quad for the lemma: england_n
snippets containing the quad
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)
The obligation resulting from the Oath of Supremacy to assist and defend the pre-eminence or prerogative of the dispensative power belonging to the King, his heirs and successors. In the asserting of that power various historical passages occurring in the usurpation after the year 1641. are occasionally mentioned; and an account is given at large of the progress of the power of dispensing as to acts of Parliament about religion since the reformation; and of divers judgments of Parliaments declaring their approbation of the exercise of such power, and particularly in what concerns the punishment of disability, or incapacity.
Pett, Peter, Sir, 1630-1699.
Wing P1884; ESTC R218916
Roman Catholick Physicians and Lawyers had incurr'd by his Acts of Parliament I have told you But what if I should now tell you how afterwards he did take care as it were unÃ¢ liturÃ¢ to delete the Execution of ââ¦ll the Penal Laws disabling ones and others against the Roman Catholicks and that as to what he did therein the most zealous Protestants among his Bishops and the Lords Temporal and others of his Privy Council did concur with him in so doing A. I think you would tell me of that which was very strange B. As in the Happy future State of England it was with an intent to detect the Degeneracy and Vanity of the Politick and Protestant-would-be's of the Age who pretended to Advance Religion by Excluding the next Heir in p. 219. shewn that one of the general and publick Articles sent by King James the First to his Embassador in Spain in Order to the Match with the Infanta was that the Children of this Marriage shall no way be compell'd or constrain'd in point of Conscience or Religion wherefore there is no doubt that their title shall be prejudiced in case it should please God that they turn'd Catholicks and that it was afterward sent as an additional Article offer'd from England that the King of Great Britain and Prince of Wales should bind themselves by Oath for the Observance of the Articles and that the Privy Council should sign the same under their Hands and that accordingly the Articles were sign'd by Archbishop Abbot John Bishop of Lincoln Keeper of the Great Seal Lionel Earl of Middlesex Lord high Treasurer of England Henry Viscount Mandevile Lord President of the Council Edward Earl of Worcester Lord Privy Seal Lewis Duke of Richmond and Lennox Lord high Steward of the Houshold James Marquess of Hamilton James Earl of Carlisle Lancelot Bishop of Winchester Oliver Viscount Grandison Arthur Baron Chichester of Belfast Lord Treasurer of Ireland Sir Thomas Edmonds Knight Treasurer of the Houshold Sir John Suckling Comptroller of the Houshold Sir George Calvert and Sir Edward Conway Principal Secretaries of State Sir Richard Weston Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir Julius Caesar Mr. of the Rolls and for the truth of which Facts reference is there made to Mr. Prynne's Introduction to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Trial p. 43 so you may there read it in p. 44. that some private Articles were agreed on and probably were Sworn to by the same Persons that the other general ones were and of which private ones the first was in short That none of the Penal Laws against Roman Catholicks should at any time hereafter be put in Execution But you may thus see it at large viz. That particular Laws made against Roman Catholicks under which other Subjects of our Realms are not comprehended and to whose Observation all generally are not obliged as likewise general Laws under which all are equally Comprised if so be they are such as are repugnant to the Romish Religion shall not at any time hereafter by any means or chance whatsoever directly or indirectly be commanded to be put in Execution against the said Roman-Catholicks And we will cause that our Councel shall take the same Oath as far as it pertains to them and belongs to the Execution which by the hands of them and their Ministers is to be exercised The 2d was That no other Laws shall hereafter be made anew against the said Roman Catholicks but that there shall be a perpetual Toleration of the Roman Catholick Religion within Private Houses throughout all our Realms and Dominions which we will have to be understood as well of our Kingdom of Scotland and Ireland as in England c. And the 4th was That we will interpose our Authority and will do as much as in us shall lie that the Parliament shall approve confirm and ratifie all and singular Articles in favour of the Roman-Catholicks capitulated between the most renowned Kings by reason of this Marriage and that the said Parliament shall revoke and abrogate the particular Laws made against the said Roman-Catholicks c. And the Conclusion there is viz. That we will interpose our Authority and will do as much as in us shall lie that the Parliament shall approve confirm and ratifie all and singular Articles in favour of the Roman-Catholicks capitulated between the most renowned Kings by reason of this Marriage and that the said Parliament shall revoke and abrogate the particular Laws made against the said Roman-Catholicks to whose observance also the rest of our Subjects and Vassals are not obliged as likewise the general Laws under which all are equally comprehended to wit ââ¦s to the Roman-Catholicks if they be such as is aforesaid which are repugnant to the Roman-Catholick Religion and that hereafter we will not consent that the said Parliament should ever at any time Enact or Write any other new Laws against Roman-Catholicks We accounting all and singular the preceding Articles ratified and accepted out of certain Knowledge as far as they concern us our Heirs or Successors approve ratifie applaud and promise bonââ¦ fide and in the word of a King by these Presents inviolably firmly well and faithfully to keep observe and fulfill the same and to cause them to be kept observed and fulfilled without any Exception or Contradiction and do confirm the same by Oath upon the holy Evangelists notwithstanding any Opinions Sentences or Laws whatsoever to the contrary In the presence of the most Illustrious Don John de Mendoza Marquess of Inojosa and Don Charles Coloma Extraordinary Ambassadors of the Catholick King of George Calvert Knight one of our Chief Secretaries of Edward Conway Knight another of our Chief Secretaries of Francis Cottington Baronet of the Privy Councel to our Son the Prince of Francis de Corondelet Apostolical or the Pope's Prothonotary and Arch-Deacon of Cambray Dated at our Palace at Westminster the 20 day of July 1623. in the English style Jacobus Rex A Compared and true Copy George Calvert Chief Secretary The Form of the Oath which the Lords of the Councel took to the former Articles is this which followeth found among the Lord Cottington's Papers Formula Juramenti Ã Consiliariis Praestandi Ego N. Iuro me debitÃ¨ plenÃ©que observaturum quantum ad me spectat omnes singulos Articulos qui in tractatu Matrimonii inter Serenissimum Carolum Walliae Principem Serenissimam Dominam Doââ¦nam Mariam Hispaniarum Iââ¦fantem continentur IURO ETIAM Quod neque per me nec per Ministrum aliquem inferiorem mihi inservientem legem ullam contra quemcunque Catholicum Romanum conscriptum executioni mandabo aut mandari faciam Poenamve ullam ab earum aliqua irrogatam exigam Sed in omnibus quae ad me pertinent Ordines Ã Majestate sua ex ea parte constitutos fideliter observabo Thus far Mr. Prynne who verifies the Facts above-mention'd not only from my Lord Cottington's Papers but from the Mercure Francois Tom. 9. A.
THE OBLIGATION Resulting from the OATH of SUPREMACY To Assist and Defend the Pre-eminence or Prerogative OF THE Dispensative Power BELONGING To the KING his Heirs and Successors In the asserting of that Power various Historical Passages occurring in the Usurpation after the Year 1641. are occasionally mentioned And an Account is given at large of the Progress of the Power of Dispensing as to Acts of Parliament about Religion since the Reformation and of divers Judgments of Parliaments declaring their Approbation of the Exercise of such Power and particularly in what concerns the Punishment of Disability or Incapacity Princes are Supreme over Persons not over Things This is the Supreme Power of Princes which we teach that they be Gods Ministers in their own Dominions bearing the Sword and freely to permit and publickly to Defend that which God commandeth in Faith and good Manners c. Princes may Command the Bodies of all their Subjects in time both of War and Peace c. Out of all Question where Princes may by God's Law Command all Men must obey them c. The Prince may discharge the Servant but no Man can discharge the Subject The Word of God teacheth you to obey Princes the words of men cannot loose you BISHOP BILSON of the SUPREMACY LONDON Printed for Thomas Dring at the Harrow at Chancery-Lane End in Fleetstreet William Crook at the Green Dragon without Temple-Bar and William Rogers at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleet-street 1687. To the Right Honorable JOHN Earl of MELFORT Viscount of Forth Lord Drummond of Rickartone c. His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Kingdom of Scotland and one of His Majesty's most Honorable Privy Council in both Kingdoms of England and Scotland c. MY LORD AS the Historian hath told us of Ireland that long ago while the Arts and Sciences were generally banish'd from the Christian World they were enthroned in Ireland and that Men were sent thither from other Parts of Christendom to be improved in Learning so I have elsewhere observ'd that in some late Conjunctures and particularly during the turbid Interval of the Exclusion men might well be sent to Scotland to learn Loyalty And I having taken occasion in the first Part of this Discourse to shew my self a just honourer of that Country and as I may say somewhat like a Benefactor to it by sending thither the notices of some pass'd great Transactions that might possibly there give more light and life to the Moral Offices of Natural Allegiance or Obedience did hold my self obliged in Common Justice to address this Part of my Work to your Lordship For as your Station here qualifies you beyond other Subjects to receive what Tribute is offer'd to your Country so your handing it thither will necessarily make it there the more acceptable And when I consider with what an incomparable Tenderness for the Monarchy and its Rights so many of the Statutes of Scotland since the Year 1660. have been adorn'd I am apt to think that any matter of Presidents or Records by me recover'd out of the Sea of time where they lay so long useless and neglected and now happening to be serviceable to those Moral Offices before-mention'd would by the so many in that Kingdom devoted to consummate Obedience and Loyalty be more valued then if I could have imported into that Realm another such Treasure as that which lay so long buried in the Ocean near the Bahama Islands and that whoever Contributed to your Loyal Country any Substantial Notions that might enrich it in the discharge of the Duties of the born and sworn Allegiance would be esteem'd there as some way sharing in the honour of Arauna in giving like a King to a King. Long may your great Master live happy in the Enjoyment of the faithful Services of so vigilant a Minister as your Lordship who by the universality of your Knowledge accompany'd with universal Charity for all Mankind have appear'd to be born as I may say for the time of his most glorious Reign the time chosen by Heaven for Mercies Triumph on Earth Nothing vulgar was to be expected from a Person of your Lordship's extraordinary intellectual and moral Endowments and in whom the Loyalty and other Virtues of your many noble Ancestors have as it were lived extraduce And the World would be unjust to you if it acknowledged not its great Expectation answer'd by your greater Performances and particularly by your having been so eminently Ministerial in the Easing both the Cares of your Prince and of all his Subjects too by the Figure you have made in promoting the Ease of his People's Consciences and in further ennobling and endearing the Name of DRUMMOND by your Lordship's Prosecuting that by the Bravery of Action which the HISTORIAN of that your Name did by Words when he transmitted to Posterity the most Christian and Statesman-like Speech of Liberty of Conscience I know extant and as spoke by a Roman-Catholick Councellor in Scotland to King Iames the Fifth I most humbly kiss your Lordship's Hands and am My Lord Your Lordships most Obedient Servant P. P. THE OBLIGATION Resulting from the Oath of Supremacy To Assist and Defend the Pre-eminence or Prerogative OF THE Dispensative Power Belonging to the KING his Heirs and Successors c. PART I A. IN this Kingdom of England so naturally of old addicted to Religion and vehemence in it as to give a Bishop of Rome cause to complain he had more trouble given him by Applications from England about it then from all the World beside and afterward to make Geneva wonder at the Sabbatarians here exceeding the Iewish strictness and to cause Barclay in his Euphoââ¦mio to say of the English Nec quicqÃºam in numinis cultu modicum possunt and that our several Sects thought unos se Coelestium rerum participes exortes coeteros omnes esse did you ever observe hear or read of the style of Tenderness of Conscience so much used as in the year 41. and sometime afterward B. I have not From the Date of King Charles the First 's Declaration to all His loving Subjects about that time wherein he speaks of his Care for Exemption of Tender Consciences till the Date of King Charles the Second's Declaration from Breda wherein the Liberty of Tender Consciences is Provided for the clause of easing Tender Consciences ran through the Messages Addresses and Answers that passed between King and Parliament almost as much as the Clause of proponentibus legatis did run through the Councel of Trent A. But were not their Consciences extremely erroneous who thought themselves bound then to advance Religion by War B. Aââ¦ and by a Civil War as you might have added against a Prince of the tenderest Conscience imaginable for that Character he had from an Arch-bishop in his Speech in the Parliament of 40 who said Our Sovereign is I will not say above other Princes but above all Christian men that ever I knew
thing of that nature but in such a fair and legal way as should satisfie all his loving Subjects The Duplys of the Divines of Aberdene p. 54. and p. 130 131. Whereupon Mr. Ley thus goes on viz. Wherein Wise men who judge of Consultations and Acts by their probable Effects and not unexpected Events cannot but highly commend His Majesty's Mildness and Clemency which we doubt not would condescend to your Requests for a removal of this great aggrievance if you would please to interpose your Mediations to so acceptable a purpose and upon our humble sute which in all submissive manner we tender to your Lordship and by you to the rest of your Reverend Order we hope you will do so since we have it upon his word His Royal Majesty's word which neither in Duty nor Discretion we may distrust that the Prelates were their greatest Friends i. e. of his Scottish Subjects their Councels were always Councels of Peace and their Solicitations vehement and earnest for granting those unexpected Favours which we were pleas'd to bestow upon our People The King 's large Declaration p. 420 Thus then the Royal Dispensation with the five Articles of Perth was at the Intercession of the Bishops tho' they knew the same Establish'd by Act of Parliament graciously afforded to his Scotish Subjects Those Articles of Perth related to various Religionary Matters viz The introducing of Private Baptism Communicating of the Sick Episcopal Confirmation Kneeling at the Communion and the observing such ancient Festivals as belong'd immediately to Christ and of which Doctor Heylin in his History of the Presbyterians having spoken saith That the King 's indulging the Scots in Dispensing with the Penal Laws about them was an Invitation to the Irish Papists to endeavour by armed force to Compass the King's Dispensation But how tenderly the Consciences of the Roman Catholics in Ireland were in the Reign of the Royal Martyr THEN Protected under the Wing of the Dispensative Power contrary to what the Dr. observ'd any one may see who will Consult my Lord Primate Bramhal's Replication to the Bishop of Chalcedon where he saith That the Earl of Strafford Lord Lieutenant of Ireland did commit much to my hands the Political Regiment of that Church for the space of Eight years In all that time let him name but one Roman Catholic that suffer'd either Death or Imprisonment or so much as a pecuniary Mulct of Twelve Pence for his Religion upon any Penal Statute if he can as I am sure he cannot c. And such was the acquiescence of the Populace and of the three Estates in the Penal Lawes there against the Roman Catholics being thus dead or asleep that in the Printed Articles of Impeachment against the then Lord Chancellor of Ireland and that Lord Primate thââ¦n Bishop of Derry and others of His Majesty's Publick Ministers of State exhibited by the Commons to the Lords in the year 1640. there is not a syllable of Complaint against those Lawes being so dispens'd with by Connivence Nor yet in the Printed Schedule of Grievances of that Kingdom voted in the House of Lords there to be transmitted to the Committee of the same House then attending in England to pursue Redresses for the same is there any representation of such Indulgence being any Gravamen nor yet of the great Figure the Irish Papists then made in the Government the Majority of the Parliament and of the Iudges and Lawyers then being such And pursuant to that Prince's Indulgence offer'd to the tender Consciences of his Subjects in the year 41. he was graciously pleas'd in the Treaty at Uxbridgââ¦ to order his Commissioners who were such renown'd Confessors of the Church of England to make the first Royal offer there that freedom be left to all Persons of what Opinion soever in Matters of Ceremony and that all the Penalties of LAWS and Customs be SUSPENDED And the truth is since the Christian Religion did in its first settlement so rationally provide for its Propagation in the World and its bespeaking the favour of Princes by its enjoyning Subjection and Obedience to their Lawes not only for Wrath but Conscience sake and since that Principle of humane Lawes binding the Conscience which was so often and so publickly avow'd by that Prince and Arch-bishop Laud and Bishop Sanderson and the Divines of the Church of England in General is the surest guard to Princes Thrones and their Tribunals and that therefore 't is the Interest of the Prince and People to be more watchful in preserving that Principle then all the Iewels of the Crown or Walls of the Kingdom that Prince did therefore necessarily take Care to preserve and to perpetuate in some of his tender-Conscienced Subjects a continued Tenderness for his Lawes by his lawful Dispensative Power as particularly in the Case of his Scottish Subjects in taking off the Obligation of Obedience and of Conforming themselves to the Establish'd Lawes for such Dispensation intrinsecally notes the taking off such Obligation from the Persons dispens'd with And it is indeed a Solecism for any one to ask Indulgence from a Prince who owns the Law of the Land binding him in Conscience if he doth not think such Prince perswaded that his Power of granting it is a part of that LAW He was not ignorant of his Father's Aversion against the Penal Lawes in general and on which Account my Lord Bacon celebrating him saith As for Penal Lawes which lie as snares upon the Subjects and which were as a Nemo scit to King Henry 7. it yields a Revenue which will scarce pay for the Parchment of the King's Records at Westminster And religionary Penal Lawes requiring the greatest tenderness as he found when he came to the Government that the two most famous Puritan Divines Mr. Hildersham and Mr. Dod Men of great Probity and Learning had often been in his Father's time Pursuant to the Act for Uniformity disabled from Preaching and been re-inabled to it by particular Indulgence and as likewise Fuller tells us in his Church History that Bishop Williams when he was Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England procured a Licence from King Iames under the Great Seal for Mr. Cotton the famous Independent to Preach notwithstanding his Non-Conformity so he in the same manner that his Royal Father did held the Reins of the Law loose in his hands as to those two other Non-Conformists beforemention'd The History of Mr. Hildersham's Life mentions that he was silenced in Iune A 1590 and restored again in Ianuary A. 1591. Again he was deprived and silenced April 24 A. 1605. for refusal of Subscription and Conformity and after some time again restored and was again Silenced in November A. 1611. by the King 's particular Command and on April 23. A. 1613. he was judicially admonished by the High Commission that saving the Catechizing of his own Family only he should not afterward Preach Catechize or use any of the Offices or Function of a Minister
publickly or privately ãâã he should be lawfully restored and releas'd of his said Suspension But shortly after the beginning of the Reign of the Royal Martyr he was again restored and was afterward again silenced and so continued till August 2. A. 1631. and then he was again restored And Mr. Dod's Life represents his Case as parallel with this before-mention'd He was in King Iames his time suspended and restored and again by the King 's particular Command disabled from Preaching and was by King Charles the First re-ennabled or restored Thus as fortis fortem amat one tender Conscienced man too loves another such and the Executive Power of the Law in re-ennabling after temporary Disability was tenderly administred by these our Princes to these Conscientious Men with respect to their real Capacity of Favour to be shew'd them A. You have here given me a taste en passant of part of the Dispensative Power as exercised in the three Realms during some Conjunctures in the Reign of King Charles the First and for which I thank you and particularly for what you told me of the Act of Parliament dispens'd with in Scotland of which I never heard before and am apt to suppose a thing of that Nature was never done before in that Realm B. I can assure you to those who know the Publick Transactions of that Kingdom the thing will not in the least seem new I can tell you that on the 26th of November A. 1593. King Iames the 6th of Scotland made an Act of State in favour of three Roman-Catholick Earls Huntly Arroll and Angus by which Act he allow'd them several Priviledges contrary to Acts of Parliament made against Roman-Catholicks And His Majesty in his Act of State expresly dispenseth with those Acts of Parliament and which Dispensation tho Queen Elizabeth importuned him to revoke and for that purpose sent the Lord Zouch as her Embassador to him he still adhered to the Act of State he had made and continued his Dispensation A. Have you this Matter of Fact out of any of the Records in England or Scotland B. I have it out of the Original Papers under the hand of Queen Elizabeth and her great Minister Burghly and the Original Instructions of the Lord Zouch when sent by her to expostulate with the King about it that were lately in my Custody and by me sent to our gracious Sovereign and I shall some other time give you a more particular account of that Dispensation A. But I beseech you did not the Protestant Divines of the Church of Scotland then cry out of the unlawfulness or inexpedience of that Dispensation B. I have read it in a learned Book of Dr. Maxwell a Scotch-man Printed A. 1644. and who was then Bishop of Killally in Ireland and had formerly been Bishop of Rosse that Mr. Robert Bruce one of the Ministers of Edenburgh and who had a great sway in the Church of Scotland was pleas'd with the King 's extending his Favour to Angus and Arroll but out of a factious Complyance with the Earl of Arguile was displeas'd at its being shewn to Huntly But that Loyal Bishop there acquiesceth in the reason of State that inclined the King to Pardon the three Earls and his thereby hindering the growth of Faction in Scotland and providing for his more easie and secure access to the Throne of England on the Death of Queen Elizabeth And so you may easily guess what sort of men in Scotland look'd with an evil eye on that Act of the Royal goodness and who did not The Bishop there had applauded the great depth of the King's Wisdom and his transcendent Goodness in the Pardoning the three Earls and mention'd that there was nothing of Religion in the Case of Bruce's Aversion against the Pardon of Huntly for that Angus and Arroll were as bigot Papists if not more then Huntly I can likewise direct you to my Lord Primate Bramhal's celebrated Book call'd A Fair warning to take heed of the Scotish Discipline where in Chap. 6. thus entituled viz. That it robs the Magistrate of his Dispensative Power he saith by way of instance When the Popish Earls of Angus Huntly and Arroll were excommunicated by the Church and forfeited for Treasonable Practices against the King it is admirable to read with what Wisdom Charity and Sweetness his Majesty did seek from time to time to reclaim them from their Errors c. and on the other side to see with what bitterness and radicated Malice they were prosecuted by the Presbyteries and their Commissioners c. sometimes threatning that they were resolv'd to pursue them to the uttermost tho it should be with the loss of all their Lives in one day c. sometimes pressing to have their Estates confiscated c. He refers there in his Margin to Ass. Edinb 1594. But any one who shall consult D'Ossat's Letters and there in the Second Book carefully read over the 37th Letter that was writ to Villeroy in the year 1596 and three years after the Date of King Iames his Act of State and observe what that great Sagacious Cardinal there refers to concerning the Circumstances of those three Earls and how all the Prudence that could be shewn by man was but little enough for the Conduct of that King in that Conjuncture in order to his removing what Impediments either from Rome or Spain or his Native Country might obstruct his Succession to the Crown of England will not wonder at his having dispens'd and continued his Dispensation as aforesaid A. I have not yet ask'd you whether the Divines of the Church of England did not lift up their voices like a Trumpet against the Dispensative Power thus exercised by their Prince as you have mention'd B. They discharged their Duties in Preaching occasionally against all growing Errors but they wanted none to mind them of the Saying Impium esse qui Regi dixerit Inique agis The Pious and Learned Author of Certain Considerations tending to Peace c. mentions how the Bishop of St. Davids in King Iames's Reign A. 1604. did in a set Speech in Convocation shew that Ministers were not in the late Archbishop's time disabled from their Ministry on the Account of Non-conformity to the Ceremonies by Law enjoyn'd and concluded his Speech with the motion of Petitioning the King That if the removal of some of the Ceremonies enjoyn'd could not be obtain'd nor yet a Coleration for them of more stay'd and temperate Carriage yet at least there might be procured a mitigation of the Penalty c. And as the Suspension or Disabling of Hildersham and Dod from their Ministerial Functions so the Restoring of them to the same without all such things done by them as the strictness of the Lawes required was in both those Princes Reigns executed by the Bishops Nor do I remember to have read of any Divine of the Church of England to have in the least look'd with an evil eye on the goodness of the
metaphysical universale however they may ââ¦ansie it to be a real being but what I know cannot exist a part from the particular Rights and Privileges belonging to the Crown being assisted and defended and from a serious endeavour to understand the truth about their belonging to it And my solicitousness to find out which in the shortest way possible and particularly as to the Privilege of discharging incapacity or disability incurr'd by Act of Parliament as I told you at our last meeting engaged me to divert you out of the course of your method and whereupon you told me you would refer my thoughts to the Assertory part of the Oath B. Well what ever damps I may see on English Mens loyalty or degeneracy from its nature by the arts of faction a while perverting them not to assist and defend this or that Privilege of the Crown I shall never despair of their coming again to themselves and that tho as in a vessel of Water and Oyl while any one is shaking it the Water may over-top the Oyl so likewise in their minds while shaken and stirred by Demagogues the Oyl of the Lord 's anointed is not there uppermost yet that through its own nature and through the English good nature and their natural addiction to Religion it will in time naturally appear to be so And now to go on without further prefacing on either side what if I should tell you that it imports you to consider that in in the Assertory part of the Oath of Supremacy you have declared and asserted that authority as due to the King that was challenged and used by king Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th that is that the King under God hath the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of Persons born within these his Realms of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so ever so as no other foreign Power shall or ought to have any superiority over them A. I would then tell you that you have mentioned some things to be in this Oath that I remember not to be there B. I grant that I mention'd to you somethings that are not express'd in the Oath and in the form of it as it is administred and was enacted 1 Eliz. c. 1. and by which Act the refusers of such Oath are punish'd with DISABILITY to bear Office. But in the same year in which that Act pass'd Queen Elizabeth in an ADMONITION annext to her Injunctions thought fit to exercise her Royal authority of the Interpretation or Declaration of the sense of that Oath enjoyn'd by Act of Parliament and in that Admonition you will find those words that you remember not in the Oath you took as likewise her ACQUITTAL of all Persons from all manner of Penalties and consequently of disability who took the Oath according to the sense of it publish'd in her Interpretation And if you consult the Act you will see that the disabilities inflicted in the Act on the refusers of the Oath are various And thus then you see that as soon as you have done taking the Oath you are immediately call'd on by your Conscience to defend the Privilege and preeminence of your Prince viz. of interpreting his Laws and of discharging the disabilities thereby inflicted A. I now remember that I have read that Admonition of the Queens but I account Proclamations Injunctions and Admonitions of Princes to be but temporary Laws and that therefore this Interpretation of the Queen's and her discharging of Disabilities expired with her Reign B. To obviate such thought I shall tell you that in the Act of the 5th of Queen Elizabeth c. 1. and by which the Refusal of the Oath of Supremacy is punish'd more severely then by the before-mention'd disability viz. by Proemunire for the first Refusal and by making it Treason for some Persons to refuse it a second time but Penalties that none ever doubted but the Crown might by its Pardon discharge there is a Proviso that the Oath viz. of Supremacy expressed in the said Act made in the said first year shall be takeu and expounded in such form as is set forth in an Admonition annexd to the Queens Majesties Injunctions Publish'd in the first year of her Reign that is to say to confess and acknowledge in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors none other Authority then was challenged and lately used by the Noble King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth as in the said Admonition may more plainly appear And this too lets you see that the Parliament by thus referring to the Queen's Admonition did approve of her Power therein exercised and of her having acquitted her Subjects from the Punishment of disability A. I must then I see fairly grant you that by that Parliament's having thus perpetuated the interpretation of the Oath of Supremacy contain'd in Queen Elizabeth ' s Admonition I am bound in Conscience to take it in that sense and am perjured if I do not so keep that Oath and must likewise grant that you have shewn how auspicious that Oath by the Queens interpreting the same and the Parliament about five years after approving that Interpretation was to the Assertion of such her Power and that if any taker of the Oath should gain-say such Power you have prepared such a Confutation in the case as was used to the old Philosopher who disputed against Motion and whom his Adversary confuted by removing him from his place But as you are a fair arguer I am to take leave to tell you That that Parliament tho they approved the Queen's Admonition in general did not particularly shew their Approbation of the Queen's Power of dispensing with the Penalties that she exercised in that Admonition B. They did sufficiently shew their Approbation of the whole and therefore you need not question their approving of its parts But because you seem to lay some stress on that Parliament's not expresly approving in terminis the Queen 's Power of discharging the Penalties and one of which by the Act of 1 o Elizabethoe was disability I shall tell you that whereas Queen Elizabeth had thought it expedient for the Supporting of the Consecration of the Bishops of the Church of England to dispense with whatever might cause Disability according to her Supream Authority by her Letters Patents the very same Parliament at their next Session did 8 o Elizabethoe c. 1. in terminis terminantibus declare their Approbations of the Queens dispensing with disability by those Letters Patents for it having been in that Statute mention'd that for the avoiding of all Ambiguities and Questions that might be objected against the lawful Confirmations investings and Consecrations of the said Archbishops and Bishops her Highness in her Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England c. hath used and put in her said Letters Patents divers other general words and Sentences whereby her Highness by her Supreme Power and Authority hath DISPENS'D with all Causes or doubts of any Imperfection or DISABILITY
doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any foreign Iurisdiction Where we attribute to her Majesty the Chief Government by which Title we understand the minds of some slanderous Folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the ministring either of Gods Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify but that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all Godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself that is that they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil doers The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in the Realm of England The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian Men with death for hââ¦inous and grievous Offences It is lawful for Christian Men at the Commandment of the Magistrate to wear Weapons and serve in the Wars Now after the Oath of Supremacy had been enjoyn'd in the first year of her Reign and the Admonition annexed to her Injunctions was then likewise publish'd viz. A. D. 1559. and after the Parliament had by proviso ãâã the interpretation of the Oath which Parliament began the 12th of Ianuary in the 5th year of her reign and from which day all things dââ¦ne in that Session are to bear date the Articles of Religion agreed on by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the 5th year of her reign and A. D. 1562. were by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces subscribed the 29th of Ianuary in that year and by the Clergy of the lower House of Convocation on the 5th of February following and to all which the Queen gave her Royal Assent And in the Articles there was by the Queens Royal Prerogative an additional Interpretation probably at the instance of the Clergy given to the interpretation in the Admonition and in the Parliaments Proviso and the which additional interpretation had in it no respect to nor mention of what being in several places of the former one might amuse the Clergy with some Fears and Iealousies namely the Duty Allegiance and Bond that were acknowledged due to Harry the 8th and Edward the 6th and the Authority that was challenged and lately used by those Princes however yet that latter Clause is qualify'd in the Admonition But for the 37th Article before-mentioned allowing the measures of the Royal Supremacy from the Prerogatives given by God in Scripture to holy Princes whereby our Clergy might seem to have brought the Prerogative into its own proper Element and theirs too the knowledge of the Scriptures being their profession our Clergy no doubt were always thankful to the Crowns Dispensative power and so exercised out of Parliament and whereby they were secured from penal disabilities either by suspension or deprivation for not taking the Oath in the sense of the Admonition Thus as things in their proper place are at rest the Queens Dispensative power and the Consciences of the Clergy by this interpretation of the Oath were so much at rest that about eight or nine years afterward the same 39 Articles that had been by the Archbishops and Bishops and Clergy of both Provinces agreed on in the year 1562. were by the said Archbishops Bishops and Clergy again agreed upon and again ratify'd by the Queen in the year 1571. the 13th year of her reign and when care was taken by the Government that that interpretation being incorporated in the body of the 39 Articles should be deem'd good in Parliament by the Statute of 13 o Eliz. c. 12. as the other interpretation in the Admonition had been by the proviso in the Act of the 5th of that Queen and probably for the same reason and as her dispensing with disability expresly in the 8th year of her reign was In the Act of the 13th of Eliz. reference was made to those Articles as agreed on by the Archbishops and Clergy and set forth by the Queens authority Anno 1562. and the Act is entituled Reformation of Disorders in the Ministers of the Church and in which it was enacted That 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 which shews if you mind it that tho the Parliament did well allow and approve of the said Articles yet the said Book oweth neither Confââ¦rmation nor Authority to the Act of Parliament And that Act concerning only Clergy-men tho the interpretation in the 37th Article is left to oblige the Clergy yet that in the Admonition might concern you to stick to if nothing had since happen'd whereby the dispensative power inherent in the Crown may have given your Conscience the benefit of the interpretation thus afforded to the Clergy But therefore I shall here tell you that the Canons of King Iames the ââ¦st Anno 1603 being confirmed for him and his Heirs and Successors are binding now however it hath been objected as the unhappiness of Queen Elizabeths Canonââ¦ viz. A. 1571. A. 1584. A. 1597. wanting those formal words of Heirs and Successors to expire with her And as those words are in King Iames's Canons so are the words of enjoyning their being observ'd fuââ¦fill'd and kept not only by the Clergy but by all other Persons within this Realm as far as lawfully being Members of the Church it may concern them and tho in the first Canon there entituled The King's Supremacy over the Church of England in Causes Ecclesiastical to be maintain'd 't is order'd That all Ecclesiastical Persons shall keep and observe and as much as in them lyeth all and singular Laws and Statutes made for the restoring to the Crown of this Kingdom its ancient Iurisdiction over the state Ecclââ¦siastical yet in the next Canon entitled Impugners of the King's Supremacy censurââ¦d the measures of the King 's ecclesiastical Authority being taken from the Godly Kings among the Iews according to the 37th of the 39 Articles was an extending to the Layety the ben fit of the Interpretation obtain'd by the Clergy the which was in effect a judgment of the Convocations that the pursuance of that Interpretation of the King 's Ecclesiastical Power and the avoiding of the punishment of Disability by the use of that Power was not agaââ¦st the Law of the Land but the 5th Canon viz. Impugners of the Artiââ¦les of Religion establish'd in the Church of England censured and in which the establishment of the 39 Articles is solely referr'd to them as agreed on in Convocation in the year 1562. without any notice of the Parliament of the 13th of Eliz. having done any thing about them doth more clearly secure to you the benefit of the Interpretation the Clergy had A. You have mention'd so many things to me relating to the interpretation
Disability of a whole third estate as to bearing secular Offices did not stand in the way of Prerogative I have read it in Fuller's Church-History that in the year 1350. the Lords and Commons in Parliament did find themselves aggrieved that the Clergy-men engrossed all secular Offices and thereupon presented the ensuing Petition to the King according to this effect insisting only in the substance thereof viz. And because that in this present Parliament it was declared to our Lord the King by all the Earls Barons and Commons of England that the Government of the Kingdââ¦m hath been performed a long time by the Men of Holy Church which are not justifyable in all Cases whereby great mischiefs and damages have happen'd in times past and more may happen in time to come in disheriting of the Crown and great prejudice of the Kingdom c. that it will please our said Lord the King that the Lay-men of the said Kingdom which are sufficient and able of Estates may be chosen for these and that no other Person be hereafter made Chancellor Treasurer Clark of the Privy-Seal Barons of the Exchequer Chamberlain of the Exchequer Comptroller and all other great Officers and Governors of the said Kingdom and that these things be now in such manner establish'd in form aforesaid that by no way it may be defeated or any thing done to the contrary in any time to come saving to our Lord the King the Election and removing of such Officers but that always they be Lay-men such as is abovesaid To this Petition the King return'd that he would ordain upon this point as it should best seem to him by the advice of his good Council In fine you see that tho the Clergy-men were thus