received thanks and two thousand pounds per annum bestowed upon him for his later service Doe Protestants think you maintain the Popish Tenent remissâ culpâ remanet poâ—â—a to punish after pardon Yea which is more to punish after pardon and reward Or may not Gods example work somewhat for preserving the Bishops Lands which did proclaim it selfe for the saving of all Sodom that if but ten of so many thousands could be found for God he would spare all those thousands grievous sinners for the sakes of those ten Or did God when ten could not be found involve Lot and his family in the general judgement of Sodom And shall the Lands of that Bishop who hath deserved so well of the two Houses be sold with the rest for the Ordinance concludes the sale of all If it be yet said as what hath not been said no matter how untruly that the late Archbishop of Canterbury promoted this last War yet was it any part of the charge at his trial And saith not our Law for Treason of dead persons not attainted or judged in their lives time 34 Ed. 3.12 their Lands shall not be impeached nor challenged And if not their own then as I conceive much lesse shall the Lands be impeached which they held of the Church But I proceed have all the Bishops promoted this War which none yet with any shadow of truth hath said for ought I ever could hear and if not why I pray shall Robert be punished for Richard And if any of the Bishops have promoted the War have they been called or suffered to answer the charge And was it ever found agreeable to Justice Law or Reason to give sentence before the party was heard if he may be found Sr Edward Coke saith it is against the Charter nay 2 Instit c. 29. was the late Impeachment of the eleven Members though by a special charge written and professed to be proved I say was this Impeachment Voted and Declared illegal and unjustifiable as to the suspending their Votes but for a time And shal such a general charge as this against the Bishops be held legal and sufficient for the selling away the Lands of all Bishops in England born and unborn without summoning hearing or giving the charge against any And if upon trial some Bishop shall be found guilty according to Law which I presume never shall be yet shall the punishment of one or more personal Delinquents extend to others who are innocent Yea to Successors which are not heirs at Law Or shall the Lord of the Land which is God lose his interest for the offence of his Assign or Tenent which is the Bishop Or is this sin in the Bishops greater then that vast damning original sin in Adam to condemn all not onely that come of his seed and race but all his Successors who are as little kin to his body or his soul as to his offence Nay yet shall the insensate thing that is the Land be prophaned and let the pretended Delinquent the Bishop goe unquestioned which is as if a Judge should take away the Sword and break it in pieces because it killed the man but let the murtherer escape the while The Charter saith 〈…〉 Nullus liber homo c. that no Free man shall be amerced or punished but according to the quality of the offence and yet so as with a salvo sibi contenemento where the Interpreter saith this Free man extends to Bishops and expounding contenementum to be his countenance saith That as the Bishop is a Scholar his books are his countenance and as he is a man of holy Function an honourable maintenance should be his countenance which if it might have held then some Bishop in this Land should not have had not onely all his maintenance Spiritual and Temporal for these four years utterly taken away not allowing him in all this time one shilling but not his bedding all houshold-stuffe and goods yea and all his books not leaving him one nor all or any of these taken by the plunder of rude Souldiers but by the Warrant of an honourable Committee although without any Ordinance The Charter goes on and saith That no Ecclesiastical person shall be amerced or punished according to his Ecclesiastical but to his Lay fee whereas here the clean contrary is published and practiced by this Ordinance â—â—od 32. Aaron the high Priest made a golden Calf Ver. 28. and built an Altar before it and proclaimed a Feast for it and said To morrow is a Feast to the Lord for which abominable act 1 Sam. 21. Moses caused three thousand men to be slain Abiwelech the Priest victualed and armed David against his King for which act Saul the furious King caused fourscore and five of the Priests to be slain 2 Reg. 1.7 1 Reg. 2.26 And K. Solomon said to Abiathar the Priest who had helped Adonijah to be King against Solomon Thou art worthy of death I could instance in many more acts of these Priests most displeasing to their Kings and some really sinful before God yet doe we find that any went about for all these acts to deprive the Priests of their Lands and maintenance for ever Might I not put you in mind that we have had in the time of Popery a Becket a Langton a Wolsey and other Bishops who instigated by the blind false Principles of their Religion have fallen into grosse treasonable acts yet did the King and the two Houses for their offences sell away the Lands of the Church which they held I read in the Reign of King Henry the Third that the Jewes in England were forced to pay the third part of their estates Mat. Par. p. 489 that they might enjoy their peace but must Bishops be worse used by Christians and their Countrey-men contrary to all Law then Jews And may not the Bishops truly say what the eleven Members give for their Answer in their printed Papers viz. We must be removed and that we may so be we must be represented to be what we are not and what ever is amisse in the Kingdom we are made the cause and must bear the blame of it Christianos adignem what publike calamity soever befell in the Primitive Persecutions the poor Christians were said to be the cause and must be made the expiatory Sacrifice for all But let men say what they will Elijah the Prophet of God was never the more the troubler of the Kingdom because he was called so and therefore we will say as Job Our witnesse is in heaven and our record is on high Thus far they and so the Bishops But for the close of all supposing the Bishops were what is here or elsewhere unjustly charged upon them yet give me leave to put you a Scripture case and Gods judgement thereupon and I shall leave it to your judgment and conscience to make the Application the case is set down Numb 16. where three ringleaders and
Lawes affirmes that in all ages without any controversie this hath held so that no Act of Parliament bindes the Subject of this Land without the assent of the King either for person lands goods or same and refers you to Sr Edward Coke where many Law-books are cited to that purpose 1 part Insâ—it sect 234. The ignorant or wilful mistake of divers holding the two Houses and their Ordinances to be truly called Parliaments and Acts of Parliaments as it hath deceived many in their consciences and of their lives so may it in this of their moneys if not timely foreseen and prevented Argum. 9 But though the King in his natural capacity and power be personally absent from the two Houses yet his Politick power and capacity is virtually in them and therefore what the two Houses ordain must as necessarily bind as if the King were personally present with them Resp In answer to this I pray consider what that great Lawyer Mr Plowden and Sr Edward Coke have determined for Law Comment f. 21â— 242. In Calv. Case and they say that the Natural and the Politick body of the King make but one body for as long as the Natural body lives the Politick is inherent in it this being a thing imaginary and invisible And I pray consider how well our Law may be called Holy in that it agrees so well with Gods own holy Law Rom. 13.1 2. for so Saint Paul speaking of the Politick power not to be resisted settles this power in the person of the King to whom it belongeth when he saith Ver. 3. Ver. 4. Wilt thou not feare the power then doe that which is good for He not they is the Ruler and He not they it the Minister of God And Saint Peter differs not but rather declares the same when he thus speakes 1 Pet. 2.13 14. Submit your selves to the King as supreme and honour the King and what can hence be lesse inferred then this that the power whereby he is a King and his Supremacy whereby he is above all naturally resteth in the person of the King and therefore he is to be honoured for his power and he to be submitted unto because he is King and Supreme Now can any man reasonably conceive that this power being an essential accident inhering in the King shoulâ— without the Kings consent and will vanish from its own proper subject and be of it selfe truly inherent in another subject which is not capable of such an accident I say not capable for the two Houses being and remaining Subjects witnesse their owne usual stile We Your Majesties humble Subjects are not a subject capable of Supremacie in that Supremacie and Subjection are opposite Relatives and therefore cannot be at one and the same time in one and the same subject The King I grant though bodily absent yet may be present representatively in the two Houses speaking either by his great Seal or by his Commissioners by himself appointed which hath been often used in our Parliaments but to say that his power is in the two Houses without his will or grant is all one as if we should say the influence of the Sun should be inherent in the earth without the natural inclination or motion of the Sun seeing that as no body can be the proper subject wherein that influence doth naturally inhere but the Sun so no body nor persons can be the proper subject to containe and hold Royal Power and Supremacie but the person of the King or they to whom he will as the Sun dispense the rayes or influence thereof And if it hath been or now may otherwise be why I pray both now as heretofore have and doe the two Houses supplicate desire crave and beseech the King to give his Royal assent which naturally ariseth from that his Politick capacity and power thereby to make that Law without which Royal assent no man worthy the name of a Lawyer ever held that any Bill Decree or Ordinance was of force to bind the Subject as to a standing and continuing Law which is plainly shewed in Answer to the Argument next before But notwithstanding that an Act made by the King Lords and Commons doth bind yet if that Act be as I before have proved this Ordinance of selling the Church-Lands to be against Gods and mans Laws it is to be repealed because it is unlawful and unjust so to ordain or enact and the Parliament should do nothing against Law and Justice Argum. 10 I have read this Argument in print that God no where commands such Lands to be given or Bishops to hold them and therefore where no breach of a Commandement is there is no sin Resp It appears that King David intended to build an house to the Lord but the Lord would not that David should build it and yet the Lord said David did well 1 Reg 8.17 18 19. that it was in his heart to doe it God commended and accepted of Davids act although that act were no where commanded to King David And in Ezra mention is made of the free-will-offerings of those who offered willingly for the House of the Lord Ezra 1.3 7. whereas elsewhere under the Law the general precept for Free-will-offerings to God his House and Servants is avowed to be a part of Gods Service although the particular offerings of what how much is left un-commanded to every mans liberty to give this or that more or lesse as God shall put into his heart And although there be no particular command to this or that man to give this or that to Gods Service and Honour yet under the general Precepts Prov. 3.9 Luke 6.38 Honour the Lord with thy substance and Give and it shall be given unto you there is warrant enough if not Precept according to every mans ability freely to give and offer to God for his Honour and Service whether by money lands or other goods Let me aâ—â— Where doth Christ command the Jewes and Gentiles to feed and clothe his Disciples and Apostles What then Were they not to do it And Saint Paul cals the Corinthians Offerings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 16.3 Luke 22.1 liberality and the Corban of the Jewes as before cited was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gifts now gifts and liberalities are free-offerings and not duties of command And saith not Christ Luke 17.9 10. Doth he thanke that servant that did the things commanded I trow not He who will allow God no more then what commanded shall in this robb God of his offerings the Donors of their reward and his servants of their relief and it would prove a pestilent Jewish opinion and too great an enemy to Christianity which consists as in voluntary sufferings so in voluntary offerings above that which is in special commanded To conclude the Ministers under the Gospel hold not their lands by any special command or Precept from God but by free-gift of the Donor man
CHURCH-LANDS NOT TO BE SOLD OR A necessary and plaine Answer to the Question of a conscientious PROTESTANT Whether the Lands of the BISHOPS and CHURCHES in England and Wales may be sold Prov. 20.25 It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy Sr Edward Coke Instit 2. c. 1. What ever is granted to Gods Church i.e. to Churchmen for his honour and maintenance of his Religion and Service is granted for and to God and what is given to God is holy Ezek. 48. Prov. 23.10 11. Remove not the old Land-mark and enter not into the field of the Fatherless for their Redeemer is mighty and he shall plead their cause with thee Coke Ibid. Our Law-Books teach us that the Church is ever understood to be under age and to be as a Pupill or Fatherlesse and that it is not agreeable to Law or Right that such should be dis-inherited Printed in the Yeare 1648. The Heads or Points briefly touched in this Answer 1. THat Lands may be given to the Church for Gods Service and Servants therein 2. That Lands so given and accepted become holy to the Lord. 3. That the Lands of Bishops and the Churches in England were so given and therefore may not be alienated or sold 4. That such Alienation or Selling is forbidden in the Old and New Testament 5. That it hath beene so judged by the most strict Reformers in the Protestant Churches 6. That this kind of Alienation is against Prudence Justice the good of the Kingdome in general and of the Tenents to such lands in special 7. That it is against the Lawes of this Kingdome of England which the two Houses of Parliament and Kingdom by their several Declarations Protestations and Covenants are bound to maintaine 8. That it is against the Prudence and Justice of the King and against his lawfull Oath 9. One and twenty Arguments which are brought in defence of or colour for such Alienation are answered 10. The Curses and punishments which are set downe and executed in Holy Writ against Sacrilegious Alienations are held forth and opened CHAP. I. That Lands may be given to the Church for Gods Service and Servants therein DId I conceive it proper to this Discourse and that it would move you it were easie to shew out of very good Histories that the Heathen who knew not the true God and Infidels not beleeving in our Lord Christ have set forth lands and possessions for the perpetual maintenance of their Priests I shall therefore give you but a touch of this and that in our owne Land wherein then Heathenish were Idol Priests Antiqu. Brit. Armicaâ— whom Lucius King in some part of Britain being converted to the knowledge and faith of Christ about the yeare 176. rooted out and taking away their possessions and territories he gave them to the Churches of the beleeving Christians which he endowed with addition of more lands and larger immunities And that this may not seem any new or strange thing I pray consider that God by his Prophet Moses hath bin pleased to expresse that the Egyptian Priests had lands for so we read Gen. 47.22 Onely the lands of the Priests he sold not in the margin of which Text it is added or of the Princes not as doubting whether they were Princes and not Priests but intimating that as the original word signifies both so they were or might be both Priests and Princes And not only the Egyptians but the Assyrians Chaldeans Medes Persians Greekes and Romans honoured their chiefe Priests as Princes Baren ad An. 383. yea Constantine the Great being Emperour and a Christian yet retained the title of Pontifex maximous The great or high Priest But to returne to our purpose for we argue not for title but maintenance out of that Text of Gen. 47. it appeares that the people who were as the Apostle speakes without God in the world Ephes 2.12 yet by the light of natural reason found and held it requisite that their Priests should have a setled maintenance and that in lands Give mee leave here to adde what Mr Selden a man of great reading hath observed that in some parts of Europe the maintenance of Priests lieth wholly in lands But I must to the holy Historie and tell you that so soone as God had raised himselfe a Church by the Ministery of his servant Moses Acts 7.22 who was learned in all the Wisdome Lawes and Policies of the Egyptians he gave to his servants in his Church besides 1. The first-borne of all men and caâ—â—â— 2. Besides the first fruits of the earth 3. Besides a part in all their severall Offerings 4. Besides all the Tithes both of their Goods Weems Synagog and of the encrease of their Lands so that if an Husband-man had 6000. bushels of graine or corne growing in a yeare after that he had paid all his Tithes he had left to himselfe but 4779. I say besides all this though the whole land was hardly 160. miles in length from Dan to Beer-sheba and but 46. Ep. ad Dardan miles in breadth from Joppa to Bethlehem as Saint Jerome who lived long there testifieth God gave them 18. Cities with the Lands and Suburbs round about And although the Tribe of Love at that time of division of the Land were but 23000. and the Tribe of Asher was 53000. of Nepthali 45000. of Zebulun 57400. of Issachar 64000. of Dau 64000. yet the most of the Lands allotted to any of these Tribes exceeded not 19. Cities so bountiful was God under the Law to a corporall abouring Levite which was but a shadow of the glorious Sun-shine of the Gospel and the Royal Priest-hood which we enjoy And yet as though nothing could then under the Law be done too much for the Servants in Gods Temple King Solomon a Type of Christ not only suffered them to enjoy what before had bin given them immediately from God but to shew the high esteeme which ought to be had to the Priest whereas the King had a Coine estamped with the Sword and Scepter which was the Royal Coine the Priests had their Coine too bearing the pot of Manna and Aarons Rod to shew it a Royal Priest-hood when as yet as before is said it was but a shadow of that Royalty which after appeared under the Gospel whereof Bishops and Presbyters are the Ministers And so long as this honour and honourable maintenance was continued to the Priests the Church of God and the whole land flourished untill the time of Jeroboam who by his Rebellion Idolatry and Sacrilege begat that confusion which by degrees brought all to utter destruction Neither did the Convert Christians with Judaisme renounce this kind of Dedicating Lands to God and his servants for what was that act of the Christians lesse which the Apostle mentions Acts 4. and 5 Whereupon Beza and other learned Divines hold that the Christians then and there dedicated the lands themselves but because the times were
But why in Gods name are not the Assembly of Divines at Westminster consulted with in this point Or why doe not our conscientious Brethren read the Annotations of the Assembly who note that Egypt which would not in the greatest extremity of famine On Gen. 47. when all other mens lands were sold yet then that they would not sell the lands of the Priests shall rise up in judgement against the alienators or sellors of lands which have been dedicated to God or his Servants CHAP. VI. That this kind of Alienation is against Prudence Justice the good of the Kingdom in general and of the Tenents to such Lands in special BUt were there not so much said in Gods Book and by learned Orthodox Divines shall neither our owne Lawes nor Prudence nor Justice prevaile in this case to keep us from selling of Church Lands For what Justice is it to sell that which is not our owne And that these lands are 1. Gods I hope it is proved sufficiently by Gods words the verdict of allowed Divines and shall be further proved anon by the Lawes of our Land 2. They are the Bishops who are Gods Assignes and Usufructuaries and these lands are theirs by as good title in Law as any man can hold any land in this Kingdome 3. They are by Patronage the Kings for this is very lately professed in a good Parliament 1 Jacob. 3.3 in these words Whereas all the Lands of the Bishops in England and Dominion of Wales were given by Kings of England the full truth whereof I will not dispute whereby the King is become the lawfull and rightfull Patron of all those Lands therefore it is desired that the King would enact not that they without the King would or could no such power then knowne and what is desired not that the Bishops Lands should be sold but that they may not be leased out by the Bishops for longer terms of time then for 21. yeares or three lives no not to the Crowne And is this Justice so soone forgotten or so soone changed in so short a time that without the consent of God the Proprietary of the King the Patron and of the Bishops the Assignes the lands shall be utterly sold away And yet must we call this Justice I pray God this Justice call not for judgement from heaven And whether it can be just to sell the Bishops Lands I pray examine by that rule and touch-stone of true Moral Justice which our Lord Christ hath expressed in two short Precepts the one Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe The other Mat. 19.9 Mat. 7.12 Whatsoever ye would that men should doe unto you doe you even so unto them for this is the Law and the Prophets Now by the first rule examine your selves whether in this act of selling the Bishops Lands you love the Bishops as your selves And trie this by the other whether you would yeeld your consent as to a thing just that if the Bishops had your power they might and should preserve to themselves their own lands and expose yours to sale If your hearts speake the truth I feare they would denie this to be just in the Bishops against you and if so then be assured that in this act of selling the Bishops lands you doe not that which by the verdict of your owne conscience is just And if you will as Law-makers should look forward and provide for future times stands it with civil Prudence to sell those Lands away which doe and will yeeld so much for maintenance of the King and Kingdome in Tenths First-fruits Subsidies and Taxes which for the most part will bee swallowed up when fallen into Lay-hands 2. Stands it with civil Prudence to robb Tenents of so good penniworths as they now hold from Bishops and Church-men which they must not expect when in Lay-hands whereby they have beene enabled the better to serve the King and Kingdome in time of need 3. Stands it with Prudence and Charitr to cast so many into a state of beggery and danger of theeving who by Bishops and Church-men have been reasonably relieved by under Offices and places in the Church Upon the dissolution of the Religious Houses in the Reign of K. Henry the Eighth Chron. f. 773. Mr Speed saith that a great Rebellion was raised in Lincolnshire and the Rebels expressing the cause thereof to the King they say Wee grieve for the suppression of so many Religious Houses whereby the Pooralty of your Realme is unrelieved and many put off their livings which is a dammage to the Common-wealth Soone after another Rebellion arose in Yorkeshire where 40000. with Horse Armes and Artillery rose for Religion who had upon their sleeves the Name of the Lord the ground of their rising was saith the same Author That the King by his evill Counsellers will destroy the Ministers of the Church f. 775. which makes against the Common good 4. Stands it with a Religious and civil Prudence to robb Learning and Religion of that profit and preferment which encouraged the study and encrease both of Learning and Religion Prov. 14.4 Where no oxen are the crib is cleane And the Land soon after K. Solomon found this true 1 King 13.33 for when Jeroboam had taken away the best maintenance of the Priests what followed but that the Priests were chosen out of the lowest of the people Which I would it were not too true now in our Land and in after times the Church suffered more under Julian then Dioclesian for this tooke away the able men but that Apostate their maintenance I shall close this point with that memorable passage of Sr Edward Coke in Winchesters Case The decay of the Revenues of the Church will draw after it the downe-fall of Gods Service and Religion which God in mercy avert CHAP. VII That it is against the Lawes of this Kingdome of England which the two Houses of Parliament and Kingdome by their severall Declarations Protestations and Covenants are bound to maintaine BUt if neither Gods Word nor the Verdict of best Divines nor Justice nor Prudence can be heard yet I pray heare what our Lawes say in this case and yet before I urge these to which I am as much a stranger as to the Profession let me remember you with that which I have heard to be a Maxime in our Law That no Statute Law or Custome which are against Gods Law or Principles of Nature can be of any validity but are all null which if granted it will save me the paines to cite our Lawes as having before proved that it is against Gods Law to sell away the lands of Bishops Yet let me adde that one Statute saith 1 Edw. 3. c. 2. That the King by evil Counsellors caused the Temporalties of Bishops to be seized into his hands for a time to the great dammage of the said Bishops which from henceforth shall not be done and this Statute is not repealed and therefore
is in its full force at this day as all other Statutes unrepealed are I might add another Statute 17 Edw. 2. that when the Templars theeving bloudy decried Souldiers had their Lands taken from them yet were not those lands then divided among Parliament men nor sold for the Common-wealth although the Kingdome at that time was in distresse and want enough I beleeve more then now no the then Parliament surely conceived they might doe neither of these they therefore translated those lands and settled them on the Priorie of St John of Jerusalem and in the same Statute it is inserted that the Parliament then did not alienate the Lands of those Templars 1. Because they were given to God though possessed by men 2. Because they held it a sinne to rob the Donors of their gift 3. Because they held it would prove mortal to the Alienators and these causes were then held sufficient to keep a Parliament from selling or alienating Church Lands And it is in the same Statute provided that if in after times the said Hospitalers or their successors shall be put out of any of those lands they shall have power to recover the same according to the Law of the Realm I have likewise read that in the 25 Edw. 1. it is declared In the Review of the Covenant Printed 1644. That Lay-men have no authority to dispose of the Lands or Goods of the Church for they are only committed to the Priests to be disposed of I confesse I finde it not in the printed Statutes but this I find and read there That none high nor low by any occasion 3 Edw. 1. c. 1. shall course in any Parke nor fish in any Pond of a Prelate or other Religious person without the leave or will of the Lord or of his Bayliffe In those times sure the Parliaments found not that they had power to sell away the Bishops Lands and I conceive that the Parliament deemed not then that they had any such power by reason of the great Charter granted by this Kings father which Charter Sr Edward Coke calls the Bulwarke of the Subjects Tenures in England and therefore upon this give me leave a little longer to insist as being a maine part and foundation of our Lawes One Statute enacts 42 Edw. 3. c. 1. That if any Statute be made contrary to the great Charter it shall be void which Statute is still in force and now heare what this Charter speakes concerning the Lands of the Church and of Bishops and then say truely whether it be not against the Law of England to sell these Lands In this Charter confirmed two and thirty times by our best Parliaments it is expresly said Wee have granted to God and by this our Charter have confirmed for us and our heires for ever that the Church of England shall be free and shall have all her whole Rights 2 part Institut in Procemio and Liberties inviolable The great Charter saith Sr Edward Coke is no new Law but it is declaratory of the principal fundamental Lawes of England 25. Edw. 1. And he saith The Nobles and great Officers were to be sworn to the observation of it and by a Parliament it was judged to be taken as the Common Law of England and well may considering the four causes or ends of that Charter as is exprest in the entrance viz. 1. The honour of God 2. The health of the Kings soul 3. The advancement of the Church 4. The amendment of the Kingdome And now heare this Law speake which is almost the same which was granted by K. John in the nineteenth yeare of his Reign with the interpretation of the Oracle of our Law Paris p. 255. Sir Edward Coke on the Charter and first as all best Grants have it begins with God and saith Concessimus Deo where the Interpreter saith What is given to the Church as Bishops lands were is given to God and what hath this Law granted to God Why that the Church shall be free where the Interpreter tells you that by the Church is meant all Ecclesiastical persons their possessions and goods And these shall be free saith he from all exactions and oppressions and to sell away their lands is it neither oppression nor exaction If not heare the Charter and Interpreter goe on Wee have granted to God that the Church shall have all her Rights entire i.e. saith the Interpreter That all Ecclesiastical persons shall enjoy all their Rights wholly without diminution or substraction whatsoever Whereby saith hee all their Rights are confirmed as they had them before or as at the first grant and then they had them not to be sold It goes on and that the Church or Church-men have and hold all their liberties Which liberties saith he grants them the liberty of the Law of England the Privilege of Parliaments and all Grants by Charter or Prescription and shall none of these keep the Bishops Lands from sale Moreover these Grants are not alone for that or any set time but for ever Heare the Charter This we have granted to the Church i.e. Church-men for our selves and our heires for ever Which saith the Interpreter is added to take away all scruple that this Charter or Grant should live and take effect for ever And which is not unworthy your observation 12 Hen. 3. p. 23. in our printed Statutes there is an heavy Curse denounced against all those who shall breake this great Charter And now if you grant which I think you will not denie that this Charter is a part of our Law then I hope it will follow that by our Law the Lands of the Church or of Bishops may not be sold or alienated You have seene what the Charter hath granted the Bishops as Church-men Chap. 19. now consider what the same Charter grants them as free-borne Subjects of the Kingdome Nullus liber homo saith it capiatur vel imprisonetur vel disseisiatur de libero Tenemento suo vel libertatibus vel liberis consuetudinibus suis nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terrae Where the Interpreter expounds 1. Who is a free-man 2. What disseising is 3. What is the Law of the Land To the first he saith That every free-born Subject is meant here to be a free-man To the second to be disseised saith he is to be put out of his seisin or dispossessed of his free-hold that is lands or livelihood To the third by the Law of the Land saith he that is either by the Common Law or the Statute Law or the Custome of England And for further explanation adds by the Law of the Land is understood by processe of Law by indictment or presentment of good and lawful men And all this saith he is no new Law or grant but it is onely declaratory of the Law of England And this saith he should admonish Parliaments that in stead of this pretious trial by the Law of
the Land they bring not in absolute and partial trials by discretion CHAP. VIII That it is against the Prudence and Justice of the King and against his lawful Oath AS the selling Bishops Lands is against our Lawes which the two Houses and Kingdome by their severall Declarations Protestations and Covenants have solemnly bound themselves to maintain so it is against the Kings Prudence against his Justice and against his lawfull and just Oath It is against the Kings Prudence to devest and rob himself of those Immunities 25 Hen. 8.20 26 Hen. 8.3 and 1 Eliz. 4. 14 Ed. 3.4 5 Rights Profits and Revenues which the Law of this Land hath settled in the Crown as Collation of Bishopricks First-fruits and Tenths It is against the Kings Justice to take or make that away from his Heires and Successours which by our Lawes are justly and rightly granted unto them and these Rights the two Kingdomes of England and Scotland have sworn to maintain It is against his Justice to doe or suffer it to be done in respect of the Bishops to whom the King as the fountaine of Justice is bound to see Justice done as to his Subjects in general 2. Institut 1. but then considering from Sr Edward Coke that by our old Law-books the Church is ever under age and in the custody or guardian-ship of the King who is bound to maintaine and defend the Rights and Inheritances of the Church and that it cannot be agreeable to Right and Justice that Pupils under age through the negligence or default of the Guardians should suffer losse or disinheritance I pray well weigh whether it wil not amount even to a crying sinne in the King to doe or suffer such an injustice to be done to his Pupil the Church destitute of all help on earth save onely what she may justly expect from the King Solomon the wisest King on earth from the Spirit of God hath spoken it Enter not into the fields of the Fatherlesse for their Redeemer is mighty and he shal plead their cause with thee Prov. 23.10 11 And when you wel consider and weigh what an Oath the King hath taken at his Coronation you cannot I beleeve acquit the King of a flat perjury if hee shall assent to the selling away of the Bishops Lands But what I shal urge in this point is not so much to inform the King who I am verily perswaded by the illumination of Gods Spirit his frequent reading the holy Scriptures and by the Principles received from his most religious and learned Father of ever blessed memory is so fully satisfied and resolved that neither height nor depth nor any creature shall be able to separate or deterr him from the just defence of the Church as to let the world see that it was not as some ignorantly and uncharitably may term it pertinacity in the King not to assent to the destruction of the Church established but the dictate of a good conscience rightly informed And that it may well be so be pleased to hear and consider what how to whom where when the King swears For being to be Crowned King of England in the convention or presence of his Nobles Clergy and People in the Church the Bishop askes the King Sir will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirm the Lawes Customes and Franchises granted to the Clergy according to the Lawes of God The King answers I grant and promise to keep them Then the Bishop speakes to the King Our Lord and King we beseech you to grant and preserve to us and to the Churches committed to our charge all Canonical Privileges and due Lawes and Justice and that you would protect and defend us as every good King ought to be a Protector and Defender of the Bishops and Churches under his Government The King answers with a willing and devout heart I promise and grant that I will preserve and maintaine to you and the Churches committed to your charge all Canonical Privileges and due Law and Justice and that I wil be your Protector and Defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in his Kingdome by right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under his government Then the King at the Communion Table makes a solemn Oath in the sight of all the people laying his hand upon the holy Book and saith The things that I have before promised I shall perform and keep So help me God and the contents of this Booke Now I beseech you all good Christians judge whether this be not an Oath able with feare and reverence to bind the King to the performance For 1. it is taken by the King Gods Anointed 2. In Gods House the holy Church 3. At Gods holy Table 4. Upon Gods holy Book 5. Tendered by Gods Ministers the Bishops 6. In the presence sight and hearing of Gods people 7. To defend Gods servants the Bishops and the Church 8. With the imprecation of Gods curses and forfeiture of Gods blessings in case of not performance so that if ever Oath could truely be called the Oath of God this is it And yet if I mistake not there is somewhat more that adds strength to the Obligation of this Oath and that is That it is upon a contract betwixt the King and the Bishops for so the Oath is tendered to the King by and for the Bishops and from such a Contract and Oath if just and lawfull as this is who can absolve but he alone who is concerned and to and for whom the Oath and Contract is made which are onely God and the Bishops I have cast mine eye upon a Treatise touching the Kings Oath published by Order and written by Mr Geree Preacher of Gods Word at Saint Albans wherein hee goes about to perswade that the King without impeachment of his Oath at his Coronation may assent to the abolishing of Episcopacy I cannot without a great digression answer his Arguments which might easily be done from his own words and grounds but in stead thereof I shall set down his own words whence I hope it will appeare clearly that the King cannot saving that his Oath assent to the selling away the Church Lands His words are these The intention of that Oath is not against Legal wayes of change but against invasion of the Rights of the Clergy So that if selling the Lands of the Church be such an invasion then he professeth that the King by his Oath is bound from it and whether it be so or no in his sense and judgement heare himselfe speake in the same Treatise where he expresly saith To abolish Prelacy and to seize the lands of Prelates to any private or civil interest undoubtedly could neither want staine nor guilt So that by the plaine expresse verdict of this Preacher of Gods Word the King is proclaimed before hand to be a man of a stained and guilty conscience if he assent to the selling Church-Lands according
understood his Disciples and Apostles read Chap. 10. 1. where he cals his twelve Disciples whom he sends to preach and then in the close speaking of them he saith Who receiveth you Ver. 40. receiveth me And accordingly Saint Paul as I before proved maketh Sacrilege or taking away holy things a breach of the first Table which concerneth God which could not be unlesse God were the Proprietarie and owner of them but of such disputers I may say as Christ did of those Jewes Mark 12.24 Do you not erre because you know not the Scriptures nor the power of God What need we plainer proofe then our owne Law when as the great Charter speaking now in the name of King and people in Parliament saith We have granted to God c. Argum. 2 But the great Charter on which the Bishops so much relie was probably penned or gained by Bishops and it was granted in time of Poperie and savours too much of it Resp If the great Charter were obtained or penned by Bishops I know not but all Englishmen should rather commend then blame them for it for it is the best flower in Englands garden and I presume it savours not of Poperie but to such as have their senses stopped or themselves ill affected But if there be any Poperie proved in the Grant take that away in Gods name but let the Rights and the Lands continue for I know not how these can be capable of Poperie But wil all others who receive benefit by that Charter hold it null because granted in time of Poperie I trow not That which silences all such cavils is that as before it is proved this Charter was and is but the declaration and confirmation of the ancient Law of this Kingdome and therefore ought to hold and bind and then let me adde the first Impropriations in England were in time of Poperie and by Popes who of 9284. Parishes impropriated the Tithes of 3845. of the best of them which Tithes now for the most part are in Lay hands And thou that abhorrest Poperie committest thou Sacrilege For we say the Receiver is worse then the Thiefe Or why rather abhorrest not thou that act And why restorest not thou the Tithes being Sacrilegiously taken Argum. 3 But these or many of these Lands of the Bishops were given as by superstitious men and in superstitious times so to superstitious uses Resp Who doubts not but many good lawful and religious acts may have been performed in superstitious times and by superstitious persons Time or person do not I am sure should not denominate the act simply good or ill But was King Lucius who An. 176. gave the Church in England Lands was he superstitious Or those times such Who can prove it But which are the superstitious uses in Bishops lands Are they Preaching keeping Hospitality doing acts of Piety Justice Charity paying the King his due and serving the Publike For I finde no worse But grant there were some superstitious uses in the first Grant yet why shall the lands be taken and sold if the abuses be by the Bishops or other wayes taken away And Mr Geree before mentioned pag. 19. saith it What was Antichristian and contrariant to the Lawes of this Land was taken from the Church in the reigne of King Henry the Eighth And though the impulsive cause of giving some lands might be ill as to pray for the soules of the dead or the like yet the final cause being good as given to God why not separate the ill take away praying for the dead and the like all which is done and yet continue the good the keeping the Lands for Gods Honour and Service For read you not that the bullock which was set apart for the Sacrifice of Baal Judg. 6.26 yet Gideon sacrificed it to the Lord because it was not then in state Idolatrous Things I confesse which have and retaine the matter forme and dependence on Idols as having the badge of Idolatry these are not to be offered or continued to God and his Service which Bishops Lands neither had nor have no not so much as is continued in the City of Londons Armes or some great mens Coates they have not so much as a Crosse on them But if all should be taken away that hath been given to superstitious uses what would become of our Churches and if all abolished that hath been abused what would become of our Pulpits Communion Tables Sacraments yea of Parliaments or that most adored peece of Gods Service Preaching Exod. 23.2 In a word the censers are by wicked persons to as wicked ends abused by Korah and his complices what then are they therefore sold or turned into pots kettles or the like the like whereof hath been done in our times no but they were by Gods owne ordinance preserved in their holy kind Ver. 18. and that because as it is expressed in the Text They were hallowed to the Lord. Argum. 4 But the King it is said is bound to confirme what the two Houses have decreed and they have ordained the selling of the Bishops Lands Resp I shall passe by that so often fully answered Elegerint and shall confidently say that the King is no more bound to assent to what they decree then they are bound to decree and to sell the Bishops Lands to which they are not bound if the thing be not just and agreeable to the Law of God and man which whether so or no Chap. 4 5 6. I desire you consider what is before expressed The Precept of God I hope in your judgements holds Exod. 23.2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to doe evil againe if that which appeares good and just to the two Houses be evil in the conscience of the King the King is not bound nay he ought not to joyne with the two Houses for Protestants as they rightly hold no salvation by implicite faith so neither that one mans conscience should ride upon the backe of another so that although some in Parliament may in part be excused in doing that which is not just through the false guidance of an erring conscience yet the King in doing the same thing against the light of his conscience may sinne whereupon further it may become a fearfull sinne by any tentation of promises threats restraints to draw or drive the King to assent to what his conscience forbids him to doe Againe the case betwixt the King and the two Houses in selling the Bishops Lands is very different for the King is bound by Oath to the Bishops to maintaine them and their Rights in their lands and possessions according to Law and Justice to which the two Houses stand not alike and so deeply obliged whereupon it followes I conceive that though the two Houses might the contrary whereof is before proved yet the King ought not to give his assent Lastly 1 Jac. 3. Coke Instit 4. the King as the Act of Parliament stiles him is the
Rights of the Church in special cannot may not by any power be violated or taken away doe they yet grant such a power to Parliaments to take those Rights away and so expresly contradict themselves And can you conceive that King Henry the Third who first granted that Charter and gave the right Power to Parliaments would have suffered the two Houses yea or that himselfe would after that Grant made to the Church have decreed that he might justly use the power of Parliament to sell those Lands Or can you conceive that those Kings who gave the Bishops Lands for so it is said that the Kings of England gave them and that with such curses on their Successours or any who should dare to alienate or sell them ever meant they should be sold And tell me I pray for I am to learne where ever good and lawful Parliament did ever take away any single mans whole estate though it were to pay the Publike debt or for Publike use except it were in a legal course And can you conceive that the two Houses may doe that to the inheritance of God the Patronage of the King and the Rights of the Church which they cannot do to him who hath yeelded up his assent by giving his Vote to his Proxie in Parliament which neither God the King nor the Church hath done Pag. 700. in this Parliament I pray you consider that in the Book of your Declarations it is said That the Rights of Publike trust are not to the prejudice of any mans particular interest Argum. 8 And if it be yet urged that Parliaments may change the municipal Lawes of this Kingdom and therefore much more this of the Title or Tenure of Bishops Lands Resp I think I may rightly answer that the King and all the people of England by a mutual assent may change the general Laws or such Laws as they hold sitting and convenient to be altered for their better good for here is neither injury nor injustice to any but yet special Laws which concerne the good of some in speciall I conceive with humble submission may not justly be changed except it be by the assent personal Vote or Proxie of those interessed none of which can here be said of the Church or Bishops or unlesse some offence liable to such a penalty hath demerited such a sentence or change of that special Law and that no such offence hath been committed deserving such a penalty I presume to be true for that the Bishops have not been legally accused heard and tried which was ever the ordinary and right course used by the Hebrewes Romans and all Religious good and Civil Nations and which is the Law of this Kingdome Ch. 14. 29. as is expressed in the great Charter But I feare these two last Arguments and many more such are built on sands which washed or driven away with a little wind all the building fals to the ground for they take it for granted that the two Houses or rather that some Lords Temporal and Commons make the Parliament for the discovery whereof I pray consider 1. The conception 2. The birth 3. The growth and strength of Parliaments In the Saxon times when the seed or conception of Parliaments was at the making consirming or witnessing Laws seldome is there any mention but of the King and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal except the Kings Servants Aldermen Spelm. Concil some wise men c. Nay when our Parliaments first were borne in the nineth and twentieth of Henry the Third there is no mention then but of the King and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal Yea at the Grant of the great Charter there is only mention of one and thirty Lords Spiritual and two and thirty Lords Temporal Coke Proâ—m to 2 Instit Mat. Par. p. 435 Id. pag. 580. 581. Id. p. 636. in the one and twentieth of King Henry the Third in Parliament at Westminster And in the one and thirtieth of Henry the Third at London which were for the relief of the distressed Kingdome yet there were only mentioned the King and the whole Nobility of the Kingdome viz. the Bishops Prelates Earles and Barons But in the two and fiftieth of Henry the Third say our printed Statutes The King providing for the Estate of this Realm the more discreet men of the Kingdome being called as well of the higher as the lower estate the King hath made these Acts Ordinances and Statutes which he willeth to be observed of all for ever And so the formes of Acts in Parliament ran The King willeth provideth ordaineth granteth In the 31 Henry 6.1 The King ordaines by the advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons being in the said Parliament In 1 Rich. 3.6 The Commons prayeth that it may please the King to ordaine 1. Eliz. 3. We the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons representing the three Estates of the Realme of England make our humble petition to your Highnesse Ch. of Parl. fol. 1 Whereupon saith Sr Edward Coke Without these three Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons no Act of Parliament can be good and rightly for as all the Freemen in England have Votes so the Bishops vote for themselves and all the Church-men in England And thereupon if they have no Votes in Parliament then either they are the onely slaves and no Free-men or else those Church-men are not bound by these Lawes it being a Maxime in our Law that no man is bound to that Law wherein he had no Vote in person or by Proxie which no Bishop and I think no Church-man hath now in this Parliament But not to dispute this though agreeable to all Law Justice and Reason yet sure it cannot be rightly called a Parliament or any Act therein binding without the Kings Royal assent for as in a natural body so in this no life nor motion without a Head which is the King yea therefore he is called Principium 4 Part Instit. s 3 4. Caput Finis Parliamenti because without the King or his Royal assent it is no binding Act. See but one Act for many 1 Jac. 1. where it is thus said We the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons beseech your Majesty c. which if your Majesty shall be pleased to adorne with your Majesties Royal assent without which it can neither be complete and perfect In answer to Judge Jenkin nor remaine to posterity And 1. Câ—r 7. the two Houses beseech the King to give his Royal assent to such Bils as they then passed and H. P. confesses which was never denied till of late and that but by some that no Acts of Parliament can be complete or formally binding without the Kings â—â—ent And so Mr Prynne affirmes Power of Parl. f. 47. Ib. fol. 104. In his Vindication p. 6. that the Kings assent is generally requisite to passe Lawes and ratifie them And Judge Jenkins that undanted Champion of our
verbum Baâ—on Sr Henry Spelman informe me right then it cannot hold that all Bishops in England hold their lands by or in the right of their Baronies for he affirmes that the title of Baron was not known in England till the time of William the Conqueror whereas most I dare say of some Bishops lands were given some one some two some three some foure hundred years before the Conquerors time and then judg whether those lands were given to hold per Baroniam Againe the same Author sayes that in England there were three sorts of Barons the first who were made by William the Conqueror and these hold their Honors and Places in all Courts by Prescription rather then by Tenure and were therefore called Barones Praescriptitii The second sort were called Rescriptitii who in the time of Henry the Third were called by Writ to the Kings Courts The third sort called Diplomatici who by the Kings Patents were first created in the time of Henry the Second and in that right had their places Now can any say but that ever since there have been great Councils in England the Bishops had their places there and so were to hold them by Prescription rather then by Tenure And if by the great Charter the Rights and Liberties of the Church be inviolable i. e. such as rightly cannot be broken then this Right Custome or Privilege cannot justly be taken away I conceive this true that the two Kings Williams Father and Son and after them King Henry the Second out of spleen ambition or avarice have impaired the first antient Dignity of Bishops in England and may have changed some of their Lands to be held per Baroâ—iam which at first were granted in puram perpâ—tuam Elâ—emosynam Whereupon Sr Henry Spelman cals the now Bishops Barones Elâ—emosynaries yet doth it follow that if some have unjustly changed their Tenure therefore others more unjustly may take away their Lands Had it been ill in David to have cut off the lap of Sauls garment might he therefore have killed the King The case then as I conceive it is briefly this The Saxon Kings first chief Donors of much if not of the most of the Bishops Lands in England gave and confirmed them to be held either in Franc-Almoigue free from all Service or for Divine Service and they to hold them as Gods Almes-men and Servants and this continued to King Edward the Confessor after which time some Kings how justly judg you as Conquerors of this Land altered the Tenure making some or most of their Lands yet not all for two are excepted Carble and Rochoster so an antient Register to hold per Baroniam After which King Henry the Third whether moved in conscience or upon some other good causes restored the Lands to their antient just Rights for his Charter could intend no lesse to the Church it looking back to the time of Edward the Confessor at least So that the Question is whether the Lands of Bishops in England should now hold per Baroniam as changed by the Conqueror or his Successors or as at first they were granted and after restored by the great Charter to their first Rights and Liberties 1 Part Instit p. 94. 2. Instit c. 1. Ibid. which was either in Franc-Almeigne or for Divine Service Sr Edward Coke affirmes this later and further saith By the great Charter all the Rights are confirmed to the Church and Church-men which they had before or at their first Grant And in the same place more fully saith The Church shall be fres i. e. freed By which saith he a restitution is graved of all such Immunities and Freedomes as they enjoyed before and to free them from all such changes as have been usurped and encroached upon by any power whatsoever And I believe that if the case were put concerning your own Lands you would soon resolve that they shouldhold as by the first Donors grant and after by the great Charter confirmed rather then by that imposition of a Conqueror And why the same judgment should not be given on Bishope Lands as on the Lands of other Free-men of England I see not Argum. 14 But some to take a shorter course will perswade that to take and sell these Lands of the Bishops is not Sacrilege because theft is onely in things moveable in which condition or acceptation Lands cannot be understood Resp Sr Edward Coke cites the Canon Law and approves of this as agreeable to our Law which saith Whâ—â— things are giâ—â—â— to the Church 2 Instit. p. 489. are holy Offerings whether they beres solide or mobiles whether they be moveable or immoveable Now doth our law say there is no theft in things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only saith it theft is in moveables If this and not that then why for the honor of our Law that it may not appeare to cross Gods may we not say that our Law hath onely made theft in moveables punishable because it doth not conceive how land in the proper and strict sense of robbing can be taken away and stoln But because Sacrilege or taking things immoveable is not by our Law punishable doth it therefore follow that it is no sin or punishable by Gods Law Suppose we have no Law to punish an Atheist an Idoater one that takes Gods Name in vaine who prophanes the Lords day who dishonoureth his Parents who tels or makes lies are therefore these no sins punishable by the Law of God And that by Gods Law defrauding God or man of immoveables be it of Lands is a sin be pleased first to bethink your self 1 King 21. whether King Ahah sinned in taking away Naboths Vineyard an immoveable I conceive in your sense and acceptation and if he sinned in this then what Commandement brake he Was it not the eighth which saith Thou shalt not steale And then doth it not plainly follow that theft may be in immoveables And that God may be robbed of immoveables which is Sacrilege And doth not God by his Prophet Ezekiel speaking not only of Tithes and Offerings but of the holy Lands say Ezek. 48.14 Thou shale not sell nor alienate them which to doe is Sacrilege Argum. 15 But now followes the Argument which will admit no Answer There is a necessity lies upon the State to sell the Bishops Lands for without it the publike debts cannot be paid and without yeelding to this the Church and State are in hazard to be utterly ruined for till this be done there will be no peace in the Land Resp Indeed we say necessity hath no law and it is a sad oase that without or against Law divine or humane nedessity must sweep all before it but before I answer fully will you give me leave to ask you a Question or two 1. How and by whom is this necessity brought on 2. If not by Bishops but others why not the Trespassers in stricter language the Debters to discharge the debt rather then the Bishops 3. If
with an arrow feathered from the Eagles own wings Hos 13.9 and had this word Propriis configimur alis which in the Prophets words is Perditio tua exâ—te Thou hast destroyed thy self But other better pens have saved me this labour Therefore that Curses may be used and in this case consult I pray Deut. 17.17 with that of Moses Cursed be he that removes his neighbours Land-Mark and all the people shall say Amen Now if a curse may be pronounced against him that removes the mark of any neighbours Lands then much more against him who removes the mark of God or his Ministers 2. If for removing the mark whereby the bounds might be known then why not for taking and selling them away that they be no more seen to be the Ministers And though we are apt to translate the deaths and punishments of Sacrilegious persons to other causes then to Sacrilege yet it is a general certain Rule Innatum est sceleri supplicium sceleris Hos 5.12 and therefore it is said God will be as a moth and rottennesse i. e. the punishment that God inflicts on sin shall be as a moth to cloth and rottennesse to the tree or body of man Now whence comes the moth that destroyes the cloth but out of dust and filth that lay hid in the cloth And whence rottennesse to destroy the plant or body of man or beast but out of the moisture and corrupt humors in the same body which is by it destroyed The Sacrilegious man in himself or posterity perisheth Say not then it was his want of providence it was his suretiship or the like no Sacrilege was the moth or rottennesse for as Solomon Pro. 20.25 It is a snare Yea but say some the snare doth not overtake or not presently so neither doth the moth nor rottennesse but know that as the moth so the snare it makes no noise that men may hear and take warning and so divine Justice winks when it sleeps not and kils while we sleep or little think of it But be sure that the snare which God sets as a trap to catch the Sacrilegious person he so sets it that first or last it shall take hold and as the man devoured holy things so shall this snare destroy the devourer And that we may fear to fall into this snare hear I pray what God hath threatned and executed upon transgressors in this kind and I think before hand I may say and say truly that more and more heavy curses and plagues have not been recorded in holy Writ to have been inflicted upon any sin then on this of Sacrilege I shall orderly proceed as I find them laid down in Gods Word yet omitting many instances and examples though pertinent to my purpose onely for brevity sake And first when Moses in Gods stead blessed the Tribe of Levi Deut. 33. Gods Ministers in his holy Service he did it in these words Lord blesse his substance and accept of the work of his hands and then immediately followes the curse upon all that shall attempt to spoile or hurt them Ver. 11. And Lord smite through the laynes of all that rise against him and of them that hate him that they rise not againe This was first denounced by Moses their first Prince and see how soon this begins to work for in the next Princes time when Achan in war had gained and privately kept that wedge of gold which was due to have been dedicated to God all Israel smarts for it Josh 7. for this they were discomfited by their enemies until the Sacrilegious person Achan was put to death and an atonement made by all to pacifie Gods wrath The Jewes are carried away captives by the Chaldeans 2 Chron. 26.14 17. as a punishment of their prophanation of the Temple and contempt of the Priests each of them being branches of Sacrilege Solomon the wisest earthly King being counselled as the most learned conjecture to make use of what his Father had laid up toward the building of the Temple answers No for sayes he Pro. 20.25 It is a snare to devour holy things in which metaphor the possessions of the Church seem to be the corn or bait and the Devil to be the hunter who holds the snare wherewith he entangleth the Church-robber to destroy him Neither did Solomon the Type of Christ alone pronounce this sentence but Darius an Heathen King when in favour of the Jewes he dedicated the building of a Temple to their God sets this curse upon the invaders spoilers or robbers thereof Ezra 6.12 The Lord destroy all Kings and people not any one or other but both who shall put their hands to alter and to destroy this House of God which is at Jerusalem and whether God said Amen to this Prayer of Darius judg ye by what happened to Antiochus Nicanor Crassus all whom as they were robbers and prophaners of that Temple so the goods thereof became snares for their destruction And this accords with that of the Prophet Jeremy Who devour things holy to the Lord Jer. 2.3 shall offend and evil shall come upon them saith the Lord and see how soon this Prophecy was fulfilled for Jehoiakim the King takes the Cedar out of Gods House Jer. 12. he takes not all the Lands and perpetual maintenance of all the Priests but he takes onely the Cedar out of Gods House wherewith he sieled his own windows he sold it not but sieled his own windows with it hear the judgement Jehoiakim shall be buried like an Asse Ver. 19. and shall be cast out beyond the gates of Jerusalem Dan. c 1. 4. After this Nebuchadnezzar robs Gods House of the gold and silver vessels therein what followes He lives with Dan. 5. and lives a Beast seven years and Belshazzor his son for prophaning those vessels which Nebuchadnezzar his Father had taken away came to a sudden end the Empire is taken from him his race and posterity for ever Neither doth this Curse and Snare reach and destroy individuals alone but it lights on the whole Land where the sin is committed we found it before in the punishment of Achans Sacrilege Mal. 3. and now we may see as much expressed by the Prophet Malachi who tels the people that for robbing God of what was offered to him Ver. 9. Ye are cursed with a curse i. e. ye are certainly and heavily cursed And ye are cursed even ye the whole land and that curse no lesse then the most dreadfull to nature with the curse of a general and great famine And see how God proportions his punishment even to the nature of the sin for in Joshua's time the people for Sacrilege committed in war is punished in war by the sword of the enemy and here in Malachi they have robbed the Priests of their maintenance and bread and themselves are therefore punished and ready to starve for want of bread where me thinks
plentiful and large against it in the Old Testament 2. Considering that whilst the Apostles lived they were so far from having Lands or Tithes or setled maintenance that they had not houses nor holes to put their heads in except they were in prisons and therefore then to write against taking away the Lands and goods of the Church when they had neither would have been accounted but a labour in vain and notwithstanding all this Saint Peter and Saint Paul the one by his sound Doctrine the other by his miraculous power have taught and admonished every good Christian enough whereby to avoid and beware of Sacrilege I will begin with the Doctrinal part Rom. 2.22 which is so plainly set down as before I made appear that all the best Divines doe and cannot but confesse from that Text that alienating the Church-Lands is a sin of an high nature and therefore utterly to be abhorred Acts 5. And what judgment hath passed upon this sin is as plain in the story and case of Ananias who for detaining but part of that which he had promised to God for the Church was suddenly struck dead which visible death sayes Mr Calvin on the place was Symbolum the fore-reckoning or fore-shot of the death eternal which saith he was just 1. to punish Ananias for so hainous a sin 2. to admonish allo after him For had not Saint Peter thus severely punisht this sin many saith Mr Calvin under colour of Religion would have been forward to have robbed the Church And now for close of all will you be pleased to compare the Sacrilege now intended and begun in selling the Bishops Lands with that of Ananias Where 1. he sold onely the lands which were his own but here that is taken away and sold that is Gods 2. He had but promised those lands to God but here in these lands God and his Assignes and Servants have for his use been in real and actual possession many hundreds of years 3. He there kept back but a part but here all must be taken away both root and branch 4. There probably he might think to keep back a part whereby to maintain himself his wife and family alive in the great persecution but here the rich and wealthy take them away thereby to joyn land unto land and Gods inheritance to their own possessions 5. It may well be conceived that as this Ananias was but one private man of no great note so that he might be of no extraordinary knowledge and understanding but more then probable that he being a New Convert from Judaism or Paganism was but a novioe in the Law of God or at least of Christ whereas they who take and sell these Lands are many selected and chosen as the wisest ablest most just in this great Kingdom and then how far this Sacrilege doth exceed that of Ananias in respect of the persons the matter the manner and almost all circumstances judge you And yet I may adde one circumstance more which doth heighten this fin as much if not more then any other for in the late Covenant you have sworn to extirpate Episcopacy which is the main and leading cause in the Ordinance wherefore the Lands of Bishops must be sold and not onely have you sworn this your selves but by threats and forfeits have urged even the Bishops themselves to take the same so that they who are to be spoiled and undone are urged contrary to Law Justice and Nature to swear their own extirpation O heavens O earth I had almost said O hell Did you ever hear the like In the Preface to the Covenant it is said that this Covenant is made according to the commendable practice of this Kingdom and the example of Gods people and I doubt not but it hath been Preached as it hath been Printed that this Covenant is warranted as agreeable to the Covenants in holy Writ and in the best Reformed Churches how truly this is spoken and printed I refer to that which Mr Nye Cov. with narrative p. 12. one of the Assembly hath printed where he saith It is such an Oath the like hath not been in any age or Oath we read of in sacred or humane Stories And I say that when this shall be proved by the Word of God by the example of Gods people and the commendable practice of this Kingdom that a few of the people without their Head did first covenant themselves and then by threats fears and punishments did compel all both head and tail to extirpate the Religion long setled by Law and confirmed by the bloud of many holy Martyrs against which nothing is brought in proof that it is repugnant to Gods Word and thereupon to take and sell away what was lawfully given to God for the maintenance of his Servants in the Church I say when this shall be proved I will take the Covenant both which will be ad Graecas Calendas that is as we say the morrow after Doomesday or never I have proved that alienating of these Lands in Gods Law is Theft and I have shewed Gods threats and judgments against this sin we have a proverb what need a rich man be a Theef for few but such cast in their lots for Christs garment and thereby to hazard the wrath of God and their own fatal execution The Philistims a people out of the Covenant of God 1 Chron. 6. yet for detaining but a while the Ark wherein the Law was kept were shamefully punished in their hinder parts and some with death which caused the living to restore what was unjustly taken with interest of much gold And when Moab and Ammon had consulted covenanted and voted utterly to take away Gods inheritance it so came to passe Psal 83. that after all the Church flourished and kept her own when Moab and Ammon were utterly extinct and laid in the dust which like consideration hath moved some as wise as pious never to mingle their other lands wlth the Churches inheritance and others as pious as wise never in Parliament to give assent to any Bils for the Alienation of Church-Lands It is conceived by many holy and learned Divines that the 74. Psalm was penned upon the robbing of the Temple at Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes which if so then read and consider the sorrow confession and death of that Antiochus Now saith he 1 Macc. 6.12 I remember the evils that I did at Jerusalem that I took away all the vessels of gold and silver that were therein I perceive therefore that for this cause troubles are come upon me and behold I perish through great grief It is time you will say to conclude and I pray let it be with Prayer and such as Mr Calvin used in his Comment on Acts 5. Lord grant that as upon the sudden fearful punishment of Ananias his Sacrilege Acts 5.11 Fear came upon all the Church and upon as many as heard these things so the same or the like fear may strike all our hearts that so out of a true love and due honor to God and that we may escape the dreadful curses and punishments threatned and inflicted on this sin we may in time while it is called to day repent us of this and all other our sins and so obtain mercy and eternal life in Christ Jesus our only Lord and Saviour Be wise now therefore O ye Kings Psal 2.10 be instructed ye Judges of the earth Serve the Lord with fear and rejoyce with trembling Ver. 11. Kisse the Son lest he be angry and ye perish Ver. 12. The end Errata TItle Pag. And what is given to God is holy Ezek. 48. add in the Margin p. 5. l. 19. Matth. 10.1 40 41 42. Mark 9.41 John 13.20 p. 6. l. 17. dele Lev. 27.32 p. 9. l. 29. d. Ibid. p. 53. in mar p. 17. l. 7. for here r. hear p. 19. l. 14. Mat. 19.19 p. 32. l. 30. d. Exod. 23.2 r. Num. 16.38 p. 33. l. 33. Pro. for 25.20 r. 20.25 in mar p. 34. l. 31. for Ball. Catoples r. Bell. Staplet in marg p. 41. l. 11. for 3. r. 4. in mar p. 42.12 r. Gal. 4.15 p. 43. l. 29. r. abased p. 48. l. penul r. 47. in mar p. 52. l. 20. r. 25 Hen. 8. c. 20. in mar p. 55. l. 25. for Covenant r. Government p. 60. l. 4. r. Christ and S. Peter p. 61. l. penult r. Rom. 3.8 in marg p. 64. l. 33. r. 1 Sam. 22.18 p. 69. l. 33. r. Mat. 4.17 in mar p. 75. l. 26. for 5. r. 4. l. 29. for 8. r. 7. l. 32. for 9. r. 8. l. 36. for 9. r. 4. p. 76. l. 4. for 11. r. 12. p. 80 for 1 Chro. 6 r. 1 Sam. 6. n mar