thereof in the main body of it not far from a little dore which openeth into one of the Prebends houses This I can say on certain knowledge being casually invited to his Funeral when I thought not of it though since his Statua hath been set up in the other place which our Author speaks of Fol. 153. The Right to the Crown lay not in this Henry but in Edmund Mortimer Earl of March descended by his Mother Philippa from Lionel Duke of Clarence elder son to Edward the third I shall not now dispute the Title of the House of Lancaster though I think it no hard matter to defend it and much less shall I venture on the other controversie viz. whether a King may Legally be depos'd as is insinuated by our Author in the words foregoing But I dare grapple with him in a point of Heraldry though I finde him better studied in it then in matter of History And certainly our Author is here out in his own dear Element Edmund Mortimer Earl of March not being the Son but Husband of the Lady Philippa Daughter of Lionel Duke of Clarence and Mother of Roger Mortimer Earl of March whom Richard the second to despite the House of Lancaster declared Heir apparent to the Kingdom of England 'T is true this Edmond was the son of another Philippa that is to say of Philip Montacute wife of a former Roger Earl of March one of the founders of the Garter So that in whomsoever the best Title lay if lay not in this Edmond Mortimer as our Author makes it 〈◊〉 154. This is one of the clearest distinguishing 〈…〉 the Temporaâ—â— and Spiritual Lordsâ— that 〈…〉 be tryed per pares by their Peers being 〈…〉 Noâ— shall I here dispute the point 〈…〉 may not challenge to be tryed by his 〈…〉 wheâ—â—er the Bishops were not Barons and 〈◊〉 of the Realm Our Author intimates that they were not but I think they were and this I think on the authority of the learned Selden in whom we finde that at a Parliament at Northampton 〈◊〉 Henry the 2. the Bishops thus challenge their own â—ee age viz. Non sedemus hiâ— Episcopi sed Barones Nos â—â—â—â—nes vâ—s Barones Pares hiâ— sumus that is to 〈◊〉 We 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 as Bishops only but as Barons We are Barons and you are Barons here we sit as Peers Which last is also 〈…〉 in terminis by the words of a Statuâ—e 〈◊〉 Act of Parliament wherein the Bishops are acknowledged to â—e Peers of the Land And for further proof heâ— eoâ— Ihon â—tratford Archbishop of Canterbury if I remember it aright being fallen into the displeâ—sure of King Edward the third and denyed entrance into the House of 〈◊〉 made his Protest that he was Primus 〈◊〉 Regni the 〈◊〉 Peer of the Realm and therefoâ—e not to be 〈…〉 from his place and Suffrage But of this Argument enough iâ— not too much as the case now stands 〈…〉 thing to consider what they have 〈…〉 what they are at this preâ—ent 〈…〉 Reign theâ—e paâ—â— an Act of Paâ—liament by which it was enacted That the Countrey of Wales should be stand and continue for ever from thenceforth incorpoâ—aâ—ed united and annexed to and with this Realm of England And that all and singular person and persons born and to be born in the said principality countrey or dominion of Wales shall have inâ—oy and inhe â—it all and singular Freedoms Liberties Rights Priviledges and Lawes within this Realm and other the Kings Dominions as other the Kings Subjects naturally boâ—n within the same have and injoy and inheâ—â—it And thirdly between the time which our Author speaks of being the 14 year of King Henry the fourth and the making of this Act by King Henry the eighth there passed boâ—e an hundâ—ed and twenty years which intimates a longer time then some years after as out Author words it Fol. 168. I will not complain of the dearness of this Univeâ—sity where seventeen weeks cost me more then seventeen years in Cambridge even all that I had The oâ—dinary and unwary Reâ—der might collect from hence that Oxford is a chargeable place and that all commodities there are exceeding dear but that our Author lets him know that it was on some occasion of distâ—â—bance By which it seems our Author doth 〈◊〉 to the time of the War when men from all 〈◊〉 did repair to Oxford not as a University but a place of safety and the fear Royall of the King at 〈◊〉 time notwithstanding all provisions were so plenâ—â—ull and at such cheap rates as no man had reason to complain of the 〈◊〉 of them No better argument of the 〈◊〉 of the soil and richness of the 〈◊〉 in which Oxford standeth then that the 〈…〉 on the accession of such 〈…〉 at that 〈◊〉 and on that occasion 〈◊〉 Author therefoâ—e 〈◊〉 be thought to relate unto somewhat else then is here expâ—essed and possibly may be that his being at Oxford at that time 〈◊〉 him within the compass of Delinquency and consequently of Sequestration And 〈…〉 hath 〈…〉 son to complain of the Vniversity or the dearness of it but rather of himself for coming to a place so chargeable and destructive to him He might have tarryed where he was for I never heard that he was sent foâ— and then this great complaint against the dearness of that Vniversity would have found no place Fol. 175. Surely what Charles the fifth is said to have said of the City of Florence that it is pity 〈◊〉 should be seen save only on holy-dayes c. Our Author is somewhat out in this in fachering that saying on Charles the fifth Emperor and King of Spain which Boterus and all other Authors ascribe to Charles Archduke of Austria that is to say to Charles of Inspruch one of the younger sons of the Emperor Ferdinand the first and consequently Nephew to Charles the fifth Not is oâ—r Author very right in taking Aquensis for Aix in Provence Fol. 178. Especially â—aith he if as I take it by Aquensis Aix be meantâ— scited in the fâ—rthermost parts of Provence though even now the English power in France was a waning For first the English never had any power in Provence no interest at all therein nor pretentions to it as neither had the French Kings in the times our Author speaks of Provence in thoâ—e dayes was independent of that Crown an absolute Estate and held immediately of the Empire as being a part and member of the Realm of Burgundy and in the actual possession of the Dukes of â—njou on the expiring of which House by the last will and Testament of Duke Rene the second it was bequeathed to Lewis the eleventh of France by him and his successors to be enjoyed upon the death of Charles Earl of Maine as it was accordingly And secondly that Bernard whom the Latine cals Episcopus Aquensis is very ill taken by our Author to be Bishop of Aix He was indeed Bishop of Acqus or
Discourse with the Bishop of Winchester And for the Narrative the Doctor whom I have talked with in this business doth not shame to say that he borrowed it from that great Treasury of Academical Antiquities Mr. Brian Twine whose learned Works stanâ— good against all Opponents and that he found the passage justified by Sir Isaack Wake in his Rex Platonicus Two Persons of too great wit and judgement to relate a matter of this nature on no better gâ—ound then common 〈◊〉 talk and that too spoke in merriment by Sir Henry Savil. Assuredly Sir Henry Savil was too great a Zealot for that University and too much a friend to Mr. Wake who was Fellow of the same Colledge with him to have his Table-talk and discourses of merriment to be put upon Record as grounds and arguments for such men to build on in that weighty Controversie And therefore when our Author tells us what he was told by Mr. Hubbard Mr. Hubbard by Mr. Barlow Mr. Barlow by Mr. Bust and Mr. Bust by Sir Henry Savil it brings into my minde the like Pedegree of as true a Story even that of Mother Miso in Sir Philip Sidney telling the young Ladies an old Tale which a good old woman told her which an old wise man told her which a great learned Clerk told him and gave it him in writing and there she had it in her Prayer-book as here our Author hath found this on the end of his Creed Not much unlike to which is that which I finde in the Poet Quae Phoebo Pater omnipotens mihi Phoebus Apollo Praedixit vobis Furiarum ego maxima pandâ— That is to say What Iove told Phoebus Phoebus told to me And I the chief of Furies tell to thee But to proceed Fol. 190. This was that Nevil who for Extraction Estate Alliance Dependents Wisdom Valour Success and popularity was superior to any English Subject since the Conquest Our Author speaks this of that Richard Nevil who was first Earl of Warwick in right of Anne his Wife Sister and Heir of Henry Beauchamp the last of that Family and after Earl of Salisbury by descent from his Father a potent and popular man indeed but yet not in all or in any of those respects to be match'd with Henry of Bullenbrook son to Iohn of Gaunt whom our Author must needs grant to have lived since the time of the Conquest Which Henry after the death of his Father was Duke of Lancaster and Hereford Earl of Leicester Lincoln and Darby c. and Lord High Steward of England Possessed by the donation of King Henry the third of the County Palatin of Lancaster the forfeited Estates of Simon de Montfort Earl of Leicester Robert de Ferrars Earl of Darby and Iohn Lord of Monmouth by the compact made between Thomas Earl of Lancaster and Alice his Wife of the Honor of Pomfret the whole Estate of the Earl of Lincoln and a great part of the Estates of the Earl of Salisbury of the goodly Tertitories of Ogmore and Kidwelly in Wales in right of his descent from the Chaworths of the Honor and Castle of Hartford by the grant of King Edward the third and of the Honor of Tickhill in Yorkshire by the donation of King Richard the second and finally of a Moity of the vast Estate of Humphry de Bohun Earl of Hereford Essex and Northampton in right of his Wife So royal in his Extraction that he was Grandchilde unto one King Cousin german to another Father and Grandfather to two more So popular when a private person and that too in the life of his Father that he was able to raise and head an Army against Richard the Second with which he discomfited the Kings Forces under the command of the Duke of Ireland so fortunate in his successes that he not only had the better in the battail mentioned but came off with Honor and Renown in the War of Africk and finally obtained the Crown of England And this I trow renders him much Superior to our Authors Nevil whom he exceeded also in this particular that he dyed in his bed and left his Estates unto his Son But having got the Crown by the murther of his Predecessor it stay'd but two descents in his Line being unfortunately lost by King Henry the sixth of whom being taken and imprisoned by those of the Yorkish Faction our Author telleth us Fol. 190. That States-men do admire how blind the Policy of that Age was in keeping King Henry alive there being no such sure Prison as a Grave for a Captive King whose life though in restraint is a fair mark for the full Aim of mal-contents to practise his enlargement Our Author might have spâ—r'd this Doctrine so frequently in practise amongst the wordly Politicians of all times and ages that there is more need of a Bridle to hold them in then a Sput to quicken them Parce precor stimulis fortiùs utere loris had been a wholesom Caveat there had any friend of his been by to have advis'd him of it The muâ—thering of depos'd and Captive Princes though too often practised never found Advocates to plead for it and mâ—â—h less Preachers to preach for it until these latter times First made a Maxim of State in the School of Machiavel who lays it down for an Aphorism in point of policy viz. that great Persons must not at all be touched or if they be must be made sure from taking Revenge inculcated afterwards by the Lord Gray who being sent by King Iames to intercede for the life of his Mother did undeâ—-hand solicit her death and whispered nothing so much in Queen Elizabeths ears as Mortua non mordet if the Scots Queen were once dead she would never bite But never prest so home never so punctually apply'd to the case of Kings as here I finde it by our Author of whom it cannot be â—ffirm'd that he speaks in this case the senâ—e of others but positively and plainly doth declare his own No such Divinity pâ—each'd in the Schools of Ignatius though fitter for the Pen of a Mariana then of a Divine or Minister of the Church of England Which whether it passed from him before oâ— since the last sad accident of this nature it comes all to one this being like a two-hand-sword made to strike on both â—â—des and if it come too late for instruction will serve abundantly howsoever for the justification Another note we have within two leaves after as derogatory to the Honor of the late Archbishop as this is dangerous to the Estate of all Soveraign Princes if once they chance to happen into the hands of their Enemies But of this our Author will give me an occasion to speak more in another place and then he shall hear further from me Now to go on Fol. 197. The Duke requested of King Richard the Earldom of Hereford and Hereditary Constableship of England Not so it was not the Earldom that is
to say the Title of Earl of Hereford which the Duke requested but so much of the Lands of those Earls as had been formeâ—ly enjoy'd by the House of Lancaster Concerning which we are to know that Humphry de Bohun the last Earl of Hereford left behinde him two Daughters only of which the eldest called Eleanor was married to Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Gloster Mary the other married unto Henry of Bullenbrook Earl of Darby Betwixt these two the Estate was parted the one Moiety which drew after it the Title of Hereford falling to Henry Earl of Darby the other which drew after it the Office of Constable to the Duke of Glocester But the Duke of Glocester being dead and his estate coming in fire unto his Daughter who was not able to contend Henry the fifth forced her unto a sub-division laying one half of her just partage to the other Moiety But the issue of Henry of Bullenbrook being quite extiâ—ct in the Person of Edward Prince of Wales Son of Henry the sixth these three parts of the Lands of the Earls of Hereford having been formerly incorporated into the Duchy of Lancaster remained in possession of the Crown but were conceiv'd by this Duke to belong to him as being the direct Heir of Anne Daughter of Thomas Duke of Glocester and consequently the direct Heir also of the House of Hereford This was the sum of his demand Nor do I finde that he made any suit for the Office of Constable or that he needed so to do he being then Constable of England as his Son Edward the last Duke of Buckingham of that Family was after him Fol. 199. At last the coming in of the Lord Stanley with three thousand fresh men decided the controversie on the Earls side Our Author is out in this also It was not the Lord Stanley but his Brother Sir William Stanley who came in so seasonably and thereby turn'd the Scale and chang'd the fortune of the day For which service he was afterward made Lord Chamberlain of the new Kings Houshold and advanc'd to great Riches and Estates but finally beheaded by that very King for whom and to whom he had done the same But the King look'd upon this action with another eye And therefore when the merit of this service was interposed to mitigate the Kings displeasure and preserve the man the King remembred very shrewdly that as he came soon enough to win the Victory so he staid long enough to have lost it ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Fifth and Sixth Books OF The Church History OF BRITAIN Relating to the time of King Henry the Eighth WE are now come to the busie times of King Henry the Eighth in which the power of the Church was much diminisht though not reduced to such ill terms as our Author makes it We have him here laying his foundations to overthrow that little which is left of the Churches Rights His superstructures we shall see in the times ensuing more seasonable for the practice of that Authority which in this fifth Book he hammereth only in the speculation But first we will begin with such Animadversions as relate unto this time and story as they come in our way leaving such principles and positions as concern the Church to the close of all where we shall draw them all together that our discourse and observations thereupon may come before the Reader without interruption And the first thing I meet with is a fault of Omission Dr. Newlen who succeeded Dr. Iackson in the Presâ—dentship of Corpus Christi Colledge in Oxford Anno 1640. by a free election and in a statuteable way being left out of our Authors Catalogue of the Presidents of C. C. C. in Oxford fol. 166. and Dr. Stanton who câ—me in by the power of the Visitors above eight years after being placed therein Which I thought fit though otherwise of no great moment to take notice of that I might do the honest man that right which our Author doth not Fol. 168. King Henry endevoured an uniformity of Grammar all over his Dominions that so youths though changing their School-masters might keep their learning That this was endevoured by King Henry and at last enâ—oyned I shall easily grant But then our Authour should have told us if at least he knew it that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thereof pâ—oceeded fâ—om the Convocation in the yeaâ— 1530. in which complaint being made Quod multiplex varius in Scholis Grammaticalibus modus esset 〈◊〉 c. That the multiplicity of Grammars did much him to learning it was thought meet by the Prelates and Clergy then assembled Vt una eadem edatur formula Auctoritate 〈…〉 singula Schola Grammaâ—icals per 〈…〉 that is to say that one only 〈…〉 that within few years after it was enjoyned by the Kings Proclamation to be used in all the Schools thoughout the Kingdom But here we are to note withall that our Author anticipates this business placing it in the eleventh year of this Kingâ— Anno 1519. whereas the Convocation took not this into conâ—ideration till the eighth of March Anno 1530. and ceâ—tainly would not have medled in it then if the King had setled and enjoyned it so long before Fol. 168. otherâ—ardiner â—ardiner gathered the Flowers made the Collections though King Henry had the honour to wear the Posie I am not ignorant that the making of the Kings Book against Martin Luther is by some Popish writers ascribed to Dr. Iohn Fisher then Bishop of Rochester But this Cavâ—â— was not made till after this King had reâ—ected the Popes Supremacy and consequently the lesse credit to be given unto it It is well known that his Father King Henry the seventh designed him for the Arch-bishoprick of Canterbury and to that end caused him to be trained up in all parts of learning which might inable 〈◊〉 for that place But his elder Brother Prince Arthur dâ—ing and himself succeeding in the Crown though he had laid aside the thoughts of being a Priest he could not but retain that Learning which he had acquired and reckon it amongst the fairest Flowers which adorned his Diadem Too great a Clerk he was to be called Beauclerk junior as if he were as short in learning of King Henry the first whom commonly they called Beauclerk as he was in time though so our Author would fain have it Hist. Cam. p. 2 3. A little learning went a great way in those early dayes which in this King would have made no shewâ— in whose â—â—me both the Arts and Languages began to flourish And if our Author doth not suspect this Kings lack of learning he hath no reason to suspect his lack of 〈◊〉 the work being small the glory great and helps enough at hand if he wanted any But of this enough Fol. 196. Which when finished as White-hall Hampton-Court c. he either freely gave to the King or exchanged them on very reasonable considerations That Hampton Court was either freely given by
of the English Parliament till the time of King Iames. It s true that on the Petition of the Commons in the beginning of each Parliament the King was graciously pleas'd to indulge them a freedom of reasoning and debate upon all such points as came before them and not to call them to account though they delivered their opinions contrary to his sence and meaning But then it is as true withal that they used not to waste time in tedious Orations nor to declaim against the proceedings of the King and the present Government or if they did the Speaker held it for a part of his Office to cut them short and to reminde them of their duty besides such after-claps as they were sure to finde from an injured and incensed Soveraign But of this take along with you this short passage as I finde it in a letter written ab ignoto to King Charls in this very business of the Duke May it please your excellent Majesty to consider That this great opposition against the Duke of Buckingham is stirred up and maintained by such who either maliciously or ignorantly and concurrently seek the debasing of this free Mâ—narchy which because they finde not yet ripe to attempt against the king himself they endeavor it through the dukes sides These men though agreeing in one mischief yet are of divers sorts and humors Viz. 1. Medling and busie persons who took their first hint at the beginning of King Iames when the Vnion was treated of in Parliament That learned King gave too much way to those popular Speeches by the frequent proof he had of his great Abilities in that kinde Since the time of H. 6. these Parliamentary Discourses were never suffered as being the certain Symptoms of subsequent Rebellions Civil Wars aâ—d the dethroning of our Kings But these last twenty years most of the Parliament Men seek to improve the reputation of their Wisdoms by these Declamations and no honest Patriot dare oppose them lest he incur the imputation of a Fool or a Coward in his Countries cause But which is more the pride they took in their own supposed Eloquence obtain'd another priviledge for them that is to say The liberty for any man to speak what he list and as long as he list without fear of being interrupted whereof King Iames takes notice in his said Speech to both the Houses at White-Hall Nor did they onely take great delight in these tedious speeches but at first disperst Copies of them in writing and afterwards caused them to be printed that all the people might take notice of the zeal they had to the common liberty of the Nation and the edge they hed against the Court and the Kings Prerogative But to proceed Fol. 47. To ballance the Dukes enemies three persons his confederates were made Barons to compeer in the Lords house the Lord Mandevil the eldest son to the Earl of Manchester created by Patent Baron Kimbolton Grandison Son to the created Baron Imbercourt and Sr Dudly Carlton made Baron Tregate In which short passage there are as many mistakes as lines For first the Lord Mandevil was not created by Patent Lord Kimbolton that title together with the tite of Vicount Mandevil having been conferred upon his father by letter Patents in the 18. year of King Iames Anno 1620. whom afterwards King Charles in the first year of his Reign made Earl of Manchester The meaning of our Author is that Sr. Edward Montague commonly called Lord Mandevil was summoned to the Parliament by the Title of Lord Kimbolton as is the custom in such cases when the eldest sons of Earls are called to Parliament by the stile and Title of their Fathers Barony Secondly there never was any such Baron as the Baron Tregate Thirdly Sr. Dudly Carlton was not created Baron Tregat but Baron of Imbercourt that being the name of a Mannor of his in the County of Surry But fourthly Grandison son to the created Baron Imbercourt is either such a peece of negligence in not filling the blanks or of ignorance in not knowing that noble Person as is not often to be met with And therefore to inform both our Author and his Reader also I must let them know that William de Grandâ—son a noble Burgundian Lord allied to the Emperour of Constantinople the King of Hungary and the Duke of Bavaria was brought into England by Edmond Earl of Lancaster second son to King Henry the 3. by whose bounty he was endowed with fair possessions and by his power advanced unto the dignity of an English Baron The estate being much encreast by the Marriage of the Daughter and Heir of the Lord Tregoz fell by the Heir general to the Pateshuls of Bleâ—so in the County of Bedford and by a Daughter of that house to the house of the Beauchamps By Margaret the daughter and Heir of Sr. Iohn Beauchamp of Bletso the whole estate came by Marriage to Sr. Oliver St. Iohn from whose eldest son descended that Sr. Oliver St. Iohn whom Queen Elizabeth descended from the said Margaret by Iohn Duke of Somerset her second husband made Lord St. Iohn of Bletho in the first year of her Reign From Oliver St. Iohn the second son of the said Margaret estated by his mother in the Mannor of Lydiard Tregoz neer Highworth in the County of Wilts descended another Oliver St. Iohn the second son of Sr. Iohn St. Iohn of Lydiard Tregoz who having in defence of his Fathers Honour killed one Captain Best in St. Georges fields neer Southwark was fain to passe over into France where he remained untill his friends about the Queen had obtained his pardon To merit which and to avoid the danger which might happen to him by Bests acquaintances he betook himself to the wars of Ireland where he performed such signal service against the Rebels that passing from one command to another he came at last to be made Lord Deputy of Ireland at what time he was created viscount Grandison with reference to the first founder of the greatnesse of his House and family That dignity entailed on him and the heires males of his body and for want of Such Issue on the Heires males of Sr. Edward Villers begotten on the body of Mrs. Barbara St. Iohn the new Viscounts Neece according unto which remainder that Honnurable Title is enjoyed by that branch of the house of Villers But being the Title of Viscount Grandison was limited to the Realm of Ireland to make him capable of a place in this present Parliament he was created Lord Tregoz of Highworth to him and to the heires males of his body without any remainder Fol. 62. Carlton gone upon this Errand and missing the French King at Paris progressed a tedious journey after that Court to Nantes in Bohemia And here we have as great an Error in Geography as before in Heraldry there being no such Town as Nantes in Bohemia or if there were it had been too farre off and too unsafe a
have produc'd those arguments by which some shameless persons endeavoured to maintain both the conveniency and necessity of such common Brothel houses Had Bishop Iewel been alive and seen but half so much from Dr. Harding pleâ—ding in behalf of the common women permitted by the Pope in Rome he would have thought that to cal to him an Advocate for the Stews had not beeen enough But that Doctor was nor half so wise as our Author is and doth not fit each Argument with a several Antidâ—te as our Author doth hoping thereby by but vainly hoping that the arguments alleadged will be wash'd away Some of our late Criticks had a like Design in marking all the wanton and obscene Epigrams in Martial with a Hand or Asterism to the intent that young Scholars when they read that Author might be fore-warn'd to pass them over Whereas on the contrary it was found that too many young fellows or wanton wits as our Author calls them did ordinarily skip over the rest and pitch on those which were so mark't and set out unto them And much I fear that it will so fall out with our Author also whose Arguments will be studied and made use of when his Answers will not Fol. 253. Otherwise some suspect had he survived King Edward the sixth we might presently have heard of a King Henry the ninth Our Author speaks this of Henry Fitz Roy the Kings natural Son by Elizabeth Blunt and the great disturbance he might have wrought to the Kings two Daughters in their Succession to the Crown A Prince indeed whom his Father very highly cherished creating him Duke of Somerset and Richmond Earl of Nottingham and Earl Marshal of England and raising him to no small hopes of the Crown it self as appears plainly by the Statute 22 H. 8. c. 7. But whereas our Author speaks it on a supposition of his surviving King Edward the sixth he should have done well in the first place to have inform'd himself whether this Henry and Prince Edward were at any time alive together And if my Books speak true they were not Henry of Somerset and Richmond dying the 22. of Iuly Anno 1536. Prince Edward not being born till the 12. of October An. 1537. So that if our Author had been but as good at Law or Grammar as he is at Heraldry he would not have spoke of a Survivor-ship in such a case when the one person had been long dead before the other was born These incoherent Animadversions being thus passed over we now proceed to the Examination of our Authors Principles for weakning the Authority of the Church and subjecting it in all proceedings to the power of Parliaments Concerning which he had before given us two Rules Preparatory to the great business which we have in hand First that the proceedings of the Canon Law were subject in whatsoever touched temporals to secular Laws and National Customs And the Laitie at pleasure limited Canons in this behalf Lib. 3. n. 61. And secondly that the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Court in cases of Heresie Lib. 4. n. 88. And if the Ecclesiastical power was thus curbed and feâ—â—ered when it was at the highest there is no question to be made but that it was much more obnoxious to the secular Courts when it began to sink in reputation and decline in strength How true and justifiable or rather how unjustifiable and false these two principles are we have shewn already and must now look into the rest which our Author in pursuance of the main Design hath presented to us But first we must take notice of another passage concerning the calling of Convocations or Synodical meetings formerly called by the two Archbishops in their several Provinces by their own sole and proper power as our Author grants fol. 190. to which he adds Fol. 190. But after the Statute of Praemunire was made which did much restrain the Papal power and subject it to the Laws of the Land when Archbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute command but at the pleasure of the King In which I must confess my self to be much unsatisfied though I finde the same position in some other Authors My reasons two 1. Because there is nothing in the Statute of Praemunire to restrain the Archbishops from calling these meetings as before that Act extending only to such as purchase or pursue or cause to be purchased or pursued in the Court of Rome or elsewhere any such translatations Processes Sentences of Excommunication Bulls Instruments or any other things whatsoever which touch the King against him his Crown and his Regality or his Realm or to such as bring within the Realm or them receive or make thereof notification or any other Execution whatsoever within the same Realm or without c. And 2. because I finde in the Statute of the submission of the Clergy that it was recognized and acknowledged by the Clergie in their Convocation that the Convocation of the said Clergie is always hath been and ought to be assembled always by the Kings Writ And if they had been always call'd by the Kings Writ then certainly before the Statute of Praemunire for that the whole Clergy in their Convocation should publickly declare and avow a notorious falsehood especially in a matter of fact is not a thing to be imagined I must confess my self to be at a loss in this intricate Labyrinth unless perhaps there were some critical difference in those elder times between a Synod and a Convocation the first being call'd by the Archbishops in their several and respective Provinces as the necessities of the Church the other only by the King as his occasions and affairs did require the same But whether this were so or not is not much material as the case now stands the Clergie not assembling since the 25 of King Henry the eighth but as they are convocated and convened by the Kings wâ—it only I only adde that the time and year of this submission is mistook by our Author who plâ—ceth it in 1533. whereas indeed the Clergy made this acknowledgement and submission in their Convocation Anno 1532. though it pass'd not into an Act or Statute till the year next following Well then suppose the Clergy call'd by the Kings Authority and all their Acts and Constitutions ratiâ—ied by the Râ—yal assent are they of force to binde the Subject to submit and conform unto them Not if our Author may be judge for he tels us plainly Fol. 191. That even such Convocations with the Royal assent subject not any for recusancy to obey their Canons to a civil penalty in person or property untill confirmed by 〈◊〉 of Parliament I marvel where our Author took up this opinion which he neither finds in the Registers of Convocation or Records of Parliament Himself hath told us fol. 190. that such Canons and Constitutions as were concluded on in Synods or Convocations before the
in this caâ—e came before by whose continual importunity and 〈◊〉 the breach of the Treaties followed after The King lov'd peace â—oo well to lay aside the Treaties and engage in War before he was desperate of success any other way then by that of the Sword and was assur'd both of the hands and hearts of his subjects to assist him in it And therefore ouâ— Author should have said that the King not only called together his great Councel but broke off the Treaty and not have given us here such an Hysteron Proteron as neither doth consist with reason not the truth of story ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Eleventh Book OF The Church History OF BRITAIN Containing the Reign of King Charles THis Book concludes our Authors History and my Animadverâ—â—ons And 〈◊〉 the end be 〈◊〉 unto the beginning it is like to 〈…〉 enough our Author stumbling at the Threshold 〈◊〉 â—moâ—gst superstitious people hath been 〈…〉 presage Having placed King Charles upon 〈…〉 he goes on to tell us that Fol. 117. On the fourtâ—enth 〈…〉 James his Funerals were 〈…〉 Collegiat Church at 〈…〉 but the fourth saith the 〈…〉 Reign of King Charls and 〈…〉 was on the 〈…〉 â—â—venth of May on which those solemn Obsequies were 〈…〉 Westminster Of which if he will not take my word seâ— him consult the Pamphleâ— called the 〈…〉 â—ol 6. and he shall be satisfied Our 〈…〉 muâ—â— keep time better or else we shall neveâ— know how the day goes with him Fol. 119. As for Dr. Preâ—â—on c. His party would 〈◊〉 us that he might have chose his own Mitre And 〈…〉 his party would perswade us That he had not only large parts of suâ—â—icient receipt to manage the broad 〈…〉 but that the Seal was proffered to him fol. 131. But we are not bound to believe all which is said by that party who look'd vpon the man with such a reverence as came near Idolaâ—â—y His Principles and engagements were too well known by those which governed Affairs to ventâ—â—e him â—nto any such great trust in Church or State and his activity so suspected that he would not have been long suffered to continue Preacher at Lincolns Inn. As for his intimacy with the Duke too violent to be long lasting it proceeded not from any good â—pinion which the Duke had of him but that he found how instrumental he might be to manage that prevailâ—â—g party to the Kings advantage But when it was 〈◊〉 that he had more of the Serpent in him then of the 〈◊〉 and that he was not tractable in steering the 〈◊〉 of his own Party by the Court Compass he was discountenanc'd and â—aid by as not worth the keeping He seemed the Court Mâ—reor for a while 〈◊〉 to a sâ—dden height of expectation and having 〈◊〉 and blaz'd a 〈◊〉 went out again and was as suddâ—â—nly â—oâ—gotten â—ol 119. Next day the King coming from Canterbury 〈…〉 with all solemnity she was 〈…〉 in London where a Chappel 〈…〉 her Devâ—tionâ— with a Covent 〈…〉 to the Articles of her 〈…〉 how â—ame he to be suffered to be present at 〈◊〉 in the capacity of Lord Keeper For that he did so is affirmed by our Author saying That the King took a Sâ—role of Parchment out of his bosom and gave it to the Lâ—rd 〈…〉 who read it to the Commons four sevâ—raâ— times East-West North and South fol. 123. Thirdly the Lord Keeper who read that Scrole was not the 〈◊〉 Keeper Williams but the Lord Keeper Coventry 〈◊〉 Seal being taken from the Bishop of Lincoln and 〈◊〉 to the custoâ—y of Sir Thomas Coventry in October before And therefore fourthly our Author is much ouâ— in placing both the Coronation and the following Parliament befoâ—e the change of the Lord Keeper and sending Sir Iohn Suckling to feâ—ch that Seal at the end of a Parliâ—ment in the Spring which he had brought away with him before Michaelmas Term. But as our Author was willing to keep the Bishop of Lincoln in the Deaâ—â—y of Westminster for no less then five or six years after it was confer'd on another so is he as desirous to continue him Lord Keeper for as many months after the Seal had been entrusted to another hand Fol. 122. The Earl of Arundel as Earl Marshal of 〈◊〉 and the Duke of Buckingham as Lord High Constâ—ble of England for that day went before his Majesty in that great Solemnity In this passage and the next that follows ouâ— Author shews himself as bad an Herald in marshalling a Royal shew as in stating the true time of the câ—eation of a Noble Peer Here in this place he plaâ—eth the Earl Marshal before the Constable whereas by the 〈◊〉 31 H. 8. c. 10. the Constable is to have 〈◊〉 before the Marshal Not want there Precedents to shew that the Lord High-Constable did many times direct his Mâ—ndats to the Earl Marshal as one of the Miniâ—â—ers of his Court willing and requiring him to perform such and such services as in the said Precepts were expâ—essed In the next place we are informed that Ibid. That the Kings Train being six yards long of Purple Velvet was held up by the Lord Compton and the Lord Viscount Dorcester That the Lord Compton was one of them which held up the Kings Train I shall easily grant he being then Master of the Robes and thereby châ—llenging a right to peâ—foâ—m this service But that the Lord Viscount Dorcester was the other of them I shall never grant there being no such Viscount at the time of the Coronation I cannot 〈◊〉 but that Sir Dâ—dley Carleton might be one of those which held up the Train though I am not sure of it But sure I am that Sir Dudley Carleton was not made Baron of Imber-Court till towards the latter end of the following Parliament of An. 1626 nor created Viscount Dorcester until some years after Fol. 122. The Lord Archbishop did present his Majesty to the Lords and Commons East West North South asking their mindes four several times if they did consent to the Coronation of King Charles their lawful â—overaign This is a piece of new State-doctrine never known before that the Coronation of the King and consequently his Succession to the Crown of England should depend on the consent of the Lords and Commons who were then assembled the Coronation not proceeding as he after â—elleth us till their consent was given four times by â—cclamations And this I call a piece of new State-doctrine never known before because I finde the contrary in the Coronation of our former Kings For in the form and manner of the Coronation of King Edward 6. described in the Catalogue of Honor â—et â—orth by Tho. Mills of Canterbury Anno 1610. we finde it thus The King being carried by certain Noble Courtiers in another Chair â—nto the four sides of the Stage was by the Archbishop of Canterbury declared unto the people standing round about both by Gods and mans Laws to be the right and lawâ—ul King of
Earl of Essex that he went Deputy into Ireland Fol. 234. Whereas indeed he was not sent over into Ireland with the Title of Deputy but by the more honourable Title of Lord Leviâ—enant having power to create a Lord Deputy under him when his occasions or the the necessities of the state should require his absence Fol. 2â—1 The 26. of February 1â—00 was born the Kings third son and Christnâ—â— Charles at Dunferling The Kings third son and afterwards his Successor in the Crown of England was not born on the 26. of February but on the 19. of Noveâ—â—er as is averred by all others who have written of it and publickly attested by the annual ringing of Bells upon that day in the City of London during the whole time of his pâ—wer and prosperity The like mistake we finde in the tiâ—e and day of the Birth of Queen Elizabeth of whom it is â—â—id Fol. 261. 25. That she gave up the Ghost to Gâ—d oâ— that day of her Birth from whom she had it intimating thaâ— she died on the Eve of the same Lady-day on which she was born But the truth is that she was born on the Eve of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary being the seventh day of September and died on the Eve of the Annuntiation being the 24. of March And so much for the History of the Reign of Queen Mary and King Iames her Son as to the Realm of Scotland onely both of them Crowned as Iames the fift had also been in their tenderest infancy But whereas our Author tells us Fol. 8. that Q Mary 〈◊〉 the kingdom to her son who was born a King I can by no means yeild to that I finde indeed that our Saâ—iour Christ was born King of the Iews and so proclaimed to be by the Angel Gabriel at the very time of his Conception And I have read that Sapores one of the Kings of Persia was not onely born a King but crowned King too before his birth for his Father dying withouâ—â—â—ue as the story saith left his wife with child which child the Magi having signified by their Art to be a Male the Persian Princes caused the Crown and Royal Ornaments to be set upon his Mothers Belly acknowledging him there by for their King and Sovaraign But so it was not with King Iames who was born on the 19 of Iune Anno. 1566. and Crowned King on the 24. of Iuly being the 5. day after his Mothers resignation of the Crown and Government Anno. 1567. ADVERTISEMENTS ON THE REIGN DEATH OF KING IAMES Of GREAT BRITAIN FRANCE and IRELAND the first WE are now come unto the Reign of King Iames as King of England or rather as King of England and Scotland under the notion of Great Britain of whose reception as he passed through Godmanchestâ—r the Historian telleth us that Fol. 270. At Godmanchester in the Counâ—y of Notthamptonshire they presented him with 70 Teem of Horses c. beâ—â—g his Tenants and holding their Land by that Tenure But first Godâ—aâ—chester is not in Northampton but in Huntiâ—gtonshire And secondly Though it be a custom for those in Godmanchâ—ster to shew their Bravery to the Kings of England in that rustical Pomp yet I conceive it not to be the Tenure which they hold their Lands by For Camden who is very punctual in observing Tenures mentions not this as a Tenure but a Custom onely adding withal that they make their boast That they have in former time received the Kings of England as they passed in their progress this way with ninescore Ploughs brought forth in a rustical kinde of Pomp for a gallant shew If onely for a gallant shew or a rustical Pomp then not observed by them as their Tenure or if a Tenure not 〈◊〉 from ninescore to 70. all Tenures being â—ixt not variable at the will of the Tenants Fol. 273. This most honorable Order of the Garter was instituted by King Edward the third c. So far our Author right enough as unto the â—ounder and rigâ—â— enough as to the time of the institution which he placeth in the year 1350. But whereas he telleth us withal that this Order was founded by King Edward the third 〈◊〉 John of France and King James of Scotland being then Prisâ—ners in the Tower of London and King Henry of Castile the Bastard expulst and Don Pedro restored by the Prince of Wales called the Black Prince in that he is very much mistaken For first It was David King of the Scots not Iames who had been taken Prisoner by this Kings Forces there being no Iames King of the Scots in above fifty years after Secondly Iohn of France was not taken Prisoner till the year 1356. nor Henry of Castile expulsed by the Prince of Wales till ten years after Anno 1366. By consequence neither of those two great Actions could precede the Order But worse is he mistaken in the Patron Saint of whom he tells us that Fol. 273. Among sundry men of valor in ancient days was Geo. born at Coventry in England c. This with the rest that follows touching the Actions and Atchievements of Sir George of Coventry is borrowed from no better Author then the doughty History of the Seven Châ—mpions of Christendom of all that trade in Knighthood-errant the most empty Bable â—But had our Author look'd so high as the Records of the Order the titles of Honor writ by Selden the Catalogue of Honor publisht by Mills of Canterbury Camdens Britannia or any other less knowing Antiquary he might have found that this most noble Order was not dedicated to that fabulous Knight Sâ—â— George of Coventry but to the famous Saint and Soldier of Christ Jesus St. George of Cappadocia A Saint so universally received in all parts of Christendom so generally attested to by the Ecclesiastical Writers of all Ages from the time of his Martyrdom till this day that no one Saint in all the Calender those mentioned in the holy Scriptures excepted onely can be better evidenced Nor doth he finde in Matthew Parts that St. George fought in the air at Antioch in behalf of the English the English having at that time no such iâ—â—eress in him but that he was thought to have been seen figâ—ting in behalf of the Christians Fol. 275. Earldoms without any place are likewise of two kindes either in respect of Office as Earl-Morshal of England or by Birth and so are all the Kings Sons In the Authority and truth of this I am much unsatisfied as never having met with any such thing in the course of my reading and I behold it as a diminution to the Sons of Kings to be born but Earls whereby they are put in an equal rank with the eldest sons of Dukes in England who commonly have the Title of their Fathers Earldoms since it is plain they are born Princes which is the highest civil Dignity next to that of Kings It was indeed usual with the Kings of England to bestow upon
their yongest Sons some Earldom or other until the time of Edward the third after which time they were invested with the Title of Dukes as appears evidently to any who are studied in their Chronologies But that they or any of them were Earls by Birth is a new piece of learning for which if the Historian can give me any good proof I shall thank him for it Fol. 278. Henry the eight thus cousened into some kindness both by his own power and purse makes Charls Emperor and the French King his Prisoner 1519. Neither so nor so For first though King Henry did contribute both his power and purse to the taking of the French King Prisoner yet to the making of Charls Emperor he contributed neither the one nor the other And secondly though Charls were created Emperor Anno 1519 yet the French King was not taken Prisoner till six years after Anno 1525. Fol. 31â— Oswald united the Crowns of England and Scotland which were 〈◊〉 afterwards for many Ages 3â— That Oswald King of Northumberland here mentioned was a Puiâ—â—ant Prince as being the ninth Monarch of the English I shall easily grant but that he united the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland is not any where found Our Author therefore must be understood of his uniting the two Realms of Deâ—ra and Pernicia part of which last hath for long time been accounted part of Scotland which after his decease were again divided Fol. 317. Whose Results notwithstanding are not to be obtruded on the Sâ—culars to be obsâ—rved with the Authority of Laws until they be allowed by assent of the King and both Houses An error far more pardonable in our present Author to whom the concernments of the Church are not so necessary to be known or studied then in our Church Historian where before we had it and which hath had a full Conâ—utation in our Animadversions to which for brevity sake I shall now refer Fol. 320. Rory Duke of Solia from France Either the Printer or the Author are mistaken here The Ambassador who was sent from France was neither called Rory nor Duke of Solia but Marquess of Rhosney created afterward Duke of Sully and Lord High Treasurer of that Kingdom by King Henry 4. A Protestant and therefore purposely selected for that imployment Of whom it is reported in the conference at Hampton-Court that having observed the order and gravity of our Church Service in the Cathedral Chuâ—ch at Câ—nâ—erbury he was heard to say that if the like had been used in France there would have been many thousands of Protestants more then were at that present Fol. 329. Ceâ—il foâ— his good Service was created Earl of Salisbury That is to say for so it must be understood for his activity and diligence in discovering the Powder-Treason But he was Earl of Salisbury before that Discovery call'd so by the Historian himself in the course of thaâ— Naâ—rative and made so by King Iames in the Mâ—y foregoâ—ng at what time also his Brother Thomas Lord Burley was made Earl of EXCESTER The like mistake I finde in the advancement of Thomas Lord Buckhurst to the Earldom of Dorcet plac'd by the Author fol. 342. in the year 1605. whereas indeed he was created Earl of Dorcet in the first year of King Iames March 13. Anno 1603. Fol. 333. The Earl of Flanders c. being by Storm cast upon our Coast c. was fain to yield to all the Kings demands in delivering up the Countess of Warwick and other Fugitives resident in Flanders This story is well meant but not rightly told there being at that time no Earl of Flanders commonly so called to be cast upon the Coast of England nor any such Woman as a Countess of Warwick whom King Henry the seventh could be afraid of the truth is that the person here meant was Philip King of Castile Duke of Burgundy Earl of Flanders c. who in his return from Spain was driven by Tempest on the Coast of England and being Royally Feasted by King Henry the seventh was detained here till he had delivered into the Kings hands the Earl of Suffolk who had fled into the Nether-lands for protection and began to work new troubles against his Soveraign The story whereof we have at large in the History of King Henry the seventh writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban from fol. 222. to 225. Fol. 334 The fate of that Family evermore false to the crown This spoken of the Piercies Earls of Northumberland too often false to the Crown though not always so For Henry the second Earl of this Family lost his life fighting for King Henry the sixth in the Battle of St. Albans as Henry his Son and Successor also did at the Battle of â—owton And so did Henry the fifth Earl in the time of King Henry the seventh for his Fidelity to that King in a tumultuous Insurrection of the Common People not to say any thing of his Son and Successor who dyed without any imputation of such disloyalty Fol. 362. Zutphen and Gelders did of right belong to the Dukâ— Arnold who being Prisoner with the last Duke of Burgundy who died before Nancy that Duke intruded upon his Possession c. 40. Not so it was not Arnold Duke of Gelders that was Imprisoned by Charls Duke of Burgundy but his Son Adolphus who having most ungratiously Imprison'd his aged Father was vanquished by Duke Charls and by him kept Prisoner and the old Duke restored again to his power and liberty In a grateful acknowledgement of which favor he made a Donation of his Estates to Duke Charls and his Heirs to commence after his decease though it took no effect till Conquered under that pretence by Charls the fifth uniting it unto the rest of his Belgick Provinces Anno 1538. Fol. 423. Sir William Seymour Grandchilde to the third Son and the Heir of the Earl of Hertford created by Henry the eighth whose sister he marryed c. And being thus near the Crown c. In this business of Sir William Seymer now Marquess of Hertford there are two mistakes For first the Earl of Hertford from whom he derived his discent married not any of the Sisters of King Henry the eighth he having but two Wives in all the first the Daughter of Filol of Woodland from whom comes Baronet Seymer of the West the second Anne Daughter of Sir Edward and Sister to Sir Michael Stanhop from whom discends the House of Hertford still in being It s true King Henry married a Sister of Sir Edward Seymer by him created Earl of Hertford but not é contra the Earl of Hertford married not with a sister of his Secondly The nearness of this House to the Crown of England came not from any such Marriage of this first Earl with that Kings Sister but from the Marriage of Edward the second Earl with a Neece of that Kings that is to say with 〈◊〉 Daughter of Henry Duke of Suffolk and of Fâ—aâ—ces his Wife
Monroe an old experienced Commander with his three thousand old and experienced Scots train'd up for five or six years then last past in the Wars of Ireland By whose assistance it is possible enough that he might not have lost his first Battle not long after his Head which was took from him on the same day with the Earl of Hollands But God owed him and that Nation both shame and punishment for all their â—reacheries and Rebellions against their King and now he doth begin to pay them continuing payment after payment till they had lost the Command of their own Countrey and being reduced unto the form of a Province under the Commonwealth of England live in as great a Vassalage under their new Masters as a conquered Nation could expect or be subject to Fol. 1078. This while the Prince was put aboard the revolted Ships c. and with him his Brother the Duke of York c. the Earls of Brentford and Ruthen the Lord Cuâ—pepper c. In the recital of which names we finde two Earls that is to say the Earls of Brentford and Ruthen which are not to be found in any Records amongst our Heralds in either Kingdom Had he said General Ruthen Earl of Brentford he had hit it right And that both he and his Reader also may the better understand the Risings and Honors of this Man I shall sum them thus Having served some time in the Wars of Gustavus Adolphus King of Sweden he was Knighted by him in his Camp before Darsaw a Town of Pomerella commonly counted part of Prussia and belonging to the King of Poland Anno 1627. at what time the said King received the Order of the Garter with which he was invested by Mr. Peter Yong one of his Majesties Gentlemen Huishers and Mr. Henry St. George one of the Heralds at Arms whom he also Kinghted In the long course of the German Wars this Colonel Sir Patrick Ruthen obtain'd such a Command as gave him the title of a General and by that title he attended in a gallant Equipage on the Earl of Morton then riding in great pomp towards Windsor to be installed Knight of the Garter At the first breaking out of the Scots Rebellion he was made a Baron of that Kingdom and Governor of the Castle of Edinburgh which he defended very bravely till the Springs which fed his Well were broken and diverted by continual Batteries Not long ater he was made Earl of Forth and on the death of the Earl of Lindsey was made Lord General of his Majesties Army and finally created Earl of Brentford by Letters Patents dated the 27 of May Anno 1644. with reference to the good Service which he had done in that Town for the fiâ—st hanselling of his Office So then we have an Earl of Brentford but no Earl of Ruthen either as joyn'd in the same Person or distinct in two Not much unlike is that which follows Ibid. His Commissions to his Commanders were thus stiled Charls Prince of great Britain Duke of Cornwal and Albany Here have we two distinct Titles conferred upon one Person in which I do very much suspect our Authors Intelligence For though the Prince might Legally stile himself Duke of Cornwal yet I cannot easily believe that he took upon himself the Title of Duke of Albany He was Duke of Cornwal from his Birth as all the eldest Sons of the Kings of England have also been since the Reign of King Edward the third who on the death of his Uncle Iohn of Eltham E. of Cornwal invested his eldest Son Edw. the Black Prince into the Dukedom of Cornwal by a Coronet on his head a ring on his finger and a silver Verge in his hand Since which time as our learned Camden hath observed the King of Englands eldest Son is reputed Duke of Cornwal by Birth and by vertue of a special Act the first day of his Nativity is presumed and taken to be of full and perfect age so that on that day he may sue for his Livery of the said Dukedom and ought by right to obtain the same as well as if he had been one and twenty years old And he hath his Royalties in certain Actions and Stannery Matters in Wracks at Sea Customs c. yea and Divers Officers or Ministers assigned unto him for these or such like matters And as for the Title of Duke of albany King Charls as the second Son of Scotland receiv'd it from King Iames his Father and therefore was not like to give it from his second Son the eldest Son of Scotland being Duke of Rothsay from his Birth but none of them Dukes of Albany for ought ever I could understand either by Birth or by Creation Fol. 1094. And so the dignity of Arch-Bishops to fall Episcopal Iurisdiction also Our Author concludes this from the general words of the Kings Answer related to in the words foregoing viz. That whatsoever in Episcopacy did appear not to have clearly proceeded from Divine Institution he gives way to be totally abolished But granting that the Dignity of Arch-Bishops was to fall by this Concession yet the same cannot be affirmed of the Episcopal Iurisdiction which hath as good Authority in the holy Scripture as the calling it self For it appears by holy Scripture that unto Timothy the first Bishop of Ephâ—sus St. Paul committed the power of Ordination where he requires him to lay hands hastily on no man 1 Tim. 5 22 And unto Titus the first Bishop of Crete the like Authority for ordaining Presbyters or Elders as our English reads it in every City Tit. 1. v. 5. Next he commands them to take care for the ordering of Gods publick Service viz. That Supplications Prayers Intercessions and giving of Thanks be made for all men 1 Tim. 2. 1. which words relate not to the private Devotions of particular persons but to the Divine Service of the Church as it is affirmed not onely by St Chrysostom Theophylact and Oâ—cumenius amongst the Ancients and by Estius for the Church of Rome but also by Calvin for the Protestant or Reformed Churches Next he requires them to take care that such as painfully labor in the Word and Doctrine receive the honor or recompence which is due unto them 1 Tim. 5. 17. as also to censure and put to silence all such Presbyters as preached any strange Doctrine contrary unto that which they had received from the Apostles 1 Tim 1. 3. And if that failed of the effect and that from Preaching Heterodoxies or strange Doctrines they went on to Heresies then to proceed to Admonition and from thence if no amendment followed to a rejection from his place and deprivation from his Function 1 Tit. 3. 10. as both the Fathers and late Writers understand the Text. Finally for correction in point of Manners as well in the Presbyter as the people St. Paul commits it wholly to the care of his Bishop where he adviseth Timothy not to receive an Accusâ—ation against