been extremely arrogant and obstinate and zealous beyond knowledg and tho they had suffered for a good Cause yet suffering for it on good or reasonable grounds as neither themselves being any way learned nor pretending the Authority of any Church nor relying on any present Teachers but on the certainty of their own private Judgment interpreting Scripture as you may see And here some Instances are given but if this Period will close it self it may for our Author who seldom takes care of such small matters leaves it in this unfinished condition I will not examine the truth of this Maxim but will only take notice that since all Protestants agree in this that the Ground of our Faith is that which appears to us to be the Sense of the Scripture our Author hath by this Limitation of his former gentleness towards us delivered us all over to the Secular Arm and so God have Mercy on our Souls for it is plain he will have none upon our Bodies XI He quarrels with the Privy-Council for imprisoning of Bonner because he said he would observe the Injunctions that were sent him if they were not contrary and repugnant to Gods Law and to the Statute and Ordinance of the Church the fault imputed here to him I suppose being that he refused to obey any Injunctions of the King when repugnant to the Statute and Ordinance of the Church But since he had a mind to blacken that time he might have as well said that they found fault with him because he promised to obey the Injunctions if they were not contrary to Gods Law and that thereby it appeared that they preferred their Injunctions to the Laws of God as well as to the Laws of the Church and by our Author 's taking no notice of the first Branch of Bonner's Exception it may be inferred That all his Concern is about the Laws of the Church and so they be secured he troubles himself little what becomes of the Law of God But if he had weighed this matter as he ought to do he would have found that this Exception is very ill grounded When a Form of a Subscription is demanded there is no Government in the World that will accept of one that indeed signifies nothing at all for it is visible that a Subscription made with those Reserves signifies nothing therefore if Bonner had acted as became his Character he should have directly refused the Subscription of such Injunctions as he found to be contrary to the Laws of God or to such Laws of the Church as he thought bound his Conscience But the Protestation he made gave a very just ground to the Government to proceed against him according to Law. XII Our Author intending to aggravate the Proceedings against Gardiner shews his great Judgment in setting down the Article relating to the Kings Supremacy at full length whereas he had only named the others for he could have invented nothing that must needs render all his Exceptions to the King's Supremacy more visibly unjust than this doth which is in these Words That his Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church of England hath full Power and Authority to make and set forth Laws Injunctions and Ordinances concerning Religion and Orders in the said Church for repressing all Errors and Heresies and other Enormities and Abuses so that the same Alteration be not contrary or repugnant to the Scriptures or Law of God. This was no other than what Gardiner had over and over again both by his Oaths and his Writings advanced and the restriction set on it was so just that one would think there lay no possible Exception to it Here there is no claim to the declaring what were Errors and Heresies but only to the repressing them and this is done by the Secular Arm even where men are burnt for Heresie Besides the Power that according to our Author belongs to the Pastors of the Church is either founded on the Scriptures or it is not if it is not founded on the Scriptures there is no great regard to be had to it but if it is founded on it then it it clearly excepted by the words of this Article so it is hard to see of what use this is to our Author unless it be to shew him his Injustice XIII He tells us That all that which had been done under King Henry and King Edward was Annulled by an equal Authority under Queen Mary But tho I acknowledg he was both the Soveraign and the Parliament yet there was neither Justice nor Moderation in the Charge now made equal to what had been done before A great deal might be said concerning the Election of the Members of Parliament and the Practices upon them and of the turning out a Multitude of the Clergy before the Laws were changed The Disorders and Irregularities in the Disputes had nothing of that fair Dealing in them that had appeared in King Edward's time and whereas all the Severity of King Edward's days was the Imprisoning of three or four Bishops and the turning out some of the other Clergy he knows well how matters went under Queen Mary So that we cannot be denied this Glory that a Spirit of Justice and Moderation appear'd at every time that the Reformation prevail'd Whereas things went much otherwise in this sad Revolution in which our Author Glories so much So that if the good or ill Behaviours of the several Parties as they had their turns in the Administration of Affairs furnishes a just Prejudice even in favour of the Cause it self we have this on our side as fully as we can wish for XIV He tells us That the Bishoprick of Durham was first kept void in King Edward's days and last of all it was by Act of Parliament dissolved to increase the Kings Revenue If our Author had examined the Records of Parliament he would have found that the Act that related to the Bishoprick of Durham did not at all propose the Increase of the Kings Revenue but the dividing of one Bishoprick into two and the raising and endowing of a new Cathedral Church all which must have risen to about Four thousand Marks of old Rents which considering how long Lands were let near the Borders did certainly very near exhaust the whole Revenue of that See. This is indeed of no great Importance to the main Cause For if sacrilegious Men went into the Reformation hoping to enrich themselves by it this is nothing but what falls out in all great Revolutions And it is plain our Author took up general Reports very easily that so he might make a Clamour with them against our Church But if some that gave an outward compliance to the Doctrine of our Church were really a Reproach to it he of all Men for a certain Reason ought not to insist on it Since we are no more accountable for the Duke of Northumberland's Actions than we are for his own XV. He tells us That the Bishops turned out
still the Priviledges of such a See when all those Reasons which at first procured to it those Priviledges come to cease As for the Third which are more perpetual we pay them all respect and have never changed them but the Dispensations of the Church of Rome hath so destroyed them all that it is a peculiar degree of Confidence for any that are in Communion with that Church to assert such an immutability in the Ancient Canons that a National Synod may not be suffered to alter any of them and yet that one single Bishop whom all Antiquity considered but as a Collegue and Fellow-Bishop to all the rest of the Order should be alloweed an Authority to break and dissolve them all This may serve to shew how weak all those Foundations are upon which our Author builds I come in the next place to examine his Defective and False Account of the Matters of Fact which will engage me into a tedious opening of many Particulars that will be little for our Author's Honour but no Discoveries will affect a Man that could stifle his Conscience for 25 Years and that now hath the Impudence to own it FINIS REFLECTIONS ON THE Oxford Theses Relating to the ENGLISH REFORMATION PART II. Amsterdam Printed for J. S. 1688. REFLECTIONS ON THE Oxford Theses Relating to the ENGLISH REFORMATION IN the former part of these Reflections the general grounds on which our Reformation was attacked were examined the matters of Fact come now to be considered but before I enter upon these alledged by our Author I thought it fitting to begin with an Enquiry into a very important matter relating to that time that hath been lately objected to our Church by one of the Church of Rome which as it is New so it is likewise of great Consequence A Sheet has appeared that was well and decently writ and with a very specious appearance of Reason to prove that Q Elizabeth was a Bastard not upon the common pretence of the Nullity of K. Henry the Eighth's Marriage with her Mother because his former Marriage with Q. Katherine was still in force but upon a Precontract in which Ann Bullen was engaged before her Marriage to K. Henry which being confessed by her self the Marriage was null of it self and was judged to be so by Arch-Bishop Cranmer whose Sentence was confirmed by the Subsequent Parliament So that here is a Nullity and by consequence a Bastardy It is true this Assertion is new so tho it may raise the Credit of him that hath discovered it since it must be confessed that it looks very like good reasoning yet on the other hand it is some prejudice against it that it doth not appear it was ever objected to us before now and no mention being made of it while the whole matter was fresh in Mens memories and while that Queen reigned whose Title this seems to weaken much more than all the other things that were alledged to shake it is a great Presumption that the Men of that time knew there was no force in it So that tho the Novelty of it may please yet it is really a strong prejudice against it But after all it must be confessed the thing is specious and it is of great consequence not only with Relation to the Credit of our Church and of its first Reformation but with Relation to our present Establishment For tho the Writer of that Sheet makes no other use of it but to blemish our Church as guilty of Sedition and Disloyalty for owning a Bastard against the Queen of Scots who was the next lawful Heir yet it will bear another Consequence that is more important in our present Circumstances For as a Precontract infers a Nullity of the Marriage and disables all the issue of it so an ill Title in a Queen infers a Nullity upon all her Laws all her Acts of Government as flowing from an Usurper and therefore this strikes not only at the Honour of our Church in the last Age but at its Settlement in the present and I believe this last is chiefly aimed at For as to the former it may serve in a great measure to justifie our Church that Q. Elizabeth was put in Possession of the Crown by the Nation while it was yet Popish and by the Body of the Clergy that were of that Religion so that all that those of our Church did was to maintain her in that Possession in which we found her and in which our Enemies had put Her. And it must be acknowledged that an anxious weighing of Titles is not so necessary after one is in a legal and peaceable Possession acknowledged by all Parties within the Kingdom as well as by all Princes without it I do not pretend to say That a Possession will justify a bad Title tho there is older Law relating to the Possession of the Crown of England passed by King Henry the VII but an undisputed Possession does certainly very much excuse those who acknowledge and submit to one that is bonoe fidei Possessor Which was plainly Q. Elizabeth's Case But because it may be with great colour of Reason alledged that Right is Right still and that Possession or Prescription are only pretences of Law which may have perhaps weight before a Judg yet these are not sufficient to extinguish a just Title when matters are examined in themselves and abstracted from those Pleadings that may perhaps be legal yet as some will alledg are scarce rational So I will examine this matter as fairly as I must confess it is stated by that Gentleman and will first propose the matter of Fact as Dr. Burnet hath put it who is the only Author that is cited and therefore he must be supposed to have some Credit here Queen Ann Bullen was attainted of Treason upon some pretended Proofs of Adultery and so Judgment was given That she should be either Burnt which is the Death that the Law prescribes for the Traitors of that Sex or Beheaded Two days after the Sentence she is prevail'd on to confess a Precontract before Arch-Bishop Cranmer and so her Marriage with the King is declared void and null and in consequence of that the Issue is illegitimated yet this was so secretly carried that one of the Iudges of that time writes of it as a thing that was only reported and in the subsequent Act of Parliament no mention is made of a Precontract tho no doubt she had confessed it with the circumstances of Time and Person Yet in the Act of Parliament it is only said that she had confessed some just and lawful Impediments by which it was evident that her Marriage with the King was not valid It cannot be now known how this matter was expressed in the Sentence given by Cranmer all these Records being burnt But it is most probable that the matter was more distinctly specified Now the only Reason we can give of those general Words in the Act of Parliament is that this pretended
matter which is at this day practiced in most of all the States of Christendom Otherwise Civil Government were a very feeble thing if it could not preserve its Members from the arbitrary Proceedings of Ecclesiastical Courts And indeed if the Canons and Rules made by the Popes and such Synods as were absolutely at their disposal were the measures of Heresy so that Judgments ought to pass upon them and that States might not cover themselves from them by Laws we know where this must carry us and how many Bonfires must be quickly made in England But God be thanked it is not come to that I must also add one thing That if the Judgment of Heresy had carried with it nothing but the Ecclesiastical Censures of Excommunications and Anathema's the Church might have pretended that the State ought not to meddle too much in it But since Heresy not only drew after it an Infamy in Law but likewise a Writ de Heretico Comburendo according to another Canon acknowledged to be in force by our Author then a State ought to have made such Regulations in this matter as were necessary to protect its Members from such a Butchery For since the Civil Government is bound to secure the Subjects while they continue Innocent and Obedient from the Rage of all their Enemies our Legislators had betrayed their Trust if they had not put an effectual Stop to the Tyranny of the Clergy And thus it is plain That this Declaration made by the Parliament was nothing but a securing to the Subjects their Lives and Fortunes to which they had formerly a very doubtful Tenure since they held them only at the Discretion and Mercy of the Clergy IX But because our Writers have often alledged the Laws made in former times Chiefly the Statute of Premunire made by Richard the 2d against all Bulls and Provisions from the See of Rome Our Author answers this very weightily as he thinks by shewing us That those Laws related only to some special matters that were temporal Things such as the Titles to Benefices or the Translation of Bishops out of England without the Kings consent by which both the King might be deprived of their Counsel and the Treasure of the Kingdom carried away out of it But all this is trifling For a Contest being raised concerning the extent of the Popes Power the Pope claims a degree of Authority to be committed to him by Christ and that the whole Pastoral Work belonged to him Upon this the King and Parliament set bounds to it Now the Question arises out of this Whether the same Authority that warranted them to determine against the Pretensions of that Court in that one Point did not warrant them likewise to do it in other Points To a man of a clear understanding the Matter will appear to be past dispute For if in one Point a Parliament may contradict the Popes Declarations and Canons sure it may do it in another and the only Question then to be examined will be concerning the matter of such Laws For if the matter of those Laws is good the Authority is certainly good and if the matter is not good it is confessed that an Act of Parliament cannot change the nature of things But because this matter is better understood by some Breves printed by Dr. Burnet it will be worth the while to examine it a little more fully That vigorous Act of Parliament came out indeed in the Reign of a feeble Prince but the Popedom at that time was in a more feeble State and the adherence of England to the Pope who sat at Rome was in that time of Schism so valuable a support that those at Rome it seems thought it fit to take no notice of it But the Council of Constance had no sooner heal'd that Wound then the Popes were resolved to have that Law repealed and England falling again under a new Feebleness in Henry 6th Minority and Factions at Home and Losses in France having sunk the Reputation of the Government extreamly the Pope laid hold of that Conjuncture and in his Letters both to the Arch-Bishops and Clergy and to the King and Parliament he Annuls the Statute and requires the Clergy to give it no Obedience declaring all Persons that obey it to be ipso facto Excommunicated and they should not be relaxed by any but himself unless it were at the point of Death and he ordered the Clergy to Preach this Doctrine to all the People He required the Parliament under pain of Damnation to repeal it and he founds his right in the Commission that Christ gave to St. Peter to feed the Flock Here sure if ever the Pope speaks Ex Cathedra yet for all this the Parliament would neither repeal nor explain the former Statute By all which it is plain that our Parliament did not think themselves bound to be born down by big Words and high Pretensions In this Dispute then between the Spiritual and Temporal Power we see the Parliament judged the matter and by the same right that they judged one Point they may judg other Points and if the matter of their Judgment was good their Judgment was as valid under Henry the Eighth as under Richard the Second or Henry the Sixth For the Point being once yeilded that the Civil Authority may examine the Decisions of the Church then this may be certainly carried to other particulars or applied to a greater extent of matter as further discoveries of Truth and new Provocations may arise X. The Affinity of the matter leads me here to make a leap over several Particulars which I will afterwards review and to examine that which our Author hath thought fit to say concerning the burning of Hereticks only by the way I must take notice of the unfaithful Recital that he makes of the two Statutes made against Hereticks under Henry 4th and Henry 5th which he represents as if they had merely left the Judgment of Hereticks to the Ordinary or Diocesan without any thing else by which the Repeal of them must appear to be the taking away that Judgment from the Spiritual Courts but there were other and more important Clauses in those Acts which gave the Parliament just Reason to repeal them In the former the Civil Magistrates are required to be personally present at the giving of Sentence against Hereticks and after the Sentence was passed they were to receive them and there before the People in a high place to be brent Here was the poysonous Sting in that Act which our Author was not faithful enough to mention and in that past by Henry 5th all Magistrates were required to take an Oath when they entred upon their employments That they should use their whole Power and Diligence to destroy all Heresies and Errors called Lollards and to assist the Ordinaries and the Commissaries in their Proceedings against them and all convict of Lollardy were to forfeit all the Lands that they held in Fee-simple as
of ours XIX Our Author excepts to King Henry the Eighth's abrogating those Laws That were established by the Authority of the Bishops of Rome as if this included all those Laws that were passed by the Councils in which Popes presided since the Canon-Law is composed of Synodal as well as of Pontifical Laws In this we will freely own to him that since the time that the Popes have so far enslaved the Bishops as to make them swear Obedience to them we look upon all the Laws that have been made in Synods composed of men so pre-engaged as Papal Laws but this doth not at all touch those Laws that passed before that Authority was claimed And indeed there never was a grosser Abuse put on the World than the whole Canon Law. For as for the first and soundest part of it which is Gratian's Decree it was only a Common-place Book drawn up by a Man that was indeed considering the Age in which he lived of great Learning and good Judgment But he was at that time so ill furnished with all necessary helps to make him judg a right of his Matter that it is an impudent thing in the Ages of more Knowledg to pretend to keep up the Credit of a Book that was compiled in so dark and so corrupt a Time. The rest is yet worst made up of Papal Constitutions or the Decrees of those ignorant and packt Assemblies that had met for the three Ages preceding the Reformation If King Henry had abrogated the Ancient Canons our Author might have had some Colour for his Complaints But the total abrogating of that course Compilation of the Canon-Laws which never was founded on any good Authority was so just a thing that there are very few Learned Men in the Roman Communion at present that will not say it were well for the Church if it were quite laid aside since now all men but such as our Author are ashamed of it XX. Our Author writes as if he intended to do Honour to the Memory of King Henry For he cites these Words out of his Preface to his Injunctions Which Agreement of the Clergy for as much as we think to have proceeded of a good right and true Iudgment and to be agreeable to the Laws and Ordinances of God He thereupon ordered it to be published An ordinary man would be upon this induced to approve mightily of the King's method First to Authorize the Clergy to examine those Matters and after that to review their Determinations himself before he gave his Civil Sanction to them Would our Author have a Prince rely blindly on a National Clergy which is subject to Error as is acknowledged by all the World What Judgment then can he follow but his own The Civil Power must be applied in matters of Religion as is acknowledged on all hands upon the Judgment of the Prince For he can follow no other even in the Principles of the Church of Rome except when he is determined by an Infallible Court which is only in a General Council XXI Among the other Exorbitances of the King's Supremacy one reckoned up by our Author is his taking away the Pope's Authority as Patriarch in confirming the Metropolitan and his requiring his Clergy under the pains of Premunire to consecrate into Bishopricks any that he shall nominate It is great Ignorance or somewhat worse in our Author if he will pretend that the Authority of the Patriarchs over Metropolitans was of Primitive Antiquity for by the Council of Nice every Province was an intire Body within it self if the Clergy is under some servitude as to the promoting those nominated by the King the Pope is under the same to the King of France by the Concordate and our subjection in this Point does not bind our Consciences but lies only on our Persons and Benefices and therefore when a case of Persecution comes we must resolve to venture on a Premunire and worse things too if we are pressed hard XXII He adds to this another gross mistake in History intimating that the Suppression of Monasteries was done by virtue of this Supremacy upon which he runs out into a long deduction of many Particulars relating to that Affair but this is all so false that the Supremacy was not so much as once pretended in it it went all upon Acts of Parliament and the surrenders of the Monks If the King acted violently and unjustly in this matter it doth not at all concern the Reformation and much less his Supremacy and as for all the Topicks of Sacriledg and Profanation and the alienation of Things and the violation of Persons Sacred these are general and dreadful words which lose their Horror when it is considered That the vast endowments of Monasteries were the effects of the Superstition of those Ages in which the belief of the Redemption out of Purgatory by the saying of so many Masses together with many false Miracles had prevailed so far on the Ignorance and Credulity of the World as to draw the best part of the Wealth of Europe into those Houses when I say not only the scandalous Lives of many Monks which were indeed but Personal Things but their false Miracles and Relicks and above all the falshood of redeeming men out of Purgatory by their means were discovered no doubt it was lawful to dissolve all those Endowments and to turn their Wealth to better uses and if the King did not enough that way it was so much the worse for him but that doth not at all blemish the Reformation So that all the long digression he makes upon this Head is impertinent to the business in hand which is the Supremacy XXIII He says That the Pope pretends no such Power as to alienate the Church-Revenues for to spend them himself or to dispose of them in what manner or to what Persons he pleases but only for some just Cause that is in a prudential Arbitration for an equal or greater benefit accruing to the Church or Christianity I do not know if the D's of Parma or a great many other Princes that have been raised out of the Patrimony of the Church would judg this to be good Doctrine and if the Church is always a minor so that the Bargains made in her name may be ever recalled it would be hard to find what Benefit hath arisen to the Church or Christianity out of the Robberies that Popes have made to raise their Families and it is a strange piece of Impudence in these men who are always reproaching us with what some of our Princes did in the time of the Reformation when all that put together doth not amount to the Injustices that have been committed in one single Pontificate of those whom they would have us look on as God's Trustees and as Christ's Vicars if they are not concerned in those who are the Spiritual Heads of their Church much less are we bound to justifie all the Actions of those who are only