Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
power_n ceremony_n church_n rite_n 2,845 5 10.3412 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A47912 A reply to the reasons of the Oxford-clergy against addressing L'Estrange, Roger, Sir, 1616-1704. 1687 (1687) Wing L1297; ESTC R21996 10,863 20

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Queen Elizabeth and King James and Charles I. relating to this very thing do sufficiently declare that such is the Plenitude and Fulness of the Kings Power in matters Ecclesiastical that he can by his Ecclesiastical Commissioners make new Laws concerning Rights and Ceremonies and impose new Articles on the Clergy requiring their Subscription on pains of Suspension and Deprivation Before the 13. Eliz. c. 12. Subscriptions were enjoyn'd by the Regal Power and tho this Statute requir'd Subscription yet it being to the Articles of Religion which only concern the Confession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrin of the Sacraments compriz'd in a Book Imprinted and Entituled Articles c. 'T was deemed by the Bishops to be insufficient who therefore apply themselves to their Prince that by her Majesties Power Ecclesiastical they might enjoyn a fuller Subscription which accordingly they did appointing Subscription not only to the Articles of Faith and Doctrins of the Sacraments but unto the Government the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and such as refused this larger Subscription tho they would readily subscribe as by the Statute requir'd were suspended and depriv'd And has not his present Majesty the same Power Queen Elizabeth had Why then may he not make new Laws about Ceremonies and require Subscription to new Articles Besides i'ts acknowledg'd that whatever Power Ecclesiastical the Popes did de facto exercise in this Kingdom according to the Canons that same Power de jure belongs to our Kings and ' it s also granted That the Canons of General Councils and the Decrees of the Roman Pontifs so far forth as they have been receiv'd by the Permission of our Kings and ancient Custom are still in force and that these Canons are daily violated by our Clergy cannot be denied especially in the matter of Pluralities which cannot be held but by a Dispensation from the King or at least by his confirming the Archbishops And will any say that tho the Dispensation by which any of our Clergy hold their Pluralities is deriv'd from the King yet the King cannot revoke them Or may not his Majesties Ecclesiastical Commissoners make Enquiry after those who have above 8 l. per Annum and by a Dispensation hold a Second Benefice and judge of the First Benefice not according to the Value in the Kings Books but according to the very Value of the Church as has been formerly adjudged or as is in the Argument for addressing may not the Treasury demand a Review of the First Fruits according to the full Value In a word may not the King send out a Quo Warranto against the Bishops and demand by what Power they hold Courts in their own Names and finding nothing but Prescription to be their Plea which can be no Bar against the King sufficiently humble our Clergy And seeing his Majesty notwithstanding the many Provocations he has met with from some of our Clergy is so far from Exercising this Power against our Church that on the contrary he is so unexpressibly gracious as to promise his Protection have we not the greatest Reason gratefully to acknowledge it to the King Their affirming these Addresses to copy out only Fanatical Loyalty and Gratitude is so very indecent that we think it unworthy of further Notice judging their Confidence also about the Impossibility of Repealing their Laws to bear some Proportion to the Extravagance of their Censure The PAPER SECONDLY That it seems our Duty to maintain Unity with our Bishop requiring it and perhaps expecting it upon our Canonical Obedience there being nothing praeter licitum honestum ANSWER As to the Bishop 't is conceiv'd that this is no Instance of Canonical Obedience nor is the Duty of our Unity with him apprehended to be such as disunites us from the most the best and soundest of the National Clergy who we think ought not and we believe will not move in an Affair which concerns the whole Church equally without their Metropolitan and his Bishops Neither hath our Bishop shewed any Pastoral Regard to us unless it be in a treating us like Children in a very weak and passive Minority by requiring our Submission to an Address formed and worded to our Hands without our Knowledge not leaving us the Liberty and thinking us able to express the Sense of our Acts or Hearts ●nd therefore till Bishops upon their Consecration declare what Faith they are of as they did in the Primitive Church for which the Reasons are the same as then to maintain Unity with a Bishop without Caution is a Principle that may lead us further than we ought to go REPLY 1. There being so much Reason why our Clergy ought to make their Address of Thanks to the King it would be very strange if such a Practice cannot be found amongst the Licita and Honesta of our Church and if it comes within this Pale and the Ordinary commands it it 's beyond us to conceive how Disobedience in the Clergy can escape the Guilt of Perjury For the Oath express'd in the Instrument of the Clergies Institution is in these words Te Primitùs de legitima Canonica Obedientia nobis Successoribus nostris in omnibus licitis honestis Mandatis per te praestanda exhibenda ad Sancta Evangelia ritè juratum admittimus So that they are sworn to perform Lawful and Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary in all his lawful and honest Mandates The Bishop then commands 'em to thank the King for his Grace and Clemency in a matter for which once heretofore they did it Is this Lawful or Unlawful Honest or Dishonest Not Unlawful nor Dishonest because when the King declared only to the Council he would protect the Church of England they then judg'd it their Duty now the King doth but make the same Declaration to the whole Kingdom and if not Unlawful and their Ordinary commands it they are bound by their Oath to obey how then can they disobey and not be at least forsworn But 2. How comes it to pass that their Obeying their Ordinary disunites 'em from the most the best and soundest of the National Clergy What! are the whole Clergy so insensible of the Kings Grace that they 'll not acknowledge it what a prodigious Change is this And why must they not rather regard their own Ordinary than the Sense of others If the matter requir'd be as we have prov'd it to be Lawful and Honest do they make nothing of an Oath and is Church-of England Unity in danger of being broken That surely is ominous and no doubt will open the Mouth both of Papist and Protestant Dissenter Is the Church of Englands Case so desperate that they must either be ungrateful to their Prince or be divided amongst themselves Furthermore 3. Their Bishop shews no Pastoral Regard to 'em unless it be in treating 'em like Children by requiring their Submission to an Address worded to their Hands not leaving 'em the