certainly before the Statute of Praemunire for that the whole Clergy in their Convocation should publiquely declare and avow a notorious falshood especially in a matter of fact is not a thing to be imagined I must confesse my self to be at a losse in this intricate Labyrinth unless perhaps there were some critical difference in those elder times between a Synod and a Convocation the first being call'd by the Arch-bishops in their several and respective Provinces as the necessities of the Church the other only by the King as his occasion and affairs did require the same But whether this were so or not is not much material as the case now stands the Clergie not assembling since the 25 of King Henry the eighth but as they are convocated and convened by the Kings Writ only I only add that the time and year of this submission is mistook by our Author who placeth it in 1533. whereas indeed the Clergy made this acknowledgement and submission in their Convocation Anno 1532. though it pass'd not into an Act or Statute till the year next following Well then suppose the Clergy call'd by the Kings Authority and all their Acts and Constitutions ratified by the Royals assent are they of force to binde the Subject to submit and conform unto them Not if our Author may be judge for he tels us plainly Fol. 191. That even such Convocations with the Royal assent subject not any for recusancie to obey their Canons to a civil penalty in person or property until confirmed by Act of Parliament I marvel where our Author took up this opinion which he neither findes in the Registers of Convocation or Records of Parliament Himself hath told us fol. 190. that such Canons and Constitutions as were concluded on in Synods or Convocations before the passing of the Statute of Praemunire were without any further Ratification obligatory to all subjected to their jurisdiction And he hath told us also of such Convocations as had been called between the passing of the Statute of Praemunire and the Act for Submission that they made Canons which were binding although none other than Synodical Authority did confirm the same Upon which premisses I shall not fear to raise this Syllogism viz. That power which the Clergy had in their Convocations before their submission to the King to binde the Subject by their Canons and Constitutions without any further ratification than own Synodical Authority the same they had when the Kings power signified in his Royal assent was added to them but the Clergy by our Authors own confession had power in their Convocations before their submission to the King to bind the Subject by their Canons and Constitutions without any further ratification than their own Synodical Authority Ergo they had the same power to bind the Subjects when the Kings power signified by the Royal assent was added to them The Minor being granted by our Author as before is shewed the Major is onely to be proved And for the proof hereof I am to put the Reader in minde of a Petition or Remonstrance exhibited to the King by the House of Commons Anno 1532. in which they shewed themselves agrieved that the Clergy of this Realm should act Authoriâ—atively and Supremely in the Convocations and they in Parliament do nothing but as it was confirmed and ratified by Royal assent By which it seems that there was nothing then desired by the House of Commons but that the Convocation should be brought down to the same level with the Houses of Parliament and that their Acts and Constitutions should not binde the Subject as before in their Goods and Possessions until they were confirmed and ratified by the Regal Power The Answer unto which Remonstrance being drawn up by Dr. Gardiner then newly made Bishop of Winchester and allowed of by both Houses of Convocation was by them presented to the King But the King not satisfied with this Answer resolves to bring them to his bent lest else perhaps they might have acted something to the hindrance of his divorce which was at that time in agitation and therefore on the tenth of May he sends a Paper to them by Dr. Fox after Bishop of Hereford in which it was peremptorily required That no Constitution or Ordinance shall be hereafter by the Clergy Enacted Promulged or put in Execution unlesse the Kings Highnesse do approve the same by his high Authority and Royal assent and his advice and favour be also interponed for the execution of every such Constitution among his Highnesse Subjects And though the Clergy on the receipt of this paper remov'd first to the Chappel of St. Katherines and after unto that of St. Dunstan to consult about it yet found they no Saint able to inspire them with a resolution contrary to the Kings desires and therefore upon the Wednesday following being the fifteenth of the same Moneth they made their absolute submission binding themselves in Verbo Sacerdotii not to make or execute any Canons or other Synodical Constitutions but as they were from time to time enabled by the Kings Authority But this submission being made unto the King in his single person and not as in conjunction with his Houses of Parliament could neither bring the Convocation under the command of Parliaments nor render them obnoxiâ—us to the power thereof as indeed it did not But to the contrary hereof it is said by our Author that Fol. 194. He viz. the King by the advice and consent of his Clergy in Convocation and great Councel in Parliament resolved to reform the Church under his inspection from grosse abuses crept into it To this I need no other Answer than our Author himself who though in this place he makes the Parliament to be joyned in Commission with Convocation as if a joynt Agent in that great businesse of Reforming the Church yet in another place he tels us another tale For fol. 188. It will appear saith he and I can tell from whom he saith it upon serious examination that there was nothing done in the Reformation of Religion save what was acted by the Clergy in their Convocations or grounded on some Act of theirs precedent to it with the Advice Counsel and Consent of the Bishops and most eminent Church-men confirmed upon the Postfact and not otherwise by the Civil Sanction according to the usage of the best and happiest times of Christianity So then the Reformation of the Church was acted chiefly by the King with the advice of the Clergy in their Convocation the confirmation on the post-fact by the King in Parliament and that by his leave not in all the Acts and Particulars of it but in some few onely for which consult the Tract entituled The Way and Manner of the Reformation of the Church of England Now as our Author makes the Parliament a joynt Assistant with the King in the Reformation so he conferreth on Parliaments the Supreme Power of ratifying and confirming all Synodical Acts. Fol. 199. The
Parliament saith he did notifie and declare that Ecclesiastical Power to be in the King which the Pope had formerly unjustly invaded Yet so that they reserved to themselves the confirming power of all Canons Ecclesiastical so that the person or property of Refusers should not be subjected to temporal penalty without consent of Parliament But certainly there is no such matter in that Act of Parliament in which the submission of the Clergy and the Authority of the King grounded thereupon is notified and recorded to succeeding times nor any such reservation to themselves of a confirming power as our Author speaks of in any Act of Parliament I can knowingly and boldly say it from that time to this Had there been any such Priviledge any such Reservation as is here declared their Power in confirming Ecclesiastical Canons had been Lord Paramount to the Kings who could have acted nothing in it but as he was enabled by his Houses of Parliament Nor is this onely a new and unheard of Paradox an Heterodoxie as I may call it in point of Law but plainly contrary to the practise of the Kings of England from that time to this there being no Synodical Canons or Constitutions I dare as boldly say this too confirmed in Parliament or any otherwise ratified than by the superadding of the Royal assent For proof whereof look we no further than the Canons of 603 and 640 confirmed by the two Kings respectively and without any other Authority concurring with them in these following words viz. We have therefore for Us our Heirs and lawfull Successors of our especial Grace certain knowledge and meer motion given and by these presents doe give our Royal assent according to the form of the said Statute or Act of Parliament aforesaid to all and every of the said Canons Orders Ordinances and Constitutions and to all and every thing in them contained And furthermore we doe not onely by our said Prerogative Royal and Supreme Authority in causes Ecclesiastical ratifie confirm and establish by these our Letters Patents the said Canons Orders Ordinances and Constitutions and all and every thing in them contained as is aforesaid But doe likewise propound publish and straightly enjoyn and command by our said Authority and by these our Letters Patents the same to be diligently observed executed and equally kept by all our loving Subjects of this our Kingdome both within the Province of Canterbury and York in all points wherein they doe or may concern every or any oâ— them according to this our Will and Pleasure hereby signified and expressed No other Power required to confirm these Canons or to impose them on the People but the Kings alone And yet I trow there are not a few particulars in which those Canons doe extend to the propertie and persons of such Refusers as are concerned in the same which our Author may soon finde in them if he list to look And having so done let him give us the like Precedent for his Houses of Parliament either abstractedly in themselves or in cooperation with the King in confirming Canons and we shall gladly quit the cause willingly submit to his ter judgement But if it be objected as perhaps it may That the Subsidies granted by the Clergy in the Convocation are ratified and confirmed by Act of Parliament before they can be levied either on the Granters themselves or the rest of the Clergy I answer that this makes nothing to our Authors purpose that is to say that the person or property of Refusers should not be subjected to temporal penalty without consent of Parliament For first before the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the 8. they granted Subsidies and other aids unto the King in their Convocations and levied them upon the persons concerned therein by no other way than the usual Censures of the Church especially by Suspension and deprivation if any Refuser prove so refractary as to dispute the payment of the sum imposed And by this way they gave and levied that great sum of an Hundred thousand pounds in the Province of Canterbury onely by which they bought their peace of the said King Henry at such time as he had caused them to be attainted in the Praemunire And secondly there is a like Precedent for it since the said Submission For whereas the Clergy in their Convocation in the year 1585. being the 27 year of Queen Elizabeth had given that Queen a Subsidy of four shâ—llings in the pound confirmed by Act of Parliament in the usual way thâ—y gave her at the same time finding their former gift too short for her present occasions a Benevolence of two shillings in the pound to be raised upon all the Clergy by virtue of their own Synodical Act onely under the penalty of such Ecclesiastical Censures as before were mentioned Which precedent was after followed by the Clergy in their Convocation An 1640. the Instrument of the Grant being the same verbatim with that before though so it hapned such influence have the times on the Actions of men that they were quarreld and condemned for it by the following Parliament in the time of the King and not so much as checkt at or thought to have gone beyond their bounds in the time of the Queen And for the ratifying of their Bill by Act of Parliament it came up first at such times after the Submission before mentioned as the Kings of England being in distrust of their Clergy did not think fit to impower them by their Letters Patents for the making of any Synodical Acts Canons or Constitutions whatsoever by which their Subsidies have been levied in former times but put them off to be confirmed and made Obligatory by Act of Parliament Which being afterwards found to be the more expedite way and not considered as derogatory to the Churches Rights was followed in succeeding times without doubt or scruple the Church proceeding in all other Cases by her native power even in Cases where both the persons and property of the Subject were alike concerned as by the Canons 1603 1640 and many of those past in Queen Elizabeths time though not so easie to be seen doth at full appear Which said we may have leisure to consider of another passage relating not unto the Power of the Church but the wealth of the Churchmen Of which thus our Author Fuller I conceived it Civil to suffer the Animadvertor to use his own phrase parler le tout to speak all out in this long Discourse which although it consisteth of several Notes yet because all treat of the same subject and because a Relative strength might result thereby to the whole I have presented it intire Yet when all is said I finde very little I have learnt thereby and lesse if any thing which I am to alter These my two preparatory Rules as the Animadvertor terms them I have formerly stated and proved and here intend no repetition It is no Beame and but a Moat-fault at most if
I have dated the submission of the Clergy to the King not from the first private performance but the passing thereof into Print and publique cognisance Thus the Age of Children are by their Parents reckoned from their birth but by others from their entrance in the Register But the main fault and that a foul one if true layed to my charge is for weakning the Authority of Church and subjecting it to the power of Parliaments But know it is past the might and spight of the most malicious man finally to weaken the just Authority of the Church God having solemnly promised That the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Yet Princes as King Henry the eighth did might retrence the Power of the Church or ambitious Church-men rather when they invaded the just priviledges of others I shall onely return a few plain and general answers to what is objected First before I entred on the difficult Subject of Synods and Convocations before and since the Clergies Submission with their respective powers I placed as followeth Church-History Book 1. pag. 191. This I humbly conceive to be the difference betwixt the three kindes of Convocations submitting what I have written to the censure and correction of the learned in the Law conscious of my own ignorance therein as indeed such skill neither is to be expected or required in one of my profession who am ready with willingnesse yea with chearfulnesse yea with thankfulnesse to God and man publickly to recall and retract what any such convince me to have mistaken herein hoping that my stumbling in so dark a subject may prevent the failing of others Having thus humbly desired I say not deserved favour I hope it will be indulged unto me Secondly I presume to tender this I hope reasonable motion to the Reader that seeing the Animadvertor not onely freely confesseth this Subject to be an intricate Labyrinth but also fairly acknowledgeth that he findeth the Positions I maintain in SOME OTHER AUTHORS that I may be discharged and that the guilt if any may be derived on such Authors as have misguided me Thirdly When I use the word Parliament it expoundeth it self what was meant thereby capable in that age of no other comment viz. The aggregation of the King Lords and Commons Fourthly I distinguish betwixt a consultive conclusive and punitive power in matters of Religion The consultive power God hath intrusted his Church with and the Clergy as the Representative thereof The conclusive power also is invested in them so far forth as to declare what is Orthodox and what Heretical But the punitive power especially when exceeding Church Censors and extending to Life Limb and Estate is in the Parliament that so neither Royal Prerogative nor Subjects Right may be injured Fifthly I distinguish betwixt the power which the Convocation had over the Clergy and what they have over the Laity Over the Estates of the latter they have no power As for the Clergy they are all represented by their voluntary elections in their Clerks or Proctors Volenti non fit injuria A man that is willing is not wronged What summes therefore they give away of the Clergy they may be presumed impowred therein with the consent of the Clergy However to clear all doubts the consent of Parliament hath since the Submission of the Clergy been required unto it As for the black Swan in the reign of Queen Elizabeth I mean that single and signal instance of thaâ— Unparliament-impowred-Convocation which gave that supplimental Subsidie to Queen Elizabeth I humbly conceive that the popularity of so peerlesse a Princesse the necessity of her occasions and the tranquilitie of those times a happinesse denyed in our Age made that unquestioned which might be questionable if any turbulent Clergy-man had proved recusant in payment As to the Convocation 1640. let me request the Reader that I may without danger humbly tender my opinion therein That Convocation as all others consisted of Bishops Deans Archdeacons and Clerks Of these the three former acted onely in their personal capacities and carrying their own Purses in their own pockets might give Subsidies to the King to what proportion they pleased and justifie the doing thereof Not so the fourth and last Members being Clerks chosen for their respective Cathedrals and Diocesses legally to sit as long as the Parliament lasted After the dissolution whereof they desisted to be publique Persons lost the notion of Representatives and returned to their private condition In which capacity they might have given for themselves what sums they pleased but could not vote away the estates of other Clergy-men except the respective Cathedrals and Diocesses had re-Elected them which had it been done they might no doubt have justifyed the giving away of Subsidies as authorized thereunto though the Parliament had been dissolved seeing every man may doe with his owne as he pleaseth and the diffusive Clergy were justly interpreted to doe what was done by their Proctors Truth may be blamed but cannot be shamed and I have unbosomed my thoughts and judgment herein But this outswelleth the proportion of my booke and let me make a faire motion to the Animadvertor I resume my two former Propositions viz. 1 The proceedings of the Canon Law in what touched temporals of Life Limb and Estate was alwaies limited with the secular Lawes and Nationall Customes of England 2 That the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings of Ecclesiasticall Courts against declared Hereticks so that they could not punish them in Life or Limbe but as limited by the Statute If the Animadvertor who hath leisure and abilitie be pleased in confutation of these my Propositions to write a few sheets it being richly worth his and the Readers paines cleerly briefly fully and fairly without the least dash of ill language subscribing his name thereunto I will God willing returne him my answere qualified accordingly and though I confesse the Animadvertor hath the advantage of me at the weapon of Law yet my confidence of a good Cause will make mee undertake the Challenge alwaies provided That no advantage be taken against us by any for delivering our Judgements and Consciences in so nice a Controversie For the present I forbeare because this dispute is substantive enough to stand by it self and too large to bee adjected to this booke Dr. Heylin Our Author proceeds Fol. 253. I have heard saith he that Queen Elizabeth being informed that Dr. Pilkington Bishop of Durham had given ten thousand pounds in marriage with his Daughter and being offended that a Prelates daughter should equall a Princesse in Portion took away one thousand pounds a year from that Bishoprick and assigned it for the better maintenance of the Garrison of Barwick In telling of which story our Author commits many mistakes as in most things else For first to justifie the Queens displeasure if she were displeased he makes the Bishop richer and the Portion greater than indeed they were The ten thousand pounds Lib
by an Arch-bishop attended with prayers and a Sermon 2. I never expected that a Chaplain to K. Charles should find fault with any thing tending to the honour of his Lord How can any good Disciple grudge at what is expended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the buriall of the Memory of his Master being the last in this kind 3. My Collections I mean printed by me but observed by my most worthy Friend are abating onely the uncertain place of the Lord Maior most critically exact Lastly though the Heralds Office doth carefully preserve all such Ceremonyes yet cannot all persons living at great distance and desiring information herein have on all occasions so facill and convenient access to their Office as to my Printed Book Dr. Heylyn The like may be said also of the quick and active Raigns of Edward the the sixth and Queen Mary in which the wâ—ole Body of the reformed Religion was digested setled and destroyed sufficient of it self to make a competent Volume but contracted by our Author like Homer's Iliads in the Nut-shell into less than 25. sheets And yet in that small Abstract we find many Impertinences as to the work he hath in hand that is to say the great proficiency of King Edward in his Grammar Learning exemplified in three pieces of Latine of his making when he was but eight or nine yerrs old Fuller Just reason of such contraction because of Mr. Fox his dilatation on the same Where he found my fault he if so pleased might have found my defence viz. If Papists preserve the Nailes and Hairs of their supposed Saints give me leave to Record the first Essays of this Pious Prince especially they being unprinted rarieties with which no Divine or Schollar save the Animadvertor alone would or could have found any fault Dr. Heylyn The long Narrative of Sir Edward Montague Chief Justice of the Common Pleas to vindicate himself from being a voluntary Agent in the business of the Lady Iane Gray needlesly inserted Fuller King Edward the sixth his passing the Crown over the heads of his two Sisters to his Cousin the Lady Iane is a piece of Church-History because the continuing of the Protestant Religion is all the plausible Plea for the same and the fair varnish of so foul a Ground-work This passage of Consequence is defectively delivered by our Historians some Circumstances thereof being hitherto lockt from the world Some have endevoured to force the lock by their bold Conjectures I am the first that have brought the true key and opened it from Judge Montague's own hand truely Passive though charged to be most Active therein driven with the Tempest of Duke Dudley's anger against the Tide of his own Inclinations I prize a Dram of acceptance from the Ingenuous Reader above a Pound of the Animadvertor's Cavilling which is offended with my inserting of so authentique and informative a Manuscript Dr. Heylyn Needless the full and punctual relation of Wyats Rebellion and the Issue of it though acted upon some false grounds of Civil Interess without relating to Religion or to Church Affairs Infinitum esset ire per singula c. Fuller This Rebellion was grounded on Erronious Principles of Religion and therefore Goodman Il-man did in his Book of that Subject entitle it GODS-CAUSE and though souly mistaken therein it is enough to reduce this Design to Church-concernment Had I omitted it the Animadvertor would have charged me with Puritanical pardon the Prolepsis compliance so hard it is to please him either full or fasting Dr. Heylyn But well it were if onely Aberrations from Historicall truth were to be met with in our Author In whom we find such a continual vein of Puritanism such dangerous grounds for Inconformity and Sedition to be raised upon as easily may pervert the unwary Reader whom the facetiousness of the style like a Hook baited with a painted Fly may be apt to work on Murthering of Kings avowed for a necessary prudence as oft as they shall fall into the power of their Subjects Lib. 4. fol. 109. Fuller The Page cited by him happily happeneth to be the Initial One of a Section and hath no more therein then as followeth Church-History Book 4. Page 109. Soon after his Death K. Edward was much lamented by those of whom in his liâ—e time he was never beloved Whether this proceeded from the meer mutaâ—ility â—f mens minds weary to loiter long in the lazie posture of the same affection Or whether it proceeded from the Pride of Mortimer whose insolence grew intolerable Or whether because his punishment was generally apprehended too heavy for his fault so that Deposition without Death or at the worst Death without such unhumane cruelty had been sufficient One of our English-Poet-Historians accquainteth us with a passage which to my knowledge appeareth not in any other Author This all in that page Reader I request thee do Me thy Self and Truth right Whether can my avowance of King-murdering be collected from any thing here written by me But because some will say the Quotation possibly may be mistaken If any thing sounding to that sense there or elsewhere be found in my Book may the Ravens of the Valleys whom I behold as loyall Subjects in Vindication of the Eagle their Soveraign pick out my eyes for delivering such rebellious Doctrine Dr. Heylyn The Coronation of Kings and consequently their succession to the Crown of England made to depend upon the suffrage and consent of the People Lib. 11. fol. 122. The Sword extorted from the Supream Magistrate and put into the hands of the common People whensoever the Reforming humor shall grow strong amongst them Lib. 9. fol. 51. The Church depriv'd of her Authority in determining controversies of the Faith and a dispute rais'd against that clause of the Article in which that Authority is declared whether forg'd or not Lib. 9. fol. 73. Fuller Stylus Equabilis Here is a continued Champian large Levell and fair Flat of fourteen untruths at least without any Elevation of Truth interposed No such matter in that place as hereafter shall appear False as the former as in due time and place cited now afterwards by him eagerly improved will appear I am depraved unjustly who never deprived ' the Church of her Authority I raised no such Dispute but would have quel'd it if in my power All which I refer to my Answer to these respective Quotations Dr. Heylyn Her power in making Canons every where prostituted to the lust of the Parliament contrary both to Law and constant practise Fuller Every where is No where And seeing no particular place is instanced to a General Charge a General Deniall shall suffice Let me add that whereas the Animadvertor hereafter taxeth me for calling the two Houses the Parliament we therefore may presume that he not running on the same rock by Parliament meaneth the King Lords and Commons which granted how much of loyalty and Discretion there is in these his words prostituted to the LUST
that the King should never be restored to his place and Power by which he might be called to a reckoning for them Fuller It Seems Multa videntur quae non sunt The Inference is false and forced Titus Livius lived in Imperial yet wrote of Regal Consulatory Tribunitial at Rome without the least imputation of falshood I conceive Monarchical Aristocratical and Democralical truth to be One and the Same It followeth not that two-faced Ianus as beholding two worlds one before the other after the Flood had also two Hearts I did not attemper my History to the Palat of the Government so as to sweeten it with any Falshood but I made it Palatable thus far forth as not to give a wilful disgust to those in present Power and procure danger to my self by using any over-salt tart or bitter Expression better forborn than inserted without any prejudice to the Truth Dr. Heylyn For in the second Book he reckons the Cross in Baptism for a Popish Trinket by which it appears not I am sure to have been written in the time of Kingly Government that being no expression sutable unto such a time Fuller Should I simply and absolutely call the Cross in Baptisme a Popish Trinket my fore-head Signed therewith would give my Tongue the lye and return the Popery in the teeth thereof I behold it as an Ancient and Significant Ceremony but in no degree essentiall to or completory of the Sacrament witness the wisdome of the Church of England which in private Baptism permitteth the omitting thereof But when Ceremonyes shall devour their distance and intrude themselves necessary and essential it is high time to term them Superstititious Trinkets The rest I referr to what I have written when this passage recurreth in the place cited by the Animadvertor Dr. Heylyn Secondly speaking of the precedency which was fixt in Canterbury by removing the Archiepiscopal See from London thither he telleth us that the matter is not much which See went first when living seeing our Age hath laid them both alike level in their Graves But certainly the Government was not changed into a State or Commonwealth till the death of the King and till the death of the King neither of those Episcopall Sees nor any of the rest were laid so level in their Graves but that they were in hope of a Resurrection the King declaring himself very constantly in the Treaty at the Isle of Wight as well against the abolishing of the Episcopal Government as the alienation of their Lands Thirdly In the latter end of the same Book he makes a great dispute against the high and sacred priviledge of the Kings of England in curing the disease comonly called the Kings Evil whether to be imputed to Magick or Imagination or indeed a Miracle next brings us in an old Wives Tale about Queen Elizabeth as if she had disclaimed that power she daily exercised and finally manageth a Quarrel against the form of Prayer used at the curing of that Evil which he arraigns for Superstition and impertinencies no inferior Crimes Are all these passages proper to that Government also Finally in the third Book he derogates from the power of the Church in making Canons giving the binding and concluding Power in matters which concern the civil Rights of the Subjects not to the King but to the Lay-people of the Land assembled in Parliament which game he after followeth in the eighth and last And though it might be safe enough for him in the eighth and last to derogate in this manner from the King's supremacy in Ecclesiastical affairs yet certainly it was neither safe for him so to do nor proper for him so to write in the time of the Kingly Government unless he had some such wretched hopes as before we spake of Fuller I desire the Reader to remember my late words as the Animadvertor recited them FOR THE MAIN I confess though these Books were written in the Reign of King Charles yet after his Death I interpolated some lines and amongst others that of levelling all Bishopricks I raised no dispute against the Kings curing the Evil it being raised before I was born and which I endeavoured to allay referring it to Miracle as to the peruser of my History in that place will appear I tell no old Wives Tale of Queen Elizabeth it being a Masculine Truth from most authentick Authors I derogate not in the least degree from the power of the Church but the Animadvertor doth arrogate unto it more then is due by the Lawes of God and Man maintaining that Church-men may go beyond Ecclesiastical Censures even to the Limbs and Lives of such as are Recusants to their Constitutions WRETCHED and what formerly he said DISLOYAL HOPES I defie and return them in the Teeth of him that wrote the words He had WRETCHED AND DISLOIAL HOPES who wrote that King Iames went to New-market as Tiberius to his Capreae he waved his Loyalty and Discretion together who so saucily and un-subject-like counted how often King Charles waved his Crown Here give me leave to tell the Animadvertor that such whom he slighteth for LOW-ROYALISTS were whilst they had a King in England as HIGH in their Loyalty to him Prayers and Sufferings for him as those HIGH-ROIALISTS who maintain that all goods of the Subjects are at the King 's absolute Dispose and yet since those Kings are departed this life can write of them in so base and disparaging Language that any one of the LOW-ROIALISTS would have his right hand cut off rather then write the like Reader pardon my too just passion when DISLOIALTY is laid to my charge It is with me Either now speak or else for ever hereafter hold your Peace Dr. Heylyn I must needs say that on the reading of these Passages and the rest that follow I found my self possest with much Indignation And I long expected when some Champion would appear in the Listes against this Goliah who so reproachfully had defied the whole Armyes of Israel And I must needs confess withal that I did never enter more unwillingly on any undertaking But beeing solicited thereunto by Letters Messages and several personal Addresses by Men of all Orders and Dignityes in the Church and of all degrees in the Universities I was at last overcome by that Importunity which I found would not be resisted Fuller Indignation is grief and anger boiled up to the height What just cause I have given for so great passion the Reader will judge If I be a Goliah in this point may I have his Success to be conquered killed and my head cut off even with my own Sword If I be none May the Animadvertor be graciously pardoned And it may be he shall never come off any undertaking more unhappily I could mate him with telling him that Men of all Sorts and Sizes their Equals in Number and Quality have likewise importuned me not tamely to sit down but to vindicate my own credit and conscience Dr. Heylyn
have thought that to call him an Advocate for the Stews had not been enough But that Doctor was not half so wise as our Author is and doth not fit each Argument with a several Antidote as our Author doth hoping thereby but vainly hoping that the arguments alledged will be wash'd away Some of our late Criticks had a like Designe in marking all the wanton and obscene Epigrams in Martial with a Hand or Asterism to the intent that young Scholars when they read that Author might be fore-warn'd to passe them over Whereas on the contrary it was found that too many young fellows or wonton wits â—s our Author calls them did ordinarily skip over the rest and pitch on those which were so mark't and set out unto them And much I fear that it will so fall out with our Author also whose Arguments will be studied and made use of when his Answers will not Fuller The commendable Act of King Henry the eighth in suppressing the Stews may well be reported in Church-History it being recorded in Scripture to the eternal praise of King Asa that he took away the Sodomites out of the Land I hope my collection of arguments in confutation of such Styes of Lust will appear to any rational Reader of sufficient validity Indeed it is reported of Zeuxes that famous Painter that he so lively pictured a Boy with a Rod in his hand carrying a Basket of Grapes that Birds mistaking them for real ones peckt at them and whilest others commended his Art he was angry with his own work-manship confessing that if he had made the Boy but as well as the Grapes the Birds durst not adventure at them I have the same just cause to be offended with my own indeavors if the Arguments against those Schools of Wantonnesse should prove insufficient though I am confident that if seriously considered they doe in their own true weight preponderate those produced in favour of them However if my well-intended pains be abused by such who onely will feed on the poisons wholy neglecting the Antidotes their destruction is of themselves and I can wash my hands of any fault therein But me thinks the Animadvertor might well have passed this over in silence for fear of awaking sleeping wontonnesse jogged by this his Note so that if my Arguments onely presented in my Book be singly this his Animadversion is doubly guilty on the same account occasioning loose eyes to reflect on that which otherwise would not be observed Dr. Heylin Our Author proceeds Fol. 253. Otherwise some suspect had he survived King Edward the sixth we might presently have heard of a King Henry the ninth Our Author speaks this of Henry Fitz Roy the Kings natural Son by Elizabeth Blunt and the great disturbance he might have wrought to the Kings two daughters in their Succession to the Crown A Prince indeed whom his Father very highly cherished creating him Duke of Somerset and Richmond Earl of Nottingham and Earl Marshal of England and raising him to no small hopes of the Crown it self as appears plainly by the Statute 22 H. 8. c. 7. But whereas our Author speaks it on a supposition of his surviving King Edward the sixth he should have done well in the first place to have inform'd himself whether this Henry and Prince Edward were at any time alive together And if my Books speak true they were not Henry of Somerset and Richmond dying the 22 of Iuly Anno 1536. Prince Edward not being born till the 12 of October Anno 1537. So that if our Author had been but as good at Law or Grammar as he is at Heraldry he would not have spoke of a Survivor-ship in such a case when the one person had been long dead before the other was born Fuller Terms of Law when used not in Law-Books nor in any solemn Court but in common Discourse are weaned from their critical sense and admit more latitude If the word surviving should be tied up to legal strictnesse Survivour is appliable to none save onely to such who are Ioint-tenants However because co-viving is properly required in a Survivor those my words had he survived shall be altered into had he lived to survive Prince Edward and then all is beyond exception Dr. Heylin These incoherent Animadversions being thus passed over we now proceed to the Examination of our Authors Principles for weakning the Authority of the Church and subjecting it in all proceedings to the power of Parliaments Concerning which he had before given us two Rules Preparatory to the great businesse which we have in hand First that the proceedings of the Canon Law were subject in whatsoever touched temporals to secular Laws and National Customes And the Laitie at pleasure limited Canons in this behalf Lib. 3. n. 61. And secondly that the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Court in cases of Heresie Lib. 4. n. 88. And if the Ecclesiastical power was thus curbed and fettered when it was at the highest there is no question to be made but that it was much more obnoxious to the secular Courts when it began to sink in reputation and decline in strength How true and justifiable or rather how unjustifiable and false these two principles are we have shewn already and must now look into the rest which our Author in pursuance of the main Design hath presented to us But first we must take notice of another passage concerning the calling of Convocations or Synodical meetings formerly called by the two Archbishops in their several Provinces by their own sole and proper power as our Author grants fol. 190. to which he adds Fol. 190. But after the Statute of Premunire was made which did much restrain the Papal power and subject it to the Laws of the Land when Arcbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute command but at the pleasure of the King In which I must confesse my self to be much unsatisfied though I finde the same position in some other Authors My reasons two 1. Because there is nothing in the Statuâ—e of Praemunire to restrain the Archbishops from calling these meetings as before that Act extending onely to such as purchase or pursue or cause to be purchased or pursued in the Court of Rome or elsewhere any such Translations Processes Sentences of Excommunication Bulls Instruments or any other things whatsoever which touch the King against him his Crown and his Regality or his Realm or to such as bring within the Realm or them receive or make thereof notification or any other Execution whatsoever within the same Realm or without c. And secondly because I finde in the Statute of the submission of the Clergy that it was recognized and acknowledged by the Clergie in their Convocation that the Convocation of the said Clergie is alwaies hath been and ought to be assembled alwaies by the Kings Writ And if they had been alwaies call'd by the Kings Writ then
dissensionem consensum in vera Religione firmandum that is to say to take away diversitie of Opinions and to establish an agreement in the true Religion Which end could never be effected if men were left unto the liberty of dissenting or might have leave to put their own sense upon the Articles But whereas our instances in the Article of Christs descent into Hell telling us that Christs preaching unto the Spirits there on which the Article seemed to be grounded in King Edwards Book was left out in this and thereupon inferreth that men are left unto a latitude concerning the cause time manner of his discent I must needs say that he is very much mistaken For first the Church of England hath alwaies constantly maintained a local Descent though many which would be thought her Children the better to comply with Calvin and some other Divines of forain Nations have deviated in this point from the sense of the Church And secondly the reason why this Convocation left out that passage of Christ preaching to the spirits in hell was not that men might be left unto a latitude concerning the cause time and manner of his Descent as our Author dreams but because that passaage of St. Peter being capable of some other interpretations was not conceived to be a clear and sufficient evidence to prove the Article For which see Bishop Bilsons Survey p. 388.389 Fuller I cannot fully concur with the Animadvertor That the Church of England hath constantly maintained a LOCAL DESCENT though no man hath an higher esteem for those worthy Writers who are of that perswasion I will confess this hitherto hath staggered me viz. St. Peter his application of Davids words to Christ thou shalt not leave my soul in hel I appeal whether these words import not a favour to all unprejudiced hearers which God did to his Son bearing this natural and unviolated sense That had God left Christs soul in hell his soul had been in a bad condition as being there in a suffering capacity but Gods Paternal affection to his dear Son would not leave his soul in hell but did rescue it thence Now all our Protestant and especially English Writers who maintain a LOCAL DESCENT doe very worthily in opposition to the Romish Error defend that Christ was then in a good estate yea in a triumphing condition Now then it had been no favour not to leave his soul in Hell but a less love unto him to contract his happiness in his triumph I protest that in this or any other point I am not possest with a spirit of opposition and when I am herein satisfied in any good degree I shall become the Animadvertors thankful Convert in this particular Dr. Heylin Our Author proceeds Fol. 74. In a word concerning this clause whether the Bishops were faulty in their addition or their opposites in their substraction I leave to more cunning Arithmeticians to decide The Clause here spoken of by our Author is the first Sentence in the twentieth Article entituled De Ecclesiae Authoritate where it is said that the Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of the Faith c. Fuller To this and to what ensueth in two leaves following I return no answer not because I am pinched therein with any matter of moment but for these reasons following First I understand That the Animadvertors Stationer taketh exception that I have printed all his book which may tend to his detriment Now I protest when I â—irst took up this resolution to present the Animadvertors whole Cloth List Fagg and all I aimed not at his damage but my own defence noâ— can I see how I could doe otherwise seeing the plaister must be as broad as the sore the tent as deep as the wound yea I have been inâ—ormed by prime Stationers the like hath formerly been done without exception taken on either side in the Replies and Rejoynders betwixt Dr. Whitgift and Mr. Cartwright and many others However being willing to avoid all appearance of injury I have left out some observations which I conceived might well be spared as containing no pungent matter against me Secondly I am confident That there needs no other answer to these notes then the distinct and serious perusal of my Church History with the due alteration of favour indulged to all writings Lâ—stly What of moment in these notes is omitted by me relateth to those two Church Questions in Law which I have formerly desired may fairly be ventilated betwixt the Animadvertor and me and if he be sensible That any thing herein tendeth to his advantage he may and no doubt will re-assume and enforce the same Dr. Heylin From the Articles our Author proceeds unto the Homilies approved in those Articles and of them he tels us Fol. 75. That if they did little good they did little harm With scorn and insolence enough Those Homilies were so composed as to instruct the people in all positive Doctrines necessary for Christian men to know with reference both to Faith and Manners and being penned in a plain style as our Author hath it were fitter for the edification of the common people than either the strong lines of some or the flashes of vain wit in others in these latter times c. Fuller With scorn and insolence I defie the words The Animadvertor might have added my words immediately following viz. They preached not strange Doctrines to People as too many vent DARKNESSES now a dayes intituled New Ligâ—ts And well had it been for the peace and happiness of the Church if the Animadvertor and all of his Party had had as high an esteem as the Author hath for the Homilies If none of them had called them HOMELY HOMILIES as one did And if they had conformed their practise to the second Homilie in the second Book and not appeared so forward in countenancing Images of God and his Saints in Churches Dr. Heylin The Author proceeds Fol. 76. The English Bishops conceiving themselves impowred by their Canons began to shew their authority in urging the Clergy of their Diocess to subscribe to the Liturgy Ceremonies and Discipline of the Church and such as refused the same were branded with the odious name of Puritans Our Author having given the Parliament a power of confirming no Canons as before was shewed he brings the Bishops acting by as weak Authority in the years 1563. 1564. there being at that time no Canons for them to proceed upon for requiring their Clergy to subscribe to the Liturgies Ceremonies and Discipline of the Church And therefore if they did any such thing it was not as they were impowred by their Canons but as they were inabled by that Authority which was inherent naturally in their Episcopal Office Fuller I profess my self not to understand the sense of the Animadvertor and what he driveth at herein And as soon as I shall understand him I will either fully concur with him or fairly
not of the Bishop And though the Tithing-man have some relation to Church-matters and consequently to the Bishop in the way of presentments yet was he noâ— bound to execute any such Commands because not tyed by an Oath of Canonicall Obedience as the Ministers were So that the Bishops did no more than they were commanded in laying the Publication of these Declarations on the backs of the Ministers and the Ministers by doing less than they were required infring'd the Oath which they had taken rendring themselves thereby obnoxious to all such Ecclesiasticall Censures as the Bishops should inflict upon them Fuller I said That there was no Express order in the Declaration that the Minister of the Parish should be pressed to the publishing of it Now the Animadvertor hath done me the favour to prove my words to be true acknowledging the Declaration onely enjoyned That the Bishop of the Diocess should order the publishing thereof through all the Parishes in his Iurisdiction And so consequently as the Animadvertor inferreth the Ministers must do it Hereby the truth of my words do appear that there was no express command seeing an EXPRESS and an INFERENCE are two things of a different nature Whereas I said That many thought it a more proper work for the Constable or Tithing-man then for the Minister There are thousands now alive which will justifie the truth thereof Yea their thoughts which otherwise I confess came not under my cognizance expressed themselves in their words wherewith they affirmed and professed the same Dr. Heylyn It seems that in our Authors judgment it was well done by the Judges for the County of Somerset to impose upon the Ministers of that County over whom they could challenge no authority to publish their own Declarations against Wakes and Feasts and that it was well done of the Ministers to obey the same for which see fol. 147. These Bishops are beholden to him for giving greater power to the Iudges and Iustices over his brethren of the Clergy then he yields to them and as much beholden are the Clergy for putting so many Masters over them instead of a Father The difference of the case will not serve the turn the King having a greater power to indulge such freedom to his Subjects then the others could pretend unto to restrain them from it If he object that the Ministers are most unfit to hold the Candle to lighten and let in licentiousness as he seems to do he must first prove that all or any of the sports allowed of in those Declarations may be brought within the compass of licentiousness which neither the Word of God nor the Canons of the Christian Church nor any Statutes of the Realm had before forbidden Lastly whereas he tells us That because the Iudges had enjoyned the Ministers to read their Order in the Church the Kings Declaration was enforced by the Bishops to be published by them in the same place There is no such matter The Declaration of King Iames appointed to be read and read by order of the Bishop in the Parish Churches doth evince the contrary Fuller I did not say The Judges did well or did ill therein but I said The Judges did order that the Ministers should publish their Declaration against Wakes and Feasts I have not nor can quickly procure a copy of their order whether it were mandatory or by way of advice did desire Ministers to do that which might be advantagious to Religion But I vvill not judge the Iudges but leave them as best skilled in their own faculty to make good their own acts If such Grandees in the Law exceeded their bounds in this their injunction to Ministers over whom they had no command how many mistakes should I run into if once offering to meddle with this matter being out of my profession And therefore no more thereof Dr. Heylyn Now for our Authors better satisfaction in the present point I shall lay down the judgment of one so high in his esteem and once in the esteem of that party too that I conceive he will not offer to gainsay him It is the Author of the Book called the Holy Table Name and Thing vvho resolves it thus All the commands of the King saith he that are not upon the first inference and illation without any Prosyllogisms contrary to a clear passage in the Word of God or to an evident Sun-beam of the Law of Nature are precisely to be obeyed Nor is it enough to find a remote and possible inconvenience that may ensue therefrom which is the ordinary objection against the Book of Recreations for every good subject is bound in conscience to believe and rest assured that his Prince enviâ—oned with such a Councell will be more able to discover and as ready to prevent any ill sequel that may come of it as himself possibly can be And therefore I must not by disobeying my Prince commit a certain sin in preventing a probable but contingent inconveniency This if it were good Doctrine then when both the Author and the Book were cryed up even to admiration is not to be rejected as false Doctrine now truth being constant to it selfe not varying nor altering with the change of times Fuller I want no satisfaction I thank God in the point and therefore the Animadvertor might have spared his pains As an Historian I have truly related de facto what vvas done and though the Animadvertor may conjecture at my judgment in this controversie he cannot be confident thereof by any thing I have vvritten All I will add is this Because I may write the more I will write the lesse of this subject I have good povver to back me for the present in this controversie and might securely express my self therein When my Text shall lead me in my Vocation to treat of the Observation of the Lords Day I shall not be sparing to express my opinion therein and will endeavour God-vvilling to justifie it Mean time I vvill not go out of mine own house which is my castle I mean I will not be drawn out into the open field of a controversie but keep my self under this COVER That matters of fact in this difference have been truly related by me and let the Animadvertor disprove it if he can Dr. Heylyn But our Author will not stop here he goes on and saith Ibid. Many moderate men are of opinion that this abuse of the Lords-day was a principal procurer of Gods anger since poured out on this Land in a long and bloudy Civill war And moderate perhaps they may be in apparell diet and the like civil acts of life and conversation but sure immoderate enough in this Observation For who hath known the mind of the Lord or who hath â—een his Counsellor saith the great Apostle But it is as common with some men of the newest Religions to adscribe Gods secret judgements to some speciall Reasons as if they had the Key which opens into his Cabinet at their
writ by one Sighing or singing readd by one Smiling or Frowning The Reader needs no Interpreter to expound the word Parliament as taken generally at this time Successe having beaten the sâ—â—se thereof into Mens Heads for the two Houses Loqui cum â—ulgo in this case I hope is no fault These two Houses at this time maintained their ENTHYMEM to be a compleat SYLLOGISM concluding all Persons under them presuming that the King though not Personally was Vertually with them A position which I have no calling to examine As for the Clause in the Article which hooked the University under Parliamentary Visitation heare how the Animadvertor reports it Dr. Heylyn I find indeed that it was agreed on by the Commissioners on both sides touching the Surrendry of that City That the Chancellor Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxon and the Governors and Students of Christ-Church of King H. 8. his Foundation and all other Heads and Governors Masters Fellows and Scholars of the Colledges Halls and Bodies Corporate and Societies of the same University and the publick Professors and Readers and the Orator thereof and all other persons belonging to the said University or to any Colledges or Halls therein shall and may according to their Statutes Charters and Customs enjoy their antient form of government subordinate to the immediate Authority and power of Parliament But I find not that any of the Heads or Delegates of that University were present at the making of this Article or consented to it or thought themselves oblig'd by any thing contained in it Fuller This last Clause was eagerly urged by the Committee against the Delegates of the University and I could wish they could as easily have untied the Knot as Answered the hardest Objection of Bellarmine in the Divinity-Schools The King when privately departing Oxford left if not a Commission at least Leave with the Lords to make as good â—earmes for themselves and all with them in the Citty besieged as the Enemy would give and they could get in that streightned condition The Vniversity therefore was urged by the Committee to have given an Implicite consent to these Articles and enjoying the Benefit they must share in the Burthen thereof To this the Delegates made many faire and Civill Answers strengthned with Law and Reason but alasse great are the Odds though Learning be the Answerer where Power is the Opponent Dr. Heylyn Nor indeed could it stand with reason that they should wave the patronage of a gracious Soveraign who had been a Nursing Father to them and put themselves under the arbitrary power of those who they knew minded nothing but destruction toward them And that the University did not think it selfe oblig'd by any thing contained in that Article appears even by our Author himselfe who tells us in this very passage that the Delegates from the University pleaded their priviledges before the Committee of Parliament that they were onely visitable by the King and such as should be deputed by him which certainly they had never done unlesse our Author will conclude them to be fools or madmen had they before submitted to that Paramount power which he adscribes unto the Houses Nor did the Houses of Parliament find themselves impowered by this clause of the Article to obtrude any such Visitation on them And therefore when the Delegates had pleaded and prov'd their priviledges a Commission for a Visitation was issued by the two Houses of Parliament in the name of the King but under the new broad Seal which themselves had made which notwithstanding the University stood still on their own defence in regard that though the Kings name was us'd in that Commission yet they knew well that he had never given his consent unto it Whereupon followed that great alteration both in the Heads and Members of most Colledges which our Author speaks of Fuller The Animadvertor endeavours to runne me on one of these dangerous Rocks either to condemne the University for Fools and Mad men whom I Love and Honour for Wise and Sober Persons or else to make me incurre the Displeasure of the Parliament And the Philosopher's Answer to the Emperour is well known That it is ill Disputing with them that can command LEGIONS The best is I am not bound to answer to this dangerous Dilemma keeping my selfe close to my Calling viz. Reporting vvhat vvas done but whether Iustly or unjustly let others decide The Animadvertor's Boldnesse herein is for me to admire not Imitate When an Old Man vvas demanded the Cause of his Confidence hovv he durst so freely tell a King of his faults he rendred a double Reason of his Boldnesse Orbitâ—s et Senectus One that he had no Children and therefore Careless to preserve Posterity the other that he vvas extreamely Old therefore lesse curious to keep that Life that vvas leaving him How it fareth vvith the Animadvertor in these two Particulars I know not sure I am for my self that I am not so old to be Weary of the World as I hope it is not of me and God having given me Children I vvill not destroy them and hazard my selfe by running into needlesse Dangers And let this suffice for an Answer Dr. Heylyn Nor deals he much more candidly in relating the proceedings of the Visitation vvhich vvas made in Cambridge the Visitors vvhereof as acting by the Paramount power of Parliament he more sensibly favoureth than the poor sufferers or malignant Members as he calls them of that University Fuller The Animadvertor sees more in me then I can see in my selfe and because vve are both Parties engaged the lesse to be credited in our owne Cause be it reported to the Reader if pleased to peruse the Conclusion of my History of Cambridge whether I cast not my Graines of Favour into the Scales of the poor Sufferers These I call not MALIGNANT MEMBERS but with this Qualification so tearmed And let not me be condemned for the Ill Language of others I say again As as an Historian I have favoured no side but told the Truth so I could not so far unman my selfe but that for Humanity sake to say no more I did pitty the Sufferers on which Account I incurred the displeasure of the Opposite Party the best is causelesse Anger being an Edglesse Sword I feare it the lesse Dr. Heylyn For whereas the Authour of the Book called Querela Cantabrigiensis hath told us of an Oath of Discovery obtruded by the Visitors upon severall persons whereby they were sworn to detect one another even their dearest friends Our Author vvho vvas out of the storm seeming not satisfied in the truth of this relation must vvrite to Mr. Ash who vvas one of those Visitors to be inform'd in that which he knew before Fuller No Person more proper or probable to inform me herein than Mr. Ash one of the Visitors who I believed did both know the Truth and would not tell a falsehood herein I was so far from desiring Information in