ejusdem Episcopatus Gratis distribuat which answers that of our Saviour Freely you have Received Freely Give and at length Resolves that if any thing be taken for the Substance of any thing to be done in Ordination Collation Institution or Induction It will be Simony but if it be not of the Substance of the thing to be done but mere Writing or the like they may Recive as much as that labour deserves and no more Thus the Case stood in the Reign of Hen. 5. An. 1422. when the famous Canonist Linwood Dr. in Laws returned from his Embassy to Spain and composed the Provincial Constitutions which have ever since been held in great esteem by Reason of his skill in the Common and Canon Law of this Kingdom and accordingly made Dean of the Arches and after Bishop of St. Davids And these Canons and Constitutions as far as they are not contrariant to the Laws of the Kingdom nor repugnant to the Royal Prerogative are established to be used and executed by an Act made in the 25 Hen. 8. chap. 19. Which Act though it were Repealed by Queen Mary yet was Revived again 1 Eliz. 1. and so they continue to this day To Conclude therefore it is advisable before Men grow so eager to vend Licenses to Preach to consider what our Lord Christ will think of such Priests as may Baptize but not Preach as may Communicate but not instruct their Charge seeing a Priest is properly a Minister of Christ one of the sacred Orders He instituted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Elders that Priest it well 1 Tim 5 17. are supposed to labour in word and Doctrine Else should they not be called Priests but Sacrificers as the French Translation of the Bible allways renders the Jewish Ministers Sacrificicatours and Sleidan and many others call the Popish Ministers Sacrifici And that such as Christ sent were to Teach all Nations as well as to Baptize them What God hath joyned together 't is great Confidence in Men to keep asunder unless there were more to be got by it than a perishable Fee Can these two Priests be both of one Order Christ's that could Teach and Baptize ours that could Baptize but not Teach seeing they differ in an Essential part of their Calling Secondly They should consider too what the Primitive Church would think of such Proceedings seeing they never heard of any License besides Ordination and Mission nor of any Priest but what could and ought to Preach as well as Baptize Thirdly They ought also to consider what Neighbour Churches and Nations will Judge of our Ministery when they shall hear that we Ordain and Institute Priests that have not Power to instruct their People Fourthly They might do well also to consider what the several Parishes of England may deem the Church Rulers are about to do in sending them Ministers that have no Power to Preach among them Will not they be apt to suspect such Rulers have little care of the Peoples Souls And that they are about to settle Sir Johns among them Fifthly Nor is it wholly to be slighted what the several Sects of this Kingdom may judge of the National Ministry may they not take occasion from hence to affirm our Priests to be no Ministers of Christ seeing they have not Power to Preach the Gospel by their Ordination and Institution without some farther Authority We know their Readiness to Catch at the shadow of an Argument against our Ministry to give some alleviation to their Schismatical Guilt and to support their sinking cause But hereby we seem to thrust a Cudgel into their hands to drub us and our Ministry withall It had been far better our own Mouths had been shut in this Point than to Open so many Mouths against us Lastly It may not altogether be unworthy our Consideration what our Reformers would think of these Licenses to Preach now urg'd seeing they changed the very Simbols of Ordination laying aside the Chalice and Patin and instead thereof putting the Testament or Bible into the hand of the Priest in his Ordination Requiring and enabling him to take Authority to Preach the word of God Thereby evincing that in their Judgment Preaching was an Essential part of the Priests Office and that it was a fault in the Roman Church needing Reformation That they made only Massing Priests and took too little Care of the Preaching part They might suspect by such Licenses we would deform the Reformation and Relapse into an Opinion that Hoc facite makes a Priest or at least that a License had been a better Simbol than their Bible to be delivered in Ordination You see dear Sir my Thoughts in this Affair and some of the Reasons of them And may peradventure guess from hence that Profit and importunity of Officers may blind wel-meaning Men. I believe you know my Resolution to comply with this our common Mother in every Indifferent thing But I fear if this were well sifted it would appear more Dangerous than the Sticklers for â—t are aware of But I leave the whole to your clear and candid Judgment to Act according to those Dictates it shall perscribe Remaining Yours in our common Saviour J. M. FINIS
Man 3. And the Practise of Latitudinarans in the Church that can explain the Mystery of the Trinity into Tritheism And shew us that we may worship Gods in a greater and Gods in a lesser Sence without believing themselves oblidged to the Contrary by these Licenses 4. And that the proper Legal Subjects of Ecclesiastical Power are swept away namely the High Commission for punishing Heresie and the Star Chamber for punishing Seditious Preaching and Conventicling to disturb the State Would they shackle the Clergy while the Sects cuff out their Eyes 5. After such Recorded Subscriptions and solemn Promises as Incumbents have made what need they fear their Preaching Heresies and Schisms unless they believe them Knaves especially seeing they are the only Banks left to stop the Inundation of Errors that threaten to drown'd all before it 6. Were Men sincere in their Zeal against Errors one would think the most probable way to stop them were to Intercede with the Government to shut the Floud-Gates which they have opened to Libertines 'T is no small ground of Suspition that the stopping Errors is not the Thing designed while men pretend to stop Errors that are possible only when they attacque not them that are flaming amongst us 'T is certain the Clergy at present have no Liberty to doat upon Questions having work enough to secure their Parishioners Consciences from the Infection of such Errors as the Sects broach among them and to confute their pernicious Pamphlets If the matter aimed at be a Power to out any Incumbent of his Cure under Pretence of Preaching Error or Sedition We may say the Bishops of the Church have power enough to deprive for Heresy and Schism for Disobedience and Incorrigibleness as Mr. Nash can tell you in his Case And for contumelious words of the Book of Common Prayer as Mr. Robert Cawdry can shew in his Case Mr. Parkers Case also can shew that a man may be deprived for Drunkenness v. Repert Can. c. 27. Pars. Law c. 17 18. Pars. Counsel lib. 1. c. 9. if he refuse to Reform after Admonition And in truth if our Authors deceive us not any Crime may deprive a Man if the Criminal stand Forty days Contumacious after Excommunication so it be a Crime of Ecclesiastical Cognizance and deprivation be its Punishment Canonical and that the Canon be not contrary to the known Law of England And the Fact be not discharged bv some general Act of Pardon But still if the Party so deprived will bring his Action for Tythes against his Parishioner the Validity of the Bishops Sentence will come into Question and must take its Fortune As it was said in Burtons Case where the Parson was deprived for Adultery but a general pardon intervening He was Restored without the Ecclesiastical Court Hab. searle and Williams case f. 293. because the Judgment of Pardons belong to the Common Law And so it will be if the Bishop deprive any after Revolt from Subscription and License according to the direction of the 38 Canon However if an Occasion of deprivation be the design the Clergy ought to be the more wary of admitting such an Innovation seeing it hath so sharp Teeth As to that Part of the Objection that referrs to Preaching Sedition we may say 1 Subscription to the three Articles Secures that too Seeing the First of the three vindicates the Royal Rights 2 Oaths of Allegiance are much stronger than these imagined Ties 3. There are Laws enough to suppress such Preaching and Punish them 4. Licenses to Preach are not proper Instruments to hinder Preaching in any kind 5 Many in 1640. did under these Licenses Preach Sedition We find therefore upon the whole matter these Licenses to Preach are expedient for nothing more than to bring in Fees which yet if they must be continued ought to be given Gratis Obj. 4 However Incumbents must take Licenses to Preach any where but in their own Cures seeing Institution can Authorise them no farther than to their own Parishoners Answ We may see by this Objection that close fisted Avarice will hold fast its Prey whilst any tho' never so weak Pretence can be made But we may knock off its Fingers by shewing that whoever is Ordained a Priest hath power to Preach in any part of the Catholick Church wherever He is lawfully called to it And who can doubt but a Bishop may have Lawfull Power to call a Man to Preach at a Visitation or to the Lord Mayor of London or before the King Or any Minister to have power to call any to help him in his own Cure 'T was never yet denied but an Incumbent's Authority is sufficient to inable him to perform by another what Sickness Necessary Absence or any other Lawful Impediment makes him unable to do in his own Person 2. Doth not the 46 Canon Authorise and command him to call in a Preaching Minister once a Month at least If he cannot do it himself Men use not to Preach in any Neighbours Church but at their Request or in case of vacancy by a License to serve the Cure 3. If it be necessary to take a License to Preach in another Parish is it not necessary also to take another Institution or License to celebrate Divine Service or Sacraments there Or if not may not the Incumbents Intreaty be as sufficient for Preaching as for Celebration of the Service and Sacraments Any thing but Avarice would blush at such trifling Objections In truth he that Preaches and he that Officiates in any other place but his own Cure doth it not by his own immediat Authority but by the Right of Him that calls him to his assistance But 4 Let it be supposed that Titius hath no Right to Preach any where but in his own Cure will the Bishop grant him a License to Preach in Sempronius's Cure will not Sempronius think that injury to himself and Usurpation in the Bishop will not such a License introduce all the Confusion complained of For in many so Licensed which of them can command the Pulpit which ought the People to hear seeing all are alike Licensed to Preach Otho const t. 12. cum sit Ars Const 13. ut 5 would not the Patron also think himself wronged by such an Intrusion yea the Constitutions Provincial forbid it Exigit namque Ars nostra Catholica ut unicus in una Ecclesia sit Sacerdos such also is that of Stephen Langton in the Council at Oxford Anno. 1222. Nec de caetero plures vicarij in eadem Ecclesia constituantur The Canonists indeed say The Pope may Preach in all the world The Bishop in any place of his Diocess and the Incumbent in his own Cure But none say the Bishop may Authorize two or more in the same Cure which yet must be upon this supposition And 't is very improbable any man would take a License to Preach where he hath no particular Intention to Preach no more than he would take out
privilegiove speciali munitus Officium ceu exercitium proedicationis ejusdem verbi Dei in se assumat Populove aut Clero quovismodò praedicet in Latino Sermone seu vulgari in Ecchsia aut Extra c. Unless He present himself to the Diocesan and undergo his Examination and being found fit he be sent to Preach to one or more certain Parishes as the Ordinary shall think fit And 't is order'd that no Rector or Vicar is to permit any to Preach unless he show his Mission or special Priviledge How he appears qualified for the service of Preaching Or if he come from the Diocesan He is to shew his Letters under Seal But this concerned those that were not authorised Jure Scripto as all Incumbents were And Friers Praedicants and Minors were authorised to Preach by special Priviledg and the Gloss thinks Augustinians and Carmelites were so too So that it did not reach them But it did reach all other Friers Strangers Lecturers Catechisers and the like That Incumbents were not intended is plain from the Exception Jure Scripto minimè authorisati for they had their Authority under Seal and by the Canons were bound to Preach And the following Clause cleers it Curatum vero perpetuum missum intelligimus a Jure ad Locum et populum Curae suae And it farther adds concerning Curates that might be changed Sacerdotes vero Parochiales seu Vicarii temporales et non perpetui in formâ supradictâ non missi in Ecclesijs illis in quibus hujusmodi officia gerunt Illa sola simpliciter praedicent quae in Constitutione Provinciali a bonae memoriae Johanne Praedecessore nostro in Capite Ignorantia Sacerdotum continentur expressè Now because men might imagine this new License to Preach was order'd to be taken on purpose to get more Fees 'T is wisely provided by the Council that it should be granted Sine aliquali Exactione pecuniae without any manner of Fee Celeriter expediunter et gratis says the Constitution And then the Council provides If any such Preach without these Letters or if any say the Church hath not power to lay on this Restraint he incurs the Sentence of the greater Excommunication and is to be treated as a Heretick or Shismatick having all his goods confiscated Yea the place where such Preaching is held if not stopt by the People is put under Interdict From this Constitution we may draw these Conclusions 1 That this was a new Law not imposed before to take Licenses to Preach 2 That Incumbents are declared to have power to Preach Jure Scripto by Law in their Cures 3 That some others had Right to Preach without taking these Licenses Privilegio Speciali as Friers Praedicants Minors Augustinians and Carmelites 4 That these Licenses were to be granted by the Diocesian Bishop and not per inferiorem Episcopo namely not by any Archdeacon Chancellor Commissary Official or the like 5 That these Licenses were to be taken by Strangers Lecturers c. but not by Incumbents nor their temporary Curates 6 That these Incumbents or temporary Curates were to Admit or Refuse such Preachers in their Cures as they should find their Licenses to be 7 That those who were bound to take Licenses to Preach were not to pay one Farthing for them This part of the Constitution well observed would end all Disputes about Parochial Diocesan and Provincial Licenses 8 It shews where this wise Council Judged Licenses to Preach necessary Namely for all that had not perpetual or temporary Cure of Souls For to them that had such Cures Ordination gave them Jus ad Rem Authority to Preach in any part of the holy Catholick Church But Institution gave them Jus in Re a Right to Preach actually to the People of their Cures And to the temporary Curates by virtue of the Incumbents Deputation As also to necessary Assistants in case of Sickness or necessary Absence The Friers Titles are not necessary here to be spoken to because this Church of England is troubled with none of them that come to challenge any Right V. Fifthly If the Canons of this Church did ever oblige Incumbents to take Licenses to Preach It was upon very extraordinary and Accidental Considerations Such as also forced the Church to compose books of Homilies for the use of Incumbents that could not Preach Upon the Reformation there were great Numbers of Incumbents brought into the Church in the time of Popery that were not able to Preach who yet turned Protestants and conformed to the Doctrine and Discipline of this Church as far as they were able whom the Piety and Charity of those times thought not fit to cast out of their Livings because they thought fit to give them some Respect for their Conformity and to save the Parishes from the burthen of their maintenance and those poor Priests from perishing through wants and because they had not Learned men enough to put into their places and because they would not willfully force by their violent treatment so many men to act against the Safety of Church and State which had Enemies enough both at home and abroad wherefore they were permitted to continue in their Living and to celebrate Divine Service but were never forbid to Preach yet when the Church found them able by their Study and Industry and often hearing Sermons to Preach They wisely took that opportunity to try their Parts and to bring them under Subscriptions to use the Protestants method by requiring them to take Licenses to Preach when they thought themselves able One may justly wonder how such ignorant Men came into the Church Con. Carth. 6. c. 19. considering how importunate the Primitive Canons are for Priests Preaching insomuch that the last Council of Carthage enjoyns it every day or at least every Lords day And if the Presbyter were sick the Deacon is order'd to read a Homily to the People And that S. Ambrose Chrysostom and Augustines Works shew that they Preacht all Fasts and Feasts as well as Sundays and often every day and many times twice a day But this change must be Attributed to the guidance of the Roman Church in which Preaching fell early into contempt for Sozomen observes the difference of that Church from all others Soz. l. 7. c. 19. in this matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was in the Reign of Valentinian and Theodosius And least any should think Sozomen mistaken in the Practise of Rome he may find the same Affirmed by Cassiodore in his Tripartite History who lived in Rome and could not be Ignorant of their services 'T is true Valesius thinks this custome alter'd in Pope Leo who did Preach to the People but one Swallow makes no Summer He himself looks Irregular for his pains You may know that that Church holds Preaching to be no part of the Essence of Priesthood for they account Potestatem offerendi verum corpus Christi remittendi peccata the power of