding obvious and for numbers infinite yet neither more in number nor more obvious than those of our Kings serving their turns by and upon their Parliaments as their occasions did require For not to look on higher and more Regal times we find that Richard the 2d a Prince not very acceptable to the Common people could get an Act of Parliament 21 Ric. 2. to confirm the extrajudicial Opinion of the Judges given before at Notingham that King Henry IV. could by another Act reverse all that Parliament entail the Crown to his posterity 1 Hen. 4. and keep his Dutchy of Laneaster and all the Lands and Scigneuries of it from being united to the Crown that King Edward the 4th could have a Parliament to declare all the Kings of the House of Lancaster to be Kings in Fact but not in Right 1 Ed. c. 1. and for uniting of that Dutchy to the Crown Imperial notwithstanding the former Act of separation that King Richard the 3d could have a Parliament to bastardize all his Brothers Children Speeds Hist in K. Richard 3. Verulams Hist of K. Hen. 7. 11 Hen. 7. c. 10. to set the Crown on his own Head though a most bloody Tyrant and a plain Usurper that K. Henry VII could have the Crown entailed by an Act of Parliament to the issue of his own body without relation to his Queen of the House of York which was conceived by many at that time to have the better Title to it another for paying a Benevolence which he had required of the Subject though all Benevolences had been damned by a former Statute made in the short but bloudy reign of King Richard the 3d that King Henry VIII could have one Act of Parliament to bastardry his Daughter Mary in favour of the Lady Elizabeth 65 Hen. 8. c. 22 28. c. 7. 35 H. 8. c. 1. another to declare the Lady Elizabeth to be illegitimate in expectation of the issue by Queen Jane Seymour a third for setling the succession by his Will and Testament and what else he pleased that Queen Mary could not only obtain several Acts in favour of her self and the See of Rome but for the setling of the Regency on the King of Spain 1 Mar. ses 2. c. 1 2. 1. 2 Ph. M. c. 8.10 in case the Children of that Bed should be left in non-age And finally that Queen Elizabeth did not only gain many several Acts for the security of her own Person which were determinable with her life but could procure an Act to be passed in Parliament for making it high Treason to affirm and say That the Queen could not by Act of Parliament bind and dispose the Rights and Titles which any person whatsoever might have to the Crown 13 Eliz. c. 1. And as for raising moneys and amassing Treasures by help of Parliaments he that desires to know how well our Kings have served themselves that way by the help of Parliaments let him peruse a book entituled the Privilege of Parliaments writ in the manner of Dialogue between a Privy Counsellor and a Justice of Peace and he shall be satisfied to the full Put all that hath been said together and sure the Kingdom of England must not be the place in which the three Estates convened in Parliament have power to regulate the King or restrain his actions or moderate his extravagances or where they can be taxed for persidious treachery of they connive at Kings when they play the Tyrants or wantonly insult on the Common-people or otherwise abuse that power which the Lord hath given them Calvin was much mistaken if he thought the contrary or if he dreamt that he should be believ'd on his ipse dixit without a punctual enquiry into the grounds and probability of such a dangerous intimation as he lays before us But against this it is objected that Parliaments have disposed of the Militia of the Kingdom of the Forts Castles Ports and the Navy Royal not only without the Kings leave but against his liking that they have deposed some Kings and advanced others to the top of the Regal Throne And for the proof of this they produce Examples out of the Reign of King Henry III. Edw. II. and King Richard the second Examples which if rightly pondered do not so much prove the Power as the Weakness of Parliaments in being carried up and down by the private conduct of every popular pretender For 't is well known that the Parliaments did not take upon them to rule or rather to over-look K. Henry III. but as they were directed by Simon Montfort Earl of Leicester who having raised a potent faction in the State by the assistance of the Earls of Glocester Matth. Paris Henr. 3. Hereford Derby and some others of the great Lords of the Kingdom compelled the King to yield unto what terms he pleased and made the Parliaments no other than a means and instrument to put a popular gloss on his wretched purposes And
't is well known that the ensuing Parliaments which they instance in moved not of their own accord to the deposing of K Edw. the 2d or K. Richard the 2d but sailed as they were steered by those powerful Councils which Qu. Isabel in the one Walsingham in Hist Angl. Hypodig Neustriae and Henry Duke of Lancaster in the other did propose unto them It was no safe resisting those as their cold wisdoms and forgotten loyalties did suggest unto them qui tot legionibus imperarent who had so many thousand men in Arms to make good their project and they might think as the poor-spirited Citizens of Samaria did in another case but a case very like the present Behold two Kings stood not before him 2 Kings 10.4 how then can we stand For had it been an Argument of the power of Parliaments that they deposed one King to set up another dethroned King Richard to advance the Duke of Lancaster to the Regal Diadem they would have kept the House of Lancaster in possession of it for the full demonstration of a power indeed and not have cast them off at the first attempt of a new plausible pretender declared them to be kings in fact but not in right whose lawful right they had before preferred above all other Titles and set the Crown upon the heads of their deadly Enemies In the next place it is objected that Parliaments are a great restraint of the Sovereign power according to the Doctrine here laid down by Calvin in that the King can make no Laws nor levy any money upon the Subject but by the counsel and assent of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament But this Objection hurts as little as the former did For Kings to say the truth need no Laws at all In all such points wherein they have not bound themselves by some former Laws made for the common use and benefit of the Subject they are left at liberty and may proceed in governing the people given by God unto them according to their own discretion and the advice of their Council New Laws are chiefly made for the Subjects benefit at their desire on their importunate requests for their special profit not one in twenty nay I dare boldly say not one in an hundred made for the advantage of the King either in the improvement of his power or the encrease of his Revenue Look over all the Acts of Parliaments from the beginning of the reign of King Henry III. to the present time and tell me he that can if he finds it otherwise Kings would have little use of Parliaments and less mind to call them if nothing but the making of new Laws were the matter aimed at And as for raising Moneys and imposing Taxes it either must suppose the Kings to be always unthrifts that they be always indigent and necessitous and behind-hand with the World which are the ordinary effects of ill husbandry or else this Argument is lost and of little use For if our Kings should husband their Estates to the best advantage and make the best benefit of such Escheats and forfeitures and confiscations as day by day do fall unto them If they should follow the Example of K. Henry VII and execute the penal Laws according to the power which those Laws have given them and the trust reposed in them by their People if they should please to examine their Revenue and proportion their expence to their comings in there would be little need of Subsidies and supplies of money more than the ordinary aids and impositions upon Merchandize which the Law alloweth of and the known rights of Sovereignty backed by prescription and long custom have asserted to them So that it is by Accident not by and Nature that the Parliament hath any power or opportunity to restrain their King in this particular for where there is no need of asking there is no occasion of denying by consequence no restraint upon no baffle or affronting offered to the Regal power And yet the Sovereign need not fear if he be tolerably careful of his own Estate that any reasonable demand of his in these money-matters will meet with opposition or denial in his Houses of Parliament For whilest there are so many Acts of Grace and Favour to be done in Parliament as what almost in every Parliament but an enlargement of the Kings favours to his people and that none can be done in Parliament but with the Kings siat and consent there is no question to be made but that the two Houses of Parliament will far sooner chuse to supply the King as all wise Parliaments have done than rob the Subject of the benefit of his Grace and Favours which is the best fruit they reap from Parliaments Finally whereas it is Objected but I think it in sport that the old Lord Burleigh used to say that he knew not what a Parliament in England could not do and that K. James once said in a Parliament that then there were 500 Kings which words were taken for a Concession that all were Kings as well as he in a time of Parliament they who have given us these Objections do either misunderstand their Authors or abuse themselves For what the Lord Burleigh said of Parliaments though it be more than the wisest man alive can justifie he spake of Parliaments according as the word is used in its proper sense not for the two Houses or for either of them exclusive of the Kings presence and consent but for the supream Court for the highest Judicatory consisting of the Kings most excellent Majesty the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Representees of the Commons and then it will not serve for the turn intended And what King James said once in jest though I have often heard it used in earnest upon this occasion was spoken only in derision of some daring Spirits who laying by the modesty of their Predecessors would needs be looking into the Prerogative or finding Errors and mistakes in the present Government or medling with those Arcana imperii which former Parliaments beheld at distance with the eye of Reverence But certainly King James intended nothing less than to acknowledg a co-ordinative Sovereignty in the two Houses of Parliament or to make them his Co-partners in the Regal power His carriage and behaviour towards them in the whole course of his Government clearly shews the contrary there never being Prince more jealous in the points of Sovereignty nor more uncapable of a Rival in those points than he But yet the main Objection which we may call the Objection paramount doth remain unanswered For if the three Estates convened in Parliament or any other popular Magistrate whom Calvin dreams of be ordained by the Word of God as Guardians of the peoples Liberties and therefore authorized to moderate and restrain the power of Kings as often as they shall invade or infringe those liberties as Calvin plainly says they were or that they know
together Ex hisce simul sanè ex primo secundo libro hoc satis puto constabit per Annos amplius M. M. M. M. tam sacrorum regimen qua forense esset atque à functione facrâ ritè distinctum quam profanorum five res spectes five personas juxta jus etiam divinum ex Ecclesiae Judaicae populorumque Dei anteriorum disciplinâ perpetuâ ad eosdem attinuisse judices seu Magistratus ejusdem Religionis atque ad synedria eadem neutiquam omnino ex juris istius instituto aliquo sacrorum prosanorum instar Ecclesiarum seu Spiritualium laicorum seu teorporalium Nominibus nullatenus discriminata Seld. de syn praefat libr. secundi And so it did till Pope Nicolas made the one independent upon the other So that their disunion is a Popish Innovation for till his time the Judges of Church and State ever sate together affairs Sacred and Religious were scan'd and determined in the morning and those that were Secular and Civil in the afternoon There was not till that time any clashing between Moses and Aaron no prohibitions out of one Court to stop or evacuate the proceedings of another and then it was that Justice run down like a stream and Righteousness like a mighty River If it be said that there are many corruptions among Church-men and especially in Ecclesiastical Courts The answer is That Callings must be distinguish'd from persons or else those two noble professions of Law and Physick will fall under the same condemnation with Divinity No man of any sobriety will condemn either of those professions because there are some Empericks in the World who kill mens Bodies and some Petifoggers that intangle and ruine their Estates And I hope Divines may have some grains of allowance granted them as well as the Inns of Court and Chancery and the College of Physicians if they cannot let that Calling which is most innocent cast the first stone It cannot be hoped that there will in this Age be a Revival of the primitive usage of these two Jurisdictions But yet this ought to be seriously regarded by all who have any belief of a Deity and regard for their native Country I mean that either our English Monarchs might be totally excused from their Coronation-Oath or not be put upon a necessity of violating thereof Their Oath in favour of the Clergy is that they will grant and keep the Laws Customs and Franchises granted to the Clergy by the glorious King St. Edward their Predecessor according to the Laws of God Rushw Hist Collect. part 1◠pag. 204. the true profession of the Gospel established in this Kingdom agreeable to the Prerogative of the Kings thereof and the Ancient customs of the Realm But how this Oath is observed when the Bishops are infringed in their ancient and indisputable priviledges let it be considered by all persons of sober mind and principles And let it be declared what order of men in the whole Nation the King can rely upon with so much safety and confidence as upon the Bishops and that not only upon the account of their Learning Wisdom Sanctity and Integrity qualifications not every day to be met withal in State-Politicians but upon the score of Gratitude and Interest For 't is from their Prince that they derive their Honours Dignities Titles Revenues Priviledges Power Jurisdictions with all other secular advantages and upon this account there is greater probability that they will be faithful to his Concerns and Interests than those who receive nothing from him but the common advantages of Government But this argument is known too well by our Anti-Episcopal Democraticks And perhaps 't is the chief if not the only reason of their enmity against an Order of men of so sacred and venerable an Institution As for this little Treatise the Author of it is too well known unto this Nation to invite any Scholar to peruse it It was written when the Bishops were Voted by the House of Lords not to be of the Committee in the Examination of the Earl of Strafford For then it was that Dr. Heylyn considered the case and put these few Sheets as a MSS. into the hands of several of the Bishops that they might be the better enabled to assert and vindicate their own Rights It was only intended for private use and therefore the Reader is not to expect so punctual an accuracy as he may find in other Treatises of this Learned Author It has been perused by some persons of good Eminency for judgment and station in the Church of England and by them approved and commended All that is wished by the Publisher is that it may produce the effects which he proposes to himself in exposing it to publick view and that those Lords who are now Prisoners in the Tower and from whose tryal some have laboured to exclude the Bishops were able to give unto the World as convincing Evidence of their Innocency as that great and generous States man did who fell a Sacrifice to a prevailing Faction and whose Innocent Blood was so far from being a lustration to the Court as some thought it would have proved as it drew after it such a deluge of Gore as for many preceding years had never been spilt in this Kingdom But 't is not my design or desire to revive any of the Injustice or Inhumanities of the last Age. Suffice it to say that it was for this Apostolical Government of Bishops that King Charles the First lost his Kingdoms his Crown his Life And the exclusion of Bishops from Voting in causes of blood was the prologue to all those Tragical mischiefs that happened to that Religion and Renowned Prince And those who have the least veneration for his present Majesty cannot certainly conceive him a King of such slender and weak abilities as to permit Himself and Family to be ruined by those very methods with which his Father was before him De jure Paritatis Episcoporum OR The Right of Peerage vindicated to the BISHOPS OF ENGLAND SINCE the restoring of the Bishops to their place and Vote in the House of Peers I find a difference to be raised between a Peer of the Realm and a Lord of the Parliament and then this Inference or Insinuation to be built upon it that though the Bishops are admitted to be Lords of Parliament yet they are not to be reckoned amongst the Peers of the Realm the contrary whereof I shall endeavour to make good in this following Essay and that not only from the Testimony of approved Writers but from unquestioned Records Book-Cases Acts of Parliament and such further Arguments as may be able to evince the point which we have in hand But first perhaps it may be said that there is no such difference in truth and verity betwixt a Lord of Parliament and a Peer of the Realm but that we may conclude the the Bishops to be Peers of the Realm if they be once admitted to
be Lords of Parliament concerning which take this from Chief Justice Coke where he affirms that only a Lord of Parliament shall be tryed by his Peers being Lords of Parliament and neither Noblemen of any other Countrey nor others that are called Lords and are no Lords of Parliament are accounted Peers that is to say Peers within this Statute he meaneth the Magna Charta or Great Charter of England the ground of all our Laws and Liberties to this very day by which it seems that he conceived a Peer and a Lord of Parliament to be terms equivalent every Peer of the Realm being a Lord of Parliament and every Lord of Parliament a Peer of the Realm which clearly takes away the pretended difference that is made between them But secondly admit the distinction to be sound and solid yet it will easily be proved that Bishops are not only Lords of Parliament but Peers of the Realm In order whereunto we must take notice of some passages in our former Treatise touching the Bishops place and Vote in Parliament that is to say that from the first planting of the Gospel in the Realms of England parcelled at that time amongst several Kings the Bishops always had the principal place in their Common Councils which the Saxons call by the name of Wittenegemote or the Assembly of wise men and afterwards in the time of the Normans took the name of Parliaments In all which Interval from Ethelbert the first Christian King of Kent in the year of our Lord 605. till the death of Edward the Confessor which happened in the year 1066 no Common Council of the Saxons had been held without them and all this while they held their Courts by no other Tenures than purâ perpetuâ Eleemosynâ franke Almoigne as our Lawyers call it discharged from all Attendances upon secular Services And therefore they could sit there in no other Capacity than ratione officii spiritualis Dignitatis in regard of their Episcopal function which as it raised them to an height of eminence in the eye of the people so it was probably presumed that they were better qualified than the rest of the Subjects as the times then were for Governing the great Affairs of the Common-wealth But when the Norman Conqueror had attained the Crown he thought it an improvident Course to suffer so much of the Lands of the Nation as then belonged unto the Prelates whether Bishops or Abbots in the Right of their Churches to be discharged from doing service to the State And therefore he ordained them to hold their Lands sub militari servitute either in Capite or by Baronage or some such military hold whereby they were compellable to aid the Kings in all times of War with Men Arms and Horses as the Lay-subjects of the same Tenure were required to do Concerning which our Learned Antiquary out of Matthew Paris informs us thus viz. Cambden Brit. fol. 123. Rex enim Gulielmus Episcopatus Abbatias quae Baronias tenebant in purâ perpetuâ Eleemosynâ catenus ab omni servitute militari libertatem habuerunt sub servitute statuit militari Irrotulans singulos Episcopos Abbatias pro voluntate sua quot milites sibi successoribus hostilitatis tempore à singulis voluit exhiberi Which though at first it was conceived to be a great Disfranchisement and an heavy burden to the Prelacy yet Cambden very well observes that it conduced at last to their greater honour in giving them a further Title to their place in Parliament a claim to all the Rights of Peerage and less obnoxious to Disputes if considered rightly than that which formerly they could pretend to so that from this time forwards we must look upon them in all English Parliaments not only as Bishops in the Church but as Peers and Barons of the Realm of the same Tenure and therefore of the same preheminence with the Temporal Lords Which certainly must be the Reason that the Bishops of the Isle of Man are not called to Parliament because they hold not of the King by Barony as the rest of the English Bishops do but hold the whole Estate in Lands from the Earl of Darby Thus also saith a Learned Lawyer Coke Institut part 2. f. 3. Every Arch-bishoprick and Bishoprick in England are of the Kings foundation and holden of the King per Baroniam and many Abbots and Priors of Monasteries were also of the Kings foundation and did hold of him per Baroniam and in this Right the Arch-bishops and Bishops and such of the Abbots and Priors as held per Baroniam and were called by Writ to Parliament were Lords of Parliament And yet not Lords of Parliament only but Peers and Barons of the Realm as he shall call them very shortly on another occasion In the mean time we may observe that by this changing of their Tenure the Bishops frequently were comprehended in the name of Barons and more particularly in that passage of Magna Charta Coke Institut part 2. fol. 23. where it is said Comites Barones non amercientur nisi per pares suos that Earls and Barons are not to be amerced but by their Peers concerning which the said Great Lawyer tells us thus viz. That though this Statute as he calls it be in the negative yet long use hath prevailed against it for now the Amerciament of the Nobility is reduced to a certainty viz. a Duke 10 l. an Earl 5 l. a Bishop that hath a Barony 5 l. where plainly Bishops must be comprehended in the name of Barons and be amerced by their Peers as the Barons were though afterwards their Amerciaments be reduced to a certainty as well as those of Earls and Barons in the times succeeding And then if Bishops be included in the name of Barons and could not be legally amerced but by their Peers as neither could the Earls or Barons by the words of this Charter it must needs follow that the Bishops were accounted Peers as well as any either of the Earls or Barons by whom they were to be Amerced And for the next place we may behold the Constitutions made at Clarendon the tenth year of King Henry the 2d Matth. Paris in Hen. 2d Anno 1164. in which it was declared as followeth viz. Archiepiscopi Episcopi universae personae Regni qui Rege tenent in Capite habeant possessiones suos de Rege sicut Baroniam inde respondeant Justiciariis Ministris Regis sicut caeteri Barones debent interesse Curiae Regis cum Baronibus quousque perventum sit ad diminutionem membrorum vel ad mortem Where first I think that those words universae personae are to be understood of none but Ecclesiastical persons according to the notion of the word persona in the Common Law and so to comprehend the Regular Clergy as well as the Arch-bishops and Bishops But secondly if we must understand it of the Laity also it
must needs follow thereupon that all which held their Lands of the Crown in Capite were capable in those times of a place in Parliament And so it seems they had in the Reign of King John and afterwards in the Reign of King Henry the 3d but in the last years of the said King Henry and by the power and prudence of King Edward the first were brought into a narrower compass none being admitted to appear and attend in Parliament but such as he thought fit to summon by his Royal Mandate And hereunto as well our choicest Antiquaries as our most eminent Lawyers do consent unanimously But here is to be noted saith Chief Justice Coke that if the King give Lands to any one tenendum per servitium Baronis de Rege he is no Lord of Parliament till he be called by Writ to the Parliament which as he there declares for a point of Law so is it also verified in point of practice out of the old Record entituled Modus tenendi Parliamentum in which it is affirmed Ad Parliamentum summoniri venire debere Archiepiscopos Episcopos Abbates Priores alios majores Cleri qui tenent per Comitatum aut Baroniam ratione hujusmodi Tenurae that all Arch-bishops Bishops Priors and other Prelates of the Church who hold their Lands either in right of their Counties or in right of their Baronages were to be summoned and come to Parliament in regard of their Tenures Where we may see that though they had a jus ad rem in regard of their Tenures yet they had no pretence to their Jus in re but only by the Writ of Summons And secondly whereas the Modus speaks of some Bishops which were to be called to the Parliament in the right of their Counties I think he means it of the Bishops of Durham and Ely which enjoyed all the Rights and priviledges of a County Palatine in their several Circuits By which we see that to the making of a Baron or a Lord of Parliament it is not only necessary that he hold by Barony but that he have his Writ of Summons to attend the service which puts a signal difference between Lords of Parliament and such as are called Lords in respect of their birth or in regard of some great Offices which they hold in the State of the first sort whereof are all the eldest sons of Earls and upwards who are not only honoured with the name of Lords but challenge a precedence by the Rules of Herauldry before all the Barons of the Realm and yet can lay no claim to the Rights of Peerage unless perhaps they may be summoned to the Parliament in their fathers life time And so it hapned in the Case of the Earl of Surrey the eldest son of Thomas Lord Howard Duke of Norfolk arraigned in the last days of King Henry the eighth and tried by a Jury of twelve men because not being called to Parliament in his fathers life-time he could not be considered as a Peer of the Realm And in the last sort we may reckon the Lord Chancellor the Lord Treasurer the Lord Privy Seal the Lord President of his Majesties Council the Lord High Chamberlain the Lord Admiral the Lord Steward and the Lord Chamberlain of his Majesties Houshold the Lord Warden of the Cinque-ports and the three Chief Judges who if they be not otherwise of the Rank of Barons can plead no Title to their Peerage nor to Vote in Parliament and so it hapned in the Case of Sir William Stanly Lord Chamberlain to King Henry the seventh tried by a Jury of twelve men in a case of Treason without relation to his great Office or Title of Lord. Most true it is that some of these great Officers have their place in Parliament and so have all the Judges of the Courts of Westminster the Master of the Rolls the Masters of the Chancery the Kings Attorney General and perhaps some others all summoned to attend the service by Especial Writs but they are only called to advise the Court to give their Judgment and Opinion when it is demanded but not to canvass or debate and much less to conclude in any business which is there discoursed of as both the Bishops and the Temporal Lords are impowred to do Which difference appears in the Writs themselves For in the Writ of Summons to the Judges and the rest here mentioned the words run thus viz. Quod intersitis nobiscum cum caeteris de concilio nostro and sometimes nobiscum only supra praemissis tractaturi vestrumque consilium impensuri But in the Writ of Summons to the Bishops and the rest of the Peers we shall find it thus viz. quod intersitis cum praelatis magnatibus proceribus super dictis negotiis tractaturi vestrumque consilium impensuri c. which Writs of Summons to the Bishops and the Temporal Peers are the same verbatim but that the Bishops are required to attend the service sub fide dilectione the Temporal Peers sub fide ligeantia quibus nobis tenemini Upon which Premises it may be rationally inferred that the Bishops of this Church were reputed Barons a Baron and a Barony being conjugata and being Barons have as good a Claim to the right of Peerage as any of the Temporal Lords who hold as well their Peerage as their place in Parliament by no other Tenure for that a Baron of Realm and a Peer of the Realm are but terms synonymous and that the Bishops of the the Church of England are both Peers and Barons hath been proved before and may be further evidenced from that which they affirmed to the Temporal Lords convened in Parliament at Northampton under Henry the 2d for the determining of the differences betwixt the King and Thomas Becket Arch bishop of Canterbury which the Temporal Lords would fain have thrust upon the Bishops as more competent Judges to which the Bishops thus replied viz. non sedemus hic Episcopi sed Barones nos Barones vos Barones Pares hic sumus We sit not here say they as Bishops only Seldens Titles of Honour pag. â—18 but as Barons also we are Barons and you are Barons here we sit as Peers Their sitting in the Parliament was in a right of their Baronies And in the right of their Baronage they were also Peers and Peers to all intents and purposes as well as any others whether Earls or Barons who had Vote in Parliament This appears further by the words of Arch-bishop Stratford who being suspended from his place in Parliament by King Edward the 3d came boldly to the Doors of the House and turning towards those that attended there thus maintained his Claim Amice Rex me ad hoe Parliamentum scripto sua vocavit Antiq. Brittan ego tanquam major Par regni post Regem primam vocem habere debens in Parliamento Jura Ecclesiae meae Cantuariensis vendico ideo Ingressum in Parliamentum peto Which
makes it plain that the Arch-bishop did not challenge a place in Parliament as the first Peer of the Realm and one that ought to have the first Voice in all English Parliaments either by way of favour or of Custom only but as a power and priviledg which he ought to have habere debeus as the words are in right of his See Proceed we to the Case of John Bishopp of Winchester in the reign of the said King Edward the 3d who having departed from the Parliament without leave from the King was for the same accused and prosecuted at the Kings Suit by one Adam de Fincham his Majesties Attorney or Sollicitor General to which Action the Bishop did appear and put in his plea in which he doth maintain himself to be a Peer of the Realm and therefore to be tried by Parliament for the said offence which in a time of Parliament was committed by him But take the whole Record with you for the more assurance Et praedictus Episcopus in propriâ personâ suâ venit defendit omnem contemptum transgressionem quicquid c. dicit quod ipse sit unus de Paribus regni Praelatus saerosanctae Ecclesiae Jus venire ad Parliamentum Domini Regis per summonitionem Coke Institut part 4. fol. 16. pro voluntate ipsius Domini Regis cum sibi placuerit dicit quod si quis eorum erga Dominum regem in Parliamento aliquo delinqueret in Parliamento debet corrigi emendari in non alibi minori Curiâ And this Record proves plainly that he challenged his Right of Peerage Though by my Author it is brought for another purpose that is to say that misdemeanours and offences which are done in Parliament ought not to be enquired into or punished in a lower Court contrary to the power and practice of the Kings of England in all times foregoing Now that which was affirmed by the Bishop of Winchester in reference to his right of Peerage was generally challenged by all the Bishops in the time of King Richard the 2d on the impeachment of the Duke of Ireland and some others in the Court of Parliament At which time being to withdraw themselves by the Canon Law which had prohibited all Clergy-men from intermedling in Causa sanguinis they made this following Protestation to preserve their Rights In Dei nomine Amen Antiqu. Brit. in Courtney cum de Jure Consuetudine regni Angliae ad Archiepiscopum Cantuariensem qui pro tempore fuerit nec non caeteros suos suffraganeos confratres Coepiscopos Abbates Priores aliosque praelatos quoscunque per Baroniam de Domino nostro Rege tenentes pertinet in Parliamentis Regis quibuscunque ut Pares Regni praedicti personaliter interesse ibidemque de regni negotiis allis ibidem tractari cousuetis cum caeteris dicti regni paribus aliis consulere ordinare statuere definire ac caetera facere quae Parliamenti tempore ibid. imminent facienda in quibus omnibus singulis not Willielmus Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus totius Augliae primas Apostolicae sedis Legatus pro nobis nostrisque suffraganeis coepiscopis confratribus nec non Abbatibus Prioribus praelatis omnibus supradictis protestamur eorum quilibet protestatur quis per se vel procuratorem si fuerit modo praesens publicè expressè quod intendi volumus ac vult corum quilibet in hoc praesenti Parliamento aliis ut Pares Regni praedicti more solito interesse considerare tractare ordinare statuere diffinire ac caeterae exercare cum caeteris Jus interessendi habentibus eisdem statis ordine nostris eorum cujuslibet in omnibus semper salvis Verum quia in praesenti Parliamento agitur de non nullis materiis in quibus non licet nobis alicui eorum juxta sacrorum Canonum Instituta quomodolibet personaliter interesse eo propter pro nobis eorum quolibet protestamur eorum quilibet hie praesens etiam protestatur quod non intendimus nec volumus sicuti de Jure non possumus nec debemus intendi nec vult aliquis eorundem in praesenti Parliamento dum de hujusmodi materiis agitur vel agotur quomodolibet interesse sed nos eorum quemlibet in eâ parte penitus absentare Jure Paritatis nostrae cujuslibet eorum interessendi in dicto Parliamento quoad omnia singula ibidem exercenda eorum quilibet statu ordine semper salun Ad hoc insuper protestamur eorum quilibet protestatur quod propter hujusmodi absentiam non intendimus nec volumus nec eoruns aliquis intendit nec vult quod habet processus habend'in praesenti Parliamento super materiis ante dictis In quibus nec possumus nec debemus permititur interesse quantum ad nos quemlibet eocum attinet suturis temporibus quomodolibet impugnentur infirmentur seu etiam revocentur In which Record we may observe First that the Bishops and the rest there mentioned held their Lands by Baronage Secondly that they were sommoned to the Parliament in regard of their Tenures Thirdly that being called to serve in Parliament they sat there as Peers and gave their Counsel in all matters and affairs of moment which were therein handled Fourthly that though to testifie their obedience to some Canons which were then in force they did withdraw their personal presence at the time of Trial yet they did it with a salvo Jure Paritatis not to infringe the rights and priviledges which belonged unto them in regard of their Peerage And finally we may observe that this Protestation is not only extant in the Antiquitates Britannicae to which the Margent doth refer us but at the desire of the said Prelates the good leave of the King and the consent of all the Peers which were there assembled it was entred in the Journal of the House of Peers where it still continues But because possibly the Bishops may claim more than belongs unto them or that perhaps their Testimony may not be admitted in matters of their own concernment we will next see what is affirmed by others as to that particular And first we will begin with the Learned Cambden who informeth us thus viz. Ad quos Abbates having first reckoned them according to their Names Cambd. Brit. fol. 123. and Order ut etiamnuin ad Episcopos Parliamentis quibuscunque ut Pares regni cum caeteris Paribus personaliter interesse consulere tractare ordinare statuere definire ratione Baroniarum quas de Rege tenebant de Jure consuetudine spectavit for proof whereof besides the Credit of the Auther we are by him referred to the publick Acts or Records of Parliament but unto what Records particularly he informs us not And therefore we nust help our selves by Sir Edward Coke who tells us Jurisdiction of
Courts Coke Institutes part 4 p. 45. out of the Records of Parliament and in his Margent pointing to the 13th of King Edward the third doth instruct us thus viz. Abbates Priores aliosque Praelatos quoscunque per Baroniam de Domino Rege tenentes pertinet in Parliamentis Regni quibuscunq ut pates Regni praedicti personaliter interesse ibique de Regni negotiis ac aliis tractari consuetis cum caeteris dicti Regni Paribus aliis ibidem jus interessendi habentibus consulere tractare ordinare statuere definire ac caetera facere quae Parliamenti tempore imminent facienda Which if it be the same with that which we had before differing only in some words as perhaps it is yet we have gained the Testimony of that Learned Lawyer whose judgment in this Case must be worth the having For hear him speaking in his own words and he tells us this viz. Coke Institut fol. 4. That every Lord of Parliament either Spiritual as Arch-bishops and Bishops or Temporal as Dukes Marquesses Earls Viscounts and Barons Peers of the Realm and Lords of Parliament ought to have several Writs of Summons where plainly these words Peers and Lords of Parliament relate as well to Spiritual as to the Temporal Lords And therefore if the Arch-bishops and the Bishops may be granted to be Lords of Parliament they must be also granted to be Peers of the Realm Now to the Testimony and Authority of particular persons we shall next add the sentence and determination of our Courts of Law in which the Bishops are declared to be Peers of the Realm and to be capable of all the priviledges which belong to the Peerage For first in the aforesaid Case of the Bishop of Winchester when he was brought upon his Trial for departing from the service of the Parliament without leave of the King and pleaded sor himself quod esset unus è Paribus Regni c. The priviledg of Barony It was supposed clearly both by Court and Council that he was a Peer that part of his defence being not gainsayed or so much as questioned So in the Year-Books of the Reign of King Edward the 3d in whose Reign the Bishop of Winchester's Case was agitated as before is said a Writ of Wards was brought by the Bishop of London and by him pleaded to an Issue and the Defendant could not be Essoyned or have day of Grace for it was said that a Bishop was a Peer of the Land haec erat causa saith the Book which reports the Case In the like Case upon an Action of Trespass against the Abbot of Abbingdon who was one of the Lords Spiritual day of Grace was denied against him because he was a Peere de la Terre So also it is said expresly that when question was made about the returning of a Knight to be of a Jury where a Bishop was Defendant in a Quare impedit the Rule of the Court was that it ought to be so because the Bishop was a Peer of the Realm And in the Judgment given against the Bishop of Norwich in the time of Richard the 2d he is in the Roll expresly allowed to be a Peer for he had taken exceptions that some things had passed against him without the Assent or knowledg of his Peers of the Realm To which Exception it was Answered that it behoved him not at all to plead that he was a Prelate for traversing such Errors and misprisions as in the quality of a Souldier who had taken wages of the King were committed by him Thus also in the Assignment of the Errors under Henry the fifth for the Reversal of the Attainder of the Earl of Salisbury one Error is assigned that Judgment was given without the consent of the Prelates which were Peers in Parliament And although that was adjudged to be no Error yet was it clearly allowed both in the Roll and the Petitions that the Bishops were Peers Finally in the Government of the Realm of France the Bishops did not only pass in the Ranks of Peers but six of them were taken into the number of the Douze-pairs or twelve Peers of that Kingdom highly esteemed and celebrated in the times of Charlemayne that is to say the Arch-bishop and Duke of Rhemes the Bishop and Duke of Laon the Bishop and Duke of Langres the Bishop and Earl of Beuvois the Bishop and Earl of Noyon the Bishop and Earl of Chalons And therefore it may be inferred that in the Government established by the Anjovin and Norman Kings the English Bishops might be ranked with the Peers at large considering their place in Parliament and their great Revenues and the strong influence which they had on the Church and State But there is little need for Inferences and book-Cases and the Authorities of particular men to come in for Evidence when we are able to produce an Act of Parliament to make good the point For in the Statute made the 4th year of King Henry the fifth it was repeated and confirmed That no man of the Irish Nation should be chosen by Election to be an Arch-bishop Bishop Abbot or Frior nor in no other manner received or accepted to any dignity and benefice within the said Land c. The Reason of which inhibition is there said to be this viz. because being Peers of the Parliament of the said Land they brought with them to the Parliaments and Councils holden there some Irish servants whereby the privities of the Englishmen within the same Land have been and be daily discovered to the Irish people Rebels to the King to the great peril and mischief of the Kings lawful Liege people in the said Land And if the Bishops and Arch-bishops of Ireland had the name of Peers there is no question to be made but the name of Peers and the right of Peerage may properly be assumed or challenged by them Now as this Statute gives them the name of Peers so in an Act of Parliament in the 25th year of King Henry the 8th they are called the Nobles of your Realm as well Spiritual as Temporal as all your other Subjects now living c. Which Term we find again repeated by the Parliament following the Nobles Spiritual and Temporal and that twice for failing so that we find no Title given to Earls and Barons Nobles and Peers and Lords as the Statutes call them but what is given to the Bishops in our Acts of Parliament and certainly had not been given them in the stile of that Court had any question then been made of their Right of Peerage And that their calling had not raised them to a state of Nobility concerning which take this from the Lord Chief Justice Coke for our more assurance and he will tell us that the general division of persons by the Law of England is either one that is Noble and in respect of his nobility of the Lords House of Parliament or one of the Commons of the
and that the way being thus laid open it was no hard matter to make the Bishop of Carlisle obnoxious to that kind of Trial which being forsaken on all sides as the times then were he was not able to avoid Which might be also the condition of Arch-bishop Cranmer and as for Fisher Bishop of Rochester he was to deal with an impetuous and violent Prince who was resolved to put the greater disgrace upon him because he had received some greater Honours from the Pope than the condition of Affairs might be thought to bear But against all these violations of their Rights of Peerage it may be said in their behalves for the times to come that by the Statute of the 25th of King Edward the 3d which serves to this day for the standing Rule in Cases of Treason it is required that the Malefactor or the suspected person must be attainted by such men as are of his own Condition and therefore Bishops to be tryed by none but the Peers of the Land unless it be in open opposit on to this Rule of King Edward and in defiance to the fundamental Law in the Magna Charta where it is said that no man is to be Disseised of his Freehold exiled or any ways destroyed nisi per Judicium parium suorum Or per Legem Terrae but by the Judgment of his Peers and by the Law of the Land and I can find no Law of the Land which tells me that a Bishop shall be tryed by a Common Jury Finally if it be a sufficient Argument that Bishops ought not to be reckoned as Peers of the Realm because they may be tryed by a Common Jury then also at some times and in certain Cases the Temporal Lords Dukes Marquesses Earls c. must not pass for Peers because in all Appeals of Murder they are to be tryed by Common Jurors like the rest of the Subjects But secondly it is objected That since a Bishop cannot sit in Judgment on the death of a Peer nor be so much as present at the time of his Trial they are but half-Peers as it were not Peers to all intents and purposes as the others are But this incapacity is not laid upon them by the Laws of the Land or any Limitation of their powers in their Writ of Summons or any thing inhering to the Episcopal Function but only by some ancient Canons and more particularly by the fourth Canon of Toledo which whether they be now of force or not may be somewhat questioned Secondly whensoever they withdrew themselves they did it with a salvo Jure paritatis as before is shewn To which intent they did not only cause their Protestations to be filed on Record Coke Institut part 4. fol. 23. but for the most part made a Proxy to some Temporal Lords to Act in their behalf and preserve their right which though they did not in the Case we had before us yet afterwards in the 21st of King Richard the 2d and from that time forwards when they found Parliamentary Impeachments to become more frequent they observed it constantly as it continues to this day Nor were they hindred by those Canons whatsoever they were from being present at the depositions of Witnesses or taking such preparatory examinations as concern the Trial in which they might be able to direct the Court by the Rules of Conscience though they withdrew themselves at the time of the sentence That was a Trick imposed upon the Bishops by the late long Parliament when they excluded them from being members of the Committee which was appointed for taking the examinations in the business of the Earl of Strafford And this they did not in relation to those ancient Canons but upon design for fear they might discover some of those secret practices which were to be hatched and contrived against him Against which Preparations for a final Trial or taking the Examinations or hearing of depositions of Witnesses or giving counsel in such cases as they saw occasion the Council of Toledo saith not any thing which can be honestly interpreted to their disadvantage So that the Bishops Claim stands good to their right of Peerage any thing in those ancient Canons or the unjust practices of the late Long Parliament to the contrary notwithstanding To draw the business to an end what one thing is required unto the constituting of a Peer of England which is not to be found in an English Bishop if Tenure and Estate they hold their Lands per integram Baroniam as the old Lords did if Voice in Parliament they have their several Writs of Summons as the Lay-Lords have if we desire Antiquity to make good their Interesse most of them have sat longer there in their Predecessors than any of our Temporal Lords in their noblest Ancestors if point of Priviledg they have the same in all respects as the others have except it be in one particular neither clearly stated nor universally enjoyed by those who pretend most to it if Letters Patents from the King to confirm these Honours they have his Majesties Writ of Conge d'eslire his Royal Assent to the Election his Mandate under the Great Seal for their Consecration If therefore we allow the Bishops to be Lords of Parliament we must allow them also to be Peers of the Realm There being nothing which distinguisheth a Peer from from a common Person but his Voice in Parliament which was the matter to be proved A TABLE OF THE CONTENTS The Way of the Reformation of the Church of England declared and justified SECT I. I. THE Introduction shewing the Occasion Method and Design of the whole Discourse Page 1 I. Of Calling or Assembling the Convocation of the Clergy and the Authority thereof when convened together Page 2 II. Of the Ejection of the Pope and vesting the Supremacy in the Regal Crown Page 5 III. Of the Translation of the Scriptures and permitting them to be read in the English Tongue Page 7 IV. Of the Reformation of Religion in the points of Doctrine Page 10 V. Of the Reformation of the Church of England in the Forms of Worship and the times appointed thereunto Page 14 VI. Of the power of making Canons for the well ordering of the Clergy and the directing of the people in the publick duties of Religion Page 18 VII An Answer to the main Objections of either Party Page 20 SECT II. I. That the Church of England did not innovate in the Ejection of the Pope and setling the Supremacy in the Regal Crown Page 23 II. That the Church of England might proceed to a Reformation without the approbation of the Pope or the Church of Rome Page 26 III. That the Church of England might lawfully proceed to a Reformation without the help of a General Council or calling in the aid of the Protestant Churches Page 30 IV. That the Church did not innovate in Translating the Scriptures and the publick Liturgy into vulgar Tongues and of the Consequents thereof to the
luck in making choice of three such instances which if true would not serve his turn Page 681 8. The danger which lyeth hidden under the disguise of such popular Magistrates as are here instanced in by Calvin Page 682 9. What moved Calvin to lay these dangerous stumbling-blocks in the Subjects way Page 683 10. The dangerous positions and practices which have hence ensued in most parts of Europe Page 684 11. The sect of Calvin professed Enemies to Monarchy and the power of Princes Page 685 CHAP. V. What are the three Estates in each several Kingdom of which Calvin speaks and what particularly in the Realm of England 1. Of the division of a People into three Estates and that the Priests or Clergy have been always one Page 687 2. The Priests employed in Civil matters and affairs of State by the Egyptians and the Persians the Greeks Gauls and Romans Page 688 3. The Priests and Levites exercised in affairs of Civil Government by Gods own appointment Page 680 4. The Prelates versed in Civil matters and affairs of State in the best and happiest times of Christianity Page 690 5. The Clergy make the third Estate in Germany France Spain and the Northern Kingdoms Page 692 6. That anciently in the Saxon times the Ecclesiasticks of this Realm were called to all publick Councils Page 694 7. The Prelates an essential fundamental part of the English Parliament ibid. 8. Objections answered and that the word Clerus in the Legal notion doth not extend unto the Prelates Page 698 9. That the inferior Clergie of the Realm of England had anciently their Votes in Parliament to all intents and purposes as the Commons had Page 700 10. Objections answered and that the calling of the Clergie to Parliaments and Convocations were after different manners and by several Writs Page 703 11. The great Disfranchisement and Slavery obtruded on the English Clergy by the depriving of the Bishops of their Votes in Parliament Page 705 12. A brief discussion of the question whether any two of the three Estates conspiring or agreeing together can conclude any thing unto the prejudice of the third Page 706 CHAP. VI. That the three Estates of every Kingdom whereof Calvin speaks have no Authority either to regulate the power or controll the Actions of the Sovereign Prince 1. The Bishops and Clergy of England not the King make the third Estate and of the dangerous consequences which may follow on the contrary Tenet Page 708 2. The different influence of the three Estates upon conditional Princes and an absolute Monarch Page 710 3. The Sanhedrim of no Authority over the Persons or the actions of the Kings of Judah Page 711 4. The three Estates in France of how small Authority over the actions of that King Page 712 5. The King of Spain not over-ruled or regulated by the three Estates Page 713 6. Of what Authority they have been antiently in the Parliaments of Scotland Page 714 7. The King of England always accounted heretofore for an absolute Monarch Page 715 8. No part of Sovereignty invested Legally in the English Parliaments Page 716 9. The three Estates assembled in the Parliament of England subordinate unto the King not co-ordinate with him Page 719 10. The Legislative power of Parliaments is properly and legally in the King alone Page 720 11. In what particulars the power of the English Parliament doth consist especially Page 723 12. The Kings of England ordinarily over-rule their Parliaments by themselves their Council and their Judges Page 724 13. Objections answered touching the power and practice of some former Parliaments and the testimonies given unto them Page 726 14. No such Authority given by God in Holy Scripture to any such Popular Magistrates as Calvin dreams of and pretends Page 727 15. The Application and Conclusion of the whole Discourse Page 728 De jure Paritatis Episcoporum The Right of Peerage vindicated to the Bishops of England Page 739. FINIS