impartial Reader to judge It is one of the ill Effects that commonly attend Controversial Writings that it is very Difficult to manage them either with that Temper and Ingenuity that becomes Scholars or with that Charity that good Christians ought to do And 't is this has given me almost as great a Disgust at them as ever Gregory Nazianzen profess'd himself to have against Synods and that almost upon the same Account Pride and Ill-Nature commonly Domineer in them and sometimes it so falls out that an Opponent must be freely dealt with or a good Cause must suffer in the Opinion of a great Many who conclude that a Man therefore only spares his Adversary because he could not get an Advantage against him How far I have fallen under this Censure in the Management of the present Controversy I must submit it to others to judge but do hope I have not so far Transgress'd as this late Author charges me to have done As for the Logick Law and History of the Person I had to deal with What it really is I pretend not to say What it appear'd to me to be my Book has shewn And if I have any where fail'd in my Allegations against him this Gentleman no doubt will take care to call me to Account for it But Honesty is a tender Point and I do not remember I have any where touch'd upon it 'T is true I have shewn what was indeed too plain to be deny'd that whosoever he were that Wrote that Pamphlet he could be no Friend to our present Establishment And this I am sure was to my Purpose to observe how little so ever it was to his to have it so plainly Discover'd However if in any thing I have been Mistaken in my Judgment either of his Affections of his Abilities I am heartily sorry for it and shall be ready to submit to whatsoever Pennance his most Vpright Logical Historical Second shall from his better skill in Antiquity and the Laws of our Church think fit to lay upon me for it THE CONTENTS INtroduction § 1. The Design of the following Treatise viz. To shew what has been the Sense of the Church of England ever since the Reformation as to the Authority of Christian Princes over the Ecclesiastical Synods of their Realms § 2. The Substance of the 25 H. 8. c. 19. to this Purpose § 3. Of its Repeal by Q. Mary and Revival by Q. Elizabeth § 4. That the Authority therein given to the King is no Other than what did always of Right belong to the Crown § 5. That it was to secure this Authority the Oath of Supremacy was framed § 6. The present Obligation of which is enquired into Ibid. That the same Authority is agreed to in the 37th Article § 7. The Sense of which is shewn Ib. And the Nature of that Subscription we make to those Articles consider'd § 8. And is yet more fully enjoin'd by the Canons of 1603. § 9. Which ipso facto Excommunicate all those who Impugn this Supremacy § 10. II. This Supremacy Confirm'd from the Sense of our Divines and Others ever since the Reformation § 11. Of the Times of K. H. 8. K. Edw. 6. and Q. Mary 1. § 12. Queen ELIZABETH The Judgment of her Self and her Parliament § 13. Of all her first Bishops § 14. Of Archbishop Whitgift § 15. Archbishop Bancroft § 16. Bishop Jewel § 17. Bishop Bilson § 18. Dr. 〈◊〉 § 19. Mr. Hooker § 20. King JAMES 1. Of the Revival of the Dispute concerning the Supremacy under this King § 21. The Judgment of the King himself Ib. And Of B. Andrews § 22. Against the Papists Of the Controversy which the King had on this Subject with the Scotch Ministers § 23. Vpon this Occasion B. Andrews Judgment more fully declared § 24. Which was also the Sense of the Rest of the Clergy at that time § 25. Particularly of our Learned Mason § 26. King CHARLES I. The Judgment of these Times more particularly shewn § 27. From the Sense of the King himself § 28. Of his Bishops especially A. B. Laud § 29. And of the whole Convocation 1640 § 30. The Judgment of A. B. Bramhall § 31. Bishop Davenant § 32. and Dr. Heylin § 33. King CHARLES II. The State of the Parliament and Convocation in 1660 consider'd How far this shews the same Sense to have continued of the Supremacy that had all along obtain'd before § 34. This farther shewn from the Opinion of Bishop Taylor § 35. B. S. Parker § 36. Dr. Falkner § 37. Dr. Barrow § 38. III. Vpon this Foundation an Appeal is here made to all the True Members of our Church against those who now Oppose this Authority § 39. And it is farther shewn That I have not been mistaken in Point of Law § 39. That the Cause was not unbecoming a Clergy Man to appear in § 40. That the time was not improper for the handling of it § 41. That it is not probable the Church will Suffer by what I have done but may by their Fury who oppose me in this Point § 42. The Close § 43. AN APPEAL To all the True Members OF THE Church of England c. AFTER an Age and half 's Dispute with those of the Church of Rome in Defence of the King's Supremacy and of the Laws that have been made for the Establishment of it it cannot but seem a little strange to Us to be Now call'd upon to begin the Controversy again with some among our selves who would be thought the Best if not the only True Members of the Church of England But that which seems yet more amazing is that tho' our Laws subsist in the same State which they have been in ever since the Reformation Our Articles and Canons made in pursuance of those Laws continue firm and unrepealed Tho' the Books that have been written by our Bishops and Clergy in defence of Both are not only not Censured but are Read Approved and Received on all hands as delivering the undoubted Sense of our Church and Convocations as well as of our Princes and Parliaments with relation to this matter it should now nevertheless be thought a Crime to assert the Supremacy of the Christian Magistrate and a Scandal for a Clergy-Man more especially to appear in behalf of that Cause by defending whereof so much Honour has been gain'd by the greatest Writers of that Order heretofore Had we now to do with the same Adversaries that those Learned Men were engaged with Were the Persons who in Our days set up against the Rights of the Prince either open Romanists on the one hand or avowed Members of the Kirk and Consistory on the Other we should the less wonder either at the Principles which they Advance or the Zeal with which they appear in Favour of them But to be Summon'd by Members of our Own Communion to defend the Doctrine of our Own Canons and Articles to be rail'd at as little better than
Apostates from the Church Catholick for pretending to Vindicate the Constitution of the Church of England as by Law Establish'd this is a Novelty which we know not what to make of a Prodigy becoming a Time and Place of Wonders To lay open the Design of this New-Attempt and which may otherwise in time improve into Another Schism and produce us a Third Church of England composed only of such Persons as will disclaim all Authority of the Civil-Magistrate from having any thing to do in Matters of Religion it may possibly be of some Use to represent to such as have not yet lay'd aside all Regard to Her the plain Sense of our Reformed Church in the Points under Debate and shew them from whom I received the Doctrine which I have asserted in Vindication of the Kings Supremacy And having done this I cannot but hope that some of them will consider what is the true Design of those who are so forward to pull down what our Wise and Pious Ancestors took so much care to Build And whether the Methods we are now running so blindly into must not end either in downright Popery or Fanaticism at the last When the Foundation was first laid for a regular Reformation of Religion among Us One of the first things which those who carry'd on that great Work saw it needful to do was to restore the Crown to that Authority which the Prevalence of the Papal Power had so notoriously deprived it of In order hereunto the Convocation having agreed to submit themselves to the King an Act of Parliament was framed upon that Submission in which among Others these four things were Establish'd 1st That the Convocation should from thenceforth be Assembled only by the Kings Writ 2dly That it should make no Canons or Constitutions but by Virtue of the Kings Licence first given them so to do 3dly That having agreed on any Canons or Constitutions they should yet neither Publish nor Execute them without the Kings Confirmation of them Nor 4thly By his Authority Execute any but with these Limitations That they be neither against the Kings Prerogative nor against any Common or Statute Law nor finally in any other respect contrary to the Customs of the Realm This Act being thus pass'd continued in force all the time of King Henry the VIII and his Son King Edward the VI. Queen Mary succeeding and rescinding whatsoever her Father or Brother had done in prejudice of the Romish Church abolish'd among Others this Act also But her Reign ending within a few Years after One of the first things done by her Sister Queen Elizabeth was to Revive such Laws made by those two Kings as were thought Necessary for the Reformation of the Church and so this Statute was brought again in Force The Title of the Act by which this Statute was revived and the other Authorities therein express'd were again Annex'd to the Crown is this An Act restoring to the Crown the antient Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical and Spiritual c. And that taken from the Words of the Act its self wherein the design of this Statute is declared to be for the Restoring of the Rights Jurisdictions and Preheminencies appertaining to the Imperial Crown of this Realm And in another place To the Imperial Crown of this Realm of Right belonging and appertaining And from which it is I suppose obvious to conclude that in the Opinion of that Parliament such an Authority over our Convocations as is before shewn to have been Establis'd by the 25 H. VIII c. 19. and was hereby again vested in the Crown was not either by that or this Statute first given to our Kings but only Restored to them as a part of their Royal Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical and which did always of right belong and appertain to them The Rights of the Crown being thus once more by Law Restored to it to secure them the better against any New Encroachments for the time to come it seem'd good to this Parliament after the Example of those of King Henry the VIII that an Oath should be framed in Recognition of the Supremacy here declared to belong to our Royal Sovereigns and be enjoyn'd to be taken by all Officers and Ministers Ecclesiastical and Temporal as in the Act may more fully be seen In this Oath we solemnly testify and declare in our Conscience that the King's Highness is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm and of all other his Highness Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal And we do promise that to our Power we will assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the Kings and Queens of this Kingdom or United and Annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Now this Oath being design'd as both the Subject of it shews and the Words of the Act it self expressly declare to be for the better Observation and Maintenance of that Statute it must follow that the Supremacy which we there Testify in our Conscience to belong to our Princes must be Interpreted by what that Act has United and Annex'd to the Crown and so comprehend All that Authority of the King over his Convocation which in the 25th H. VIII was expressly Restored to our Princes and which being again by the Repeal of that Act recovered from them was by this present Statute once more Re-setled in the Crown as it had been before How those who now appear so Zealous in Opposition to this Authority and have probably more than Once solemnly taken this Oath will acquit themselves either before God or the World of a manifest Violation of it by their present Behaviour is past my skill to Comprehend Unless because some part of that Oath is now laid aside they should chance to think that therefore the whole Obligation of it is ceased even to those who have taken it in its former Integrity But indeed should we allow that there were some weight in this yet since the Laws made in Defence of the Kings Supremacy are still the same they ever were our Recognition of it must be look'd upon to be the same too And in renouncing all Forreign Jurisdiction in Causes Ecclesiastical which We still do we must be accounted as Effectually to acknowledge the Kings Supremacy according to the legal Notion of it as when we the most fully declared our Assent to it tho' it should be granted that we do not now so expressly Oblige our selves to the Defence of it as we were heretofore wont to do And this I say with particular Respect to the present State of this Oath for otherwise as to what concerns Us of the Clergy it cannot be doubted but that Our Obligation as to the Substance of it is still the same it ever was The Declaratory part of this Oath being what we in Terms subscribe to
been made to the Emperours in the Greatest Causes So the Donatists did Appeal to Constantine Athanasius and the AEgyptian Bishops to the same Priscillianus to Maximus Idacius to Gratian. III. And here I shall put an End to these Collections It would have been a very easie Matter to have added many more Authors than I have here Alledged and to have much Enlarged upon those which I have Produced But what is already done may Suffice till those who now Advance the Contrary Opinion shall be able at least to make some Tolerable Proof that they do not forsake the Received Doctrine of our Church in Opposing an Authority by Law confessedly Establish'd And I think no less Confirm'd by our Articles and Canons too It remains now that I take the Liberty freely to APPEAL to every Sincere Member of Our Communion to Judge in this Case between Me and Those who so warmly Oppose me and so highly Charge me upon this Occasion And to consider what I have done with Relation to the Rights and Liberties of the Church of England for which I ought to Humble my selfe before God and to make a Satisfaction to Her Is it that I have Asserted the King's Authority over the Ecclesiastical Synods of this Church and Realm But so the Laws speak as well as I And to these both the Articles and Canons of the Church require me to Conform Nay they do more they Require me not only to Conform my self but to do what in me lies to move All Others to the Observance of them And if for this I must be Censured these Laws and Canons must run the same Fate with Me. And I shall always account it an Honour to Suffer for Asserting the Laws of the Realm and for maintaining the Doctrine and Constitutions of the Church of England Or is it that I have gone beyond the Bounds of the Law and given a Greater and more General Authority to the Christian Prince than either the Submission of the Clergy or the Act of King Henry the VIIIth founded thereupon have declared to belong to Him This for ought I know I may have done and yet not be Guilty of any Fault neither in the doing of it I have before said and do here again Repeat it with the same Assurance I at first delivered it That I do not found the Right of our Kings to this Jurisdiction either upon that or upon any Other Act that has been made in pursuance of it I fix it upon the Right of Sovereignty in General and upon that Antient Jurisdiction in Causes Ecclesiastical which the very Statute of Queen Elizabeth speaks of and allows to have been always of Right belonging to the Imperial Crown of this Realm To this our Laws themselves agree They speak still of Restoring to the Crown its Antient Rights and our Lawyers have accordingly constantly Affirm'd that these Acts and particularly that which we are here especially concern'd in the 1 Eliz. c. 1. was not Introductory of a New Law but Declaratory of the Old And therefore before I can justly be condemn'd upon this account my Proofs must be Answer'd and it must be shewn that what I ascribe to the King is not a parcel of that Jurisdiction which was once enjoy'd by the Kings and Princes of this Realm and did Always of Right belong to them And that I believe it will be no easie Matter to do 1st I affirm that it is the Right of every Christian King to Call his Clergy together in Convocation and that without his Call they cannot Regularly Assemble to any such purpose of themselves But so our Law expresly declares that the Convocation shall Evermore be Called by the King 's Writ And it is Notorious to Every One who has any Knowledge in these Matters how dangerous it would be for the Clergy to presume to come together without it 2dly I Assert that the very Persons who meet in Our Convocations are Determined and Empower'd by the King 's Writ and that none have a Right to Assemble but such as he Calls by it Let the Writs of Summons be Examined and let it there be seen whether the Case be not so as I pretend it to be Let this Author tell me if he can why such and such Dignitaries are required personally to come to the Convocation Others to send such a certain Number of Delegates to Represent them but that the Writ of Summons so Directs so Authorizes them to do And tho' I do not suppose it to be now in the King's Power to alter this Form yet the Sovereign Legislative Authority may without Controversy do it and appoint any Other Method of Framing the Lower House of Convocation that should appear to them to be more Proper and Expedient 3dly I declare that by Our Law the Convocation can deliberate on No Canons or Constitutions without first Obtaining the King's Licence so to do It is the express Resolution of the Act of Submission And our Convocations do accordingly notoriously Govern their Proceedings by it 4thly I add That heretofore the Christian Emperors prescribed to their Synods the very Method they should observe in handling the Matters which lay before them This indeed I affirm and I think I have proved it too And if to this End Our King should think fit either Himself to Come or to Appoint any Other to Preside in his Stead and Direct the Debates of our Synods as he should Command them to do I do not see that he would therein do any more than what some of the best Christian Princes have done before him 5thly I pretend that to the Civil Magistrate it belongs to Confirm or Annihilate such of the Acts of their Synods as they think fit Our Laws agree to it Our Kings claim it Our Convocations submit to and approve of it And let those who scruple this consider how low they sink the Authority of a Prince if they leave him not the Power which every ordinary Person claims of Judging for Himself but would oblige him at a venture to Confirm whatsoever the Lords of the Consistory shall please to Define 6thly That the Prince may Alter their Constitutions I no otherwise affirm than as I say it is in his Power to make Laws in Matters Ecclesiastical And that for the doing of this He may Advise with his Clergy and follow their Counsel so far as he approves of it Thus Charles the Emperor made up his Capitular And thus any Other Sovereign Prince may take the Canons of the Church and form them in such Wise into an Ecclesiastical Law as he thinks will be most for the Honour of God and the Good of his People 7thly In Cases of Appeals I shew what Power the Antient Emperors both Claim'd and Exercised And I modestly Vindicate to our Own Sovereign the same Authority which the Fathers of the Church without all Scruple allow'd to their Princes And except it be in such Cases where the King
AN APPEAL To all the True Members OF THE Church of England In behalf of the King 's Ecclesiastical Supremacy AS By Law Establish'd by our Convocations Approved and by our most Eminent Bishops and Clergy-Men Stated and Defended against both the Popish and Fanatical Opposers of it By WILLIAM WAKE D. D. and Chaplain in Ordinary to his Majesty LONDON Printed for Richard Sare at Grays-Inn-gate in Holborn MDCXCVIII TO The most Reverend Father in GOD THOMAS By Divine Providence Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Primate of all England and Metropolitan My LORD THIS Appeal which Addresses it self to Others for their Judgment Sues with all Humility to Your Grace for Your Protection and that such as I conceive is neither Unfit for me to Ask nor for Your Grace to Afford You will here see what that true Agreement is between the Priesthood and the Empire which our Laws have Establish'd our Convocations approv'd of and our Greatest Clergy-men hitherto defended without the Censure of Any but the profess'd Enemies of our Church and Constitution But now a New Sort of Disciplinarians are risen up from within our selves who seem to comply with the Government of the Church much upon the same account that Others do with that of the State not out of Conscience to their Duty or any Love they have for it but because it is the Establish'd Church and they cannot keep their Preferments without it They hate our Constitution and Revile all such as stand up in Good Earnest for it but for all that they resolve to hold fast to it and go on still to Subscribe and Rail IN Opposition either to the Errors or Designs of these Men the Present Appeal bespeaks Your Grace's Protection not so much for its self as for the Articles and Canons of our Church and for those Excellent Worthies who in their several Successions have appear'd in Defence of the King's Supremacy over the State Ecclesiastical as by Law declared and Establish'd That you will vouchsafe still to Continue to Own a Cause in which not only the Church of England but the Church Catholick ever since the Civil Powers have become Christian is concern'd together with her The Authority we plead for in behalf of our Kings being no Other than what the most famous Bishops and Councils of the Church have given to their Empeperors and who by consequence must All be involved in the same Censure with our Parliaments and Convocations And they who now Revile the One would as freely Condemn the Other but that they are sensible that many who are well content with the Reproach of King Henry VIII and his Clergy would not endure to hear the like Charges made against Constantine and Theodosius and those Bishops and Councils which all Christians in all Ages have been wont to pay so Great a Regard to THIS My LORD is the Cause which I here bring before Your Grace In the Defence whereof I have Once already been engaged and shall with God's Assistance again appear when those who now talk with such Confidence against my former Allegations shall give me Occasion to shew how just they were and how little in Reality there is to be excepted against them In the mean time I was willing for the better Discovery of these New-Reformers by this short preliminany Treatise to draw aside the Curtain and let the World see whose Off-spring they are and from whom they derive both their Principles and their Animosities against Us. I cannot but hope that by this I shall awaken all the Sincere Members of our Church to beware of them and not give Countenance to such Attempts as under a shew of bettering Our Constitution do in Reality tend to the Utter Subversion of it To Your Grace I submit both the Design and the Performance and with all possible Duty and Respect Remain My LORD Your Grace's Most Humble and Obedient Servant WILLIAM WAKE THE PREFACE WHEN I entred upon the Defence of the Kings Supremacy in Answer to the Letter to a Convocation Man I was not so little acquainted with the Tempers and Designs of a certain Party among us as not to know that my Undertaking would be likely to displease Those who think any the least Authority that is given to his present Maiesty to be an Encroachment either upon their Civil or Ecclesiastical Rights Nor was I unsensible what might possibly be reply'd to the Arguments which I brought in Proof of it The knowledge I had of what the Papists were wont to return to the like Allegations of our Writers against them having in some measure inform'd me what upon this Occasion might probably be said in Answer to Me. But to find my self charged as if in defending the Authority of the Prince I had betray'd the Rights of the Church and appear'd in such a Cause as neither became my Function nor had any of our Clergy ever before concern'd themselves withall this I confess was a perfect Surprise to me and abundantly Convinces me that some Mens Resentments are as much beyond Modesty as they are without Reason It cannot be unknown to any who is not an utter stranger to the History of our Reformation upon what Principles it was undertaken and at last happily setled among us How the Prince's Authority was both the Means by which it was carry'd on and the Ground on which we justify'd our selves in the doing of it And indeed at the first none but the Papists that is to say those who had engrossed this Power into their own Hands and could neither endure to part with it nor to submit to the Use which they saw we intended to make of it complain'd of what we did in restoring the Prince to his antient and undoubted Right or pretended to enter any Process against us upon the Account of it It is true some time after another Party how opposite soever to the Papists in other Matters yet in this too nearly Approaching to Them began to set up themselves and to claim the same Power in behalf of their Kirk that the Romanists had pretended to in Right of their Pope and Church But against Both these our Bishops and Clergy continued firm and costant and were by all impartial Judges allow'd to be as much Superiour to them Both in their Arguments as they were in the Justice of the Cause which they maintained Thus stood this Controversy till our Own times Insomuch that I hardly know any Author professing himself a Member of the Church of England who has either cast any Aspersion upon our first Reformers for restoring the Crown to its Antient Jurisdiction or pretended that the Divine Rights of the Church were in any wise violated or infringed by it But it seems the Case is very much altered now And it is of a suddain become an Encroachment not to be endured by our New-Church-Patriots for the King to pretend to lay any Restraint upon their Assemblies and an Enterprise unbecoming a Minister of the Gospel tho'
by more than one Obligation engaged so to do to appear in defence of the Royal Supremacy It is indeed very strange to consider after what manner a certain Writer has of late deliver'd his Sense as to both these and such as will hardly be Credited except I repeat it in his own Words 'T was Natural says He to expect the Insurrection of Infidels and Hereticks against the Proposals and Power of a Convocation But who would have dreamed that any Clergy Man of the Church should lift up his Heel against Her When the great Luminaries of the Church shall sign the Theta upon Her Rights Liberties and Authorities Divine and Humane and this Voluntarily and without any Bribe offer'd or Menace denounced the Concession is taken for Sincere and for that Cause Just. King Henry the VIII of famous Memory notwithstanding all his Claims at Common-law and his Interest in his Parliament thro' Power and the Rewards by Abby and Church-lands could not have made himself so absolute in Eccesiasticals had he not procured before the Submission of the Clergy Nor could he have compassed That but by the Terrour of a Praemunire under which they had fallen and upon which he was resolved to follow his Blow and so to bend or break them And yet this Act of a Popish Vnreform'd and will nigh Outlaw'd Convocation Extorted for fear of Ruin and thro' Ignorance and Non-suspicion of the Acts consequent upon it prejudges more against our Liberties than all Secular Constitutions could possibly have done without it And must we Now consecrate all these Procedures the Results of which we feel in the total Ruin of Ecclesiastical Discipline and Christian Piety by Our voluntary Pleas and Acclamations And to gratifie the Civil Powers to an Arbitrary Vtmost violate the most Important Truths of Principles and Histories treat the Synods of the Church with Spite and Contumely and Recommend the greatest Slavery of her to the Appetite of Civil Powers This is a severe Charge and a Man had need have a very Good Cause or a very Impregnable Face who treats Kings and Parliaments Convocations and Clergymen after such a Rate For when all is done it cannot be denied but that what that Convocation did and that King and Parliament Enacted was after two intermediate Reigns again Repeated in the First of Queen Elizabeth is at this day Approv'd of by the Canons of King James the First and allow'd of in the Nine and thirty Articles of Religion to which this Author himself has more than once Subscribed And methinks the consideration of that if nothing else might have induced him to have been more temperate in his Charge against me who have defended no Other Authority in the Prince than what both He and I and every Other Clergy-man of the Church of England have solemnly declared our Assent to and are obliged to our Power to maintain But our Author does not intend to leave this Point so easily his Zeal carries him yet farther in Opposition to the King's Supremacy To say nothing of his fresh Invectives against that King and that Convocation which first began to assert the Royal Authority against the Invasions which had so notoriously been made upon it Pag. 110. He affirms the Authority of the Church in the Convention Freedom and Acts of Synods to be of Divine Right This he again insists upon pag. 115. and in the next Page calls them Divine Privileges given by God and granted to Priests for the Conduct and Conservation of the Church And in the same Page speaking of the Prince's breaking in upon these supposed Rights he says Not only the Romish Church but all Other Sectaries and the Scotch Kirk illustriously scorn to admit any Servitude notwithstanding not only National Protection but Promotion being sensible that a Liberty of Religion Government and Church-Discipline is more valuable than all worldly Wealth or Interest and without which they cannot apprehend any Protection to Religion or the Societies that Profess it From which last Words I suppose I shall not injure his Sense if I infer that then according to his Notion the Church of England is really at present in a Persecuted State and has been so ever since the Reformation And cannot be look'd upon so much as a Protected Church till this Act of the Submission of the Clergy shall be Repealed A strange Reflection certainly and very Unbecoming those manifold Blessings our Church has enjoy'd under its Reformed Princes and does at this time Enjoy under her Glorious Preserver Whose greatest Crime I am afraid it is in some Mens Opinion that he has delivered us from that Slavery into which we were running tho' such as our new Disciplinarians seem to think the only way to a Canonical Liberty I must transcribe a great part of his Book should I here Repeat all that this Author has said in the most spiteful manner that he knew how to Express it against all that plead for or speak well of this part of the King's Supremacy See how he Harangues his Brethren of the Clergy upon this Occasion P. 119. We we only says he are the Poor Tame Dis-spirited Drowsie Body that are in love with our Own Fetters And this is the only Scandalous Part of our Passive Obedience to be not only Silent but Content with an Oc n of our P rs which are not forfeited nor forfeitable to any Worldly Powers whatsoever It might perhaps be here no Improper Question to ask what this Gentleman means by so Warm an Application to the Whole Body of the Clergy Whether he would have them take Heart upon the Matter and having so Redoubted a Champion to lead them on like true Missionaries see what they can do to raise up a Croisade against these wicked Magistrates who so unwarrantably Usurp upon the Churches neither forfeited nor forfeitable Powers At least thus far 't is plain he has gone towards it that as he has before shewn the Church to be out of the Protection of the Prince so he will by and by declare the Prince to be out of the Bosom of the Church and by Both authentically qualified for a Holy War to be made upon Him For thus he goes on p. 122. Can a Claim of an Oppressive Supremacy be deem'd a Glorious Jewel in a Christian Crown which if exercised must of necessity forfeit the King's Salvation And is it not a dangerous complaisance in Priests to fan such an Ambition as must End in the Ruin of the Church the Priesthood and the Soul of the Prince which the Liberties and Powers Hierarchical were design'd to Convert Direct and Preserve But still it may be doubted how far he accounts the King's Supremacy to be Oppressive That the whole Act of the Submission of the Clergy to King Henry the VIIIth falls under this Censure we have already seen In short all that he thinks fit to be allow'd to the Christian Prince is this That the Church be
obliged to acquaint him with her Desires Reasons Places Seasons and Necessaries of Convening To petition his Leave and Favour his Inspection Assistance and Succour to the Piety of her Designs To secure him of her Fidelity to all his Proper Honours and Interests That they will keep within Ecclesiastical Concerns and do all things Openly to the Glory of God and the Good of Souls in the Vnity Order and Purity of the Church preserved by the Rules of Catholick and Canonical Communion and this under the Guard and Watch of Temporal Powers Well but what if the Prince shall not approve of the Reasons that are offered to Him for their Assembling nor think either the Time Convenient or the Place Proper and shall thereupon refuse Them the Leave they Petition for What if He shall think their Designs not to be so Pious as they pretend but rather to have a great Allay of Humane Passion and Prejudice in them What if He shall differ with them in His Notion of what is his Proper Honour and Interest May he in such a Case forbid them to Meet May he Assign them some Other Time or Place Or Command them not to meddle with such Causes or Persons as he shall judge his Honour or Interest to be Concern'd in What if what they call Ecclesiastical Concerns should chance to have an Influence upon Civil Affairs And that instead of Preserving they shall Act so as to divide the Vnity of the Church May he by the Temporal Power which is still left to Him put a stop to their Proceedings or Annul their Acts or Receive and Appeal from their Sentences On the contrary He flatly tells us That all the Power of Calling Moderating at and Dissolving Synods of Confirming their Acts or Suspending their Sentences is Negative of those Liberties and Authorities of the Church which she once claim'd as of Divine Right and of which He before affirm'd that they were neither forfeited nor forfeitable And here then we have a plain Account of the Judgment of this Author in the Case before Us. I was willing the rather to put it together in this Place that so by comparing it with what is said in the following Collection the Reader may be the better enabled to judge who has acted more sincerely upon the Church of England's Principles I in Asserting the King's Supremacy as by Law Establish'd or He in his violent and impetuous Opposing of it Or if this shall not be thought enough to convince those who have been dissatisfied with my Undertaking how close I have kept to our Churches Doctrine let me then for a final Proof desire this Author in his next Attempt to satisfie the World in these 3 Points 1st Let him shew wherein I have ascribed any more or Greater Power to the Prince than our Laws have given Him and our Convocations and Clergy have either expresly or by a plain Consequence approved of and declared to be his Right 2dly Let him tell us Wherein the Opinion here advanced by Him differs from that of our Missionary Papists and Jesuits who have written against the Supremacy and against whom our Divines have so Learnedly maintain'd the King's Prerogative 3dly Let him inform Us Whether any Writers of the Church of England since the passing of this Convocation Act have ever made any such Exceptions as he has here done against it and charged it as Destructive of the Divine Rights and Powers of the Church And who those Writers are and in what Books they have done it This being done if it shall appear that in any thing I have run into an undue Extreme and by that means derogated from the Churches Authority I shall then be ready to comply with the Advice he has given Me and not only humble my self before God for the Wrongs I have done the Church but publickly make a Reparation of them But if upon the Enquiry it shall appear that I have affirm'd nothing but what the Law Establishes our Convocations have Agreed to and our most Eminent Clergy Men have constantly defended I must then be excused if I look upon my self to have done no more than in Duty I was bound to do and by Opposing whereof I take this Gentleman not only to have acted contrary to the Laws of the Land and the Articles and Canons of the Church but to have actually incurr'd an Excommunication for such his Offence Having said thus much with respect to the Subject of my late Treatise I shall add but little more concerning the Design which is here laid for the Answering of it As this Author has order'd the matter it is become absolutely Necessary for Him to Go on with it For having charged me with Violating the most important Truths of Principles and Histories having told the World that I have treated the Synods of the Church with Spite and Contumely and Recommended the Greatest Slavery of Her to the Appetite of the Civil Powers and every part of which Charge does I conceive Accuse Me of no small Crime the Weight of this Accusation must fall very Heavy either upon Him or Me and I look upon my self as concern'd to tell him that I do expect he should make it Good or Honestly own that he cannot do it Only for his own sake as well as mine and which is yet more for the Satisfaction of Those who shall think fit to Interest themselves in this Controversy some few things there are which I would here Recommend to him and they are such as in my Apprehension ought not to be thought at all Unreasonable by Him And 1st Since this Debate however managed must be likely to Run out into a considerable Length I would desire him not to Increase the necessary Bulk of it by alledging Passages out of the Antient Fathers to prove that which Neither of Us make any doubt of Thus p. 160. He produces the Authority of Athanasius to prove that the Nicene Fathers were not constrain'd by any force that was laid upon them to condemn Arius but did it freely and of their Own Accord Now this I allow to be very true but cannot help thinking it to be in our present Case very little to the Purpose And p. 162. He cites a much larger Proof out of Gregory Nazianzen the Appositeness of which to our Debate I cannot yet imagine unless it be that He thinks all Greek to be equally Pertinent to most Readers in which he is certainly in the Right 2dly I would intreat him not to insist upon any Testimonies of Antiquity which have been already alledged again and again by Harding and Stapleton by Saunders and Dorman and the Rest of our Popish Fugitives in their Treatises against the Oath of Supremacy and as often answer'd by Our Writers unless he shall think fit at the same time to take Notice of their Replys to them and shew that they do not destroy the force of His Allegations To what purpose for example does he bring
of these Articles is Great and Unavoidable To affirm them in any part to be Superstitious or Erroneous whether he who does it be found out or no is by the Canons of our Church Excommunication ipso facto And if the Offender be discover'd and fortunes to be a Clergy-Man he is by the Statute Law of the Realm to be convented before his Bishop for it and if he does not presently Revoke his Error is in the First Instance to be Deprived of All his Ecclesiastical Promotions and in the Second loses them without more ado This is the Law both of the Church and of the State in the present Case And with what Conscience any Clergy-Man beneficed in such a Church can excuse himself for flying with so much Virulence in the Face both of these Laws and of these Canons I shall leave it to any One who has any Conscience himself though never so much prejudiced against the King's Supremacy to consider To the Articles of Religion set forth by Queen Elizabeth let us add the next authentick Evidence of our Church's Sense in this particular the Canons and Constitutions made by the Convocation in the first Year of King James I. Of these the very first is design'd to assert the Supreme Authority of the King's Majesty over the Church of England In order whereunto it ordains That All Persons Ecclesiastical shall faithfully keep and observe and as much as in them lieth shall cause to be observed and kept of Others All and Singular Laws and Statutes made for Restoring to the Crown of this Kingdom the antient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical Which last words being the very Title of the Act of the First of Queen Elizabeth we must conclude the meaning of the Canon to be this That they shall faithfully Observe the Laws referred to in that Statute and do what in them lies to cause All Others to Observe the same Seeing then that Act of the 25 H. 8. c. 19. is One of those which is there expresly Revived it will follow that it expresly comes within the Words of this Canon and that the Powers therein annexed to the Crown over the Convocation are hereby approv'd and allow'd of as part of that Antient Jurisdiction which always of Right belong'd to our Kings over the Estate Ecclesiastical But the next Canon is more express and will come more fully up to our present purpose It s design is to Restrain the Impugners of the King's Supremacy over the Church of England And thus it runs in our English Version of it Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the King's Majesty hath not the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical that the Godly Kings had amongst the Jews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church Or impeach any part of the Regal Supremacy in the said Causes Restored to the Crown and by the Laws of this Realm therein Established let him be Excommunicated ipso facto and not Restored but only by the Archbishop after his Repentance and Publick Revocation of those his Wicked Errors It is plain by comparing of these two Canons together that the design of the Convocation was in the First to Declare and Assert the King's Supremacy and to oblige the Clergy to a strict and diligent Observance of it By the Second to Restrain all sorts of Persons from denying or otherwise endeavouring to hurt or extenuate the Legal Notion of it And two things there are which will deserve to be taken notice of in this Second Canon First What that Supremacy is which our Convocation was so careful to Assert and Defend And Secondly What it is to Impugn this Supremacy within the meaning of this Canon First As for the former of these the Supremacy here meant two Rules there are delivered by this Canon whereby we may come to a Right Understanding of it First It is that Authority over the Estate Ecclesiastical which by the Statutes of King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth was Restored and by the Act of Queen Elizabeth Confirm'd as of Right belonging to the Imperial Crown of this Realm And Secondly It is such a Power in matters of Religion as the Godly Kings had amongst the Jews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church And from which by the way it may be Observed what good Reason I had to enquire into the Authority of the Christian Emperors in these Cases and to argue from thence in behalf of that Power which our Church ascribes to our Own Princes on the like Occasions How much soever some Men may slight such Proofs as being sensible that they are not to be Answer'd Secondly To impugn this Supremacy within the meaning of this Canon is either first to deny Altogether this Authority and affirm that the King either has not or ought not to have any such Power Or it is secondly By any other means to Impeach or as the Latin Canon has it more plainly to Extenuate or Hurt this Supremacy Which I conceive is then done when Men Write and Argue against it when they Censure the Laws for Establishing of it and Damn the Prince so long as he shall continue to Exercise it according to those Laws But these are not the only Canons which justify what I have written in Defence of the King's Supremacy and Condemn those who appear against it The Twelfth is yet more express to my particular Case and will shew what the Sense of our Church is concerning those who Abet the now so much magnified Opinion on the other side Whosoever shall affirm that it is lawful Cuivis Ministrorum aut Laicorum Ordini vel Eorum alterutris simul Congregatis for any Sort Rank or Degree of Ministers or Laics or for either of them Gathered together to make Canons Decrees or Constitutions concerning Ecclesiastical things without the King's Authority and shall submit themselves to be Ruled and Govern'd by them let them be Excommunicated ipso facto and not be Restored until they Repent and publickly Revoke those their Wicked and Anabaptistical Errors For if in the Opinion of our Church it be necessary for the Clergy to have Authority from the King to meet on such Occasions If to say that any Persons of what Order soever they be may without his Licence make any Canons Decrees or Constitutions Ecclesiastical nay or but even submit themselves to be govern'd by such as shall be so made be a Wicked Anabaptistical Errour and for which a Man deserves to be cast out of the Communion of our Church then it must without all Question be allow'd that according to the Doctrine Establish'd among Us the Clergy can neither Meet nor Act but with the King's Permission Nor ought we to account those Constitutions of any Authority which any Persons shall make without his leave or as such submit to them how much soever they may please to cry up their Divine Powers and Vnalienable Rights to justify their Irregular and Anabaptistical Proceedings
The Sentence of both these last Canons is That they who Offend against them are to be ipso facto Excommunicated And concerning which I shall only observe thus much first that in such a Case there is no need of any Admonition as where the Judge is to give Sentence but every One is to take notice of the Law at his Peril and see that he be not overtaken by it And Secondly That there is no need of any Sentence to be pronounced Which the Canon it self has pass'd and which is by that Means already Promulged upon every One as soon as he comes within the Obligation of it In other Cases a Man may do things worthy of Censure and yet behave himself so warily in Them as to escape the Punishment of the Church for want of a legal Evidence to convict him But Excommunicatio Canonis Ligat etiam Occulta delicta Where the Canon gives Sentence there is no escaping but the Conscience of every Man becomes Obliged by it as soon as ever he is Sensible that he has done that which was forbidden under the Pain of such an Excommunication To these Canons relating to the Kings Supremacy I might add those which speak of the Authority of our Synods and there again Expressly provide for the Princes Rights Thus Can. 139. the Church affirms the Assembling of Synods to be by the Kings Authority In the 140th she acknowledges the Necessity of his Licence both for the Making and Ratifying of her Decrees in Causes Ecclesiastical And Can. 141. Censures such as shall upon this Account undervalue the Acts of our Synods in these Words Whosoever shall affirm that their Proceedings in making of Canons and Constitutions in Causes Ecclesiastical by the Kings Authority as aforesaid ought to be Despised and Contemned the same being Ratified and Enjoyn'd by the said regal Power Supremacy and Authority let them be Excommunicated and not Restored untill they Repent and publickly Revoke that their wicked Errour But in a Case so plain I shall not need to insist on any more Proofs and therefore shall content my self to observe that the Title given by publick Authority to these Canons is this Constitutions or Canons Ecclesiastical by the Bishop of London President of the Synod for the Province of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops and Clergy of the same Province by the Kings Authority Treated and Concluded upon In their Synod c. Afterwards by the same Royal Majesty Approved Ratified and Confirm'd and by the Authority of the same under the Great Seal of England Promulged to be diligently observed thro' both Provinces as well of Canterbury as York This is the true Title given to these Canons And was fit to be thus particularly taken notice of because in our English Book of Canons which is of most common Use this Inscription as well as many of the Canons themselves is very imperfectly rendred and may be apt to lead Men into some mistakes concerning these as well as other Matters It were easie to make several Observations to our present Purpose upon the several Parts of this truly Accurate and Legal Title But I shall chuse rather to express the process of this Convocation in the Words of an Author who may perhaps be less liable to Exception and whose account of it is this That the Clergy being met in their Convocation according to the Tenour and Effect of his Majesties Writ his Majesty was pleased by Vertue of his Prerogative Royal and Supreme 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 Alimighty God the good and quiet of the Church and the better Government thereof from time to time c. 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 King Henry VIII and by his Majesties Prerogative and Supreme Authority in Ecclesiastical Causes to Ratifie and Confirm the same His Majesty was graciously pleased to Confirm and Ratifie them by his Letters Patents straightly commanding and requiring all his loving Subjects diligently to observe execute and keep the same c. And here I shall put an end to my first kind of Proofs in Defence of that Authority which I have ascribed to our Kings over the Convocations of the Clergy of the Church and Realm of England I proceed in the next place more fully to confirm this Authority to be agreeable to the Doctrine of our Church from the Testimony 's of our most learned Divines who have written upon this Subject from the beginning of the Reformation to our Own times II. It has been the Endeavour of some of late who would be thought still to retain a good Affection to the Reform'd Religion nevertheless to cast the worst Aspersions they are able upon those who were the chief Instruments of God's Providence in the Reformation of it What their design in this their Procedure is or how upon the Principles now set on Foot to justifie what was heretofore done among us as to this Matter or indeed without a Miracle ever to have had any thing at all done in it I cannot tell It being certain that such a Convocation as they now seem alone to allow of as Canonical would never have departed from the Way that they were in or have endured any Proposals tending to such a Change as was otherwise happily made among Us. But however since such is their Prejudice both against the Opinions and Actions of our first Reformers I will so far comply with their unreasonable Humours as to pass lightly over those Times of Church Servitude as well as Church Reformation and come to such Authorities as I suppose they will not have the Confidence to except against To pass by then the Opinion of the Convocation which about 3 Years after the Submission made to King Henry the VIII set out the first Doctrinal Treatise that led the Way to the Discovery and Renuntiation of the Popish Errors What shall we say to the Publick Declaration made by King Henry himself against the Council of Mantua and in which He cannot be supposed to have Spoken any thing but what he thought carry'd its Own Evidence along with it In times past says He All Councils were appointed by the Authority Consent and Commandment of the Emperours Kings and Princes Why now taketh the Bishop of Rome this upon him Wherefore we think it best that every Prince call a Council Provincial and every Prince to Redress his Own Realm And this he Spake not of his own Head but with the Advice of his Bishops and
Clergy of the former of which all but two subscribed to the Instrument which was presented to him upon this Occasion And when notwithstanding this he was again Sollicited by the Emperour and some other Princes the Year after either himself to come or to send his Ambassadors to it He again renew'd his former Protestation and made again the same Exceptions against it Nor in this did he do any more than some even of his Popish Bishops had before approved and that on such Occasions wherein it cannot be pretended that any Force was laid upon them I shall in proof of this alledge only the Letter of Tonstal and Stokesly to Cardinal Poole in which the Authority of the Christian Prince over the Convocations of his Clergy is fully asserted and proved from the like Instances of the Antient Kings and Emperours that I have made use of to the same purpose And tho' Queen Mary in her Zeal to the Papal Interest repealed whatever Acts had been pass'd by her Father and Brother against it and this of the Submission of the Clergy among the Rest yet she did not therefore give up the Power over her Synods but still continued it according to the Substance of that Statute As is evident from her Calling and Dissolving not only the first Convocation of her Reign but of that which was held two Years after and to Assemble which Cardinal Pool himself had her Licence as he also had to make such Canons as should be thought needful in it QVEEN ELIZABETH But I will not tarry any longer in these Times but pass forward to that of the next Reign in which the Reformation was both more regularly carry'd on and at last brought to the State in which it continues at this Day Queen Mary having as I observed abolish'd whatever Laws had been made in the two preceding Reigns in Derogation to the Papal Vsurpations the first Thing done by Queen Elizabeth was to set the Crown again upon its antient Foundation and to Restore it to that Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical which of right belong'd to it This was the Work of the very first Act that pass'd in her Reign and by Vertue whereof the Statute made 25th Henry the VIII c. 19. to Ratifie the Submission of the Clergy was brought again in Force I have before observed what care was taken by this Parliament to secure these Rights of the Crown by an Oath then Establish'd under the Title of the Oath of Supremacy I must now add that the more to oblige the Clergy to a due Observance of them the Queen her self this same Year set out her Injunctions and in the very first Place took care of her Supremacy in them For thus the Injunctions begin That all Deans Archdeacons Parsons Vicars and all other Ecclesiastical Persons shall faithfully keep and observe and as far as in Them may lie shall cause to be observed and kept of Other all and singular Laws and Statutes made for the Restoring of the Crown the Antient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical And that this Power over the Convocation was one Branch of it the Revival of the Law of King Henry the VIII relating to it which was made the same Year and in that very Act whose Title the Injunction transcribes is a Proof not to be gain-said It is evident then that this Queen as well as her Parliament looked upon this Power to be not only no Vsurpation upon the Churches Priviledges but to be a part of that Jurisdiction which had always of Right belong'd to the Crown and was Vsurp'd from it in the Times of Popery And so in the next place did her Bishops too For however being not yet assembled in Convocation they could not so Authoritatively settle the Articles of Religion as shortly after they did yet being met together they agreed upon certain Articles to be sent to their Clergy and by them publish'd to the People in the mean time till a Convocation should be call'd to consider farther of this Matter In the 7th of these their Articles they treat of the Power of the Civil Magistrate And therein require their Clergy to acknowledge the Queens Majesties Prerogative and Superiority of Government of all Estates as well Ecclesiastical as Temperal to be Agreeable to God's Word and of Right to appertain to her Highness in such sort as in the late Act of Parliament is express'd and Sithence by her Majesties Injunctions Declared and Expounded It would be needless to observe that the Act of Parliament here referr'd to is that of the same Year made for the Restoring the Crown to its Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical and by which the so often mention'd Act of King Henry the VIII was expresly Revived As for the Queen's Injunctions I have already shewn that where they Treat of this Matter the most Favourably they nevertheless assert the same Power to the Queen that King Henry the VIII and King Edward the VI. challenged and used And what that was in the particular under Debate is not doubted of or deny'd by those who the most oppose Us in the present Vindication of it So that here then we have in our first Entry upon this Reign the Queen the Parliament and the Bishops All approving of and confirming this Authority And so they continued all her Time to do There being hardly any Controversy either more largely Debated or more accurately Handled than this of the Royal Supremacy against which our Adversaries on both sides appear'd with all their Skill and were as effectually Answer'd by the Greatest and most Learned of our Church Among these as there was no one higher in Dignity so neither was there any more Eminent both for his Abilities and good Affections to the Church of England than Arch-Bishop Whitgift And whose Controversy with the Puritans is one of the most learned and judicious Works of those Days In this the xx th Tract is wholly spent in the defence of the Princes Right in Ecclesiastical Matters Wherein having charged his Adversaries with holding the Popish Opinions and even using their very Arguments He tells them Pag. 698 699. That the continual Practice of the Christian Churches in the time of Christian Magistrates before the Vsurpation of the Bishop of Rome was to give Christian Princes Supreme Authority in making Ecclesiastical Orders and Laws yea and which is more in Deciding of Matters of Religion even in the Chief and Principle Points This he proves by several Instances and then concludes in these very Words whereby it appeareth that the chief Authority in Councils was given to the Emperour and that He was esteem'd as the chief Judge In his next Division he shews that the learned and antient Fathers have committed the Matters of Controversy to Emperours And then adds The Practice therefore of the Authority of Princes in Ecclesiastical Matters even in Determining and
them p. 154 155. Nay and even the Persons that should come to them p. 207. And have Voices in them p. 208. 3. That they directed what should be handled in them p. 135. Managed their Debates p. 134. And forbad them to call in Question the Faith that had by former Synods been Establish'd p. 155 208. 4. That they judged of their Proceedings p. 135. And that in Matters of Doctrine p. 261. By the Common Rule of All Christians the Word of God p. 264 266 276. 5. That they Confirm'd the Councils Decrees See p. 242. And this not at all adventures but chose such of their Canons as they approv'd and passed them into Laws p. 139. 6. That as to their Sentences they Received Appeals from Councils p. 135 151 152. Suspended p. 154. And if they thought them too severe Released the Rigour of their Censures and Determinations p. 136. These are some of the Points which this Learned Man not only allows of but defends from the Examples of the Jewish Princes and Christian Emperors And I will be bold to say either his Treatise is altogether False and Scandalous contrary to the Rights of the Church and the Sense of the Antient Fathers or my Discourse after all that has been said against it must be Confessed to be True and Orthodox and agreeable to the Doctrine of the Church of England But because Bishops may be look'd upon as Suspicious Men let us see what those of an Inferior Order have written in this Case And for these I will take but One of a Kind Dean Nowell for the Dignitaries and the Venerable Mr. Hooker for the Rest of the Lower House As for Mr. Hooker the latter of these He was much too Young to have had any part in that Convocation in which our Articles of Religion were settled But Dr. Nowell was not only one of the most considerable Members of the Lower House at that time by his Own Dignity but chosen by the Clergy for their Prolocutor and so had the Chief Management of All that was done in it It was but Three Years after this that Mr. Dorman one of our Fugitive English Papists attacking the Queen's Supremacy as by Law Establish'd and then newly approv'd of by the Convocation this Learned Dean thought himself concern'd to undertake the Defence of it And indeed he has so well discharged his Part in it that I believe it will be very hard for our Modern Transcribers of their Arguments and Authorities to alledge any thing upon this Occasion that will not be found to have been fully answer'd before-hand in that Book His Treatise is expresly Referr'd to and approved of by Archbishop Whitgift in his Discourse upon this Subject and so may be look'd upon to deliver the Sense of that Great Archbishop as well as the Dean's Nor can it be reasonably doubted by Any but that it does deliver the Sense of the Whole Convocation and Clergy of the Church of England in this particular Let us see then how he States the Point between Us and his Adversary as to this matter and by what kind of Proofs he undertakes to Vindicate the One against the Other The matter in debate he thus accurately determines For. 23. We expresly divide the Offices of Christian and Godly Princes from the Offices of Bishops and Other Ministers of the Church under Them as distinct and divers Offices And we do teach that the Offices of Preaching of God's Word of the Pronouncing of Publick Prayer in the Church of Christ the Power of the Keys or of Binding and Loosing and of Ministring the Holy Sacraments are by the Word of God appointed to be the Peculiar Offices of Bishops and of other Ecclesiastical Ministers And we Teach and Preach even in Presence of Princes that neither Princes nor Any Other Persons saving only Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Ministers under them may intermeddle with the said Offices and Ministries Ecclesiastical so peculiarly and only appertaining to the said Bishops and Other Ministers of the Church P. 24. When we do speak of Causes Ecclesiastical wherein Christian Princes are the Chief Governors we mean not that Princes should Execute these Peculiar Offices of Priests as is also in the Queen's Majesty's Injunctions notified to all the Subjects of the Realm that will be disposed to understand the Truth without Cavillation But now touching the Authority of Princes to Oversee that the Bishops and Clergy do these their Offices diligently and truly according to the Rule of God's Word to Command them to do their Duty to Admonish them being therein slack to Reprehend them Offending Depose or Deprive them being Incorrigible This we say is the Office of a Chief Governor over the the said Persons Ecclesiastical which doth appertain to Christian Princes every One in their own Dominions Further besides the Office of Preaching and Ministring the Sacraments there are many other Orders Matters and Causes Ecclesiastical touching Ceremonies and the outward Regiment of the Church which may be term'd the Ecclesiastical Policy Page 25. There is also the Authority to Receive Appellations and finally to Determine Controversies arising amongst Persons Ecclesiastical To Summon and Call Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Persons as Men exercised in the Study of the Scriptures to Synods Convocations and Councils in Necessary Cases To Order Govern and Protect the said Bishops and Clergy being so call'd together and to Approve and Authorize things for the Outward Order Ecclesiastical and Policy determined in such Synods These be those Causes Ecclesiastical that we do speak of which do not pertain to Bishops and Priests only In these Cases and Causes Ecclesiastical the Authority of a Christian Prince is not only not excluded from intermedling with the Bishops and Clergy but the Prince's Authority is Chief therein Which Authority the Christian Prince exercising doth not Intermeddle with any Office belonging to Bishops and Priests only as the Adversaries of the Truth do falsly bear Men in hand but with their Own Offices by the Examples and Practice of all Antient Godly Princes as well in the Old Law as in Christian Religion proved of Right to them to Appertain And to Our Prince also by the Antient Laws and Statutes of the Realm as to the Learned in the said Laws is not Unknown of Right appertaining This is the Account which he gives of the Doctrin of the Church of England concerning the Authority of Christian Princes in Matters of Religion The Proofs he alledges are full and conclusive From the Examples of Constantine p. 208 to 223. Theodosius p. 227 to 238. The Council of Chalcedons p. 239 to 246. The Third Council of Constantinople p. 250 to 253. Justinian the Emperor p. 276 c. To Omit many other Particulars in the Vindication of which I am not so immediately concern'd And I will be bold to say there is nothing by me advanced in this Argument which has not been both more highly carried and more particularly explain'd
of those of the Reign foregoing I have already alledged the Authorities of those two Eminent Archbishops Whitgift and Bancroft To these I have added those of Bilson and Hooker and I thought it but Reasonable to give them a place in the same Period in which their Books were publish'd But yet I must observe that the most of These not only continued to the present time but attain'd to their highest Promotions under this Government The Synod of 1603 was held under the Presidence of Bancroft then Bishop of London Bishop Bilson was a Member of it and no doubt concurr'd heartily to the passing of those Canons which relate to the King's Supremacy in it I shall therefore here add only the Judgment of One Learned Man more who must never be mentioned but with a particular Respect by Us Mr. Mason and that out of a Work which he wrote expresly in Vindication of the Reformed Church and Ministry of England Champanaeus his Adversary had thus far allow'd of the Authority of the Christian Prince in Matters of Religion That He might make Laws in Defence of the true Religion which he was to learn from the Clergy and might nay was bound to see them Put in Execution But that Princes should have a Power of Judging or Defining in Ecclesiastical Matters as the Proper Judges and Hearers of them this he says is a Paradox never heard of in the Christian World before the time of Henry VIII To this Mr. Mason Replies That it is indeed the Business of Pastors to Explain the Doubtful things of the Law But that it belongs to the Prince to Promulge the Truth when known and to command his Subjects to Obey it That he must judge Whether the Priests do Go according to the Law of God And to that End must Search the Scriptures Pray to God Advise with Learned Men and not be led away with the fair Titles or Characters of Any nor have so much Regard to the Number of Votes as to Truth Upon this Foundation he proceeds at large to assert these following Points 1. That it is the Prince 's business to Call Councils and to appoint the Time and Place of their Assembling 2. That he has the Power to propose to the Bishops and Clergy what shall be treated on in their Synod 3. To prescribe the Rule and Measure of Judging 4. To Restrain them from calling in question the Faith already Orthodoxly setled in former Synods 5. To Rescind the Pernicious Decrees of Councils and to Confirm and Ratify such as are Pious and Wholesom by his Authority Lib. iii. c. iv p. 298. To which Points thus put together by Himself let me add from the other parts of his Discourse 6. The Power to Preside in Synods and to Govern their Acts. 7. To Appoint Judges in Ecclesiastical Matters and over Ecclesiastical Persons 8. To Judge between the Bishops if they shall happen to differ even in Matters of Faith And lastly To suspend the Acts of Councils tho' in relation to Points of Doctrine so that during such Suspension they shall not take Effect This is that Authority which this Renowned Defender of our Ministry and Reformation look'd upon as due of Right to the Christian Prince Of what Esteem this Work in those days was may be Gather'd not only from the Great Care and Accuracy with which it was Composed but from that Concern which the Archbishop of Canterbury shew'd for the Publication of it Twice it was solemnly dedicated to King James And being first publish'd in our Own Language it was thought considerable enough to Carry both the Doctrine and Defence of our Church to those Abroad in a Latin Translation And I have never yet heard that any of its Adversaries could charge it with any false Representation of our Church's Sense how little soever they pretended to be satisfied with His Vindication of it KING CHARLES I. But I shall not tarry any longer in this Reign but proceed to pursue the History of the Supremacy in the Sense of our most Eminent Bishops and Divines during the Unfortunate Reign of that Excellent Prince and true Friend of our Church King Charles the First And here one would have thought that the Account I took care on purpose to give with a more than ordinary particularity of the Convocation of 1640 might have sufficiently convinced all Unprejudic'd Persons what the Judgment of those Times was in the present Case But since it is insinuated by some who cannot deny but that that Prince did in Fact both Claim and Exercise all that Power over the Convocation for which I am pleading as if All this were done meerly in compliance with the Iniquity of our Laws and not as what Either the King or his Archbishop in their Own Consciences approved of I will proceed to clear this matter a little farther and shew that we have all the Reason in the World to believe that in the Management of that Convocation they Both of them acted not more agreeably to the Laws of the Realm than to the Real Sense of their Own Judgment It was but about Twelve Years before the Meeting of that Synod that upon the breaking out of some Disturbances upon the Account of the Arminian Tenets the King was induced to publish anew the Articles of Religion and to prefix his Royal Declaration to them suitable to that Occasion The Words of this Declaration are these Being by God's Ordinance according to our just Title Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church within these our Dominions We hold it most agreeable to this our Kingly Office and our Own Religious Zeal to Conserve and Maintain the Church committed to our Charge in Unity of true Religion and in the Bond of Peace and not to suffer unnecessary Disputations Altercations or Questions to be Raised which may nourish Faction both in the Church and Commonweal We have therefore upon Mature Deliberation and with the Advice of so many of our Bishops as might conveniently be called together thought fit to make this Declaration following That the Articles of the Church of England which have been allow'd and authorised heretofore and which our Clergy generally have subscribed unto do contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to God's Word Which we do therefore Ratify and Confirm Requiring all our Loving Subjects to continue in the Vniform Profession thereof and prohibiting the least difference from the said Articles which to that End we command to be New-printed and this Our Declaration to be publish'd therewith Such is the beginning of this Declaration and in which we may already observe several notable Instances of that Supremacy we are enquiring into For 1st It is plain this King thought himself Authoriz'd as Supreme Governour of the Church within his Dominions to take care of the Vnity of it and to put an End to those Disputes which Some
had raised to the manifest endangering of it 2dly Upon his Own mature Deliberation and with the Advice of such of his Bishops as he thought fit to call to his Assistance he judges anew of the Doctrine of the Church contain'd in the XXXIX Articles and confirm'd by so many Synods of the Clergy as had met since the first Establishment of them And 3dly Upon that Judgment he again Ratifies and Confirms them and Requires all his Subjects to continue in the Vniform Profession of them But we will go on with the Declaration which the King farther makes That We are Supreme Governor of the Church of England and that if any difference arise about the External Policy concerning the Injunctions Canons or Other Constitutions whatsoever thereto belonging the Clergy in their Convocation is to Order and Settle them having first Obtain'd Leave under Our Broad Seal so to do and We approving their said Ordinances and Constitutions provided that none be made Contrary to the Laws and Customs of the Land This is the next Paragraph and it gives us a clear account of the Ecclesiastical Constitution of the Synods of this Realm To them it belongs to deliberate of what concerns the Policy of the Church and to make Canons c. for the Ordering of it But before they can do this they must have the King's Leave not only to Sit but to Go about any such Work being Sate And having done it the King is to have the last Review He is to Confirm or Reject what they do And even that too within the Bounds that the Laws have set both to Him and Them But we will Go yet farther In the next place then the King thus declares That out of our Princely Care that the Church-men may do the Work which is Proper unto them the Bishops and Clergy from time to time in Convocation upon their humble Desire shall have Licence under our Broad Seal to deliberate of and to do all such things as being made plain by them and assented unto by Us shall concern the setled Continuance of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England now Established from which we will not endure any Varying or Departing in the least Degree And here we have not only our former Reflections again confirm'd but with an Addition of some farther Instances of the Prince's Authority in these Cases The Clergy in Convocation are humbly to move the King for his Licence to do what they shall Judge to be necessary for the better Establishment of either the Doctrine or Discipline of the Church of England To this the King is pleased to promise them at all times a favourable Answer That they shall have Leave to do what they desire and he shall judge needful to be done by them But still he declares it shall be with this Restraint that what they desire to do be consistent with the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church already Establish'd For from that the King Resolved that the Clergy even in Convocation assembled should not be at Liberty to Vary or Depart in the least degree All which being supposed yet still they are only to deliberate and make plain to the King what they think to be of Use even within these Restrictions But the King is to Allow or not Allow of it and upon his Rejecting or Ratifying their Resolutions the whole Authority and even Subsistence of them is to depend Such was the Opinion which this Prince had of his Own Royal Authority over the Convocations of his Bishops and Clergy Wherein the Power here claim'd by him comes short of what our Laws have assign'd the King and I in my late Treatise on this Argument have contended for it will I believe be very difficult to shew I shall only add that this Declaration was made by Him with the Advice of so many of the Bishops as might conveniently be Called together Who those Bishops were with whom the King consulted upon this Occasion we are not told But that Archbishop Laud was One of them we have all the Reason in the World to believe He was at that time a Privy-Counsellor Dean of the Chappel and One of the Commissioners for the Administring of the Archbishoprick upon the Sequestration of Archbishop Abbot And especially advised with by the King in all Matters of Importance relating to the Affairs of the Church And upon all which accounts we may venture almost confidently to say that this Declaration was without Controversy publish'd by his Advice above any Others and speaks his Sense in these Matters no less than the King 's It is indeed a thing justly to be wonder'd at after what I have formerly publish'd that any One who pretends to have any Veneration for the Memory of that Great Prelate should be able to make any doubt of his Judgment in this particular The Integrity which he shew'd in all his Actions sufficiently assures us that what he Swore to in the Oath of Supremacy Subscribed in the Articles of Religion Approved of in the Canons of the Church Advised in this last Declaration and Acted under at the Head of the Convocation Anno 1640 was undoubtedly agreeable to the Inward Sense of his Own Mind And I would desire those who upon such slender Grounds now insinuate the Contrary to consider What a mean Spirit they must take a Person of his High Character to have been acted by who can suppose that in a Matter of such vast Concernment to the Church and upon which the Divine Rights and Authority of it in their Opinion so much depend He should nevertheless against his Own Conscience run in with the Iniquity of the Times and thereby give so dangerous a Countenance to those Enslaving Principles to which he submitted However since such is the Rashness of some Men that they care not what Injury they do the Greatest Personages so they may but seem thereby to justify their Own Errors I will now give such an Evidence not only of that Archbishop's but with his of all the Other Bishops and the whole Convocations Sense in this Case as will I think admit of no Exception In the Canons of 1640 and whose Authority tho' I pretend not to assert yet I conceive I may without Offence produce them as a private Evidence of the Judgment of Those who Compos'd Them the very first is Concerning the Regal Power In this they not only Approve of the Acts made for the Acknowledgment of the King's Authority over the State Ecclesiastical but enjoin them All to be carefully Observed by all Persons whom they may Concern They add That a Supreme Power is given by God himself to Kings to Rule and Command all Persons of what Rank soever whether Ecclesiastical or Civil The Care of God's Church say they is so committed to Kings in Scripture that they are Commended when the Church keeps the Right way and Taxed when it runs Amiss And therefore Her Government belongs in
Chief unto Kings For otherwise One Man would be Commended for Anothers Care and Taxed for Anothers Negligence which is not God's way The Power to Call and Dissolve Councils both National and Provincial is the true Right of all Christian Kings within their Own Realms and Territories And when in the first Times of Christ's Church Prelates used this Power 't was therefore only because in those days they had no Christian Kings And again in the VIIIth Canon they oblige all Preachers positively and plainly to Preach and Instruct the People in their Publick Sermons twice in the Year at least That they ought Willingly to Submit themselves unto the Authority and Government of the Church as it is now Establish'd under the King's Majesty It is therefore as plain as any thing can well be that this Convocation undoubtedly approved of ALL the Laws even this of the Submission of the Clergy made for the Security of the King's Authority over the State Ecclesiastical that they look'd upon the Government of the Church to belong in Chief unto Kings That they accounted the Power of Calling and Dissolving Synods to be the true Right of All Christian Princes and that the Bishops have only then a Power to do this when the Church is in a State of Persecution and the Necessities of it enforce them thereunto And by Consequence that they themselves not only met and acted under the Powers I have formerly shewn because they were forced so to do but Approved of the Vse which the King made of them and were satisfied that in Meeting and Acting according thereunto they behaved themselves so as became Christian Bishops and Clergy-Men to do under the Favour and Authority of a Christian King I shall observe only this one thing farther to prevent any new Cavils in this particular that we are assured by Him who best knew it Archbishop Laud himself that these Canons were pass'd with the greatest Freedom and Vnanimity that ever any Canons were So that upon that account also we may the more undoubtedly look upon them as delivering the Real Sense of the Church of England in those days To the Judgment of this Archbishop and the Convocation held by him let me subjoin that of an Eminent Bishop in our Neighbour Country the Learned Bramhall afterwards Archbishop of Ardmagh and Primate of All Ireland In his Survey of the Scotch Discipline among other Exceptions which he takes at it we have these to our purpose particularly insisted upon by him That they Affirm 1st That Ecclesiastical Persons have the sole Power of Convening and Convocating Synods 2dly That no Persons Magistrates or Others have Power to Vote in their Synods but only Ecclesiastical 3dly That Synods have the Judgment of True and False Religion of Doctrine Heresy c. That they have Legis-lative Power to make Rules and Constitutions for keeping Good Order in the Kirk And all this without any Reclamation or Appellation to any Judge Civil or Ecclesiastical 4thly That they have these Privileges not from the Magistrate or People or Particular Laws of the Country but Immediately from God c. Lastly That they have all this Power not only without the Magistrate but against him that is tho' he Dissents c. So different a Notion had this great Writer of these Powers of the Kirk for which our Late Author so highly Applauds them and sets up their Discipline above our Own slavish Constitution But the Archbishop proceeds and against these Vsurpations of the Kirk lays down Chap. ii these Orthodox Church of England Principles That All Princes and States invested with Sovereign Power do justly challenge to themselves the Right of Convocating National Synods of their own Subjects and of Ratifying their Constitutions And that he is a Magistate of Straw that will suffer the Church to Convene Whensoever or Wheresoever they list To Convocate before them Whomsoever they please To change the Ecclesiastical Policy of a Common-Wealth To alter the Doctrine and Religion Establish'd and all this of their Own Heads by a Pretended Power given them from Heaven Synods ought to be Called by the Supreme Magistrate if he be a Christian And either by Himself or by such as he shall please to chuse for that purpose he ought to Preside over them This Power the Emperors of Old did challenge over General Councils Christian Monarchs in the Blindness of Popery over National Synods The Kings of England over their Great Councils of Old and their Convocations of latter Times But say they we give the Magistrate a Political Power to Convocate Synods to Preside in Synods to Ratify the Acts of Synods to Reform the Church Here are Good Words but they signify Nothing For in plain English what is this Political Power to call Synods c. It is a Duty which the Magistrate Owes to the Kirk when they think Necessary to have a Synod Convocated to strengthen their Summons by a Civil Sanction To secure them in Coming to the Synod and Returning from the Synod To compel obstinate Persons by Civil Laws and Punishments to submit to their Censures and Decrees What Gets the Magistrate by All this For they declare expresly that neither All the Power nor any Part of the Power which Synods have to Deliberate of or to define Ecclesiastical things doth flow from the Magistrate But can the Magistrate call the Synod to Account for any thing they do Can he Remedy the Errors of a Synod either in Doctrine or Discipline No This is one main branch of Popery and a Gross Encroachment upon the Right of the Magistrate And accordingly we find him charging the Papists with it in his Writings against them He maintains that All Ecclesiastical Coercive Jurisdiction did Originally flow from the Civil Magistrate He bids them Weigh all the Parts of Ecclesiastical Discipline and consider what One there is which Christian Emperours of Old did not either Exercise by themselves or by their Delegates Or did not Regulate by their Laws or Both. And then particularly Instances in the Points of Calling Councils Presiding in Councils Dissolving of Councils and Confirming Councils And Pag. 93. He insists upon it as One just Ground of our Separation from the Court of Rome that they endeavour'd to Rob the King of the fairest Flowers of his Crown namely of his Right to Convocate Synods and to Confirm Synods within his Own Dominions of his Legis-lative and judiciary Power in Ecclesiastical Causes c. To the Opinion of this learned Prelate were conformable the Sentiments of all the Other Bishops and Clergy of these Kingdoms as to these Matters Christian Emperours says Bishop Davenant heretofore Called Councils As in Civil Causes Princes advise with their Learned in the Law so in Theological Matters they ought to Consult with their Divines Yet are they not so tied up to the Opinions of their Clergy but that if They go contrary to the
Law of God Princes are Obliged by their Duty as Kings to set forth the True Religion to their Subjects tho' the Clergy should never so much or so generally Oppose them in it And in Another of his Books he proves the last Judgment in Matters of Religion to belong to Princes by this Argument He to whom the Holy Bishops remit their Decrees to be Examined from whom they desire the Confirmation of them Whom alone they Acknowledge to have the Power to prescribe to the People the True Religion by a Judiciary Coactive Power Him they constitute Supreme Judge in the Business of Religion But all this is ascribed to Pious Emperours and Kings As both from Councils and Fathers may evidently be made Appear I add that the Clergy cannot by Vertue of their Function compel the King to receive for the True Religion whatsoever they shall resolve by their Votes so to be But they must direct him by God's Word and always leave it to Him to Confirm that by his Authority which shall to Him upon Examination of their Reasons appear to be agreeable to God's Word Kings Sin when they throw off all Care of Religion and leave it to their Bishops alone Confirming by their Authority and Defending with their Sword whatsoever Faith They shall think fit to prescribe It is true indeed that as Other Christians so Princes themselves are to be directed in Matters of Religion by the Fathers of the Church But they are to be directed by the Light of God's Word and not to be drawn at the Pleasure of Bishops to the Defence of any Errour whatsoever The Church of England did not Innovate says Dr. Heylin in setling the Supremacy in the Royal Crown The like Authority was exercised and enjoy'd by the Christian Emperours not only in their Calling Councils and many times Assistiug at them or Presiding in them by themselves or their Deputies or Commissioners but also in Confirming the Acts thereof The like he shews to have been done by our Own Kings heretofore and then concludes thus so that when the Supremacy was recognized by the Clergy in their Convocation to King Henry the VIII it was only the Restoring of him to his Proper and Original Power If you conceive that by ascribing to the King the Supreme Authority taking Him for their Supreme Head and by the Act of Submission which ensued upon it the Clergy did unwittingly ensnare Themselves and draw a Vassallage on those of the Times Succeeding inconsistent with their Native Rights and contrary to the Usage of the Primitive Church I hope it will be no hard matter to remove that Scruple Its true the Clergy of this Realm can neither Meet in Convocation nor Conclude any thing therein nor put in Execution any thing which they have Concluded but as they are Enabled by the King's Authority But then it is as true that this is neither inconsistent with their Native Rights nor contrary to the Usage of the Primitive Times I grant indeed that when the Church was under the Command of the Heathen Emperours the Clergy did Assemble in their National and Provincial Synods of their Own Authority Which Councils being Summon'd by the Metropolitans and Subscribed by the Clergy were of sufficient Power to bind all good Christians who lived within the Verge of their Authority But it was Otherwise when the Church came under the Protection of Christian Princes As for the Vassallage which the Clergy are supposed to have drawn upon Themselves by this Submission I see no fear or danger of it That which is most insisted on for the Proof hereof is the Delegating of this Power by King Henry the VIII to Sir Thomas Cromwell by the Name of his Vicar General in Ecclesiastical Matters Who by that Name Presided in the Convocation Anno 1536. And this is look'd upon both by Saunders and some Protestant Doctors not only as a great debasing of the English Clergy but as a kind of Monstrosity in Nature But certainly these Men forget that in the Council of Chalcedon the Emperour appointed certain Noble-Men to sit as Judges whose Names Occur in the first Action of that Council The like we find Exemplified in the Ephesine Council in which by the Appointment of Theodosius and Valentinian the Roman Emperours Candidianus a Count Imperial sat as Judge or President It is not Possible to imagine any thing more express to our present Concern than what this Learned and Zealous Defender of our Church has here advanced If any One should be so Uncharitable as to imagine that this great Man had any Byass of private Interest upon him when he wrote this He may please to know that this Book was set forth by him in the time of Oliver Cromwel when our Church was in its worst Estate and there seemed but little hopes Remaining of its ever Recovering its self to a New Establishment But indeed this was his real Judgment and the General Sense of our Clergy in those Days Nor had our greatest Church-Men then learnt either to think Otherwise of the Princes Right Or to run down the Learning and Piety of those Holy Men by whose Courage and Conduct the Reformation was carry'd on and many of whom sealed the Sincerity of their Opinions with their Own Blood KING CHARLES II. I have now but one Period more to pass over and that a very short One too wherein I am to enquire How this Doctrine continued to be Received after the Restauration of King Charles the II. and upon that last Reveiw that was then made of our Constitution That at that time both the King and his Parliament were not only well Affected to the Interests of our Church but ready to concur with whatever the Convocation could reasonably have proposed to Them for the better Settlement of it is not to be doubted But what then did they do as to this Matter Was this enslaving Act made by our Saint Henry the VIII and continued by all his Oppressing Successors of the Reform'd Religion repealed by this Zealous Church-Parliament Or because that cannot be pretended Did that Reverend Synod which altered so many Other things ever once touch upon this and were stop'd in it Neither can that be Affirm'd Was there in that large Body Any One but One Generous Freeborn Spirit who being Scandalized at the Restraints under which the Divine Rights of the Church had so long lain moved the Convocation to protest against the King's Supremacy if they could not yet be so Happy as totally to shake it off Neither does any thing of this Occurr in the Diary which I have seen of that Convocations Proceedings Now that which makes me the rather to Remark this is that both that Parliament and that Convocation had this very Business of the King's Supremacy and the Churches Power under their Consideration And an Act was made for the better Execution of the One but still so
as not to Prejudice the Other Here therefore was a just Opportunity given to the Convocation to have declared its self and for the Parliament to have provided for the Liberties of the Church They were actually Repealing One Branch of that very Statute of the First of Eliz. c. 1. And two Lines more had done the Business But alas they were both Negligent in this Particular Or rather for that is the Truth they Neither of them thought the Church was at all Oppress'd by this just Jurisdiction of the Prince over it But we know Acts of Parliament are Obstinate things and will no longer bend as they were wont to do to the Ecclesiastical Canon Did the Synod therefore at least make bold with its Own Constitutions and Rescind those base and flattering Canons which stampt upon this Act the Churches Approbation And by so doing sign'd the Theta upon her Rights Liberties and Authorities On the contrary they continue still in force and have as far as One of King Henry's Convocations has power to do it ipso facto Excommunicated some among Us who while they make a Noise in the World as if they only were the true Sons of the Church of England are Really cut off from all Communion with Her In a word When upon the Review of the Liturgie several other Alterations were made in the Forms of Ordaining of Bishops Priests and Deacons did they slip aside the Oath of Supremacy that Bond of Iniquity contriv'd by the Atheists and Erastians of the Parliament in the First of Q. Elizabeth on purpose to run down the Rights of the Clergy and set up an Oppressive Supremacy over them But they still stand as they did before and may move some to consider who have been Ordain'd by these Forms How to Reconcile the Solemn Recognition of that Oath in behalf of the King's Authority with what they have since Written with so much Bitterness against it But tho' the Convocation therefore did nothing to Recover the Church out of that slavish Estate into which former Convocations and Parliaments had brought her it may be some Others of the Clergy at least in their Writings on this Subject may have Remonstrated against it That any have done so till this present Controversy began is what I never Heard This I know that several have Asserted and which is more defended too the Supremacy on its present Legal Bottom beyond the possibility of a Reasonable Reply Among these I know not whom more properly to mention in the very first place than our Pious and Learned Bishop Taylour It was but a very little while before the Restauration of King Charles that he published his Excellent Book of Cases of Conscience and which has never I conceive fallen under any Censure tho' often Re-printed since In these having first in General shewn that the Prince has Authority in Matters of Religion and Asserted it so highly as to say That without it he is but the Shadow of a King and the Servant of his Priests He proceeds more particularly to lay down this as his next Rule of Conscience That Kings have a Legislative Power in the Affairs of Religion and the Church Which having also shewn his next Conclusion to our purpose is this § 9. The Supreme Civil Power hath a Power of External Judgment in Causes of Faith That is as he Explains himself a Power to determine what Doctrines are to be taught to the People and what not And to prevent mistake he thus declares himself more particularly as to this matter § 16. I do not intend by this that whatsoever Article is by Princes allow'd is therefore to be accounted a part of True Religion For that is more than we can justify of a Definition made by a Synod of Bishops But that They are to take care that True Doctrine be Establish'd That they that are bound to do so must be supposed Competent Judges what is true Doctrine Else They Guide their Subjects and some Body Else Rules them And then Who is the Prince The Prince then is to Judge what is true Doctrine yet this He must do by the Assistance and Ministries of Ecclesiastical Persons Kings are the Supreme Judges of Law Yet in Cases where there is Doubt the Supreme Civil Power speaks by them whose Profession it is to Vnderstand the Laws And so it is in Religion The King is to study the Law of God not that He should wholly depend in Religion upon the Sentences of Others but be able of Himself to Judge But the Prince's Office of providing for Religion and his Manner of doing it in Cases of Difficulty are rarely well discoursed by Theodosius the Younger in a Letter of his to St. Cyrill The Doctrine of Godliness shall be discuss'd in the Sacred Council and it shall prevail or pass into a Law so far as shall be judged Agreeable to Truth and Reason Where the Emperor gives the Examination of it to the Bishops to whose Office and Calling it does belong But the Judgment of it and the Sanction are the Right of the Emperor who would see the Decrees should be Establish'd if they were True and Reasonable Ib. § 5. This I observe in Opposition to those bold Pretences of the Court of Rome and of the Presbytery that Esteem Princes bound to Execute their Decrees and account them but Great Ministers and Servants of their Sentences And a little lower he saith If He the Prince be not bound to Confirm All then I suppose He may chuse which he will and which he will not § 6. He shews that Princes are not bound to Govern their Churches by the Consent and Advice of their Bishops but only that it is Reasonable they should For says he Bishops and Priests are the most Knowing in Spiritual Affairs and therefore most fit to be Councellors to the Prince in them In his Fifth Rule § 1. he Affirms That Kings have Power of Making Laws And therefore as Secular Princes did use to Indict or Permit the Indiction of Synods of Bishops so when they saw Cause they Confirm'd the Sentences of Bishops and pass'd them into Laws Before Princes were Christian the Church was Govern'd by their Spiritual Guides who had Authority from God in All that was Necessary and of Great Convenience next to Necessity And in Other things they had it from the People For the better providing for These God raised up Princes to the Church And then Ecclesiastical Laws were Advised by Bishops and Commanded by Kings They were but Rules and Canons in the hands of the Spiritual Order but made Laws by the Secular Power These Canons before the Princes were Christian were no Laws farther than the People did Consent but now even the Wicked must Obey This was the Judgment of that Great Bishop as to the Princes Supremacy in Matters Ecclesiastical And this Judgment he delivered in his full Years in One of his last Works and that purposely design'd to
is a Party and the Appeal therefore is to stop at the Vpper House of Convocation I see no Reason why this Authority should not be reserved to the King and I conceive the Law of our Realm does allow of it 8thly As for the Dissolving of the Convocation that is so evidently a part of the Royal Jurisdiction and has been so fully adjudged to belong to the King that I do not see what Exceptions can be taken at it However the Constant Practice of our Convocations in this matter is on my Side And I have herein ascribed no Authority to the Prince but what our Clergy for above these Hundred and Fifty Years last past have constantly submitted to and by that Submission alone have sufficiently Vested in Him But if I am not mistaken in Point of Law what is it that deserves so Tragical an Outcry as this late Author has made against me Is it that being a Clergy-Man my self I appear'd in Defence of the King's Authority over the Clergy and which in some Mens Notion is the same thing as to say against the Rights of the Church So indeed the Convocation seem'd to think in the Case of Dr. Standish heretofore and so Some seem to account it now But God be thanked the Reformed Church of England never yet thought it any Offence in her Clergy to stand up for the just Rights of the Prince nor have I any Apprehension that I shall ever be Condemn'd upon this account by any True Members of Her Communion And for Others give me leave to ask only Am I the First of Our Order that have appear'd on this Occasion Or do I stand Alone in this Cause But what then shall we say of all those Learned Bishops and Clergy-Men whose Books I have here Quoted to the same Purpose Nay rather what shall we say of those whole Convocations who compiled our Articles and Canons And have Obliged us thereby not only Occasionally to Defend the Kings Supremacy but to the best of our Wit Learning and Knowledge publickly to Declare and Confirm it to our Congregations four times every Year If this be that for which I ought to be Censured I am afraid so great a part of our Order will go along with me as may make it even Scandalous to stay behind And be number'd among that Little Noisy Turbulent Party that now set themselves up as Judges over Us. But if both the Law be on my side and it be no improper Enterprize for a Clergy-Man to appear in What shall we say more Was the Time improper Did I take an Unseasonable Opportunity of Asserting this Authority Nay but this They should have consider'd who by appearing so Eagerly against the Princes Power over the Convocation made it absolutely Necessary for some or Other of our Church to do her Right and let the World know that she never Commission'd any of her Members to broach any such Principles on her Behalf That she is content to Act under the Royal Supremacy and is sensible that it is her Duty so to do That if some Hot Men for ought she knows her Enemies will under pretence of asserting such a Power to her as she has always disclaim'd endeavour to raise any Jealousies in the Mind of her Defender against her it is what she cannot help And she hopes she shall not be the worse Accounted of for such Attempts as she neither approves of nor knows how to Prevent And now there is but One thing more that can I think be Objected against my Undertaking And I shall lay it down in the Words in which it is Charged upon me For what if the Publick from such a Work inscribed to the Metropolitan should be tempted to proceed to further Resolves against the Powers Hierarchicall This I confess would be such a use of it as I should be heartily sorry for tho' even in such a Case I cannot tell whether I should ever the more deserve to be Censured for what I had done There can nothing be either so well Design'd or so carefully Perform'd of which an ill Use may not be made And if that should be Sufficient to cry down any Undertaking I do not see how we shall be able to Satisfie our Consciences in anything we have to do But in Reason I am sure the Church might have expected to suffer much more by the Letter to the Convocation Man than by the Answer which I made to it When Church-Men set up their Divine Rights in opposition to the Laws of their Country and upon Visionary Notions endeavour to lead Men into Discontents against their Governours it is Natural not to say Necesiary for Princes to look to themselves and consider how to stop those Attempts at the Beginning which Experience has shewn them may Otherwise in time grow too strong for Them It was the Intollerable Insolence and Vsurpations of the Roman Church that made her first Fear'd then Hated and at last crush'd the Hierarchic in many Places to peices And whatever Party shall think fit to pursue the same Methods ought in all Reason to expect the same Treatment If Clergy-Men will enjoy the Protection of Princes it is but Reasonable that they should be Content to acknowledge their Authority To contend for more Power than either Christ has left us or our Calling requires or the Bishops and Councils under the first Christian Emperours pretended to or desired is neither Prudent nor Justifyable It is to render the Church suspected by the State and to set those Powers in Opposition to which ought mutually to Help and Support One-Another I have before shewn what Opinion a very Learned Man upon this Ground had of the Act of Submission now so much railed at in these Days He look'd upon it as a Law of great Benefit to the Church even for this Reason alone that it freed the Civil Powers from entertaining any more Fears and Jealousies of the Clergy This was a Remark founded upon Good Reason as well as upon the Experience of those former Miscarriages which the Clergy had run into for want of such a Restraint And I cannot but every Day more and more acknowledge the Goodness of God towards our Church in that very thing for which some Men so Tragically lament the Oppression and Slavery of it Being fully Perswaded that nothing at this Day preserves us from Ruin and Desolation but that we have not Power of our selves to do the Church a Mischief and the Prince who sees but too much of our Tempers is too Gracious to Us and has too Great a Concern for the Churches Good to suffer Us to do it These are the Advantages which I look upon the Church to derive to her self from this Act. It prevents all Jealousies which either the Odd Principles the Violent Tempers Or the Wicked Designs of some Men might justly raise in the Minds of our Governours against us And frees them from all Temptation as well
as from all Need of laying any farther Restraints upon Us. It encourages the Civil Powers to be willing to allow us both Liberty to come Together and leave to Deliberate of what may be Profitable to the Church when ever they shall Judge it to be in any wise Needful or but Proper so to do And in the mean while it hinders us from throwing all into Confusion in such Times of Faction and Discontent of Heats and Animosities as we are at present in to the certain Scandal and Division of the Church it may be to a New Confusion of All things in the State too And thus have I deliver'd the Real Sense of my Own Conscience in the Matter before me I have shewn what my Principles as to the Kings Supremacy are and from Whom I have Learnt them That the Laws the Articles and Canons of our Church are my Instructors And all these as explain'd to me by the Greatest and most Eminent of our Profession both for Character and Ability that Our Church has produced ever since the Reformation All that I desire in Return is That those who now appear so vehemently against me in this Point would as freely declare their Sense and as plainly shew from whom they have Received it If they can make as fair a Plea to our Church's Patronage as I have here done I must then ingenuously Own I have been Greatly Mistaken If they cannot I shall then leave them under this Character that whatever they may pretend they must in Reality be either of the Conclave or of the Consistory and manage this Cause for the Pope or for the Kirk Whether of these Parties they will fly unto to me it is indifferent This I am sure of that if they are resolved to hold to our Church in Defiance of Her Doctrine they must at least be confessed to be in a very low Degree of Communion with Her She having solemnly by her Canons excluded them from her Sacraments and left them no Regular method of returning to the participation of them but by the Archbishop's Absolution and that upon Sincere Repentance for what they have done and after a Publick Revocation of their present Wicked Errors FINIS ERRATA PAge vii Margin for 39 Can. read 36. p. 9. f. 39. Can. r. 36 p. 68. l. 20. f. Attain'd to r. Enjoy'd The literal Errors the Reader will please to Correct IN my other Book of the Authority of Christian Princes p. 382. Blot out line 5. 6 7 8. In which I find my self to have been mistaken Books Printed for R. Sare at Grays-Inn-Gate THE Authority of Christian Princes over their Ecclesiastical Synods Asserted With particular Respect to their Convocations of the Clergy of the Realm and Church of England Occasioned by a late Pamphlet Intituled A Letter to a Convocation-Man c. 8 o Price 5 S. A Practical Discourse concerning Swearing 8 o. Price 1 s. 6 d. Also several Sermons upon particular Occasions All by W. Wake D. D. Municip Eccles Pref. Ib. Preface Municip Eccles Pref. pag. 2. Ib. pag. 3. Pag. 4. 39th Can. First Can. Ibid. p. 107. Comp. p. 155. Pag. 123 124. Pag. 109. Pag. 177. By the 1 2 and 12. Can. Preface P. 160. ⸪ Def. of the Apolog. p. 590. 605. c. ‖ Bilson p. 174 179. 182. 184. 186. 200. * Whitgift fol. 700 †Tort. Torti 169. 170. Pag. 6. 8. 49. 55. See Euseb. Vit. Const. l. 1. p. 352. Comp. p. 405. Pag. 177. Pag. 177. §. 1. § 2. § 3. The Act of 25 H. VIII c. 19. 26. H. VIII c. 19. § 4. 1 2 Ph. M. c. 8. 1 Eliz. c. 1. § 5. 1 Eliz. c. 1. Ib Sect. 1. 2. Which I observe in answer to the Peevish cavils of a late Author against me on this Account Municip Eccles. p. 108. 176. See below §. 39. § 6 The Oath of Supremacy 28. H. VIII c. 10. and 35. H. VIII c. 1. * 1 Eliz c. 1 Sect. 7. Which all Persons in H. Orders are at their Ordination obliged to do See 1 of W. M. c. 8. 1. Eliz. c. 1. From the 1st of Eliz to the 1st of W. and M. above 130 Years §. 7. The Nine and Thirty Articles * In the Latin Article it is Supreme §. 8. See p. 10. Municip Eccles. pag. 119. * Especially if Graduated in the University too See Can. 36. Ibid. Can. v. 13 Eliz. c. 12. §. 9. Of the Canons of King James the First Comp. Munic Eccles. pag. 165. Municip Eccles chap. x. p. 126. Pag. 122 155 176. § 10. Excommunication Ipso facto Cap. 26. Ext. de Appellat Heylin Ref justified p. 19. 20. § 11. The Testimony of our Clergy in defence of this Supremacy Municip Eccles pag. 55. Ib. p. 121. 122. § 12. Of K. H. 8. Q. Mary Institution of a Christian Man Anno. 1537. See the Convocations Address to the King subscribed by both Houses ‖ Regis senatus populique Angliae sententia de Concilio c. Witebergae Anno 1537. A. 5. Ib. B. 5. Bishop Burnet Hist. Ref. Vol. 1. App. p. 155. 156. Regis Angl. Epistola de Synod Vincentina Vitebergae Anno. 1539. Munucip Eccles Pref. Fox Mâ—rt 2 Vol. 347. Fox Ibid. 3 Vol. p. 19. 29. Strype Hist. of A. B. Cranmer p. 368. § 13. The Parliament The Queen Sparrow's Collect p. 67. 1. Eliz. c. 1. § 14. All the Bishops together Bishop Burnet Hist of the Reform 2 Vol. Append p. 365. 366. 1 Eliz. c. 1. Sparrows Collect pag. 83. See Municip Eccles. p. 107. § 15. A. B. Whitgift Defence of the Answer to the Admonition c. Ib. p. 700. Whose Authority the Municip Eccles. also brings against it p. 163 164. Ib. pag. 701. See Municip Eccles. p. 173. very Foolishlyly as well as Disrespectful as to this Matter Pag. 702. §. 16. Archbishop Bancroft See the Survey c. chap. xxii xxiii Page 259. Page 267. P. 269. Municip Eccle p. 123 124. §. 17. Bishop Jewell Jewell Def. of the Apolog. p. 582. Ibid. p. 592. Pag. 558. Ibid. p. 600. Pag. 597. Ibid. p. 604. Pag. 602. Ibid. p. 558. §. 18. Municip Eccles Pref. and pag. 7. Bishop Bilson Pag. 192 to 198. Ibid. p. 200 249. §. 19. Dean Nowell Dean Nowell's Reproof of Mr. Dorman's Book Entituled A Proof c. 4 o. Lond. 1565. Part Second Against T. C. before §. 15. Comp. pag 51 68 257 263. §. 20. Mr. Hooker Eccles. Polit. p. 457. Pag 459. Page 468. §. 21. King James The King 's Works p. 255. Ib p. 427. § 22. Bp. Andrews Tort. Torti p. 177. Comp. Municip Eccles. p. 14. 15. See also p. 174. §. 23. See Spotswood lib. vii p. 486. Calderwood Hist. p. 543. ⸪ Let the Author of the Municip Eccles. Answer this Question better if he can §. 24. Sermons pag. 105. Pag. 106. Comp. Municip Eccles. p. 100. 101. Pag. 107. Comp. Municip Eccles. p. 131 132 c. Pag 108. Comp. Municip Eccles p. 126 135 c. Pag. 109. Pag.
110. Comp. Municip Eccles. p. 6. Ib. p. 159. Ib. p. 110. Ib p. 111. Comp. Municip Eccles. p. 168. Comp. Municip Eccles. Chapt. vi vii Ib. p. 112. Ib. p. 113. See Municip Eccles. p. 115. Ib. p. 113. § 25. Anno 1603. §. 26. Mr. Mason De Ministerio Anglic. lib. 3. c. 3. pag. 271. Page 272. Ibid. p. 273. Pag. 291 292 294. 298. Comp. Munic Eccles. pag. 108 109. Ibid. 292 300. Ib. p. 292 298. 295. 297. 289. §. 27. Municip Eccles p. 117. §. 28. King Charles I. Book of Articles Printed Anno 1628. Rolles Rep. Hill 14. Jac. in Cam. Scacc. Colt vers Glover p. 454 c. §. 29. Archbishop Laud. Municip Eccles pag. 117. §. 30. Sparrow's Collect P. 345. * Therefore not of ours only nor by the Stat. of H. 8. Municip Eccles. ‖ Therefore not by a Divine Unalienable Right which they had so to do * From the Writs and Commission of King Ch. 1. Hist. of A B. Laud p. 80 81 154 155 282. §. 31. Archbishop Bramhall See his Wâ—rks Page 496. Municip Eccles p. 116. Page 494. P. 497 498. Comp. Municip Eccles. p. 123 124. See his Works Tom. 1. pag. 88. Comp p. 233. Ib. § 32. Bishop Davenant Determin qu. xix p. 95. De doub controv par i. p. 73. Ib. p. 76. Ib. p. 93. § 33. Dr. Heylin Historic Misc. tracts fol. Lond. 1681. Pag. 24. Comp. Municip Eccles. Pref. p. 107 108 136 c. Ib. numb vi See the same tract p. 7 23 24 39 40 41 c. more to the same Effect § 34. ‖ Municip Eccles p. 107. ⸪ Ib. p. 114 122. c. Ib. p. 119. 13 Car. 2. cap. xii An Act for Explanation of the 17 Car. 1. c. xi Entituled An Act for Repeal of a Branch of a Statute 1 Eliz. c. i. concerning Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical Ibid. Pref. and p. 122. Ibid. Pref. p. 1 2. Ibid. p. 119. § 35. Bp. Taylour Book iii. ch 3. Rule 4. Ib. §. 7 8 9. Ib. Rule 8. §. 36. Bp Parker Ibid. p. 43. Ib. p. 48. Ib. p. 49. Ib. p. 50 51. Ib. p. 53. Ib. p. 56. The Case of the Church of England stated § 37. Dr. Falkner Christian Loyalty p. 42. Ib. pag. 44. Ib. pag 46. Can. 2. Comp. Munic Eccles. Pref. § 38. Dr. Barrow See his Works 1st Vol. p. 311. Ib. Comp. p. 211. 216. If the Author of the Municip Eccles. thinks this Account of the Original of Synods clearer than Mine he may take it as an Explanation of my Meaning and which I see no Cause yet to Retract Municip Chap. 1. Ib. p. 312. Ib p. 320. Ib. p 321. Comp. p. 185. Ib p. 185. Ib. p. 188 189. Ib. Ib. p. 191. Comp. 192. Ib. p. 193. Ib. p. 194. 206. Ib. p. 204 205. Ib. p. 24. Ib p 251. § 39. ‖ Horn against Fecknam Bridges against Sanders Burhill and Tooker mention'd §. 22. Sarravia Sutcliffe Whitaker Abbot Bp. of Salisbury Reynolds against Hart Morton Bp. of Durham against Bellarmine Carleton Bp. of Chichester Dr. Ferne. c. ⸪ Municip Eccles. p. 107 136. 176. Municip Eccles p. 177. Can. 1. ‖ See Mr. Hooker's Judgment §. 20 Bishop Andrews § 34. Convoc of 1640 §. 30. A. B. Bramhall Sect. 31 c. * 1 Eliz. c. 1. Sect. 1. †Coke v. Rep. Cawdries Case Id. 4. Inst. p. 325 326. More 's Rep. p. 755. 2. Crook Rep. p. 73. Heylin Ref. Just. p. 7 23. See the Queen's Injunctions above Sect. 7. Canons of K. James §. 9. 4 Inst. pag. 340. §. 40. Municip Eccles Pref. 1. Can. § 41. §. 42. Municip Eccles Pref. p. 5. Comp. p. 3. See above §. 37. §. 43.