Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	king_n	parliament_n	prerogative_n	7,334	5	10.0491	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B15350	De adiaphoris Theological and scholastical positions, concerning the nature and vse of things indifferent. Where also is methodically and briefely handled, of ciuill and ecclesiasticall magistrates, of humane lawes, of Christian libertie, of scandall, and of the worship of God. A vowed worke, destinated (by the grace of God) to appease the dissentions of the Church of England. Written in Latine by M. Gabriel Powel, and translated into English by T.I.; De adiaphoris. English	Powel, Gabriel, 1576-1611.; Jackson, Thomas, 1579-1640, attributed name.; T. I., fl. 1607.	1607 (1607)	STC 20146; ESTC S101530	122,532	204

of depriuation so giuen in the Ecclesiasticall Courts which causeth me the more to maruel at the impudencie and presumption of the refractarie faction that contradict all the Iudges and traduce all such Sentences as vniust vnlawfull c. That which followeth concerning the Statute of Magna Charta and the lawfulnes of the Depriuation of the refractarie Ministers for not conforming themselues c. requireth no farther answere seeing the Defender himselfe pag. 93. confesseth such depriuation to be iust and according to Law Depriuation for non-conformitie granted lawfull by the Defender saying Hereupon WE GRANT that if the King haue any Ecclesiasticall Law of the Land which thing was neuer doubted by any man for the DEPRIVATION of a Minister from his libertie and freehold for not subscription periurie contempt of Canonicall so called obedience omission of rites and ceremonies not precise obseruation of the booke of Common Prayer c. then WE GRANT that the Ordinaries being the Kings Iudges Ecclesiasticall MAY RIGHTLY DEPRIVE A MINISTER FROM HIS BENEFICE for these offences Yet I can but wonder at the giddines of the Defenders Spirit where he seemeth expressely to deny what heere he confesseth Notwithstanding saith he I affirme that all Iudiciall acts and Sentences how many soeuer of depriuation of Ministers from their Benefices had made and giuen by the Ecclesiasticall Iudges since the 25. of King Henry the 8. only according or only by force and vertue of the said Ius Pontificium or Bishop of Rome his Law the Sentences giuen in the time of Queene Mary excepted are and ought to be holden not to be had made and giuen by the Lawes of this Kingdome or by the Kings Ecclesiasticall Law And why Euen because the whole Ius Pontificium or Bishop of Romes Law was altogether excepting the time of Queene Mary abrogated annulled and made void by an Act of Parliament and consequently is but a meere Alien Forraine and Strange Law and no municipall Law of England and therefore not the Kings Ecclesiasticall Law I answere I. The Defender had been a good Anuocate for bloodie BONER and other Popish Prelats that were depriued in the daies of that renowmed Prince King EDVVARD the VI. and also in the beginning of the raigne of our late noble Queene for all the Lawiers in England were not then able to espie what now the Defender plainely seeth except his eyes deceiue him II. The Depriuation of the refractarie Ministers for non-conformitie is grounded not vpon the Canon Law but vpon the expresse words of the Statute of 1. Eliz. cap. 2. All and singular Archbishops and Bishops c. shall haue full power and auctoritie by vertue of this Act c. to punish by admonition excommunication sequestration or DEPRIVATION c. III. It is not true that the Canon Law was euery yet How farre the CANON Law is abrogated or is now altogether abrogated annulled and made void by Act of Parliament and so consequently it is not a meere Alien Forraine and Strange Law but is the Law of the Land yea and the Kings Ecclesiasticall Law as is manifest by the very words of the Statute which the Defender would haue pointed at 25. H. 8. cap. 19. in fine Prouided also that such Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals prouinciall being already made which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the Lawes Statutes and customes of this Realme nor to the damage or hurt of the Kings prerogatiue Royall SHALL NOVV STILL BE VSED AND EXECVTED as they were afore the making of this Act. And in the 21. Chapter more plainely 25. H. 8. cap. 21. non longè à princip Where this your Graces Realme recognising no Superiour vnder God but only your Grace hath bin is free from all subiection to any mans Lawes but only to such as haue been deuised made and ordained within this Realme for the wealth of the same NW or To SVCH OTHER as by sufferance of your Grace and your Progenitors the people of this your Realme haue taken at their free libertie by their owne consent to be vsed amongst them and haue bound themselues by long vse and custome to the obseruance of the same not as to the ordinance of the Lawes of any forraine Prince Potentate or Prelate but as to the CVSTOMED AND ANCIENT LAVVES OF THIS REALME NW originally established as LAVVES OF THE SAME by the said sufferance consents and custome and none otherwise It standeth therefore with naturall equitie and good reason that all and euery such Lawes humane made within this Realme or induced into this Realme by the said sufferance consents and custome your royall Maiestie c. Thus farre the words of the Statute Both which Acts being repealed by Queene Mary were reuiued againe by Queene Elizabeth 1. Eliz. cap. 1. in princip and so stand in force at this day The Defenders long and tedious Digressions touching the Oath ex Officio a point learnedly hādled by M. Doctor Cosens in his Apologie whereunto I referre the Reader and also concerning the Canons it were to wearisome vnto the Reader here to refute Neither haue I such leasure to follow him in his idle and adle discourses but haue determined precisely to keepe my selfe within the bounds prescribed by the Suppliants Linquo coax ranis c. IX ARGVMENT God doth euer plentifully recompense any kindnes shewed vnto his Children Supplicat specially vnto the Ministers and disciples of Christ Ergo The high Court of Parliament ought to shew kindnes vnto the refractarie ministers ANSVVERE To the Consequence I OVr Sauiour saith Answere He that receiueth a Prophet in the name of a Prophet shall receiue a Prophets reward Matth. 10.41 So shall he also that doth any kindnes vnto a Minister But if a Minister do otherwise then he ought as these Refractaries do what kindnes then ought such to haue done vnto them The Defender replieth two things I. Reply There is a secret contradiction in this Answere for as a Maior out of his Office is no Maior so a Minister out of his Ministerie is no Minister Was there euer heard such a Proposition vttered by any Diuine A Minister out of his Ministeris is no Minister Reioynder An absurd Position of the Defender Then belike as oft as a Minister is silenced or suspended or depriued if he shall be restored againe or called into some other place hee must haue a new ordination Vnpossible and absurd Neither can the Office of a Maior being but temporary for a yeere only be compared vnto the Office of a Minister being perpetuall The Error is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Theologia Also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 II. Reply What a multitude of conformable Ministers are quite ouerthrowne by this Argument For do not many of them otherwise then they ought But what aduantageth this the refractarie Ministers Reioynder We doe not affirme that such as doe otherwise then they ought whether conformable or refractarie

exercises of pietie whether publique or priuate or for the auoiding of the Scandall of the weake and for their conuersion to the Church and knowledge of the truth as we haue said before 15 Ciuill Lawes 2. Ciuill are the Determinations of Circumstances necessary or profitable for the keeping of the morall Precepts of the second Table 16 Because they concerne the Conseruation of Order and Comlinesse in common life and ciuill society and of peace amongst men 17 And albeit both the Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill functions be Both the functions haue all others subiect vnto themselues euerie one in regard of it selfe Principall hauing all other functions subordinate and subiect thereunto yet are they distinguished one from another by certaine boūds and limits in the administration of the affaires of Religion 18 For the Minister of the Church instructeth the consciences of men by the Word The Minister whereunto the greatest Magistrate is as well bound to harken and yeeld obedience as the inferiour citizen of lowest degree 19 And the Ciuill Magistrate taketh charge and care The Magistrate that the Word be truly taught preached and receiued punishing with the external sword the violators and contemners of Discipline whether they be Ministers or common people 20 And this is certaine The Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill functions are distinct Offices that these two Offices or functions are distinct and different one from the other which Satan hath marueilously confounded in the Papacie but we and all other good Christians must watch diligently that they be not confounded againe 21 From whence it ariseth Note well that one and the same Person cannot be a Bishop and a Prince or King also a Pastor and a Master of a familie For as these Offices are diuided and seuered so ought also the Persons to be 22 And yet ONE MAN may vndergoe and beare both Persons Whether one and the same Man may beare two persons as the same N. may be both a Minister and a Master of a family So N. being one and the same man may be both Duke of Cornwall and Archbishop of Yorke and yet the Duke of Cornwall cannot be Archbishop of Yorke 23 A Bishop as he is Bishop hath no power ouer the Church to impose any Law Tradition or Ceremony without the consent thereof either expresse or implied 24 Because the Church is a free Lady or Mistresse and the Bishops ought not to beare rule ouer the faith of the Church nor to oppresse or burthen her against her will For they are the Stewards and Ministers of the Church and not LORDS ouer the same 25 But if the Church doth giue her consent and ioyne as one body with the Bishops then they may impose what they please vpon themselues prouided it be not against the analogie of faith and so againe omitte and release the same at their owne pleasure 26 A Bishop as he is a Prince much lesse may burthen the Church with any constitutions for this were to confound both Offices and to be indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I speak this of the Church as it is a Church and distinguished from the Ciuill estate 27 A Bishop as he is a Prince may impose whatsoeuer he thinketh good vpon his Subiects as they be Subiects and they are bound to yeeld obedience thereunto so it be godly and lawfull For then they obey not as they are the Church but as citizens and Subiects For there is a two-fold Person in one and the same man 28 So N. as he is Duke of Cornwall commanding all his Subiects to keepe a generall fast or any other such lawfull thing this commandement constraineth all them that acknowledge his power as he is Duke to obedience but not all those which acknowledge him to be their Archbishop namely which are subiect to some other temporall Duke or Prince albeit they be of the Prouince of Yorke 29 Euen as N. compelleth his Seruant to be obedient vnto his Oeconomicall or Domestique Lawes and Orders but not his Church N. 30 But to come neerer the point The Office of the Ciuil Magistrate in Ecclesiasticall matters there is a three-fold Office of the Ciuil Magistrate in Ecclesiastical affaires First that after the example of Dauid 1. Chron. 16.27 he prouide that true Doctrine the sincere Worship of God may flourish in euery part of his kingdome and that the Churches may be rightly setled and gouerned by able and sufficient persons 31 The Second Office is that the Magistrate doe by his publique authority approue establish that Order which was ordained by GOD himselfe for this end and purpose Euen as the godly King Iehoshaphat destroyed the groues and tooke away the high places out of Iuda and sent his Nobles with the Priests and Leuites through all his kingdome with the Booke of the Law which they had that they might goe about all the cities of Iuda and teach the same to all the people 2. Chron. 17.6 32 So also Ezekias sent letters and messengers into all Israel to call them to the house of the Lord at Ierusalem to offer the Passeouer to IEHOVAH the God of Israel 2. Chro. 30.2 c. 33 And so Nehemiah caused the Booke of the Law to be read in the eares of the people and according to the Law therein contained he separated and put away al the strange wiues which the Israelites had married contrarie to the ordinance of GOD Nehem. 13.1 c. 34 The Third Office is that they prouide that all those things which doe appertaine to God and concerne the consciences of men be administred onely by the Ministers of the Church and yet themselues ought to assist and defend the Ministerie with their presence counsell protection and authoritie so as there may be a coniunction and not a confusion of both these Orders and functions 35 According to the Rule and counsell of Dauid to his sonne Salomon when hee exhorteth him to the care and charge of building the Temple and also of prouiding for the holy Worship of God 1. Chro. 28.21 Let all the Priests and Leuits be with thee in all the Ministerie of the house of God 36 The Summe briefly is The Ciuill Magistrate is the keeper of the Law of God for so much as concerneth the outward discipline that the difference betwixt the Ministerie of the Gospell and the Magistracie may alway bee preserued 37 The Ministerie of the Gospell proponeth the Gospel of grace whereby the Holy Ghost is effectuall in the beleeuers as it is 2. Cor. 3.6 He hath made vs able Ministers of the new Testament not of the letter but of the spirit 38 And yet in the meane time the Magistrate hath his outward Office for the repressing of all Scandals for forbidding Idolatrie as well as adulterie and murder Which thing is notablie manifested by S. Paul saying The law was giuen against the vnrighteous profane and despisers of God And the same Apostle calleth this the LAVVFVL vse

of the fifteenth Age since Christ CALVINE and ZANCHIVS but that I had hitherto purposely abstained from citing any Humane Testimonies And I am not ignorant how little the Ministers esteeme Humane authoritie and how vngratefull it is vnto them to be pressed with the iudgement yea of the most learned Diuines 38 The Error is two-fold 1. A shamefull Begging of Question 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Theologia OBIECTION III. 39 Thirdly they Obiect Obiect 7. All the monuments and instruments of Idolatrie ought vtterly to be taken away and destroyed Ergo The Churches wherein Masses haue been said the Surplice and Consignation of the Crosse in Baptisme are vtterly to be abolished ANSVVERE I. To the Antecedent 40 I. The Antecedent is not vniuerfally true For then Answ all instruments of Idolatrie and Superstition Of abolishing of things abused to Idolatrie are vtterly to be a bolished when they are rather hurtfull then profitable vnto Pietie and not simplie nor of themselues nor at all places and times 41 And this 1. Because it is not prohibited in the holy Scriptures vnto Christians to Worship God in all places and times Ioh. 4.21 Malach. 1.11 1. Tim. 2.8 2 Because euery Creature of God is good and the earth is the Lords and the fulnes thereof 3 Because whatsoeuer is in the world we may vse it for the glory of God and the profit of the Church 4 Because as no meate is vnlawfull vnto a Christian so it be receiued with thankes-giuing so also no Creature no place is prohibited vnto a Christian so that all things be taken from thence which repugne the Law of God 5 Because it is lawfull for a Christian to eate things sacrificed vnto Idols if there be no offence yeelded vnto the weake nor any occasion of Idolatrie nor the Aduersaries confirmed therein seeing an Idoll is nothing in the world and that meate doth not commend a man vnto God 1. Cor. 8. 9. 10. and in the new Testament Vnto the cleane all things are cleane 6 Because as it is lawful to conuert a man being an Idolater abolishing only the vicious affections of the mind and the Idolatrous Worship which he vsed So also is it lawfull to conuert the Instruments of Idolatrie vnto the godly vse of the Church the abuse only being taken away 7 Because Almightie GOD himselfe commanded that all the gold and siluer and brasse should be taken out of Ierico and put into the treasure of the house of the Lord Iosh 6.24 42 Two most certain Rules teaching what we ought to do in this case The FIRST II. But that no man be deceiued herein these two most certaine and infallible Rules are diligently to be obserued and remembred whereof the first is If there be any thing in any place vnprofitable and idle or not very conuenient and necessary which hath bin abused specially to Idolatrie that together with the abuse ought to be taken away albeit it be not impious of it selfe 43 So Ezechias tooke away the Brasen Sarpent that all occasion of euill might be remoued 44 So also the Apostle saith that we must abstaine not only from all euill but also from all apparance and shew of euill that is from all occasion of euill 45 And Christ himselfe saith Matth. 5.29 If thy right eye cause thee to offend pluck it out and cast it from thee that is Thou oughtest to take away and cast from thee all things yea though they be most deare vnto thee which are an offence and hinderance that thou canest not follow Christ and make progresse in pietie 46 The SECOND The second Rule is If any thing seeme profitable and commedious for Edification that may be still retained and vsed in the Church the abuse being refuted by the Doctrine of the truth and abolished As appeareth out of that place Let no man iudge you in meate or drinke or in the part of an holy day c. Coloss 2 15. 47 III. The Error is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 48 Obiect 8. The Ministers insist God plainly commandeth Deut. 7.25.26 The grauen Images of their Gods shall yee burne with fire and couet not the siluer and gold that is on them nor take it vnto thee lest thou bee snared therewith for it is an abomination before Iehouah thy God Bring not therefore abomination into thine house lest thou be accursed like it but vtterly abhorre it and count it most abhominable for it is accursed Ergo. Not only the abuse is to be taken away but also the thing abused it selfe is vtterly to abolished 49 ANSVVERE God forbiddeth not Answ The Commandement of taking away the gold c. of Idols how it is to be vnderstood but that the gold and siluer of Idols and such like things of value may be conuerted INTO THE VSE OF THE HOVSE OF GOD but only that they be not conuerted INTO PRIVATE VSE and that we do not HONOR them as euidently appeareth out of the Text Take not VNTO THEE lest THOV be ensnared therewith Bring it not into THINE HOVSE 50 The Error is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 51 Againe they insist Obiect 9. But it is an expresse precept of God Numb 33.52 Yee shall driue out all the Inhabitants of the Land of Canaan before you and destroy all their pictures and breake asunder all their Images of mettall and plucke downe all their high places Ergo. All the monuments and instruments of Idolatrie are to be vtterly be abolished 52 ANSVV. I. Answ Christians are not tied vnto the Politicall Lawes peculiarly giuen vnto the Israelites Of things abused to Idolatrie Now that Commandement appertaineth vnto the Israelites only and speaketh onely of the temporal land of Canaan as is plainly manifest in the Text. 53 II. Before the comming of Messiah GOD would that there should be but one Temple onely amongst his people the mysterie whereof is not vnknowne wherefore he commandeth by law that there should not one of the Temples of the Gentiles bee permitted to stand but ought to be battered and made euen with the ground which law now in the Christian Common-wealth hath no place 54 III. The Errour is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 55 They insist Obiect 10. The godly Princes in the old Testament are commended because they not only tooke away the Idols out of Iuda but also destroyed all the high places and Temples and Altars of the Idols Contrariwise many Kings being otherwise godly are reprehended by the Holy Ghost because they did not take away the high places Ergo c. 56 ANSVVERE Answ I. We ought not to liue by Examples but by Rules and Lawes Of abolishing the instrumēts of Idolattie 57 II. The Kings of Israel were bound and tied by the Law of God vtterly to deface destroy and burne all the high places and all Idolatrous groues wherefore what they did was but their necessarie obedience and dutie and such

whole Parliament What reward the Defender deserueth for this bold slander against the Parliament house I leaue to their wise consideration and censure whom it concerneth and more neerely toucheth His error is Crimen falsi III. ARGVMENT It is a sinne not to recompense a good turne receiued Ergo The refractarie Ministers are to be regarded and spoken for ANSVVERE I. IT is true Answere good deeds must be rewarded specially the Ministers faithfull labours The Apostle saith 1. Cor. 9.11 If we haue sowen vnto you spirituall things is it a great thing c. II. But in that the refractarie Ministers haue looked backe and withdrawne their hands from the plough Luk. 9.62 making a manifest Schisme and disturbing the peace of the Church this deserueth no recompense Here the Defender bestirreth himselfe Reply and produceth all his forces Whether the refractarie Ministers be Schismatiques to prooue that the refractarie Ministers are not Schismatiques I say first of all saith he that this accusation of vs to be Schismatiques is a most beggerly begging of the Question most vniust vntrue and vncharitable neuer yet proued neither able to be proued vntill they proue the matters in controuersie to be meerely indifferent to such vses as whereto they are imploide and vrged by them yea good and laudable ceremonies matters of decencie and order in the Church yea that wee also refuse to conforme our selues vnto them more of stomacke than of conscience Two things the Defender saith must be performed by vs The Defenders first Reason that the Ministers are not Schismatiques ouerthrowne before the refractarie Ministers will acknowledge themselues to be Schismatiques 1. That we proue the matters in controuersie to be indifferent 2. That we euince them to refuse conformitie rather of stomacke then of conscience Touching the first we haue already in diuers Bookes and Treatises purposely written to that end more then sufficiently proued the things in controuersie to be meerely indifferent both in their owne nature and to such vses as the Church allotteth and appointeth them And for the Second I know not well what the Defender meaneth thereby What shall a thiefe be a thiefe notwithstanding that to steale be not against his conscience shal an heretique be an heretique albeit he thinketh he holdeth nothing but truth and must not a Schismatique be a Schismatique vnlesse he be conuinced to sinne against his owne conscience Note the Defenders absurditie What Schismatique will euer confesse that he is such euen against his conscience By this meanes no man shall euer be conuinced to be a Schismatique But we know that obstinate contumacie against the Church in things lawfull is a schisme whatsoeuer a mans conscience be Consciences are of two sorts 1. Too large 2. Too strict Consciences are of diuers and sundrie sorts there is one Conscience that is too large and prophane and another Conscience too strict and superstitious a Popish Conscience and a Precise Conscience I meane in the extreame So then the first part of this Argument being abundantly proued by vs and the second being atheologicall and ridiculous what remaineth but that the Defender labour the refractarie Ministers to acknowledge their ouersight and to yeeld to conformitie The Defenders second Reason Reply to proue that the refractarie Ministers are not Schismatiques is this There is nothing heere obiected against vs wherwith our ancients and betters haue not been charged in former times Eliah was charged with troubling Israel Michaiah might haue been charged with singularitie and Schisme for dissenting from the 400. Prophets Ieremie was accused by the Priests and Prophets to haue spoken against the State of the Citie Amos was charged with conspiracie against the King The enemies of Daniel framed the like accusation against him to Darius Our Sauiour himselfe was blasphemed by the name of a seducer and deceiuer Paul was accused that he taught against the Law and the Temple Such also haue been the accusation of all Martyrs by the common Aduersaries the Paptsts And such are the Prelats accusations against vs. I answere Reioynder The Defenders 2. Reason ouerthrowne As for Michaiah because the false Prophets did not accuse him of singularitie and schisme the Defender becomes their Aduocate and doth as much for them by what right let himselfe looke to it But who will not detest the impudencie of the Defender in that he dareth equall the refractarie Ministers case with the condition of the Prophets and Apostles of the blessed Martyrs yea of CHRIST himselfe But not to particularize I answere in generall The difference betweene the examples alleadged and their case is very great easie to be discerned 1. Those holy men did nothing contrarie to their vocation these do 2. They taught nothing but the truth of God necessarie to be receiued these teach their owne fancies 3. They neuer oppugned the lawfull auctoritie of the Magistrate in Ecclesiasticall causes and Things indifferent these do 4. They were vniustly accused by the false Church for doing their office and dutie these are iustly taxed by the true Church as themselues cannot deny for hatefull schisme and faction 5. The Error is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His third Reason Reply is Do we varie from the sincere doctrine of the Scriptures Nay rather many of them doe much more swarue from the same touching generall grace and the death of Christ for euery particular person against particular election and reprobation for Images in Churches for deuotion touching the manner of Christs presence in the Eucharist that the Pope is not the Antichrist whereby they hinder the zeale of Christian Princes from executing that against him in generall and against his members in particular which the Word partly foretelleth and partly commandeth to he done concerning the necessitie of Baptisme touching auricular confession for ignorance in the people Who can lay any such points to vs or to any of vs I answere Reioynder 1. The Defenders report of our doctrine is vtterly vntrne The Defender slandereth our Church for false Doctrine for we derest and abhorre euen all and euery of the particular points he saith we teach Wherefore let him either iustifie these things to be true out of the Confession of the faith of our Church which he ought to do if he challenge vs for Doctrine or by any writer of ours of credit in the Church or let him feare without repentance and satisfaction for it by confessing his ignorance and malice in thus slandering the Church of God the iust condemnation of Lyers and false witnesses whose portion is with hypocrites 2. His Argument is this The Defenders 3. Reason ouerthrowne The refractarie Ministers do not varie from the sincere doctrine of the Scriptures Ergo They are not Schismatiques To let the Antecedent passe for I haue not obserued that any of them erre in any fundamentall or materiall point of doctrine which we thanke God for praying farther for their preseruation vnto

question the proceedings of their Ordinaries vpon a pretense of a Canon lately made II. Because some Ordinaries in their Sentences haue vniustly and leasingly charged some Ministers with the deniall of the Oath to the Kings supremacie and stuffed their sentences full of generall crimes contrary to the right forme of Iudgement III. Because vpon notice giuen vnto the Patron of the auoydance of the Church they haue not only instituted new Clerkes but also intimated that the possession of the Church was kept per vim Laicam whereby the partie appellant hath been remoued out of his possession IV. Because sundry Ordinaries vpon appeales made before them haue taken order with their Registers and Notaries not to deliuer to the parties appellant any note or copie of any act or sentence made or giuen before them V. Because sundry Sentences of depriuation haue been giuen à Iudicibus non suis namely by such whose iurisdiction was suspended and shut vp by the Archbishop of Canterburies Commission and his Archiepiscopall Visitation VI. Because the whole power and iurisdiction by sundrie Diocesans was committed in solidum for tearme of life vnto their principall Comissaries Officials or Vicars generall which they could not resume at their pleasure VII Because Sentences haue been ginen nullo iuris ordine seruato but omni iuris ordine spreto neglecto IIX Because some Sentences haue been giuen in some priuate Chamber of some common Inne or Tauerne and not in publico competente foro IX Because some Sentences haue been giuen not vpon inquisition information or accusation according to the Statute but only vpon processe ex mero Officio X. Because some Ministers haue been depriued only for not subscribing to the three Articles mentioned in the 36. Canon Scriptures and Reasons not succeeding to the Suppliants and Defenders wish Reioyner Of the lawfulnes of the proceedings against the refractarie Ministers nor sorting to that effect they purposed now they haue entered a more politique course challenging the proceedings against the refractarie Ministers in the Ecclesiasticall Courts not to be iustifiable by Law and pretending that they are dealt with and grieuously oppressed forsooth contrary to Law as if they did cary a principall and zealous care to haue all his Maiesties Lawes duly obserued For my owne part I go not about to defend the fact and proceedings of particular men in this case of Depriuation because I know not the circumstances whereby they were induced so to determine neither haue I the leasure and meanes at this instant to enquire thereof and I doubt not but the graue and wise Personages here traduced by the Defender are able to answere for themselues and sufficiently to iustify their proceedings against this Calumniator Only I am according to my poore abilitie to maintaine the generall equitie of the proceedings ordained and practised by the prescript and determination of our Church and State against these factious Ministers Wherefore I answere to these particular Grieuāces or branches of supposed Oppression To the 1. I. Factious Appellants Answ to the 1. Grieuance Of factious Appellants are denied prosecution of their friuolous and vniust appeales because they are notorious perturbers of the peace of the Church and the CANON made thereupon seemeth to haue reference vnto a locall Statute of the Vniuersitie of OXFORD whereby Nightwalkers incontinent liuers and such as commit any corporall violence to the disturbance of the common quietnes of the Vniuersitie are tearmed perturbers and breakers of the publique peace and therefore are not permitted to prosecute the ordinarie course of appeales granted to others in Ciuil and Ecclesiasticall causes with which kind of people the refractarie and incorrigible Ministers are iustly to be rancked as men that are not by the Iudge ad quem permitted to make their appeales nor haue the ordinary times and termes of prosecution allowed them For as by the Statutes of the said Vniuersitie the Iudices inhibitionum are the Proctors who are to tye the hands and to shut the mouthes of all Iudges from proceeding or annulling such Sentences as are by them giuen if they in their discretion shall thinke it fit and by the Statutes are lawfull So is the Archbishops Iudge ad quem by the Decrees of the Conuocation confirmed and ratified by the Kings auctoritie prohibited as the Proctors of the Vniuersitie are to giue passe to such factious Appellants The equity of which restraint is apparant by the reason thereof inserted in the preāble of the Canon 98. cited by the Defender Because they who breake the Lawes cannot in reason claime any benefit or protection by the same II. Conformable hereunto it is decreed both in the Ciuill and Canon Lawes In the Ciuill Law it is said ff lib. 49. tit 1. de Appellationibus l. 16. Constitutiones quae de recipiendis nec non appellationibus loquuntur vt nihil noui fiat locum non habent in eorum persona quos damnatos statim puniri publicè interest vt sunt insignes latrones vel seditionum concitatores vel duces factionum Stirrers vp of sedition and leaders of factions ought not to be permitted to appeale but must be presently punished Vide Bartol ad lib. 49. Digest de appellat l. 16. Constitutiones Also Cod. lib. 7. tit 65. Quorum appellationes non recipiuntur l. 2. the Emperours Constantius and Constans decree that Confessus non auditur appellans but the refractarie Ministers do not only CONFESSE that they are such but also wilfully PROFESSE that they will NEVER be conformable and submit themselues vnto the Kings Ecclesiasticall Lawes and ordinances Wherefore then should they be permitted to appeale Againe in the Canon Law it is decreed Si vero publicus est notorius eorum excessus appellationis obtentu non praetermittas quin eos excommunicatos denuncies Decr. Greg. lib. 2. tit 28. de appellationibus cap. 13. Peruenit ad nos If the Appellants crime or excesse be publique and notorious they are not permitted to appeale Vide Glossam in vers Notorius Moreouer Durandus saith In delictis notorijs non admittitur appellatio Durand Speculi lib. 2. part 3. § In quibus autem casibus nu 13. and Maranta Quartò principaliter limita non procedere appellationem in factis notorijs quia in illis non admittitur appellatio Rob. Maranta Speculi aurei part 6. Versic Et quando appellatur nu 293. Now euery crime is NOTORIOVS by Confession Sext. Decr. lib. 2. tit 15 de Appellat cap. 3. Romana Ecclesia § Si autem in Gloss Vers Vel de quo Nec potest negari crimen per confessionem fore notorium In like manner Panormitan writeth Si verò Subditus commonitus à Praelato appellauerit si eius excessus euidentiâ rei vel ipsius confessione vel alio modo legitimo fuerit manifestus appellations deferatur cum appellationis remedium non fuerit institutum ad defensionem iniquitatis sed ad praesidium innocentiae Panormit

de appellat cap. 61. Cum speciali § Porrò Also Durandus Appellatio non debet esse praesidium iniquitatis Duran Spec. lib. 2. part 3. § In quibus autem casibus nu 13. And Maranta Septimò limita non procedere appellationem in Latrone insigni fameso item in Seditioso auctore alicuius factionis quia quicunque damnatur de huiusmods criminibus vel altero ipsorum non appellat nec supersedetur executioni Marant Spec. aures part 6. Versic Et quando appellatur nu 296. The refractarie Ministers are required to conforme themselues according to the order established They refuse and being proceeded against they appeale To what end ad perseuerandum in malicia to continue still in their singularitie and faction Now who seeth not that such appeales are vniust and vnlawfull seeing the remedy of Appeales was not ordained to bee a cloake and defence for wickednes and Appellatio frustratoria nunquam est admittenda Durand Spec. lib. 2. part 3. § In quibus autem casibus nu 33. III. The proceeding against the Ministers is according to the expresse letter and meaning of the Kings Lawes and Statutes and whither would they appeale from the King Non appellatur à Principe Durand Spec. lib. 2. part 3. § Videndum à quibus appellari possit nu 15. IV. It is the common course of all Iustice after any contempt first to obey the censure of the Court and then to plead to the vniust proceedings pretended and therefore do the Archbishops Iudges require nothing but what the Kings Ecclesiasticall Lawes do prescribe To the 2. There is not any man that will hastely beleeue Answ to the 2. Grieuance that any Ordinarie did euer vniustly and leasingly charge any Minister with deniall of the Oath of Supremacie as the Defender perhaps most leasingly suggests without particular instance of time or person And touching the Sentences they are euer conceiued in generall termes with relation to the processe wherein are contained the particular crimes In sententia definitiua regulariter non requiritur expressio Causae saith Caesar Contardus in l. Vnicam Cod. Si de momentanea poss fuerit appellatum pag. 110. Vide ff de appell l. 2. To the 3. Answ to the 3. Grieuance The equitie of the proceedings dependeth vpon the reasons alleadged in the Answere to the first Grieuance Seeing the partie depriued is dead in Law his appellation being void and of no effect as is aforesaid the Ordinarie is bound to giue intimation and notice vnto the Patron of the auoydance of the Church whereupon he instituteth a new Clerke being presented vnto him whom if any shall resist it is the ordinarie course of Law he should be remoued by the writ de vi laica remouenda which writ the reuerend and sage Iudges of the Common Law would neuer grant except it were liable in such a case And if this course be to be held INIVRIOVS then certainly not the Ecclesiasticall proceedings but the Common Law is to be blamed for both the Intimation and the Writte de vilaica remouenda are Common Law To the 4. Answ to the 4. Grieuance The fact is particular if it be true Neither are the Registers and Notaries vpon their oath to deliuer copies of the Acts made before them but only to write the same truely without falsification corruption or forgerie albeit the refusall of deliuering copies their fees being tendered them is otherwise punishable by the Canon To the 5. Answ to the 5. Grieuance I. The Ordinarie is the Archbishops Deputie and exerciseth Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction as from and vnder the Archbishop II. The Archbishop his inhibition during the time of his Visitation is in mouendis non motis III. If the Bishop should do any thing against the Archbishops inhibition it followeth not that therefore his act should bee void in Law but his contempt were punishable c. To the 6. Answ to the 6. Grieuance The Bishops grant vnto his Commissaries Officials or Vicars generall is no otherwise but saluis iuribus Episcopalibus neither can the Bishop so resigne his iurisdiction vnto another but that he may at his owne pleasure aduocate any cause vnto himselfe No Comisarie or Officiall can depriue a man for Eius est destituere cuius est instituere To the 7. It is a flat vntruth and a meere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answ to the 7. Grieuance Answ to the 8. Grieuance To the 8. I. The question is not of the nullitie of the act but whether the Bishop did obserue decorum for simplie the Ordinarie may ius dicere in any part of his iurisdiction II. The parties consented to the place III. The fact is particular To the 9. Processe made ex mero Officio Answ to the 9. Grieuance is made by INQVISITION according vnto the letter and meaning of the Statute for the Bishop may lawfully inquire ex Officio Lyndwood saith Siue scandalum siue periculum siue suspicio grauis sint contra aliquem Praelatus suus potest procedere ad inquisitionem vel si non inueniat probationes indicet purgationem c. Lynd. Constitut. Prouinc lib. 5. cap. 1. § Compellant in Gloss To the 10. The fact if it be true is particular Ans to the 10. Grieuance and needeth no farther answere II. In the meane time I would propound two or three Questions vnto the Suppliants Answere wherein I would craue their resolution and direct answere I. Quaere 3. Quaeres proposed to the refractarie Ministers Whether the Church vnder Christian godly Magistrates hath any Tribunal proper vnto it self for deciding of Controuersies and punishing of such persons as shall refuse the ordinances thereof II. Quaere Whether so many iudiciall Acts of depriuation of Bishops Priests Ministers from their Benefices c. since the Conquest to the time of Magna Charta and sithence that to this age were euer held to be contrary to the Lawes of this Kingdome and Magna Charta III. Quaere Whether any Iudge of this Realme or any chiefe officer learned in the Lawes be of opinion that such Sentences of depriuatiō as haue lately passed in due forme in any Ecclesiasticall Court be contrarie to any much lesse to many Statutes At these 3. Quaeres the Defender standeth so astonished and amazed as if they were so many heads of Medusa And knowing not whither to wind turne himself lest he might seeme to be altogether mute as indeed he is for any thing he answereth to the purpose he so inuolues himselfe in such intricate Labyrinths of obscuritie that any man may easily perceiue he laboureth of purpose to decline the questions babling he knoweth not what suspecting euery word as if he feared a Scorpion vnder euery stone To the first Quaere he answereth Vnto this Quaere Reply when he shall distinguish and make his so many Equiuocations contained in the Quaere perspicuous and plaine to the vnderstanding of euery simple