Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	bill_n	house_n	pass_v	12,480	5	7.4741	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

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

in that House is as essential as the Lords And this about the Laws made without them is built only upon some difficult emergent Cases from which they desired to be exempt and free themselves Not from any constraint of the State nor from any Opinion of the King Peers or People that it was fit to make Laws without them But to this we have given an Answer before But this Objection of taking away the Earls and Barons next strikes as I conceive another way at the Lord's House than either of those Answers or Reasons seem to meet with And perhaps this Lord himself is willing to pass it by if he does see it and 't is thus The House of Commons sees and knows well enough that should they bring up a Bill open and with a bare edge to take away the Votes from the Lords it could not possibly be endured by either King or Peers Therefore the Bill which may come to take them away next and which may be meant in this Objection may be a Bill to make one House of both and set them altogether under the pretence of greater Unity and more free and quick dispatch of all Business all Messages and Conferences and breach of Correspondencies and Differences happening between the Two Houses while they are Two being by this means taken away And this I am sure hath been much spoken of since this Parliament began and may with far more ease be next compassed now the Bishops are thrust out both because there are fewer in the Lord's House to help to cast out such a Bill and because the Commons House which would willingly receive the Lords in among them would never admit the Bishops into their House So that both ways this is made far more easie to Pass And should this happen I would fain know of this Lord wherein this Objection would fail that they might the next time remove the Barons and the Earls Not remove them from making Laws as his Lordship speaks of it but remove them into the House of Commons where their Votes shall be swallow'd up among the many and might be quite overmaster'd though they should not all Agree and Vote one way For then the meanest Commoner in that House would have his Vote as great as the greatest Earls Whereas now in their own House being distinct though all the House of Commons agree upon a Bill or any thing else the Lords may if they see Reason alter or reject it So that if hereafter they be reduced to one House I make no question but their Votes are gone next after the Bishops And if his Lordship shall think this an impossible Supposition let him know it is not half so impossible as that which he made before of the Heavenly Bodies breaking out of their own Spheres But we are now come to the last Objection the other of the two which his Lordship says are stronger And 5. The other Objection is this That this Bill alters the Foundation of this House and Innovations which shake Foundations are dangerous And truly this Objection seems to me very strong but perhaps that is by reason of my Weakness for my Lord tells us before that it is capable of a satisfactory Answer and here his Lordship gives two for failing I Answer First That if there should be an Errour in the Foundation when it shall be found and the Master-Builders be met together they may nay they ought rather to amend it than to suffer it to run on still to the prejudice and danger of the whole Structure This Answer whatever this Lord thinks of it is not satisfactory and the thing will be full of danger whensoever it shall be put to trial For Foundations are seldom meddled withal but with great hazard and a Fundamental Errour in a Kingdom is born with more Safety to the whole than it can be taken away And this happens partly because among the many Subjects of a Kingdom there are different Judgments and as different Affections whence it follows that all Men are not of Opinion that that which is called an Errour in the Foundation is so indeed Nor do the Affections of all Men dislike it nay perhaps the greater perhaps the better part will approve it In this Case if the Master-Builders fall to mending of this somewhat boisterously may they not rend all in pieces to fall about their own Ears and other Mens And partly because the Master-Builders which are to meet to repair the decays of the State though in all Ages they have the same Authority to make Laws yet they have not in all Ages the same Skill and Wisdom for the making or the mending of them Whence it follows that even the Master-Builders themselves may mistake and call that the Errour which is indeed a great part of the Strength of the Foundation And so by tampering to mend that which is better already endanger the shaking if not the fall of the whole Structure which they would labour to preserve And I pray God Posterity do not find it that even the Master-Builders which are now met be not so deceived and with as ill Success in casting the Bishops Votes out of the House under the Name of an Errour in the Foundation But if this Answer satisfie not his Lordship may hope his next will For Secondly he says This is not Fundamental to this House For it hath stood without them and done all that appertains to the Power thereof without them yea they being wholly 〈◊〉 and that which hath been done for a time at the King's pleasure may be done with as little danger for a longer time and when it appears to the fit and for publick good not only mahy but ought to be done altogether by the Supreme Power It seems this Lord distrusts his former Answer about mending Fun damental Errours in a State and therefore here he denies that Bishops and their Votes are Fundamental to the Lords House But I doubt his Lordship is mistaken in this For that is Fundamental in any Court which in that Court is first laid and settled upon which all the future Structure is raised Now in the Lords House of Parliament the Bishops Votes were laid at the very first as well as the Votes of the Lords Temporal Nay with a Precedency both in Place and Number and all the Ordinances and Powers of that great Court have equally proceeded from the Votes of the Bishops and the Lords and therefore for ought which yet appears to me either the Lords Vote are not Fundamental to that House or the Bishops are But his Lordship proves they are not Fundamental to that House because that House hath stood without them But weakly enough God knows like a House whose Foundations are shaken upon one side and because that House hath done all that appertains to the Power of it without them It may be so But I doubt whether it did all that appertains to the Wisdom of it without them For this

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

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

Decemb. 24. 1634. Sanctitati vestrae Devotissima Acad. Oxon. At this time there was a Proposition made for setting the Poor on work at Oxford by making New Stuffs and Drapery Ware much after the fashion that the Dutch and Walloons use at Canterbury Norwich and other places Divers Letters passed between me and the Vicechancellor and some other interessed men about it But in Conclusion such difficulties appeared in the Business that the whole project suddainly vanished and came to nothing And yet Mr. Escott of Wadham College who very carefully and certainly with a very good intention laboured in the Business gave me this Answer following to such Doubts as I had made And set down some other things very considerable in the business And yet for all this that good intention fell to nothing THE Doubts that you have made to me I think in part be thus answered To the First The Man John Roberts of Yarmouth and born there is a man as I suppose conformable for I have heard him speak with dislike of some sactious Brethren of the Town of Yarmouth and of some of this Town of Oxford And he commends Mr. Brook the Minister of Yarmouth and particularly for a Suit that he lately commenced in the High Commission against a factious Lecturer for preaching scandalously of the Blessed Virgin c. by reason of which Suit I suppose the said Minister and his Conformity is known to my Lord's Grace of Canterbury To the Second If this Man die another may be had upon the same Terms But if he live any time he will make his own Sons and others perfect in the Trade that may supply the place after him To the Third I hope we shall not need to fear the making us a number of Poor by them that shall be trained up in this Trade because this Course encreaseth not the number of Poor but only teaches them whom it finds idle and enables them to maintain themselves and their Families if they have any for it employs both Men Women and Children and where there be no Idlers 't is like there will not be many Beggars To the Fourth I find not indeed that we have power to impose a Tax upon Ale-houses To the Fifth The Taxes and Levies now made by the Town for the Poor are by the Statute to be employed and disposed of by the Overseers of the Poor with the consent of two Justices of Peace for the providing of Materials to set them to Work and for the placing out of poor Children to honest Trades Now if the Overseers of this Work be made Justices of Peace I see not but they may have a hand in disposing of those Taxes and convert as much of them as shall be fit to this use However the University may by its own power tax all privileged men There is a man of good Place in the Town who is like to be a Benefactor to this Work that thinks the Town if the University go through with it will willingly Bind themselves to a yearly Contribution towards it or else will undertake to maintain constantly a certain number of Children which shall work there But if none of these things be I think there may be shewn a way how the University of its self without the assistance of the Town may be able to go on with this charitable Work and provide for the maintaining and teaching Sixty poor Children the first year and add to them 20 or 30 more every year perpetually and yet so that whatsoever any man shall contribute towards it shall return to him within the compass of the year with advantage Which way may be this There must be raised a Sum of Money that shall issue out yearly for the maintaining of a certain number at work suppose sixty or an hundred This yearly Charge shall never increase and yet the number to be maintained shall increase every year thus Suppose there be eighty to be maintained as Apprentices for seven years at five pounds charge for every Child per annum The first year their Earnings will but answer their Spoilings The second year this Eighty will earn 120 l. which will take in twenty four Children more The third year the first eighty will earn 200 l. and the 24 taken in the 2d year will earn 36 l. in all 236 l. Out of which deduct to maintain the 24 taken in the second year 120 l. and there will remain 116 l. which will take in 23 more The fourth year the first Eighty will earn 280 l. and the rest will earn so as to take in 30 more The fifth year will take in 40 more the sixth year 50. The seventh 40. The Eighth year The first Eighty shall be manumitted and yet there will be left at work 204. and there may be taken in 30 more The ninth year will manumit the 24 that were taken in the Second year and there will be left at work 210. And so always a certain number will go off yearly as they come in and others will be taken in their room If there be taken in but 60 the first year there will be added the second year 20. the third year 16. the fourth year 20. the fifth 30. the sixth 40. and so onward as it is shewed before If the Town contribute towards it there may be taken in the first year 100. If the University go on alone they may besides the allowance of the Master and Overseers take in 60 by raising through the University by the Pole 1 d. a Week upon every man except poor Scholars or by setting a certain Sum upon every College to be raised as it shall seem meet to the Governours Now if any man think this 1 d. a Week to be a Burthen I answer him thus First that upon the matter he doth not give any thing but only lays out by the Week what within the Year will come in to him again in the Buying of his Gowns Suits Stockings c. Neither is this a thing only in imagination but it may easily be made to appear that if things be well ordered there shall be saved in some Stuffs 4 d. in some 6 d. in some 8 d. a Yard in some more in some less as it is of higher or lower price and in Stockings after the same proportion Secondly I think I may say there is well nigh as much as this given every Week at Buttery-Hatches and to Beggars in the Town which by this means might be saved for if a right course be taken there should not be seen a Beggar or an idle Person within the Precincts of the University Thirdly I believe that my Lord Keeper 〈◊〉 Petitioned by the University will easily be induced in regard of the undertaking of this work to keep this University out of all Breves which now come very frequently upon us and that we shall be burthened with no Collections save only some extraordinary ones that shall first pass the Consent and approbation

Houses most of them poor mean Persons seven or eight in all here a Pistol and there a Sword rusty and elsewhere a Birding-Piece so we are safe enough from them God keep us from the Scots In that View I found two Convicted One here below East-Gate a sorry labouring Mason The other one Mr. Hunt by the Castle a Stranger staying here only a while in a House of his own till he can find some Brewer to take it being fit for that purpose and standing void November ult 1640. Ch. Potter I Thank you for your Pains in your Search for Arms among Recusants and am glad you find all so safe and them so unfurnish'd As for Mr. Hunt if he be a Stranger the sooner the Town is rid of him the better For the Confirmation of your Endowments upon your Professors and Orators you shall do well when the great Businesses are more over for till then it will not be intended to move for Confirmation in Parliament And in the mean time it may be very for you fit to prepare a Bill by some good Council which may contain them all in one if it may be It is true you write that most Colleges have upon Christmas-day a Sermon and a Communion in their private Chapels and by that means cannot come to the publick Sermon of the University at Christ-Church And whereas you write farther that some have wished that in regard of this the Morning Sermon for the University might be put off to the Afternoon as it is upon Easter-day for the like occasion I for my part think the motion very good it being a day of Solemn Observation Yet I would have it proposed to the Heads and then that which you shall do by publick Consent shall very well satisfie me Lambeth Dec. 4. 1640. W. Cant. MR. Wilkinson complained in Parliament against the Vice-Chancellor for Censuring of his Sermon The Vice-Chancellor according to the Command of the Committee for Religion in the House of Commons sent up the Copy of Wilkinson's Sermon and his Exceptions against it upon Tuesday December 8th the time appointed for the Committee But the Carrier's late coming in hindred the delivery for that time but it was deliver'd the next Morning by Dr. Baylie W. Cant. WHereas upon Enquiry made by Dr. Frewen late Vice-Chancellor of Oxford in two several Assemblies of the Heads of Houses there none of them could inform him of any University-Man whom he knew or probably suspected to be a Papist or Popishly affected Notwithstanding which Care of the Governors and clearness of the Vniversity it could not be avoided but some Persons suggestions should be put up to the High Court of Parliament as if Mass were ordinarily said in the University and frequented by Vniversity-Men without any Controll of the Governors there We therefore the present Vice-Chancellor and the Heads of Houses for the better clearing of our University from such foul Imputations have thought fit under our Hands to testifie That we are so far from conniving at the Celebration of Mass here or knowing of any such Matter that we neither know nor can probably suspect any Member of our University to be a Papist or Popishly addicted In witness whereof we have Subscribed Decem. 4. 1640. Christo. Potter Vice-Chancel Oxon. Nat. Brent Praefect Coll. Mert. Ro. Kettle President of Trin. Coll. Jo. Prideaux Rector Coll. Oxon S. T. P. Regius Jo. Wilkinson Aul. Magd. Princ. Samuel Radclif Coll. AEr Nas. Princ. Jo. Tolson Coll. Oriel Praepos Paul Hood Rector Coll. Lincoln A. Frewen Pres. Coll. Magd. Rich. Baylie Praesid S. John Tho. Clayton Coll. Pembr Magr. Med. Prof. Reg. Tho. Lawrence Magist. Coll. Bal. Fran. Mansel Coll. Jesu Princ. Tho Walker Universit Mr. Gilbert Sheldon Ward of All-Souls Coll. Daniel Escott Ward of Wadh. Coll. Guil. Strode Eccl. Christ. Subdec Adam Airay Princip of Edmond-Hall Ro. Newlin Praes Coll. Corp. Christ. Rich. Zouch Aul. All. Princip Philip. Parsons Aul. Cervin Princip John Saunders Aul. Mur. Princ. Degory Wheare Princ. Glouc. Hall P. Allibond Proct. Sen. N. Greaves Proct. Jun. The other Headsof Houses were not in Town when this was Subscribed MY Present Condition is not unknown to the whole World yet by few pitied or deplored The righteous God best knows the Justice of my sufferings on whom both in life and death I will ever depend the last of which shall be unto me most welcome in that my life is now burdensome unto me my mind attended with variety of sad and grievous thoughts my soul continually vexed with anxieties and troubles groaning under the burden of a displeased Parliament my name aspersed and grosly abused by the multiplicity of Libellous Pamphlets and my self debarred from wonted access to the best of Princes and it is Vox Populi that I am Popishly affected How earnest I have been in my Disputations Exhortations and otherwise to quench such sparks lest they should become Coals I hope after my death you will all acknowledge yet in the midst of all my afflictions there is nothing more hath so nearly touched me as the remembrance of your free and joyful acceptance of me to be your Chancellor and that I am now shut up from being able to doe you that Service which you might justly expect from me When I first received this honour I intended to have carried it with me to my Grave neither were my hopes any less since the Parliament called by his Majesties Royal Command committed me to this Royal Prison But sith by reason of matters of greater consequence yet in hand the Parliament is pleased to procrastinate my Tryal I doe hereby as thankfully resign my Office of being Chancellor as ever I received that Dignity entreating you to Elect some Honourable Person who upon all occasions may be ready to serve you and I beseech God send you such an one as may do all things for his glory and the furtherance of your most famous Vniversity This is the continual Prayer of Tower June 28. 1641. Your dejected Friend and Chancellor Being the last time I shall write so W. Cant. FINIS AN ANSWER TO THE SPEECH OF The Right HONOURABLE WILLIAM Lord Viscount Say and Seal c. SPOKEN IN PARLIAMENT Upon the BILL about BISHOPS POWER in CIVIL AFFAIRS AND COURTS of JUDICATURE Anno 1641. By the Most Reverend WILLIAM LAUD Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Then Prisoner in the TOWER Non apposui ultimam manum W. CANT Arch-Bishop LAVD's ANSWER TO THE Lord SAY's SPEECH Against the BISHOPS THIS Speech is said to have done the Bishops their Calling and their present Cause a great deal of harm among the Gentry and divers sober-minded Men and therefore I did much wonder that so many learned Bishops present in the House to hear it should not some of them being free and among their Books so soon as it was printed give it Answer and stop the venom which it spits from poysoning so many at least as it 's said to

of another Nature and so he is at a loss in that And if it be of another Nature yet it appears by the Apostle's practice that for all that it can give a Rule in this For that which can give the Apostle a Rule can give a Rule to us And so he is at a loss in the whole Proposition For whether that which was before be or be not of another Nature yet it can give a Rule I have been long upon this Passage because I conceive the main Controversie hangs and turns upon this hinge And if any Reader think it long or tedious or be of this Lord's Mind that he need not go so high for Proof yet let him pardon me who in this am quite of another Judgment And for the pardon I shall gratifie him by being as brief as possibly I can in all that follows Thus then this Lord proceeds The Question which will lye before your Honours in passing this Bill is not Whether Episcopacy I mean this Hierarchical Episcopacy which the World now holds forth to us shall be taken away Root and Branch but Whether those exuberant and superfluous Branches which draw away the Sapp from the Tree and divert it from the right and proper use whereby it becomes unfruitful shall be cut off as they use to pluck up Suckers from the Root After this Lord had told us we need not go so high for the business he comes now to state the present Question Where he tells us what himself means by Episcopacy Namely Hierarchical Episcopacy such as is properly and now commonly so called in the World And this his Lordship adds because of that distinction made by Beza in his Tract de Triplici Episcopatu Divino scilicet Humano Satanico In which what part Beza plays I will forbear to speak but leave him and his Gall of bitterness to the Censure of the Learned Sir Edw. Deering in his printed Speeches tells us that others in milder Language keep the same sense and say there is Episcopus Pastor Praeses and Princeps So in his account Episcopus Princeps Satanicus is all one in milder terms But the Truth is that in the most learned and flourishing Ages of the Church the Bishops were and were called Principes Chief and Prime and Prince if you will in Church Affairs For so Optatus calls them the Chief and Princes And so likewise did divers others of the Fathers even the best learned and most devout And this Title is given to Diocesan or Hierarchical Bishops which doubtless these Fathers would neither have given nor taken had Episcopus Princeps and Satanicus been all one Nor would Calvin have taught us that the Primitive Church had in every Province among their Bishops one Arch-Bishop and that in the Council of Nice Patriarchs were appointed which should be in order and dignity above Bishops had he thought either such Bishops or Arch-Bishops to have been Satanical And had Beza lived in those times he would have been taught another Lesson And the Truth is Beza when he wrote that Tract had in that Argument either little Learning or no Honesty But for this Lord whether he means by Hierarchical Episcopacy the same which Beza I will not determine He uses a Proper word and a Civil and I will not purpose to force him into a worse meaning than he hath or make him a worse Enemy to the Church if worse he may be than he is already Though I cannot but doubt he is bathed in the same Tub. Having told us what he means by Episcopacy he states the business thus That the Question is not whether this Hierarchical Episcopacy shall be taken away Root and Branch So then I hope this Lord will leave a Hierarchy such as it shall be in the Church We shall not have it all laid level We shall not have that Curse of Root and Branch for less it is not laid upon us Or at least not yet But what shall follow in time when this Bill hath us'd its edge I know not Well if not Root and Branch taken away what then What why 't is but whether those exuberant and superfluous Branches which draw away the Sapp from the Tree and divert it from the right and proper use whereby it becomes unfruitful shall be cut off as they use to pluck up Suckers from the Root This Lord seems to be a good Husbandman but what he will prove in the Orchard or Garden of the Lord I know not For most true it is that Suckers are to be plucked from the Root and as true that in the prime and great Vine there are some Branches which bear no fruit and our Saviour himself tells us that they which are such are to be taken away St. Joh. 15. 2. And therefore I can easily believe it that in Episcopacy which is a far lower Vine under and in the Service of Christ and especially in the husbanding of it there may be some such Branches as this Lord speaks of which draw away Sapp and divert it and make the Vine less fruitful and no doubt but such Branches are to be cut off So far I agree and God forbid but I should But then there are divers other Questions to be made and answered before this sharp Lord fall to cutting As first What Branches they be which are Exuberant and Superfluous as this Lord is pleased to call them What time is fittest to cut them off Whether they be not such as with Pruning may be made fruitful If not then how near to the Body they are to be cut off Whether this Lord may not be mistaken in the Branches which he thinks divert the Sapp Whether a Company of Lay-Men without any Order or Ordinance from Christ without any Example from the days of Christ may without the Church take upon them to prune and order this Vine For whatever this Lord thinks in the over abundance of his own Sense the Lord hath appointed Husbandmen to order and prune this Vine and all the Branches of it in his Church without his Usurpation of their Office And while he uses a Bill which is too boisterous a Weapon for a Vine instead of a Pruning-hook the Church it self which is the Vine which bears Episcopacy may bleed to death in this Kingdom before Men be aware of it And I am in great fear if things go on as they are projected that Religion is upon taking its leave of this Kingdom But this Lord hath not quite done stating the Question for he tells us next That The Question will be no more but this Whether Bishops shall be reduced to what they were in their first advancement over the Presbyters which although it were but a Humane device for the Remedy of Schism yet were they in those times least offensive or continue still with the addition of such things as their own Ambition and the Ignorance and Superstition of succeeding times did add thereunto and which are now