on their 〈…〉 Our Author tells us in his Brerewood upon a diligent enquiry hath found it otherwise then our Author doth letting us know That the first Countrey in Christendom whence the Jews were expelled without hope of return was our Countrey of England whence they were banished Anno 1290. by King Edward the first and not long after out of France Anno 1307. by Phiâ—ippus Pulcher. Not out of France first out of England afterwards as our Author would have it Fol. 100. Thus men of yesterday have pride too much to remember what they were the day before An observation true enough but not well applyed The two Spenâ—â—rs whom he speaks this of were not men of yesterday or raised out of the dirt or dunghill to so great an height but of as old and known Nobility as the best in England insomuch that when a question grew in Parliament whether the Baronesse de Spencer or the Lord of Aburgaveny were to have precedency it was adjudg'd unto de Spencer thereby declar'd the antientest Barony of the Kingdom at that time then being These two Spencers Hugh the Father was created Earl of Winchester for term of life and Hugh the Son by marrying one of the Daughters and co-heirs of Gilbert dt Clâ—re became Earl of Gloster Men more to be commended for their Loyalty then accused for their pride but that the King was now declining and therefore it was held fit by the prevalent faction to take his two supporters from him as they after did Fol. 113. The Lord Chancellor was ever a Bishop If our Author by this word ever understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most commonly or for the most part he is right enough but then it will not stand with the following words viz. as if it had been against equity to employ any other 〈◊〉 〈…〉 he take the word ever in its proper and more natural sense as if none but Bishops had ever been advanced unto that office he doth not only misinform the Reader but confute himself he having told us fol. 31. of this present book that Thomas Becket being then but Archdeacon of Canterbury was made Lord Chancellor and that as soon as he was made Archbishop he resign'd that office But the truth is that not only men in holy Orders but many of the Laity also had attained that dignity as will appear to any who will take the pains to 〈◊〉 the Catalogue of the Chancellors and 〈◊〉 of the Grâ—at Seal in the Glossary of Sir Henry 〈◊〉 in which appear not only some of inferior dignity as Deans Archdeacons House-hold Chaplains but many also not dignified with any Ecclesiasticall â—â—â—â—or Notification and therefore in all probability to be looked on as meer Laymen Counsellors and Servants to the Kings in whose times they lived or otherwise studied in the Lawes and of good affectionâ— and consequently capable of the place of such trust and power Fol. 116. This yearâ— viz. 1350. as Authors generally agree King Edward instituted are Order of the Garter Right enough as unto the time but much mistaken in some things which relate unto that antient and most noble Order our Author taking up his Commodities at the second hand neither consulting the Records noâ— dealing in this business with men of credit For first there are not 〈◊〉 Canons resident in the Church of Winâ—or but thirteen only with the Dean it being King Edwards purpoâ—e when he founded that Oâ—deâ— consisting of twenty 〈◊〉 Knights himself being one to 〈◊〉 as many greater and lesser Canons and as many old Souldiers commonly called poor Knightsâ— to be pensioned there Though in this last the number was 〈…〉 up to his first intention He tels us secondly that if he be not mistaken as indeed he is Sir Thomas Row was the last Chancellor of the Order whereas Sir Iames Palmer one of the Gentlemen Huishers of the Privy Chamber succeeded him in the place of Chancellor after his decease Anno 1644. He tels us thirdly that there belongs unto it one Register being alwayes the Dean of Winsor which is nothing so For though the Deans of late times have been Registers also yet ab initio non suit sic it was not so from the beginning The first Dean who was also Register being Iohn Boxul Anno 1557. Before which time beginning at the year 1414. there had been nine Registers which were not Deans but how many more before that time I am not able to say their names not being on Record And soâ—â—thly he tels us that the Garter is one of the extraordinary Habiliments of the Knights of this Order their ordinary being only the blew Ribbon about their necks with the picture of St. George appendant and the Sun in his glory on the left shoulder of their Cloak whereas indeed the Garter is of common wearing and of such necessary use that the Knights are not to be seen abroad without it upon pain of paying two Crowns to any Officer of the Order who shall first claim it unless they be to take a journey in which case it is sufficient to wear a blew Ribbon under their Boots to denote the Garter Lastly whereas our Author tels us that the Knights heâ—eof do wear on the left shoulder of their Cloaks a Sun in his glory and attributes this wearing as some say to King Charles I will first put him out of doubt that this addition was King Charles his then shew him his mistake in the matter it self And first in the first year of that King Ap. 26 1626. it was thus enacted at a publick Chapter of the Oâ—der viz. That all Knights and Companions of the Order shall wear upon the left part of their Cloaks Coats and riding Cassacks at all times when they shall not wear their Roabs and in all places of Assembly an Escocheon of the Armes of St. George id est a Crosse within a Garter not enriched with Pearls or Stones in token of the honour which they hold from the said most noble Order instituted and ordained for persons of the highest worth and honour Our Authour secondly may perceive by this Act of the Kings that St. Georges Crosse within the Garter is the main device injoyned to be worn by all the Knights of that noble Order to which the adding of the Sun in his glory served but for ornament and imbellishing and might be either used or not used but only for conformities sake as they would themselves So many errors in so few lines one shall hardly meet with The Fourth Book From the first Preaching of Wickliffe to the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the Eighth OUR Author begins this Book with the Story of Wickliffe and continueth it in relating the successes of him and his followers to which he seems so much addicted as to Christen their Opinions by the name of the Gospel For speaking of such incouragements and helps as were given to Wickliffe by the Duke of Lancaster with other advantages which
Aux in Guienne called antiently Aquae Augustae from whence those parts of France had the name of Aquitaine and not of Aix which the antient writers called Aquae Sextiae in the Countrey of Provence Now Guienne was at that time in the power of the Kings of England which was the reason why this Bernard was sent with the rest of the Commissioners to the Councell of Basil and being there amongst the rest maintained the rights and preheminences of the English Kings In agitating of which controversie as it stands in our Author I finde mention of one Iohannes de Voragine a worthless Author fol. 181. Mistook both in the name of the man and his quality also For first the Author of the Book called Legenda aurea related to in the former passage was not Iohannes but Iacobus de Voragiâ—e In which Book though there are many idle and unwarrantable fictions yet secondly was the man of more esteem then to passe under the Character of a Worthless Author as being learned for the times in which he lived Archbishop of Genâ—a a chief City of Italy moribus dignitate magno precio as Philippus Bergomensis telleth us of him Anno 1290. at what time he liv'd most eminent for his translation of the Bible into the Italian tongue as we read in Vossius a work of great both difficulty and danger as the times then were sufficient were there nothing else to free him from the ignominious name of a worthlesse Author A greater mistake then this as to the person of the Man is that which followes viz. Fol. 185. â—umphâ—y Duke of Gâ—oueâ— son to King Henry the fifth This though I cannot look on as a fault of the Presle yet I can easily consider it as a slip of the pen it being impossible that our Author should be so far mistaken in Duke Humphry of Gloster who was not son but bâ—otheâ— to King Henry the fifth But I cannot think so charitably of some other errors of this kinde which I finde in his History of Cambridge fol. 67. Where amongst the English Dukes which carryed the title of Earl of Cambridge he reckoneth Edmund of Langly fifth son to Edward the third Edward his son Richard Duke of York his brother father to King Edward the fourth But first this Richard whom he speaks of though he were Earl of Cambridge by the consent of Edward his elder brother yet was he never Duke of York Richard being executed at South-Hampton for treason against King Harry the fifth before that Kings going into France and Edward his elder brother slain not long after in the Battail of Agincourt And secondly this Richard was not the Father but Grandfather of King Edward the fourth For being marryed unto Anne sister and heir unto Edmund Mortimer Eaâ—l of March he had by her a son called Richard improvidently â—estored in bloud and advanced unto the Title of Duke of York by King Henry the sixth Anno 1426. Who by the Lâ—dy Cecely his wife one of the many Daughters of Ralph Eâ—rl of Westmerland was father of King Edward the fourth George Duke of Clarence and King Richard the third Thirdly as Richard Earl of Cambridge was not Duke of York so Richard Duke of York was not Earl of Cambridge though by our Author made the last Earl thereof Hist. of Cam. 162. before the restoring of that title on the House of the Hamiltons If our Author be no better at a pedegree in private Families then he is in those of Kings and Princes I shall not give him mâ—â—h for his Art of Memory for his History less and for his Heraldry just nothing But I see our Author is as good at the succession of Bishops as in that of Princes For saith he speaking of Cardinal Beaufort Fol. 185. He built the fair Hospital of St. Cross neer Winchester and although Chancellor of the University of Oxford was no grand Benefactor thereunto as were his Predecessoâ—s Wickam and Wainfleet Wickam and Wainfleet are here made the Predecessors of Cardinal Beaufort in the See of Winchester whereas in very deed though he succeeded Wickam in that Bishopâ—ick he preceded Wainfleet For in the Catalogue of the Bishops of Winchester they are marshalled thus viz. 1365. 50. William of Wickham 1405. 51. Henry Beaufort 1447. 52. William de Wainfleet which last continued Bishop till the year 1486. the See being kept by these three Bishops above 120. years and thereby giving them gâ—eat Advantages of doing those excellent works and founding those famous Colledges which our Author rightly hath ascribed to the first and last But whereas our Author telleth us also of this Cardinal Beaufort that he built the Hospital of St. Crosse he is as much out in that as he was in the other that Hospital being first built by Henry of Blais Brotheâ— of King Stephen and Bishop of Winchester Anno 1129. augmented only and perhaps more liberally endowed by this Potent Câ—â—dinal From these Foundations made and enlarged by these three great Bishops of Winchester successively pâ—oâ—eed we to two others raised by King Henry the sixth of which our Author telleth us Fol. 183. This good precedent of the Archbishops bounty that is to say the foundation of All-Souls Colledge by Archbishop Châ—cheley may be presumed a Spur to the speed of the Kings liberality who soon after founded Eaton Colledge c. to be a Nursery to Kings Colledge in Cambridge fol. 184. Of â—aton Colledge and the condition of the same our Author hath spoken here at large but we must look foâ— the foundation of Kings Colledge in the History of Cambridge fol 77. where I finde some thing which requireth an Animadversion Our Author there chargeth Dr. Heylyn for avowing something which he cannot justifie that is to say for saying That when William of Wainfleet Bishop of Winchester afterwards founder of Magdalen Colledge perswaded King Henry the Sixth to erect some Monument for Learning in Oxford the King returned Imo potius Cantabrigiae ut duas si fieri possit in Anglia Academias habeam Yea rather said he at Cambridge that if it be possible I may have two Universities in England As if Cambridge were not reputed one before the founding of Kings Colledge therein But here the premises only are the Doctors the inference or conclusion is our Authors own The Doctor infers not thereupon that Cambridge was not reputed an Vniversity till the founding of Kings Colledge by King Henry the sixth and indeed he could not for he acknowledged before out of Robert de Reningtâ—n that it was made an Vniversity in the time of King Edward the second All that the Doctor says is this that as the Vniversity of Cambridge was of a later foundation then Oxford was so it was long before it grew into esteem that is to say to such a measure of esteem at home or abroad before the building of Kings Colledge and the rest that followed but that the King might use those words in his
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
place for a Summers progress It is Nantes in Bretaigne which he means though I am so charitable as to think this to be a mistake rather of the Printer than our Authors own With the like charity also I behold three other mistakes viz. the Emperor of Vienna fol. 137. and the Archdutchesse of Eugenia fol. 139. Balfoure Caselie for Bolsovey Castle fol 192. By which the unknowing Reader may conceive if not otherwise satisfied that Balfour Castle was the antient seat of the Balfours from whence Sr. William Balfour Lieutenant of the Tower that false and treacherous Servant to a bountifull Master derives his pedigree Eugenia which was a part of that Ladies Christian name to be the name of some Province and Vienna the usual place of the Emperors residence to be the name of an Empire But for his last I could alledg somewhat in his excuse it being no unusual thing for Principalities and Kingdomes to take Denomination from their principal Cities For besides the Kings of Mets Orleans and Soissons in France we finde that in the Constitutions of Howel Dha the Kings of England are called Kings of London the Kings of South-Wales Kings of Dyneuor and the King of North-Wales Kings of Aberfraw each of them from the ordinary place of their habitation For which defence if our Author will not thank me he must thank himselfe The mention of Nantes conducts me on to Count Shally's Treason against the French King who was beheaded in that City of which thus our Author Fol. 63. The Count upon Summons before the Privy Councel without more adoe was condemned and forthwith beheaded at Nantes the Duke Momerancy then under Restraint suffered some time after But by his leave the Duke of Monmorency neither suffered on the account of Shalley's Treason nor very soon after his beheading which was in the year 1626. as our Author placeth it For being afterwards enlarged and joyning with Mounsier the Kings Brother in some designe against the King or the Cardinal rather he was defeated and took prisoner by Martial Schomberg created afterwards Duke of Halwyn and being delivered over to the Ministers of Justice was condemned and beheaded at Tholouse Anno 1633. Ibid. Our Wine-Merchants ships were arrested at Blay-Castle upon the Geroud returning down the River from Burdeaux Town by order of the Parliament of Rouen That this Arrest was 〈◊〉 by Order of the Parliament of Rouen I shall hardly grant the jurisdiction of that Parliament being confined within the Dukedome of Normandy as that of Renes within the Dukedome of Bretaigne neither of which nor of any other of the inferior Parliaments are able to doe any thing Extra Sphaeram Activitatis suae beyond their several Bounds and Limits And therefore this Arrest must either be made by Order from the Parliament of Burdeaux the Town and Castle of Blay being within the jurisdiction of that Court or of the Parliament of Paris which being Paramount to the rest may and doth many times extend its power and execute its precepts over all the others Fol. 92. At his death the Court was suddenly filled with Bishops knowing by removes preferments would follow to many expected advancements by it Our Author speaks this of the death of Bishop Andrews and of the great resort of Bishops to the Court which ensued thereupon making them to tarry there on the expectation of Preferment and Removes as his death occasioned till they were sent home by the Court Bishops with the Kings Instructions But in this our Author is mistaken as in other things The Bishops were not sent home with the Kings Instructions till after Christmas Anno 1629. and Bishop Andrews dyed in the latter end of the year 1626. after whose death Dr. Neil then Bishop of Durham being translated to the Sea of Winchester Febr. 7. 1627. Dr. Houson Bishop of Oxon succeeded him in the Sea of Durham in the beginning of the year 1628. Doctor Corbet Dean of Christ-church being consecrated Bishop of Oxon the 17 day of October of the same year so that between the filling up of these Removes and the sending the Bishops home with the Kings Instructions there happened about 15 Moneths so that the great resort of Bishops about the Court Anno 1627. when they were sent back with the Kings Instructions was not occasioned by the expectation of such Preferments and Removes as they might hope for on the death of Bishop 〈◊〉 Fol. 105. In Michaelmas Term the Lady Purbeck daughter and heir to the Lady Hatton by her former Husband and Wife to the Viscount Purbeck Brother to the Duke passed the tryall for adultery c. Our Author is here out again in his Heraldry the Lady Purbeck not being Daughter to the Lady Hatton by her former Husband but by her second Husband Sr. Edward Coke then Attorny Generall and afterwards successively Chief Justice of either Bench. Yet I deny not but that she was an Heir and a rich marriage as it after followeth For being Daughter to Thomas Cecil Earl of Exeter she was married by the care and providence of her Grandfather the Lord Burleigh to Sr. William Newport who being the adopted sonne of the Lord Chancellor Hatton succeeded in his name as well as in his Lands In ordering of which marriage it was agreed on that the vast Debt which the Chancellor owed unto the Crown should be estalled to small Annual payments and that in lieu thereof Sr. William in defect of issue should settle on his wife and her Heires by any Husband whatsoever the Isle of Purbeck and some other of the out parts of his Estate By means whereof her Daughter Frances which she had by Sr. Edward Coke was heir to Corse Castle in the Isle of Purbeck and so much of the rest of the Lands of Hatton as the mother being a woman of great expence did not sell or aliene Fol. 106. The King for all his former Arrears of loan was put to it to borrow more of the Common Councel of London 120000. l. upon Mortgage on his own land of 21000. l. per an And here I think our Author is Mistaken also the Citizens not lending their money upon Mortgage but laying it out in the way of purchase Certain I am that many goodly Mannors lying at the foot of Ponfract-Castle and appertaining to the Crown in right of the Duchy of Lancaster were sold out-right unto the Citizens at this time and therefore I conclude the like also of all the rest But whether it were so or not I cannot chuse but note the sordid basenesse of that City in refusing to supply their King in his great Necessities without Sale or Mortgage especially when the mony was to have been expended in defence of the Rochellers whose cause they seemed so much to favour But for this and other refusals of this nature the Divine vengeance overtook them within few years after the long Parliament draining them of a Million of pounds and more without satisfaction for every
ordinary temper And so much was the King startled when he heard of the giving up of that City with the Fort and Castle and that too in so short a time that he posted away a Messenger to the Lords at Oxford to displace Col. Legg a well known Creature of Prince Ruperts from the Government of that City and Garison and to put it into the hands of Sir Thomas Glenham which was accordingly done and done unto the great contentment of all the Kings party except that Prince and his Dependents But Legg was sweetned not long after by being made one of the Grooms of his Majesties Bed-chamber a place of less command but of greater trust Fol. 891. And now the Parliament consider of a Term or Titleâ— to be given to the Commissioners intrusted with their Great Seal and are to be called Conservators of the Common-wealth of England Not so with reference either to the time or the thing it self For first The Commissioners of the Great Seal were never called the Conservators fo the Common-wealth of England And Secondly If they ever had been called so it was not now that is to say when the Kings Seals were broken in the House of Peers which was not long after Midsummer in the year 1646. But the truth is that on the 30 of Ianuary 1648. being the day of the Kings most deplorable death the Commons caused an Act or Order to be printed in which it was declared that from thenceforth in stead of the Kings Name in all Commissions Decrees Processes and Indictments the â—â—tle of Custodes Libertatis Angliae or the Keepers of the Liberties of England as it was afterwards englished when all Legall Instruments were ordered to be made up in the English-Tongue should be alwaies used But who these Keepers of the Liberties were was a thing much questioned some thought the Commissioners for the great Seal were intended by it whom our Authour by a mistake of the Title cals here the Conservators of the Common-wealth others conceiv'd that it related to the Councel of State but neither rightly For the truth is that there were never any such men to whom this Title was appliable in one sense or other it being onely a Second Notion like Genus and Species in the Schools a new devised term of State-craft to express that trust which never was invested in the persons of any men either more or fewer Fol. 892. â—o then the eldest Son and the yongest Daughter are with the Quâ—â—n in France the two Dukes of York and Glocester with the Princess Elizabeth at St. James 's The Prince in the Weâ—t with his Army â— This is more strange then all the rest that the Kings eldest Son should be with his Mother in France and yet that the Prince at the same time should be with his Army in the West of England I always thought till I saw so good Authority to the contrary that the Prince and the Kings eldest Son had been but one person But finding it otherwise resolved I would fain know which of the Kings Sonâ— is the Prince if the eldest be not It cannot be the second or third for they are here called both onely by the name of Dukes and made distinct persons from the Prince And therefore we must needs believe that the Kings eldest Son Christned by the name of Charls-Iames who dyed at Greâ—nwich almost as soon as he was born Anno 1629. was raised up from the dead by some honest French Conjurer to keep company with the yong Princess Henrietta who might converse with hâ—m as a Play-Fellow without any terror as not being able to distinguish him from a Baby of Clouts That he and all that did adhere unto him should be safe in their Persons Honors andâ—â—onsciences in the Scotish Army and that they would really and effectually joyn with him and with such as would come in unto him and joyn with them for his preservation and should employ their Armies and Forces to assist him to his Kingdomâ— in the recovery of his â—ust Rights But on the contrary these jugling and perfidious 〈◊〉 declare in a Letter to their Commissioners at London by them to be communicated to the Houses of Parliament that there had been no Treaty nor apitulation betwixt his Mâ—â—esty and them nor any in their names c. On the receit of which Letters the Houses Order him to be sent to Warwick Castle But Lesâ—ly who had been us'd to buying and selling in the time of his Pedlâ—ry was loth to lose the benefit of so rich a Commodity and thereupon removes him in such post-haste that on the eighth of May we finde him at Southwel and at Newcastle on the tenth places above an hundred Miles distant from one another and he resolv'd before-hand how to dispose of him when he had him there â—o Scotland he never meant to carry him though some hopes were given of it at the first for not onely Lesly himself but the rest of the Covenanters in the Army were loth to admit of any Competitor in the Government of that Kingdom which they had ingrossed whoâ—y to themselves but the 〈◊〉 in an Assembly of theirs declare expresly against his coming to live amongst them as appears fol 〈◊〉 So that there was no other way left to dispose of his person but to â—ell him to the Houses of Parliament though at the first they made 〈◊〉 of it and would be thought to stand upon Terms or Honor The Eaâ—l of Lowdon who lov'd to hear himsâ—lf speak more â—hen â—ny man living in some Speâ—ches made beâ—ore â—he Houses protested strongly against the dâ—livery of their Kings Person into their Power 〈◊〉 what in 〈◊〉 â—â—amy would lie upon them and the whole Nation â—f 〈◊〉 â—hould to 〈◊〉 But this was but a coâ—y of their Countenance onely 〈◊〉 â—â—vice to raise the Marâ—eâ— and make is â—uch money 〈…〉 as they could At last they came to this Agreement that for the sum of Two hundred thousand pounds they should deliver him to such Commissioners as the Houses should Authorize to receive him of them which was done accordingly For Fol. 939. The Commissioners for receiving the Person of the King came to Newcastle Iune 22. c. Not on the 22 of Iune I am sure of that the Commodity to be bought and sold was of greater value and the Scots too cunning to part with it till they had raised the price of it as high as they could The driving of this Bargain took up all the time betwixt the Kings being carried to Newcastle and the middle of the Winter then next following so that the King might be delivered to these Commissioners that is to say from Prison to Prison on the 22 day of Ianuary but of Iune he could not And here it will not be amiss to consider what loss or benefit redounded to those Merchants which traded in the buying and selling of this precious Commodity And first The Scots not long before their breaking out
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
was I from making any Aâ—theme to be sung of the three Kings of Colen as that I maâ—e iâ— when I first saw it to be torn in pieces and I my selâ— cut it out of the old Song Books belonging to the Choristers School with a Penknife that lay by at my very first coming to reside in that Colledge But sure I was that no such Antheme had been sung in the Qâ—ire during all my time of attendance there nor for ought that any the eldest persons of the Church and Town could tell or ever heard to the contrary for fifâ—y or threescore years before and more 9. That there was indeed an ordinary Knife I confess provided and laid ready among other things belonging to the Administration of the Communion for the cutting of the Bread and divers other uses in the Church Vestry that when the under Officers there had any occasion to use a Knife they might not be put to go to seek one abroad But that it was ever consecrated or so called otherwise then as Mr. Smart and some of his Followers had for their pleasure put that appellâ—tion upon it I never heard nor I believe any body â—lse that lived here among us There were divers other Articles of this nature in the Bill of Complaint whereof Mr. Smart could not prove any one to which I gave the like Answers as I did here to these but Mr. Fullers History makes no mention of them 10. Touching Mr. Smarts Sermon I made answer and submitted his censure to the prudent and religious consideration of the Lords whether he was not justly condemned to be scandalous and seditious by his preaching thereof and I represented many passages in it disagreeable to the Laws of God and his Church and repugnant to the publick Statutes of Parliament 11. For which after we had begun â—o question him in the High Commission Court at Durham where we endeavoured to reduce him to a better mind and to an unity with the Church against which he had so injuriously and intemperatly declaimed I had no further hand or meddling with the prosecution of this maâ—ter in other Courts against him more then that I wrote at the speciall instance of Judge Yelverton a Letter in his behalf to the Archbishop of York and the Commissioners there which I procured the Dean and most of the Prâ—bendaries of Durham to sign and subscribe with me earnestly intreating for him that upon any due sence of his â—ault he might be quietly sent back to us again in hope that he would hereafter live in better peace and concord with us as he promised both judge Yelverton and us to do then he had done before 12. The cruell usage and imprisonment that he suffered whereof Mr. Fuller taketh speciall notice and makes a Marginall mark at it was as I have been credible assured nothing else but a faire and gentle treatment of him in an Officers House at York to whom he was committed for a while and paid little for it Iâ— is the Historians mistake here to say he was carryed â—rom York to Lambeth for he was at his own request sent from Lambeth to York the Fine thâ—t was seâ— up 〈◊〉 him he never paid and by his own wilfull loss of his Church-livings he gained a larger maintenance living at his ease and pleasure by the contribution that he got as a suspended and silenc'd Pâ—eacher though the truth was that having had a Prebend and a Benefice many years together in the Bishoprick of Durham and being alwaies in health he neglected preaching so much at them both and elsewhere besides that he was seldom noted to preach above two Sermons in a year who though he demanded many thousand poundâ— at the Parliament yet by Mr. Fullers leave the Parliament gave him none nor ordered either my self nor any other that he impeacht ever to pay him a Groat only upon Doctor Carrs death who had bâ—en put into hiâ— Prebend place he was sent by the Lords tâ— his Vicâ—rage and his Prebend again which he had little â—â—ill to take because he â—ound but little profit in comparisoâ— of what he hoped to be had by them in the mean while he took up divers great summâ— of monâ—y from some of his Partisans in London and made them believe that the Parliament would pay them all with advantage 13. There is another Marginall Note in Mr. Fuller referring as he saith to my due praise and commendation whereof he makes one part to be that I joyned not with the French Proâ—estants at Charâ—nton since I got over hither into France but I would that he and all the World should know it I never refused to joyn with the Protestants either there or any where else in all â—hings wherein they joyn with the Church of England Many of them have been here at our Church and we have been at theirs I have buried divers of our peopâ—e at Châ—renton and they pâ—rmit us to make use of their pecuâ—iar and decent Saeâ—eâ—erie here in Paris for â—hâ—t purpose which if they did not we â—hould be â—orced to bury our Dead in a Diâ—ch I have Baptized many of their Children at the request of their own Ministers with whom I have good acquaintance and find them â—o be very deserving and learned men great Lovers â—nd Honoureâ—s of our Church notwithstanding the loss which She hath lately received in externall Matâ—ers wherein we are agreed that the Essence of true Religion doth not consist Many of their people and of the best sort and quality among them have frequented our publick Prayers with great reverence and I have delivered tâ—e holy Communion to them according to our own Order which they observed religiously I have Married divers persons of good Condition among them and I have presented some of thâ—ir Sâ—hâ—llars to be ordained Deacons and Priests 〈◊〉 by our own Bishops whereof Monsieur De Tarenne's Chaplain is one and the Duke De la Force's Chaplain another and the Church at Charenton apâ—â—â—ved of it and I preached here publickly at their Ordination Besides I have been as often aâ— I had â—are time from attending our own Congregation to pray and sing Psalmes with them and to heare both the Weekly and the Sunday Sermons at Charenton whither two of my Children also pensioned here in a Protestant Family at Paris have daily repaired for that purpose with the Gentlewoman that governed them All which is abundantly enough to let the World know and see here as it doth what a vain and rash man Mr. Fuller is in his History wherein he hath done Injury to many more besides me some dead and some alive who I hope will represent his unfaithfulness in his own Country both to himself and to others I am only beholden to him for telling the tâ—uâ—h of me in one particular which is that I have by Gods blessing reduced some and preserved many others from communicating with the Papists defending the Truth of our own Religion as I have
over to the King when he was at Oxford about the latter end of the year 1643. But finding his sufferings unregarded and his Person neglected as not being suffered to appear as a Member of the House of Commons when the Parliament was summoned thither he retired again into France to his Wife and Children And secondly He dyed not a profest Catholick but continued to the last a true Son of the Church of England reproacht in his best fortunes by the name of a Papist because preferr'd by the Arch-Bishop a faithful servant to the Queen and a profest enemy to the Puritan Faction For which last reason the Earl of Arundel must be given out to be a Papist though I have seen him often at Divine Service in the Kings Chappel and is so declared to be by our Author also who tells us further That finding his native Countrey too hot for him to hold out he went with the Queen Mother unto Colen fol. 428. as if the Land had been hotter for him or his Zeal hotter then the place had he been a Papist as he was not then for any other Noble Man of that Religion Fol. 320. The English proposed a Cessation of Arms but the Scots as they would obey his Majesties command not to advance so they could not return till they had the effects of their Errand And all this while I would fain know what became of the Irish Army which had been raised in so much haste by the Earl of Strafford with the beginning of the Spring An Army consisting of 10000 Foot and 1500 Horse kept ever since in constant pay and continual Exercise by which the King might have reduced the Scots to their due obedience as the Earl of Strafford declared openly at the Councel Table immediately on the dissolving of the former Parliament yet now this Army lies dormant without acting anything thing toward the suppressing of the Scots exprest in their invading England their wasting the Northern parts of the Kingdom and their bold Demands Which Army if it had been put over into Cumberland to which from the Port of Carick-Fergus in Ireland is but a short and easie passage they might have got upon the back of the Scots and caught that wretched People in a pretty Pit-fall so that having the English Army before them and the Irish behinde them they could not but be ground to powder as between two Mill-stones But there was some fatality in it or rather some over-ruling providence which so dulled our Councels that this Design was never thought of for ought I can learn but sure I am that it was never put into Execution An Army of which the prevailing Members in both Houses stood in so much fear that they never left troubling the King with their importunities till they had caus'd him to Disband it the Scots in the mean time nesting in the Northern Counties and kept at most excessive charges to awe the King and countenance their own proceedings Fol. 334. The Book whilst in loose Papers â—re it was compleat and secured into his Cabinet and that being lost was seized by the enemy at Naseby fight c. Our Author here upon occasion of his Majesties most excellent Book called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he hath wholly Incorporated part per part in this present History gives a very strange Pedigree of it that being composed before Naseby fight it was there taken with the rest of the Kings Papers and coming to his hands again was by the King committed to the hands of one Mr. Symonds and by him to the Press In all which there is nothing true but the last particular For first That Book and the Meditations therein contained were not composed before Naseby fight many of them relating to subsequent Passages which the King without a very hâ—gh measure of the Spirit of Prophecy was not able to look so far intoâ— as if past already Besides that Book being called The Porâ—raiâ—ure of his Maâ—esty in his Solitudes and Sufferings must needs relate unto the times of his Solitude and therefore could not be digested before Naseby fight when he had been continually exercised in Camp or Counsel and not reduc'd to any such Solitude as that Title intimateth Secondly These Papers were not found with the rest in the Kings Cabinet or if they were there must be somewhat in it above a miracle that he should get them again into his hands Assuredly those men who used so much diligence to suppress this Book when it was published in print and many thousand Copies disperst abroad would either have burnt it in the fire or use some other means to prevent the printing of it to their great trouble and disadvantage Thirdly These papers were not delivered by the King to Mr. Symonds who had no such near access to him at that time For the truth is that the King having not finisht his Conceptions on the several Subjects therein contained till he was ready to be carried away from Carisbrook Castle committed those papers at the time of his going thence to the hands of one of his trusty Servants to be so disposed of as might most conduce to the advancement of his Honor Interest By which trusty Servant whosoever he was those papers were committed to the care of the said Mr. Symons who had shewed himself exceeding zealous in the Kings Affairs by whom there was care taken for the publishing of them to the infinite contentment of all those well affected Subjects who could get a â—ight of them Fol. 372. The loss of his place viz. the City of Arras animated the Portugueses to revolt from the Spanish Yoke and to submit themselvesâ— to the right Heir Duke John of Braganza Our Author is out of this also For first it was not the loss of the City of Arras but the secret practices and sollicitations of Cardinal Richelieu which made the Portuguez to revolt And secondly if the King of Spains Title were not good as the best Lawyers of Portugal in the Reign of the Cardinal King Don Henry did affirm it was yet could not the Duke of Braganza be the right Heir of that Kingdom the Children of Mary Dutchess of Parma the eldest Daughter of Prince Edward the third Son of Emmanuel being to be preferr'd before the Children of Katherine Dutchess of Braganza her younger Sister He tells next of Charls That Fol. 373. The Soveraignty of Utrick and Dutchy of Gelders he bought that of William he won by Arms with some pretence of right But first the Soveraignty of Vtreckt came not to him by purchase but was resigned by Henry of Bavaria the then Bishop thereof who being then warred on by the Duke of Gelders and driven out of the City by his own Subjects was not able to hold it Which resignation notwithstanding he was fain to take the City by force and to obtain a confirmation of the Grant not onely from Pope Ciement the 7. but also from the Estates of the Countrey
off so clearly with those evaâ—â—ns which he had put upon the Articles in charge against him or with those touches on the by which are given to the Defendant in the Doctors Answer supposing that the Paper exemplified in the Pamphlet never before publisht as the Authour tels us contain the substance and effect of that which he delivered to the King for his justification as indeed it doth not For the truth is that this Paper was digested by D. Prideaux as soon as he returned to Oxon coppied out and disperst abroad by some of his own party and perswasions to keep up the credit of the cause And though at first it carried the same Title which the Pamphlet gives it viz. The Answer of D. Prideaux to the Information given in against him by D. Heylin yet afterwards upon a melius inquirendum he was otherwise perswaded of it and commonly imputed it to one of Trinity Colledge whom he conceived to have no good affections to him And here I might conclude this point touching the traducing and disturbing of D. Prideaux did I not finde that by the unseasonable publishing of that Antiquated and forgotten Paper the Respondent had not been disturbed and traduced in a far courser manner then he was the Doctor had those passions and infirmities which are incident to other men of lesse ability and having twice before exposed the Respondent to some disadvantages in the point of same and reputation he was the more easily inclined to pursue his blow and render him obnoxious as much as possibly he could to the publike censure The story whereof I shall lay down upon this occasion and hope that I may safely do it without the imputation of affecting the fresh credit of coping with the deceased or purposing any wrong at all unto the reverend name and living fame of that Learned man Proximas egomâ—t sum mihiâ— as the Proverb hath it my own credit is more dear to me then another mans And where I may defend my self with truth and honesty I have no reason to betray both my name and fame by a guilty silence Know then that on tht 24. day of April Anno 1627. I answered in the Divinity Schools at Oxon upon these two Questions viz. An Ecclesia unquam fâ—erit invisibilis And 2. An Ecclesia possit errare Both which I determined in the Negative And in the stating of the first I fell upon a different way from that of D. Prideaux in his Lecture de visibilitate Ecclesiae and other Tractates of and about that time in which the visibility of the Protestant Church and consequently of the renowned Church of England was no otherwise proved then by looking for it into the scattered conventicles of the Berengarians in Italy the Waldenses in France the Wicklifists in England the Hâ—ssites in Bohemia which manner of proceeding not being liked by the Respondent as that which utterly discontinued that succession in the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy which the Church of England claimeth from the very Apostles he rather chose to look for a continual visible Church in Asia Aethiopia Greece Italy yea and Rome it self as also in all the Western Provinces then subject to the power of the Popes thereof And for the proof whereof he shewed First That the Church of England received no succession of doctrine or government from any of the scattered Conventicles before remembred Secondly That the Wicklifsists together which the rest before remembred held many Heterodoxes in Religion as different from the established doctrine of the Church of England as any point which was maintained at that time in the Church of Rome And thirdly That the Learned Writers of that Church Bellarmine himself amongst them have stood up as cordially and stoutly in maintenance of some fundamental Points of the Christian Faith against the Socinians Anabaptists Anti-Trinitarians and other Hereticks of these last ages as any of the Divines and other learned men of the Protestant Churches Which point I closed with these words viz. Vtinam quod ipse de Calvino â—ic semper errasset nobilissimus Cardinalis and this so much displeased the Doctor that as soon as the Respondent had ended his determination he fell most heavily upon him calling him by the odious names of Papicola Bellarminianus Pontificius and I wot not what and bitterly complaining to the younger part of his Audients to whom he made the greatest part of his addresses of the unprofitable pains he had took amongst them if Bellarmine whom he laboured to decry for so many years should now be honoured with the Title of Nobilissimus The like he also did tantaene animis caelestibus irae at another time when the Respondent changed his Copy and acted the part of the Prior Opponent loding the poor young man with so many reproaches that he was branded for a Papist before he understood what Popery was And because this report should not get footing in the Court before him in his first Sermon preached before the King which was in November next following on the words Ioh 4. viz Our Fathers worshiped on this mountain he so declared himself against some errours and corruptions in the Church of Rome that he shewed him to be far enough from any inclinations to the Romish Religion as afterwards in the Year 1638. when that clamour was revived again he gave such satisfaction in his third and fourth Sermon upon the Parable of the Tares that some of the Court who before had been otherwise perswaded of him did not stick to say That he had done more towards the subversion of Popery in those two Sermons then D. Pâ—ideaux had done in all the Sermons which he had ever preached in his life But to proceed the Respondent leaving Oxon within few years after the heat of these reproaches began to cool 〈◊〉 he had reason to conceive that the Doctors 〈◊〉 might in so long a tract of time as from 1627. to 16 〈…〉 cooled also but it happened otherwise For the 〈…〉 being to answer for his degree of Doctor in the 〈…〉 insisted then on the Authority of the Church 〈…〉 he had done on the infallibilâ—ty and visibility of it His Questions these viz. An Eccleâ—ia habeat authoritatem in determinandis â—idei controversâ—â—s 2. Interpretandi Scripturas 3. Discernendi ritus ceremonias All which he held in the Affirmative according to the plain and positive doctrine of the Church of England in the 20. Article which runs thus interminis viz habet Ecclesiae ritas sive ceremonias statuendiâ—us in â—idei controversâ—â—s authoritatem c. but the Doctor was as little pleased with these Questions and the Respondent stating of them as he was with the former And therefore to create to the Respondent the greater odium he openly declared that the Respondent had falsified the publike Doctrine of the Church and charged the Article with that sentence viz. Habet Ecclesia ritus sive Ceremonias c. which