of the Royal Martyr and I shall be glad to know if the dispensing with the Penal Laws and particularly such as are inclusive of disability made any part of the fermentation B. No doubt if the Dispensative Power of the Crown as to any Penal religionary â—…aws had then appear'd any considerable gravamen to any of the three Estates they would then have cry'd out of it But which they did not Yet I shall tell you that they had a fair occasâ—…on then given them to do it if they had thought it tanti For in the first year of his Reign there was a ferment in Parliament about the Penal Laws against the Papists and particularly the disabling ones but which soon went off as I may say by insensible Perspiration It sâ—…ems that Mr. Prynne in p. 74. and 77. saith both Houses that year having presented a Petition to that Prince wherein they took notice that his Majesty had in his Princely Wisdom taken order that none of his natural born Subjects not professing the true Religion and by Law establish'd shall be admitted into the Service of his Royal Coâ—…sort and having further desired that his Majesty would be pleas'd to remove from all Places of Authority all such Persons as are either Popish Recusants or according to direction of former Acts of State to be justly suspected and that his Majesty said he would give order for it yet that that Parliament being unhappily dissolv'd in discontent his Majesty thought not fit to shew such severity to Recusants as he intended And in p. 76. Mr. Prynne had mentioned that Sir Iohn Winter Mr. Walter Mountague Sir Maurice Drummond and other Papists were admitted in her Majesty's Service But by what appears from Mr. Prynne in p. 80. in the following Parliament in the Second year of that King the House of Commons took divers Examinations concerning Recusants that were in Office and at last agreed on a Petition against Recusants in Office and to present their Names therewith to the King to the end they might be removed and He then saith that Martis 6. Iunii 2. Car. Regis The Petition against Recusants in Authority was engrossed read and allow'd to be presented to his Majesty and this to be done by the Privy-Councel of the House and Sir John Fâ—…llerton which was done accordingly but with what real success I can give no exact account But that the disabling and other Laws against the Papists had been dispens'd with by the Royal Martyr as well as his Father any one will conclude who reads what there followeth viz. In this Parliament these ensuing Articles against Popish Recusants were Consulted of in the House of Commons with an Intent to draw them into an Act and of which the 9th is No Recusant to bear Office of Iustice of Peace or otherwise or any man whose Wife shall be a Recusant or practice Law Common or Civil or Physick nor have Command in War c. And I should first have told you that the Third was A New Oath with more Additions to be taken concerning the Supremacy A. Good God! A new Oath with more Additions about the Supremacy B. You may suppose it would have been seemingly a New Oath by that Parliament's approving all the Authentick Regal Interpretations of the old one as Queen Elizabeth's Interpretation was approved by her Parliament But you may here observe that tho the Disabling and other Penal Laws were by this Pious Prince tacitly and often dispens'd with and the time of the doing of it caus'd some temporary ferments to arise in the Minds of his Subjects in Parliament yet their animosities have soon tacitly evaporated and the Regal Power of Dispensing then came to no question The Puritan Dissenters and scruplers of Ceremonies knew they wanted the benefit of that Power as well as the Papists and the exercise of that Power was in the Petition of both Houses before mention'd implored as to the disabled or silenced Ministers And therefore you will not wonder at it when I tell you that during all the great Patriotly efforts that were made for the removing all Grievances by the Petition of Right there was no offence taken at the Right of the Dispensative Power A. I thank you for that observation B. The thought is too obvious to deserve thanks and I assure you it is a kind of Proverbial Saying in the Canon Law that Dispensationum modus nulli Sapientum displicuit But even in the Conjuncture of the Petition of Right to shew you that the Dispensative Power did not in the least contribute to the ferment I shall let you see out of Rushworth how Mr. Glanvile who made so great a figure of a Patriot then in Parliament did with the greatest popular applause appear as an Assertor of that Power and when in his Speech in a full Committee of both Houses May 23. A. 1628. he inter alia said There is a Trust inseparably reposed in the Persons of the Kings of England but that Trust is regulated by Law For example when Statutes are made to Prohibit things not mala in se but only mala quia Prohibita under certain Forfeitures and Penalties to accrue to the King and to the Informers that shall sue for the breach of them the Commons must and ever will acknowledge a Regal and Soveraign Prerogative in the King touching such Statutes that it is in his Majesty's absolute and undoubted Power to grant Dispensations to particular Persons with the Clauses of Non-obstante to do as they might have done before those Statutes wherein his Majesty conferring Grace and Favour upon some doth not do wrong to others But there is a difference between those Statutes and the Laws and Statutes whereon the Petition is grounded By those Statutes the Subject hath no interest in the Penalties which are all the fruit such Statutes can produce until by Sute or Information he become entituled to the particular Forfeitures whereas the Laws and Statutes mention'd in our Petition are of another Nature There shall your Lordships find us to rely upon the good old Statute called Magna Charta which declareth and confirmeth the ancient Common Laws of the Liberties of England and there he speaks afterward of other Statute Laws not inflicting Penalties upon Offenders in malis prohibitis but Laws declarative or positive conferring or confirming ipso facto an inherent Right and Interest of liberty and freedom in the Subjects of this Realm as their Birth-rights and Inheritances descendable to their Heirs and Posterities the Statutes incorporate into the Body of the Common Law over which with reverence be it spoken there is no Trust reposed in the King 's Soveraign Power or Prerogative Royal to enable him to dispense with them or to take from his Subjects the Birthright which they have in their Liberties by virtue of the Common Law. So then according to the sense of this loyal Patriot if the King shall by his Prerogative dispense with the Disabilities or Premunires or
Case or to the quite contrary in More 542. Armiger's Case I shall most consult the ease of your thoughts by directing them to what interpretation my Lord Coke in Cawdrys Case gives as to the words of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. and where he saith that that Act doth not annex any Iurisdiction to the Crown but what was of right or ought to be by the Ancient Laws of this Realm parcel of the King's Iurisdiction c. and which lawfully had been or might be exercised within the Realm The end of which Iurisdiction and of all the Proceedings thereupon that all things might be done in Causes Ecclesiastical to the Pleasure of Almighty God encrease of Vertue and the Conservation of the Peace and Unity of the Realm as by divers places of the Act appears And therefore by this Act no pretended Iurisdiction exercised within this Realm being ungodly or repugnant to the ancient Law of the Crown was or could be restored to the Crown according to the ancient Right and Law of the same And here I may tell you that as the Pope did often dispense with incapacity incurr'd by his Positive Laws and that even in the use of the Power of the Keys as by his delegating the Power of Excommunication to Lay-men and to Abbesses as aforesaid so our Kings d d anciently by their Letters Patents and Charters grant Power to those who were no Bishops Ordinaries or Ecclesiastical Iudges or Officers to inflict Ecclesiastical Censures of the greater Excommunication on Offenders and that for Causes not merely Spiritual or Ecclesiastical with Power to Certify them into Chancery and thereupon to obtain Writs de Excommunicato Capiendo as Mr. Prynne tells us in his Animadversions on the Fourth part of the Institutes and there cites the President of Edward the Third thus empow'ring the Chancellor of the University of Oxford tho a Lay-man so to do and so to Punish Breakers of the Peace Offenders against the Statutes Privileges and Customs of the University and all Forestallers and Regraters and Sellers of corrupt Meat and Wine and to Excommunicate such who refused to cleanse the Streets from filth and to Pave them before their Doors and this he saith was confirm'd by sundry succeeding Statutes of our Princes In what particulars it is by this Statute of the 25. of H. the 8th warranted that the King his Heirs and Successors may dispense with Persons and in Causes that the Papacy was never accustomed to dispense in I shall not trouble you or my self to enquire but shall tell you that Mr. Nye in his Book call'd Two Acts of Parliament and wherein are contain'd his Observations on the Oath of Supremacy doth in p. 164. cite this Statute of 25. H. 8. c. 21. and thereupon say the King's Majesty may dispense with any of those Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws meaning the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws indulge the Omission of what is enjoyn'd by them make void the Crime and remove the Penalty incurred by breach of them yea and give faculty to do and practice otherwise any Synodal Establishment or long usage to the Contrary notwithstanding in what offends not the Holy Scripture and Laws of GOD. And therefore when our Soveraign in the course of his Ecclesiastical Supremacy doth only dispense with incapacity we are sure he goes not to the height of the Dispensative Power justify'd in him by that Statute nothing having been more customary to the Papacy then rehabilitation It was upon the Revival of this Statute of Harry the 8th by that first of Queen Eliz. c. 1. that she according to the Papal custom of dispensing with the Commutation of Penance did in her Articles in the Synod began at London A. D. 1548. establish one De moderandâ solennis Poenitentioe Commutatione whereby she orders that such Commutation shall be but seldom and for weighty Causes and when it shall appear to the Bishop that that way is the safer to reform the guilty Person and that the Commutation-Money be employ'd to Pious uses And then follows the Title De Moderandis quibusdam Indulgentus pro Celebratione Matrimonii absque trinundinâ denunciatione quam bannos vocant Matrimoniales where you will find she makes Faculties and Indulgences all one And as I have shew'd you how she thought it necessary for the safety of her Subjects Consciences to exercise her Dispensative Power of interpreting and of relaxing disabilities occasion'd by the very first Statute of her Reign and how soon she put the Dispensative Power of those kinds in practice which by that Statute were restored and united to her Imperial Crown so I may observe to you that shortly after the making of the Second Statute in her Reign viz. That for Uniformity of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments which punisheth with Premunire Sequestration and Deprivation and Excommunication which while it is depending is so variously inclusive of disability the not using the Book of Common-Prayer as Publish'd in English she by her Letters Patents dated the 6th of April in the Second year of her Reign and A. 1560. alloweth the use of Latine Prayers to the Colleges of both Universities and to Eaton and Winchester Colleges with a particular Non-obstante to that Statute a Copy of which Letters Patents may be seen in Bishop Sparrow's Collection of Articles c. And I have before acquainted you in general how in her Letters Patents for the Consecrating new Bishops she expresly dispens'd with incapacity But what may perhaps seem to you as a new Indication of her being the better able to dispense with it is an Instance I shall give you of her making incapacity by her Supreme Ecclesiastical Power The instance of her thus making incapacity is a thing that Mr. Nye in his Beams of former Light reflects on as strange for he there in p. 201. referring to Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions A. 1559. Injunct 29. viz. It is thought very necessary that no manner of Priest or Deacon shall hereafter take to his Wife any manner of Woman without the Advice and Allowance first had by the Bishop of the Diocese and two Iustices of the Peace next to the place of her abode c. and if any shall do otherwise they shall not be permitted to Preach the Word or give Sacraments nor be Capable of any Ecclesiastical Benefice saith then Doth this seem strange now It seem'd very necessary in the judgment of our Governors then A. I must acknowledge that you have spoke that which is very much for my Satisfaction concerning the Dispensative Power and the Oath thus supporting one another But I wonder that I have not in any of our celebrated Writers of the Church of England read that the Contents of the Assertory and Promissory parts of this Oath and our abjuring foreign Iurisdictions Powers Superiorities and Authorities in the Oath i. e. those of the Papacy were intended in order to the statuminating our Prince's Dispensative Power pursuant to the Statutes of 25. H. 8th and 1
Religion being the same almost Verbatim with those formerly agreed on in the Spanish Treaty And he there refers to Rot. Tractationis Ratificationis Matrimonâ—… inter Dom. Carolum Regem Dom. Henret Mariam Sororem Regis Franc. 1 o Cat. in the Rolls and then in p. 71. saith Besides these general Articles of the Match these particular ones were concluded and agreed on in favour of the Roman-Catholicks the same in Substance with those of Spain and where he saith the Second is to this effect that the English Catholicks should be no more searched after or molested for their Religion But Mr. Prynne there particularly sets down only three short Articles and those comprised in about six lines and the words or molâ—…ted in the second Article are Printed in a different Character from the others as if he thereby intended them as his own Explication of the word searched A. You just now mention'd King Iames his having in the year 1622. order'd all the Popish Recusants who were in Prison on the account of their Religion to be set at liberty and you told me how he tacitly dispens'd with the Disability that Popish Physicians and Lawyers had incurr'd by Act of Parliament Was that all the favour he shew'd Roman-Catholicks B. No He allow'd them to make a very Considerable figure in the Government as you may find if you consult the Iournals of Parliament as referr'd to by Mr. Prynne p. 66. Seq of that Book For he there mentions that in the year 1624. The Commons sent a Petition to the Lords desiring their Concurrence with them in presenting it to His Majesty for removing Popish Recusants and those whose Wives were Papists from Offices of Trust which by Law they were DISABLED to execute which the Lords took into their Consideration and which Mr. Prynne saith was enter'd in their Iournal in this manner Die Jovis viz. Vicessimo die Maii 1624. The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury reported that at the meeting this Day with the Commons they Presented an humble Petition to the King desiring this House to joyn therein with them The which Petition was read in haec verba c. In short the Commons in their Petition take notice of the Growth of the Number of Popish Recusants in this Kingdom and of their insolency in all the Parts thereof and that many of them contrary to the Laws were gâ—…t into Offices and Places of Government and Authority under the King And the Prayer of the Petition is That the Lords and Gentlemen there undernamed may be removed from all His Majesty's Commissions of great Charge and Trust Commissions of Lieutenancy Oyer and Terminer and of the Peace and from all other Offices and Places of Trust. And they in their first Schedâ—…le there name 11 Lords and 18 Knights And in their second they name many Persons of Quality who were in Places of Charge and Trust in their several Counties and had marry'd Popish Wives and whose Children and Servants were bred up to Popery A. Doth any Act of Parliament disable a man from bearing Office because his Wife is a Papist or because his Children or Servants are bred up to be Papists B. Yes the Act of the Third of King Iames the First cap. 5. doth it as you will see if you consult it for 't is there Enacted That no Popish Recusant Convict nor any having a Wife being a Popish Recusant Convict shall at any time after this Session of Parliament or any Popish Recusant hereafter to be Convict or having a Wife which hereafter shall be a Recusant Convict at any time after his or her Conviction shall exercise any publick Office or Charge in the Common-wealth but shall be utterly DISABLED to exercise the same by himself or his Deputy except such Husband himself and his Children which shall be above the age of Nine years abiding with him and his Servants in Houshold shall once every Month in the least repair to some Church usual for Divine Service and there hear Divine Service and the said Husband and such his Children and Servants as are of meet Age receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and do bring up his said Children in true Religion A. Now have you set me a longing to know what the House of Lords did in the Case of that Petition about removing those disabled Persons from serving the King in those great Stations And since the Judgment of Parliament was always had in such great veneration I think if the result of the desire of the House of Commons was that the Lords had joyn'd with them in the Petition and had urged that the King could not dispense with that Act of Parliament and Pardon Disability it may make a notable President in the Case we have been discussing B. You will find that the Commons urged nothing to the prejudice of Prerogative in the Prayer of their Petition Their style there was We humbly beseech your Majesty graciously to vouchsafe that the said Lords and Gentlemen here under-named for this important Reason and for the greater Safety of your Majesty and of your Realm may be removed from all your Majesty's Commissions of great Charge and Trust Commissions of Lieutenancy c. And the important reason did refer to the great Countenance hereby given to Popery the great grief and offence to all his best affected and true loving Subjects by putting the Power of Arms into such mens hands as by former Acts of His Majesty's Councel are adjudged Persons justly to be suspected c. But to let you see what the House of Lords did hereupon Mr. Prynne tells you p. 69. That this Petition being read the House did defer the Debate thereof at this time for that the day was far spent And answer was given to the Commons who attended for the same in the Painted Chamber that the Lords will send them an Answer of this Petition hereafter when they are resolv'd thereof Whereupon Mr. Prynne concludes his account of this Transaction thus Whether any of these were displaced upon this Petition I find not in any Memorials it being certain some of them were not but continued still in these Offices of Trust. A. How have you here disappointed my Curiosity in making that ferment then in the Government about the Disability of the Papists being dispens'd with thus silently to go off through the House of Lords forbearing to joyn with the House of Commons in their Petition B. I shall here afford your Curiosity a recompence by observing it to you with allusion to some of the words of the Royal Martyr in his Answer to the 19 Propositions That the ancient equal happy well poysed and never enough commended Constitution of the Government of this Kingdom having made this Nation so famous and happy to a great degree of Envy c. and the Lords being trusted with a Iudicatory Power are an excellent Screen and Bank between the Prince and the People to assist each against any Encroachment of
taken to the Oath tender'd to him as Sheriff on the account of several Additions alledged by him to be in the Oath that were not in the Ancient Oath in the Register and afterward Confirm'd and Appointed by the Statute of 18 Edw. the Third and all the Iudges being Consulted as to the allowance of the same tho they allow'd of his first exception namely as to his suppressing all Errors and Heresies commonly call'd LOLLARIES and being assistant to Commissaries and Ordinaries in Church-matters c. and that that Clause was fit to be omitted out of the Oath because it is appointed by Statutes that are repeal'd and was intended against the Religion now Establish'd yet as to his second Addition complain'd of the greater part of the Iudges were of opinion that an Oath in this Point may be well enjoyn'd by the King and Order of State without Parliament and that it may well be imposed on the Sheriff to take being for the publick Benefit and Execution of the Laws And as to his Fourth Addition complain'd of namely That he should Cause the Statute of Winton and the Statutes against Rogues and Vagabonds to be put in execution whereunto he excepted because the Statute of Winton was alter'd and the Statutes against Rogues and Vagabonds are appointed to be executed by the Iustices of the Peace and not by the Sheriff to this the Judges said that this Fourth Addition rests on the former reason that this Oath being appointed and continued divers years by direction of the State altho without the express Authority of any Statute Law yet may he well be continued for the publick benefit in repressing such Persons c. A. What a terrible thing was it that that Clause about suppressing Lollaries c. should continue in the Oath so long after the Reformation and that Sir Edward Coke should be the first Protestant Sheriff we have heard of whose Conscience was so delicate as to refuse to swallow that poisonous Clause B. You may too as justly say what a terrible thing is it that so many Protestants who have formerly by the frequent swallowing the Poison of Contradictory Oaths habituated themselves to the quiet concocting of all Oaths as the King of Pontus brought himself at last to digest all Poisons will yet be so ready to endeavour to compel the Consciences of others to swallow such Oaths that they believe or suspect to be poisonous a thing that hath probably tended to make so many among us to Nauseate the use of all Oaths as unlawful A. Whom do you mean by those B. The Quakers And here I shall freely tell you that Providence having permitted so numerous a Sect as that of the Quakers among us to bear their Testimony against the lawfulness of Oaths in general I shall be well content if the event of the bending the Crooked stick the contrary way as my Lord Primate's Expression was may be an universal tenderness as to Oaths as I just now described it and the want of which hath as I shew'd you at our last meeting been so scandalous to our Country and brought an opprobrium both on Protestancy and Christianity it self Alexander ab Alexandro l. 5. tells us that there was no use of Oaths among the Phrygians And tho Grotius saith in his De jure Belli Pacis that jure gentium testi injurato non creditur yet it was by Polybius observ'd that in the better and simpler Ages of the World Oaths were seldom used in Iudicatures The Athenians would not suffer Xenocrates a Person of known Probity to take his Oath at the Altar as a thing below his reputation Gellius l. 10. c. 15. saith Verba Proetoris ex edicto perpetuo de Flamine Diâ—…li de Sacerdote Vestoe adscripsi Sacerdotem Vestalem Plaminem Dialâ—…m in omni meâ jurisdictione jurare non cogam And Livy hath it that among the Romans the Flamen Dialis was not in any case allow'd to swear least at any time he should forswear which in him was held as the most hainous thing I have too somewhere read Plutarch cited for justifying to this purpose the reasonableness of their not swearing for that an Oath was a kind of torture to a free man and that it was absurd not to credit their words and for that an Oath draws after it an Imprecation or Curse in Case they should be forsworn which seems to be a detestable omination toward the Priests of God. Iosephus relates it that the Essenes Word was as sure as an Oath So great likewise was the reputation of the Christians in the Ancient times for truth in Matters asserted or promised by them that the Saying of Christianus sum did frequently pass currant for the Cautio Iuratoria And I shall always with reverence think of Bellarmine's Tutissimum and of S. Austin's Nullum Iuramentum tutum A late ingenious Writer apply'd to the Clergy's obtaining Canons for their not Marrying the Observation that they always knew what was good for themselves but I shall think it more applicable to what I read of in the Book of Mr. Ley beforementioned p. 112. that as S. Basil was very zealous in behalf of Bishops that they might not be put to swear in respect of the Peril of an Oath so he prevail'd so far as to free them from that Peril and that the Council of Challons Can. 18. was thus favorable to Presbyters and that the Triburiensian Council favour'd them with this Constitution that a Presbyter should not be compell'd to swear but instead of an Oath he should be question'd upon his Holy Consecration in verbo sacerdotis because as the reason is there rendred Our Lord forbad his Disciples to Swear And I shall tell you that if you will allow Lawyers to know what is good for themselves you will find them of all sorts of men to have the greatest aversion against being Witnesses The Iesuites too who are by all reputed wise in their Generation are by Dr. Donne in his Pseudo-Martyr p. 350. referred to as having so extraordinary an aversion against Oaths that he cites the Spongia pro Iesuit p. 79. for their out-doing the Essenes in hyperbolical Detestations of Oaths I account it for the honour of the Age that any one doth fall under the Character of bipedum nequissimus who being sued by a Quaker at Common-Law for a just Debt would obstruct such Debt by an Injunction out of Chancery till the Quaker hath there answer'd a Shamming Bill upon his Oath And as by the Clemency of His Majesty's Government Quakers there making Answer upon their Oath to Captious Bills hath been to the general Satisfaction of the compassionate Just as it were tacitly dispens'd with and as likewise their Promissory Oaths of Allegiance have been I doubt not but his express or tacit dispensing with other Loyal and Conscientious particular Persons doubting of the lawfulness or expedience of some Promissory Oaths will be as generally grateful I wish there were no greater