Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	house_n	parliament_n	vote_n	2,038	5	10.1645	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67877	The history of the troubles and tryal of the Most Reverend Father in God and blessed martyr, William Laud, Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury. [vol. 2 of the Remains.] wrote by himself during his imprisonment in the Tower ; to which is prefixed the diary of his own life, faithfully and entirely published from the original copy ; and subjoined, a supplement to the preceding history, the Arch-Bishop's last will, his large answer to the Lord Say's speech concerning liturgies, his annual accounts of his province delivered to the king, and some other things relating to the history.	Laud, William, 1573-1645.; Wharton, Henry, 1664-1695.; Prynne, William, 1600-1669. Rome's masterpiece.	1700 (1700)	Wing L596; ESTC R354	287,973	291

never move His Majesty directly or indirectly for that Honour and was surprized with it as altogether unlooked for when His Majesty's Resolution therein was made known unto him Nor ever did that Bishop take so much upon him as a Justiceship of the Peace or meddle with any Lay-Employment save what the Laws and Customs of this Realm laid upon him in the High Commission and the Star-Chamber while those Courts were in being and continued Preaching till he was Threescore and four and then was taken off by Writing of his Book against Fisher the Jesuit being then not able at those Years to continue both And soon after the World knows what trouble befel him and in time they will know why too I hope Besides the Care of Government which is another part of a Bishop's Office and a necessary one too lay heavy upon him in these Factious and broken Times especially And whatsoever this Lord thinks of it certainly though Preaching may be more necessary for the first planting of a Church yet Government is more noble and necessary too where a Church is planted as being that which must keep Preaching and all things else in order And Preaching as 't is now used hath as much need to be kept in order as any even the greatest Extravagance that I know Nor is this out of Christ's Commission Pasce Oves John 21. 15. for the feeding of his Sheep For a Shepherd must guide govern and defend his Sheep in the Pasture as well as drive them to it And he must see that their Pasture be not tainted too or else they will not thrive upon it And then he may be answerable for the Rot that falls among them The Rhetorick goes farther yet To contend for sitting at Council Tables to govern States No but yet to assist them being called by them To have States-Men instead of Church-Men No but doing the Duty of Church-Men to mingle pious Counsels with States-Mens Wisdom To sit in the highest Courts of Judicature And why not in a Kingdom where the Laws and Customs require it Not to be employed in making Laws for Civil Polities and Government And I conceive there is great Reason for this in the Kingdom of England and greater since the Reformation than before Great Reason because the Bishops of England have been accounted and truly been grave and experienced Men and far fitter to have Votes in Parliaments for the making of Laws than many young Youths which are in either House And because it is most fit in the making of Laws for a Kingdom that some Divines should have Vote and Interest to see as much as in them lies that no Law pass which may perhaps though unseen to others intrench upon Religion it self or the Church And I make no doubt but that these and the like Considerations settled it so in England where Bishops have had their Votes in Parliaments and in making Laws ever since there were Parliaments yea or any thing that resembled them in this Kingdom And for my part were I able to give no Reason at all why Bishops should have Votes in Parliament yet I should in all Humility think that there was and is still some great Reason for it since the Wisdom of the State hath successively in so many Ages thought it fit And as there is great Reason they should have Votes in making Laws so is there greater Reason for it since the Reformation than before For before that time Clergy-Men were governed by the Church Canons and Constitutions and the Common Laws of England had but little Power over them Then in the Year 1532. the Clergy submitted and an Act of Parliament was made upon it So that ever since the Clergy of England from the Highest to the Lowest are as much subject to the Temporal Laws as any other Men and therefore ought to have as free a Vote and Consent to the Laws which bind them as other Subjects have Yet so it is that all Clergy-Men are and have long since been excluded from being Members of the House of Commons and now the Bishops and their Votes by this last Act are cast out of the Lord's House By which it is at this Day come to pass that by the Justice of England as now it stands no Clergy-Man hath a Consent by himself or his Proxy to those Laws to which all of them are bound In the mean time before I pass from this Point this Lord must give me leave to put him in mind of that which was openly spoken in both Houses that the Reason why there was such a Clamour against the Bishops Votes was because all or most of them Voted for the King so that the potent Faction could not carry what they pleased especially in the Vpper House And when some saw they could not have their Will to cast out their Votes fairly the Rabble must come down again and Clamour against their Votes not without danger to some of their Persons And come they did in Multitudes But who procured their coming I know not unless it were this Lord and his Followers And notwithstanding this is as clear as the Sun and was openly spoken in the House that this was the true Cause only why they were so angry with the Bishops Votes yet this most Godly and Religious Lord pretends here a far better Cause than this namely that they may as they ought carefully attend to the Preaching of the Word and not be distracted from that great Work by being troubled with these Worldly Affairs And I make no doubt but that the same Zeal will carry the same Men to the devout taking away the Bishops and the Church Lands and perhaps the Parsons Tythes too and put them to such Stipends as they shall think fit that so they may Preach the Gospel freely and not be drawn away with these Worldly Affairs from the principal Work of that Function Well! my Lord must give me leave here to Prophesie a little and 't is but this in short Either the Bishops shall in few Years recover of this Hoarseness and have their Honour and their Votes in Parliament again or before many Years be past all Baseness Barbarity and Confusion will go near to possess both this Church and Kingdom But this Lord hath yet somewhat more to say namely that If they shall be thought fit to sit in such Places and will undertake such Employments they must not be there as ignorant Men but must be knowing in Business of State and understand the Rules and Laws of Government and thereby both their Time and Studies must be necessarily diverted from that which God hath called them unto And this surely is much more Vnlawful for them to admit of than that which the Apostles rejected as a distraction unreasonable for them to be interrupted by Why but yet if they shall be thought fit to sit in such Places and will undertake such Employments what then Why then they must not sit there as ignorant Men

relation again to that Parliament under Edward the First from which his Lordship says Bishops were excluded and we know that Parliament is called Indoctum Parliamentum the unlearned Parliament For all the Lawyers were excluded from that Parliament as well as the Clergy-Men And therefore were this Lord indifferent he might argue that Lawyers Votes are not Fundamental in the Commons House which is true tho' no way convenient rather than that Bishops Votes are not Fundamental in the Lords House which is utterly against all Truth and Convenience But his Lordship's Tooth is so sharp and so black against that Order that he snaps at them upon all and upon no Occasion and would invenom them had he Power To make this seem the better his Lordship ends this Speech with a piece of Philosophy which I cannot approve neither For he says That which hath been done for a time at the King's Pleasure may be done with as little danger for a longer time For First this Proposition is unsound in it self For many Cases may happen in which divers things may be done for a Prince's Pleasure once or for a time and with no great danger which continued or often repeated will be full of danger and perhaps not endured by the Subject Secondly I am confident let the Tables be but turned from a Bishop to a Lay-Man and this Lord shall eat his own Proposition For instance in another Parliament and in a time generally received to be as good as that of Edward the First in Queen Elizabeth's time and within my own Memory Mr. Peter Wentworth moved in the House of Commons to have an Heir apparent declared for the better and securer Peace of the Kingdom in After-times The Queen for her meer Will and Pleasure for that which he did was no Offence against Law took him either out of the House or so soon as he came out of the House clap'd him up in the Tower where he lay till his Death What will this Lord say to this Will he say this was done once at the Prince's Pleasure Why then I return his Proposition upon him and tell him that that which was done once at one Prince's Pleasure may be done oftner at other Prince's Pleasure with as little danger Or will this Lord say this was not done at the Queen's Pleasure but but she might justly and legally do so Then other Princes of this Realm having the same Power residing in them may do by other Parliament Men as she did with this Gentleman And which soever of the two he shall say King Charles had as good Right and with as little Breach of Parliament-Privilege to demand the Six Men which by his Attorney he had accused of Treason as that great Queen had to lay hold on Mr. Wentworth Since I had written this the Observer steps in and tells us That a meer Example though of Queen Elizabeth is no Law for some of her Actions were retracted and that yet without question Queen Elizabeth might do that which a Prince less beloved could never have done 'T is true that a meer Example is not a Law and yet the Parliaments of England even in that happy Queen's Time were not apt to bear Examples against Law and if that she did were not against Law that 's as much as I ask For then neither is that against Law which King Charles did upon a far higher Accusation than could be charged against Mr. Wentworth 'T is true again that Queen Elizabeth might do that which a Prince less beloved could not have done that is she might do that with safety which a Prince less beloved could not do that is not do with safety But whatsoever is lawful for one Prince to do is as lawful for another though perhaps not so expedient in regard of what will be well or ill taken by the People But otherwise the Peoples Affection to the Prince can be no Rule nor Measure of the Princes Justice to the People I will be bold to give him another Instance King Charles demanded Ship-Money all over the Kingdom Either he did this justly and legally for the Defence of himself and the Publick or he did it at his Will and Pleasure thinking that an honourable and fit way of Defence I am sure this Lord will not say he did it legally for his Vote concurred to the condemning of it in Parliament And if he say he did it at his own Will and Pleasure then I would fain know of his Lordship whether this which was done for a time at the King's Pleasure may be done with as little danger to the Liberty of the Subject and the Property of his Goods for a longer time and so be continued on the Subject And if he says it may why did he Vote against it as a thing dangerous And if he says it may not then he must Condemn his own Proposition For he cannot but see that that which is once done or done for a short time at a Prince's Will and Pleasure cannot be often repeated or continued but with far greater danger than it was once done Though for the thing it self if it were not legal I am sorry it is not made so For it would be under God the greatest Honour and Security that this Nation ever had Whereas now the Tugging which falls out between the King's Power and the Peoples Liberty will in time unless God's infinite Mercy prevents it do that in this Kingdom which I abhor to think on This Lord goes on yet and tells us That that which hath been so done for a time when it appears to be fit and for publick Good not only may but ought to be done altogether by the Supream Power So then here this is his Lordship's Doctrine that that which was once done at a Prince's Will and Pleasure when it shall appear to be fit and for the publick Good as he supposeth here the taking away of Bishops Votes to be it not only may but ought to be done altogether by the Supream Power as now that is done by Act of Parliament Not only may but ought Soft a little His Lordship had the same Phrase immediately before Why but First every thing that is fit ought not by and by to be made up into a Law For fitness may vary very often which Laws should not Secondly Every thing that is for the publick Good is not by and by to be made up into a Law For many things in Times of Difficulty and Exigency may be for publick Good which in some other Times may be hurtful and therefore not to be generally bound within a Law And if his Lordship shall say as here he doth that they ought to be done altogether and be made up into a Law by the Supream Power but fitted only to such Times under his Lordship's Favour that ought not to be neither For let such a Law be made and he that is once Master of the Times will have the Law ready to

Life time as if God would give a pattern in the first High Priest under the Law what his Successours in some Cases might and in some must do in great and Civil Affairs And not so only but to instruct the Successours of Moses also what value they should put upon Aaron and his Successours if they will follow the way which God himself prescribed and which hath been taken up and followed in all well govern'd Kingdoms as well Christian as Heathen till this very time that this ignorant boisterous Faction hath laboured to bear sway as a learned Country-Man of ours hath observed And therefore though God set the pattern in Aaron yet he continued it farther to shew as I conceive that his Will was it should continue For no sooner was Aaron dead but his Son Eleazar succeeded in all those great Civil employments as well as in the Priesthood For when the People of Israel were come into the plain of Moab near Jerico and were ready to enter into the Land of Promise God himself joyned Eleazar with Moses for the numbring of all the People that were found fit for War which they were to expect at their entrance into Canaan Numb 26. 1 3. In the difficult point of Inheritance for the Daughters of Zelophehad when they came and demanded right of Moses their demand was made to him and Eleazar and the Princes of the Congregation Numb 27. 2. which they would not have done had not Eleazar had a Vote in that Judicature with Moses and the Princes And no less than God himself commanded Moses to declare Joshua to be his Successour in the presence of the Congregation Josh. 17. 4. And orders farther that Joshua shall stand before Eleazar the Priest and that Eleazar shall ask Counsel for him after the Judgment of Vrim before the Lord. Numb 27. 18 19 23. Now I would fain know of this Lord whether Eleazar might give Joshua the Counsel which he asked of God for him If he might not why did God appoint him to ask it for Joshua If he might then he might give Counsel in Temporal Affairs for so runs the Text about the War to be had with the Canaanites At Eleazar's word they should go out and at his word they should come in both Joshua and all the Children of Israel Phineas the Son of Eleazar but Priest too though not High Priest till after his Father's Death was employed by Moses in the War against the Midianites Numb 31. 6. and the Trumpets put into his Hands After the Victory over them the Captains and the Spoil were brought to Moses Eleazar and the chief Fathers of the Congregation to divide them v. 12 26. and an express Law ordained that if there be a matter too hard for them in Judgment I pray mark it 't is between blood and blood between plea and plea between stroke and stroke these are no Ecclesiastical Matters I trow that they should go unto the Priests the Levites and to the Judges that shall be in those days Deut. 17. 8 9. and he that will not hearken unto the Priest and Judge shall die v. 12. Was the Priest here excluded from all Temporal affairs Nay was he excluded from any when his Judgment was required between Blood and Blood Nay the Geneva Note adds here that the Judge was to give Sentence as the Priests counsel him by the Law of God which gives the Priest a greater power than the Judge since he was to follow the Priest's Direction and Dr. Raynolds tells us very learnedly that this Law was made to establish the highest Court of Judgment among that People in which all harder Causes both Ecclesiastical and Civil should be determined without farther Appeal When the People made War and came nigh unto the Battle the Priest was to approach and speak unto them and when he had done the Officers were to speak to them likewise which must needs imply that the Priests which were present were not strangers to some at least of the Counsels of the War Deut. 20. 2 5. and the whole Law the Judicial as well as the rest was delivered by Moses after he had written it unto the Priests the Sons of Levi and unto all the Elders of Israel Deut. 31. 9. so was the Priest trusted with the Custody and in the discussing of the Law and as is before mentioned Eleazar had his Hand in distributing the Land of Canaan to the several Tribes as well as Joshua and the other Elders of Israel Josh. 14. 1. Nay though this were not ordinary and usual yet Eli was so far trusted with and employed in Temporal Affairs as that being High Priest he was also Judge over Israel fourty Years 1 Sam. 4. 18. and after him Samuel a Levite Judged Israel and no Man better Yea and after the Captivity of Babylon also for well near five Hundred Years the Priesthood had the greatest Stroke in the Government as under the Maccabees and they did all that belonged unto them very worthily and it pleased God to make that Family very victorious After Samuel when that People had Kings to Govern them in that great and most unnatural Conspiracy of Absalom against his Father David in that great distress Hushai was ordered by David to return and mix himself with the Counsels of Absalom and to impart all things to Zadoc and Abiathar the Priests that by them and their Sons David might come to know what was useful or necessary for him to do 1 Sam. 15. 27. 32. 35. and Hushai's making no scruple nor reply to this makes it clear that Zadoc and Abiathar were formerly trusted with David's Counsels and that Hushai had observ'd them to be prudent and secret And when David was old he called a kind of Parliament for the settling his Son Solomon in the Kingdom To that great Assembly he gathered together all the Princes of Israel with the Priests and the Levites 1 Chron. 23. 1 2. so far was he from turning their Votes out of the House of that great Consultation that Six Thousand of them were by the Wisdom of that Senate made Officers and Judges throughout the Kingdom v. 4. and this was done on both sides of Jordan in all businesses of the Lord and in the Service of the King 1 Chron. 26. 30 32. In the beginning of Solomon's Reign Abiathar the High Priest was in all the great Counsels of that State but falling into the Treason of Adonijah he was deprived by Solomon and Zadock made High Priest in his Room 1 King 2. 27 35. And when Jehosaphat repaired the decays of that State he set the Priests and the Levites in their right places again according to that Law in Deut. 17. 8 9. and restored to them that Power in Judicature which was by God's appointment settled in them 2 Chron. 19. 8. And that he had relation to that Law is manifest because he pitches almost upon the same words v. 10. as Dr. Raynolds hath observed before

would have suffered him to take that place upon him so contrary to the command of Christ and the Practice of the Apostles if it had been so indeed Or would they have suffer'd their Preachers which then attended their Commissioners at London not only to meddle with but to preach so much temporal Stuff as little belonged to the Purity of the Gospel had they been of this Lord's Opinion Surely I cannot think it But let the Bishops do but half so much yea though they be commanded to do that which these Men assume to themselves and 't is a venture but it shall prove Treason against the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom and an endeavouring to bring in an Arbitrary Government Well! I 'll tell you a Tale. There 's a Minister at this day in London of great Note among the Faction well esteem'd by this Lord and others of this Outcry against the Bishops Votes in Parliament and their meddling in Civil Affairs this Man I 'll spare his Name being pressed by a Friend of his how he came to be so eager against the Church of which and her Government he had ever heretofore been an Upholder and had Subscribed unto it made this Answer Thou art a Fool thou knowest not what it is to be the Head of a Party This Man is one of the great Masters of the present Reformation and do you not think it far more inconsistent with his Ministerial Function to be in the Head of a turbulent Faction to say the least of them than for a Bishop to meddle in Civil Affairs Yet such is the Religion of our Times But 't is no matter for all this his Lordship hath yet more to say against the Ambition of the Prelates For Their Ambition and intermeddling with Secular Affairs and State Business hath been the cause of shedding more Christian Blood than any thing else in the Christian World and this no Man can deny that is versed in History This is the same over and over again saving that the Expression contains in it a vast Untruth For they that are versed in History must needs say 't is a loud one that Bishops meddling in Temporal Affairs hath been the cause of shedding more Christian Blood than any thing else in the Christian World What a happiness hath this Lord that his pale Meagerness cannot blush at such thing as this Yea but he will prove it here at home in this Kingdom For says he We need not go out of our own Kingdom for Examples of their Insolency and Cruelty When they had a dependency upon the Pope and any footing thereby out of the Land there were never any that carryed themselves with so much Scorn and Insolency towards the Princes of this Kingdom as they have done Two of them the Bishop that last spake hath named but instances of many more may be given whereof there would be no end 'T is true indeed we need not go out of our own Kingdom for Examples of their Insolency and Cruelty For in so many Ages 't is no wonder in any Kingdom to find some bad Examples be it of Insolency Cruelty or what you will Especially in the midst of so much Prosperity as accompanied Clergy-Men in those times But 't is true too that there are far more Examples of their Piety and Charity would this Lord be pleased to remember the one with the other As for their bad Examples his Lordship gives a Reason why not all but some of them carryed themselves with so much Scorn and Insolency towards their Princes even with almost as much as this Lord and his Faction carry themselves at this day towards their mild and gracious King And the Reason is a true one it was their dependency upon the Pope and their footing which thereby they had to subsist out of the Land which may and I hope will be a sufficient warning to his Majesty and his Successours never to let in again a foreign Supream Power into any of his Dominions For 't is to have one State within yet not dependent upon the other which can never be with Safety or Quiet in any Kingdom And I would have the World consider a little with what Insolency and perhaps Disallegiance this Lord and his Round-head Crew would use their Kings if they had but half so strong a foreign dependance as the Bishops then had that dare use the most gracious of Kings as they do this present day Two of these Insolent ones this Lord says the Bishop that last spake named Lincoln stands in the Margin by which it appears that Dr. John Williams then Bishop of Lincoln and since Arch-Bishop of York was the Man that named two but because this Lord names them not I know not who they are and therefore can say nothing for or against them but leave them to that Lord which censured them As for that which follows that the instances of many more may be given whereof there would be no end This is a piece of this Lord 's loud Rhetorick which can have no Truth in it especially relating as it doth to this Kingdom only But whereas this Lord said immediately before that their meddling in State business hath been the cause of shedding more Christian Blood than any thing else in the Christian World and in the very next words falls upon the proof of it in this Kingdom I must put him in mind that one Parliament in England namely that which most irreligiously and trayterously deposed Richard II. was the cause of the effusion of more Christian Blood amongst us than all the Bishops that ever were in this Kingdom For that base and unjust Parliament was the cause of all the Civil Wars those Bloody Wars which began in the Heir's time after the Usurpation of Henry IV. and ceased not till there were slain of the Royal Blood and of Nobles and the common People a Numberless Number And I heartily beg it of God that no disloyal Parliament may ever bring this Kingdom into the like distress For our Neighbours are far stronger now than they were then and what desolation it might bring upon us God in Heaven knows So this Lord may see if he will what a Parliament it self being misgoverned may do But will his Lordship think it Reason to condemn all Parliaments because this and some few more have done what they should not do as he here deals by Bishops Sure he would not But having done with the Bishops dependency on the Pope he goes on and tells us farther that Although the Pope be cast off yet now there is another Inconvenience no less prejudicial to the Kingdom by their sitting in this House and that is they have such an absolute dependency upon the King that they sit not there as free Men. I am heartily sorry to see this Lord thus far transported The Pope is indeed cast off from domineering over King Church and State But I am sorry to hear it from this Lord that this other

Inconvenience by Bishops sitting in the House of Parliament is no less prejudicial to the Kingdom Where first I observe that this Lord accounts the Pope's ruling in this Kingdom but a matter of inconvenience for so his words imply For that must be one Inconvenience if the Bishops voting be the other and I am sure the Laws both of this Church and State make it far worse than an Incovenience Had I said thus much I had been a Papist out of Question Secondly I 'll appeal to any prudent and moderate Protestant in the Christian World whether he can possibly think that the Bishops having Votes in the Parliaments of England can possibly be as great or no less an Inconvenience than the Pope's Supremacy here And I believe this Lord when he thinks better of it will wish these words unsaid Well! but what then is this inconvenience that is so great Why my Lord tells us 't is because they have such an absolute dependency upon the King that they sit not there as free-Men Where first 't is strange to me and my Reason that any dependency on the King be it never so absolute can be possibly so great an Inconvenience to the King as that upon an Independent foreign Power is the King being sworn to the Laws but the Pope being free and as he challenges not only independent from but superiour to both King and Laws Secondly I conceive the Bishops dependency is no more absolute upon the King than is the dependence of other Honourable Members of that House and that the Bishops sit there as absolute free-men as any others not excepting his Lordship And of this Belief I must be till the contrary shall be proved which his Lordship goes thus about to do That which is requisite to Freedom is to be void of Hopes and Fears he that can lay down these is a Free-man and will be so in this House But for the Bishops as the case stands with them it is not likely they will lay aside their Hopes greater Bishopricks being still in expectancy and for their Fears they cannot lay them down since their Places and Seats in Parliament are not invested in them by Blood and so hereditary but by annexation of a Barony to their Office and depending upon that Office so that they may be 〈◊〉 of their Office and thereby of their Places at the King's pleasure My Lord's Philosophy is good enough for to be void of Hopes and Fears is very requisite to Freedom and he that can lay these down is a Free-man or may be if he will But whether he will be so in that great House I cannot so well tell For though no Man can be free that is full charg'd with Hopes or Fears yet there are some other things which collaterally work upon Men and consequently take off their Freedom almost as much as Hopes and Fears can do Such are Consanguinity Affinity especially if the Wife bears any sway private Friendship and above all Faction And therefore though I cannot think that every Man will be a Free-man in that House that is void of Hopes and Fears yet I believe he may if he will Now I conceive that in all these collateral Stiflings of a Man's Freedom the Lay Lords are by far less free than the Bishops are Again for the main bars of Freedom Hopes and Fears into which all the rest do some way or other fall I do not yet see but that Bishops even as the case stands with them may be as free and I hope are in their Voting as Temporal Lords For their Hopes this Lord tells us 't is not likely they will lay them aside greater Bishopricks being still in expectancy Truly I do not know why a deserving Bishop may not in due time hope for a better Bishoprick and yet retain that Freedom which becomes him in Parliament as well as any Noble-man may be Noble and Free in that great Court and yet have moderated Hopes of being called to some great Office or to the Council-table or some honourable and profitable Embassage or some Knighthood of the Garter of all or some of which there is still expectancy Lay your Hand on your Heart my Lord and examine your self As for Fears his Lordship tells us roundly the Bishops cannot lay them down Cannot Are all the Bishops such poor Spirits But why can they not Why because their Places in Parliament are not hereditary but by annexation of a Barony to their Office and depending upon it so that they may be deprived of their Office and thereby of their Place at the King's pleasure First I believe the Bishops gave their Votes in Parliament as freely to their Conscience and Judgment as this Lord or any other Secondly If any of them for Fear or any other motive have given their Votes unworthily I doubt not but many Honourable Lords have at some time or other forgot themselves and born the Bishops company though in this I commend neither Thirdly I know some Bishops who had rather lose not their Baronies only but their Bishopricks also than Vote so unworthily as this Lord would make the World believe they have done Lastly it is true their Seat in Parliament depends on their Barony their Barony on their Office and if they be deprived of their Office both Barony and Seat in Parliament are gone But I hope my Lord will not say we live under a Tyrant and then I will say Bishops are not deprivable of their Office and consequently not of the rest at the Kings Pleasure But this Lord proceeds into a farther Amplification And to whet his inveterate Malice against the King says as follows Nay They do not so much as sit here dum bene se gesserint as the Judges now by your Lordships Petition to the King have their Places granted them but at Will and Pleasure and therefore as they were all excluded by Edward the First as long as he pleased and Laws made excluso Clero so may they be by any King at his Pleasure in like manner They must needs therefore be in an absolute dependency upon the Crown and thereby at Devotion for their Votes which how prejudicial it hath been and will be to this House I need not say If I could wonder at any thing which this Lord doth or says in such Arguments as these when his Heart is up against the Clergy I should wonder at this For if he will not suppose the King's Government to be Tyrannical the Bishops have their Places during Life and cannot justly be put out of them unless their Miscarriage be such as shall merit a Deprivation And therefore by this Lord 's good leave they have as good a Tenure as the Judges is of a Quamdiu bene se gesserint And this they have without their Lordships Petition to the King as his Lordship tells us was fain to be made for the Judges thereby galling the King for giving some Patents to the Judges during Pleasure which as

rest For out of all doubt their Votes do hurt sometimes and it may be more often and more dangerously than the Bishops Votes And when this Lord shall be pleased to tell us what those other Irregularities are which are as antient and yet redressed I will consider of them and then either grant or deny In the mean time I think it hath been proved that it is no Irregularity for a Bishop that is called to it by Supreme Authority to give Counsel or otherwise to meddle in Civil Affairs so as it take him not quite off from his Calling And for his Lordship 's Close That this is not so antient but that it may be truly said Non fuit sic ab initio his Lordship is much deceived For that Speech of our Saviour's St. Matthew 19. 8. is spoken of Marriage which was instituted in Paradise and therefore ab initio from the beginning must there be taken from the Creation or from the Institution of Marriage soon after it But I hope his Lordship means it not so here to put it off that Bishops had not Votes in the Parliaments of England from the Creation For then no question but it may be truly said Non fuit sic ab initio But if his Lordship or any other will apply this Speech to any thing else which hath not its beginning so high he must then refer his Words and meaning to that time in which that thing he speaks of took its beginning as is this particular to the beginning of Parliaments in this Kingdom And then under Favour of this Lord the voting of Bishops in Parliament is so antient that it cannot be truly said Non fuit sic ab initio For so far as this Kingdom hath any Records to shew Clergy-Men both Bishops and Abbots had free and full Votes in Parliament so full as that in the first Parliament of which we have any certain Records which was in the Forty and ninth Year of Henry the Third there was Summoned by the King to Vote in Parliament One hundred and twenty Bishops Abbots and Priors and but Twenty three Lay-Lords Now there were but Twenty six Bishops in all and the Lords being multiplied to the unspeakable Prejudice of the Crown into above One hundred besides many of their young Sons called by Writ in their Father's Life-time have either found or made a troubled time to cast the Bishops and their Votes out of the House 2. To the Objection for being Established by Law his Lordship says The Law-makers have the same Power and the same Charge to alter old Laws inconvenient as to make new that are necessary The Law-makers have indeed the same Power in them and the same Charge upon them that their Predecessors in former Times had and there 's no question but old Laws may be Abrogated and new ones made But this Lord who seems to be well versed in the Rules and Laws of Government which the poor Bishops understand not cannot but know that it 's a dangerous thing to be often changing of the Laws especially such as have been antient and where the old is not inconvenient nor the new necessary which is the true State of this Business whatever this Lord thinks 3. And for the Third Objection the Privileges of the House this Lord says it can be no Breach of them For either Estate may propose to the other by way of Bill what they conceive to be for publick Good and they have Power respectively of accepting or refusing This is an easie Answer indeed and very true For either Estate in Parliament may propose to the other by way of Bill and they have Power respectively of accepting or refusing and there is no Breach of Privilege in all this But this easie Answer comes not home For how my Lord understands this Objection I know not it seems as if it did reach only to the external Breach of some Privilege but I conceive they which made the Objection meant much more As namely that by this Bill there was an aim in the Commons to weaken the Lords House and by making their Votes fewer to be the better able to work them to their own Ends in future Businesses So the Argument is of equal if not greater strength against the Lord's yielding to the Bill to the Iufringement of their own strength than to the Commons proposing it and there is no doubt but that the Commons might propose their Bill without Breach of Privilege but whether the Lords might grant it without impairing their own strength I leave the future Times which shall see the Success of this Act of Parliament to judge of the Wisdom of it which I shall not presume to do I thought his Lordship had now done but he tells us 4. There are two other Objections which may seem to have more force but they will receive satisfactory Answers The one is that if they may remove Bishops they may as well next time remove Barons and Earls This Lord confesses the two Arguments following are of more force but he says they will receive satisfactory Answers And it may be so But what Answers soever they may receive yet I doubt whether those which that Lord gives be such For to this of taking away of Barons and Earls next his Lordship Answers two things First he says The Reason is not the same the one sitting by an Honour invested in their Blood and Hereditary which though it be in the King alone to grant yet being once granted he cannot take away The other sitting by a Barony depending upon an Office which may be taken away for if they be deprived of their Office they sit not To this there have been enough said before yet that it may fully appear this Reason is not Satisfactory this Lord should do well to know or rather to remember for I think he knows it already that though these great Lords have and hold their Places in Parliament by Blood and Inheritance and the Bishops by Baronies depending upon their Office yet the King which gives alone can no more justly or lawfully alone away their Office without their Demerit and that in a legal way than he can take away Noblemens Honours And therefore for ought is yet said their Cases are not so much alike as his Lordship would have them seem In this indeed they differ somewhat that Bishops may be deprived upon more Crimes than those are for which Earls and Barons may lose their Honours but neither of them can be justly done by the King's Will and Pleasure only But Secondly for farther Answer this Lord tells us The Bishops sitting there is not so essential For Laws have been and may be made they being all excluded but it can never be shewed that ever there were Laws made by the King and them the Lords and Earls excluded This Reason is as little satisfactory to me as the former For certainly according to Law and Prescription of Hundreds of Years the Bishops sitting