Spelm. anno 1070. but whether so justly or no I shall not determine And a little after Vlstan the good Bp. of Worcester was by a Synod held at Westminster under Lanfranc in like manner deposed and God wot for Grounds inconsiderable enough quia Linguam gallicam non noverat onely because Mat. Paris Hist Ang. Edit Lond. 1640. he did not understand the Norman Language which methinks to me is much the same as if at this day Depositions were to proceed against our Bishops because they do not understand the Lingua of the Dutch And at this rate for ought I can find all future Affairs were managed to K. Stephen's days onely the Conquerour nonnullos tam Episcopos quam Abbates deposed several both Bishops and Abbats as Conquerors use to Spel. an 1070. do quos nec Concilia nec Leges Seculi damnabant whom neither the Synods of Bishops nor the Laws of the Land had pronounced guilty And thus he did not minding the Irregularity or Injustice of the Proceedings sed ad confirmationem sui quod noviter acquisiverat Regni but that he might settle and confirm himself in the Possession of that Kingdom which by his Arms he had newly acquired In K. Stephan's days if Dr. Brady be not Compl. Hist p. 216. Edit 1685. mistaken the Canon Law and Lawyers were called into England and no one need to doubt whilst that lasted and was esteemed good Law among us that either the Churches Rights their Synods or their Judicatures were invaded We read indeed of some * Ibid. p. 213. that were imprisoned of others †P. 481. that were proscribed of others ‖ P. 479. that had their Bishopricks seized and their Goods confiscated to the King's use but of none as I can find deposed without a Synod There was indeed an Attempt not long after as Matthew Paris and Dr. Brady relate the matter much of a like nature against one Adomar alias Athelmar the King's Brother elect of Winchester He say they was not onely forced by the Nobles to quit Hist Ang. p. 982. Comp. Hist p. 635. the Kingdom but the King himself was so far wrought upon that he not onely seized his Temporalties but judged his Bishoprick void yea and suffered Henry de Wenghan his Chancellour to be chosen in his stead But then Adomar all this while was no more than elect never consecrated Bishop and though no more than so yet the very Election of another seemed so irregular to Henry that was chosen that he refused it because it was litigiosa incerta litigious and uncertain Neither would the King yield unto it but with a Salvo to his Brother 's Right namely Si Frater suus Athelmarus praeelectus that if the praeelect his Brother had or should obtain his Consecration from the Pope to whom he had applied himself as it was customary in those days to do ipsemet prae omnibus aliis fieret in eadem Ecclesia institutus he should be first instituted Nay when the Communitas Angliae the Comites Proceres Magnates the Nobles Mat. Par. Addit p. 217. and the great Men of the Nation supplicated the Pope that he might be put from his Administration they used his Non-consecration for an Argument Et certe clementissime Pater hoc satis credimus sine scandalo faciendum cum non sit in Episcopum consecratus For this most holy Father we are well assured may be granted us seeing he is not as yet consecrated thereby intimating and conceding that if he had not been consecrated it could not by them nor any other without eminent Scandal be desired much less effected And if we may believe the History of the Reformation this lasted for Law amongst us till Henry VIIIth's day neither would Burnet part 1. p. 330. he in any wise suffer an Eversion of it nor so much as a Purgation farther than of those Canons onely that were repugnant to the King's Prerogative Stat. 25. H. 8. c. 19. Royal and the known Laws of the Land as certainly those ancient Canons touching Synods and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction were not as being in use even in England long before the Italian Bishop or his encroaching and usurping Canons were received 27. Neither did the Reformation innovate in this matter for by a Preamble to a Statute cited by Cosins we are told that the People of this Apol. Courts Eccl. part 1. ch 14. Realm have bound themselves by long Use and Custome to the Observance of certain Laws besides those which were ordained in this Realm meaning the Canon Laws as to the accustomed Laws and that such Laws were originally established as Laws of the same by the Sufferance of Kings and by the Consent and Customes of the People And because some of those Laws were onerous to the King and his Subjects Power was granted to the King by another Statute to nominate and assign two and 25 H. 8. c. 19. thirty Persons whereof sixteen of the Clergy to view examine and by the King's Signature to establish all such as they should think meet to be established not being contrariant to the Laws of God to the Laws and Customes of the Realm or to the Damage and Hurt of the Prerogative continuing however the aforesaid Laws and Canons in use and vigour under the aforesaid Proviso and Restraint till either the Review be made or it be otherwise ordered and determined This Cranmer often pressed to have bâ—en done saith the Historian but he could never Hist Ref. vol. 2. l. 3. p. 330. obtain it during that King's Reign insomuch that all things remained as they were In the 5th Year of K. Edw. VI. the Design was set on foot again and the Act renewed and accordingly saith Heylin in his Ecclesia Hist Edw. 6. Ediâ— 1670. restaurata the King directed his Commission to Archbishop Cranmer and others and afterwards appointed a Sub Committee consisting saith the Author of the Preface to the Book called Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum of two Bishops two Divines two Doctors of the Law and two Common Lawyers to prepare the Work and make it ready for the rest that it might be dispatched with the more Expedition By them saith Heylin in the aforequoted place the Work was undertaken and digested fashioned according to the Method of the Roman Decretals and called by the Name of Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum Nec dubium quin Parliamentari etiam Authoritate eaedem Sanctionis istae constabilitae And no doubt saith the same Prefacer the Decrees had been established by Act of Parliament and Praes ad Ref. Leg Eccl. Edit 1640. made the standing Law of the Land if it had pleased God that the Life of the King had been continued but a little longer However it was not so imperfect an Embryo nor altogether so unshapen but we may easily discern what Features it had and of what Complexion it would have been and more particularly as to
purg ad Optat. Bishop of Cirta one of the Ordainers of Majorinus thereby to find out which of the two were Traditors that the Controversy between the Caecilianists and the Donatists might be stated and ended unde pulsa atque exter sa infamia cum ingenti laude illo judicio recessit by which Judgment of theirs saith Optatus the infamous aspersions that were cast upon Cont. Par. l. 1. p. 30. Caecilian and Felix by the Donatists were wiped off to the eternal Honour of Caecilian and his adherents And thus also for the better management of the Conference between the Catholick and the Donatists Bishops Honorius the Emperor appointed Macellinus his Tribune for a Judge in the case before whom saith Possidonius the Donatists being convicted of De Vitâ Aug. their faults sententia Cognitoris notati sunt were by his Sentence declared guilty and thereupon condemned And thus might Tonstal of Duresme as well as Bonner of London or as Gardiner of Winchester have had their Cause heard had not Archbishop Gardiner refused to meddle because Burnet Part 2. lib. 1. p. 216. he was found to lye under a misprison of Treason And so properly might Voisy of Exeter been tried but for the same reason for he also was found saith Heylin to have fomented the Rebellion of the Devonshire Edw. 6. p. 100 Men And whether Day of Winchester was not in with them and for that reason also not tried by Cranmer to me it is doubtful for the Historian confesses he cannot tell us whether his Deprivation arose from Reform Par. 2. lib. 1. p. 203. the refusing to submit to the new Book or his falling into other transgressions However I cannot but observe 1. That the aforesaid Bishops enjoyed their Bishopricks notwithstanding an ipso facto Deprivation till a farther process was made aad a declaratory Sentence passed upon them 2. That Bonner who led the way unto the rest was not deprived till four months or more after the Act of Deprivation took Fox 1209. place Gardiner not till two years almost after Bonner Voisy not till Heylin p. 100. some months after the Sentence passed upon Gardiner Day Heath Tonstal Burnet lib. 2. p. 203. 216. not till some months after him so slowly was the Act at that time executed 3. That as they enjoyed their Bishopricks till their Deprivations so in all probability they enjoyed the Profits and Revenues thereof Gardiner's were not sequestered from him till within three Heyl. Edw. 6. p. 99. months of the time yea and then also his House and Servants were maintained out of his Bishoprick to the very instant that the declarary Fox p. 1218. Sentence was judiciously pronounced against him This was the Case of the deprived Bishops then and if this method had been taken in reference to our present Bishops that is had the matter for which they are deprived been debated in a Convocation of the Clergy and there concluded that the Allegiance they had sworn might lawfully be transferred without the Breach of Oath or guilt of Perjury had the Refusers of the said transferring been afterwards by a true and legal Parliament decreed to be deprived and had they upon that been Legally and Canonically evicted of such a refusal though no such time had been allowed them nor no such favour granted as in the interim to enjoy their Bishopricks and the Revenues of them nay though after all the Sanctions of the one and the Determinations of the other had seemed to them unjust there would not have been such cause as there is for a complaint So that I think we may cry out of the Injustice at least of the unprecedented Severity of the present Age and yet neither blemish nor expose the Reformation 44. Neither will they be assisted or screened by any thing that was done in Q. Elizabeth's Reign For though according to Stow there were Ann. 2. Eliz. p. 182. Eliz. p. 36. Ed. Lond. 1615. thirteen or fourteen deprived of their Bishopricks omnes qui tunc â—ederunt praeter unum Antonium Landevensem all says Cambden that were then Bishops which he reckons to be sixteen in number besides him of Landaff yet will their Deprivations be found of a quite different nature to those that have been made in our days And to make this out four things are necessary to be observed 45. First That all matters of Ecclesiastical concern were left at King Edward's death under a full and regular establishment consented and agreed thereunto by the King in his Convocation as well as by the King in his Parliament And so it is asserted to be in the Answer to the Lady Mary's Letter as cited out of Master Fox by the Author of Church-Government viz. that the Reformation as touching the Common-Prayer Book Part 5. p. 130. from the second year of his Reign and as touching other Articles of Religion from the fifth was Regular and Canonical as being the Act of the Clergy Thus was the Supemacy and Service Book established as is before shewn thus also were the Articles of Religion and in them the Tit. Art 1552. Art 31. St. 5. 6 Edw. 6. cap. 12. Marriage of the Clergy agreed upon own'd by the Parliament it self to have been so in the Act for adjudging such Marriages lawfull declaring therein that the Learned Clergy of the Realm had determined the same by the Law of God in their Convocations as well by the common assent as by the subscription of their hands 2. That no less Authority ought to be allowed to null the establishment than what was thought necessary by the standing Laws of the Land at first to make it and therefore since it had its Birth and Rise from the King and Convocation as well as from the King and Parliament and more properly from the first than from the latter the Queen had not power of her self no nor by the Parliament without the Convocation to destroy it And hence her own Clergy in Q. Elizabeth's days foreseeing the ill effect of such Power utterly disclaimed it and in their Convocation declared against it telling the Parliament in hopes to keep their Possessions but in the mean time forgetting the method whereby they came possessed that the Authority to handle and define such things which belong to Heyl. Q. Eliz. p. 113. Faith in the Sacraments and Discipline Ecclesiastical hath hitherto ever belonged and only ought to belong to the Pastor of the Church whom the Holy Spirit hath placed in the Church and not unto Lay-Men no though in Parliament as then they were assembled 3. That the Power whereby Q. Mary acted for dissolving the Reformation and for the laying aside the Bishops that asserted it was a less Authority than that by which at first it was established For no sooner was she come unto the Crown upon the death of K. Edw. VI. but and before ever a Heyl. Hist Q. Mary p. 22. Parliament was called she purely
the Case before us Deprivation is declared to be an Ecclesiastical Crime inter poenas ecclesiasticis legibus constitutas and liable to Tit. de Depr c. 1. the Punishments assigned by the Ecclesiastical Laws and thereupon it orders that a Bishop in amittendi status sui periculum venit that falls under Cap. 2. the danger of being deprived be referred to the Archbishop and two other Bishops deputed thereunto by the King qui Judicium exercebunt who shall have Power and Authority to hear and determine the said Cause And in case of Appeals it is farther decreed that they may be made from Tit. de Appel c. 11. the inferior Courts to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop from the Archbishop to the King quo cum fuerit causa devoluta which if once brought thither it is then to be transmitted si gravis sit causa if it be a matter of great concern to a Provincial Synod if of a less to three or four Bishops appointed thereunto to put a final End unto it a Method purely antient and primitive and if any other were practised whilst these Constitutions were framing it was certainly contrary to the Designs of the Reformers and perhaps no more justifiable than the Sacrilege the filling of Ecclesiastical Places with Lay Persons or the Bishops taking Commissions for the Exercise of their spiritual Offices was and which I think no Clergyman that at this day wears a Cassock in England will advocate for However since the designed Book was never admitted and no Review made thereof from that time to this I cannot see but what Dr. Heylin hath asserted must hold good to wit That all Hist Edw. 6. p. 19. the said Canons and Constitutions so restrained and qualified as above must still remain in force as of old they did and so we leave the Matter for the present 28. And indeed a State Deposition whatsoever noise it makes in the World or how much soever it pleases the Ears of some is but a novel and wicked Invention If Bishops saith St. Clemens be once constituted Ep. ad Cor. 1. c. 44. and approved of by the Church and it appears that they have been faithfull in their Office constant to their Ministration and for the time past well thought of for their Episcopal Qualifications 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we cannot if such as these be laid aside but look upon it as a piece of great Injustice neither will it be a small Crime in us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they continue piously and blamelesly to offer up their Oblations for us to turn them out of their Bishopricks A thing never heard of in the Church for many Centuries of Years But if at any time the Bishop became so irregular as that the Church would no longer endure him in his Office they deposed as well as deprived him and reduced the first Bishop into a Layman before they advanced the second to his See and probably upon this very account to prevent the Inconvenience to which a State-Deprivation is subject of having two Bishops pretending to one See at once Nay saith Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pallad p. 20. de Vit. Chrys if such Proceedings prevail and it once become lawfull to invade and usurp another's Bishoprick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to cast out what Bps. they please for their own Interest and Humor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all things will speedily run to ruine and the whole Christian World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the casting out of some and the being cast out by others be turned upside down An Arian Constantius may then deprive all the Orthodox and fill the Church with that Doctrine Mahomet may pull down the Cross and its Followers and set up the Half-moon and his Musselmen in their stead The long Parliament must not be thought to have done amiss when they cast off not some but the whole Order of Bishops nor the Usurper Cromwell the C. L. Asses that were got into their room a Matter of such fatal consequâ—nce to the Church that the divine Hosius understanding that Constantius was putting it into practice against the Bishops that would not subscribe to his Arianism and in my opinion Socinianism and Aerianism are not much better steps in on the behalf of the deprived giving the Emperour to know that it belonged not to him to exercise such an Authority over the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I beseech you says he leave off these Attemps Athan. Ep. ad solitar Vit. Edit Commet 1600. of yours and remember that though you be an Emperour you are not immortal dread the Day of Judgment and keep your self unspotted against that day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inter meddle not with Ecclesiastical Affairs neither command us therein but rather take your Direction from us For God hath committed the Care of the Kingdom to you and to us the Care of his Church and as he who invades the Kingdom contradicts the divine Ordinance so be you carefull that you draw not into your Jurisdiction the things of the Church lest thereby you draw Guilt upon your self Give as it is written unto Caefar the things that belong unto Caesar and unto God the things that belong unto God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is neither lawfull for us to meddle in the Affairs of the Empire nor for you to meddle in the more sacred Affairs of the Church A Power certainly never designed by Christ since it is so affrontive to his Institution and so destructive to his Church However I would fain know of these Latitudinarian Statesmen who are so zealous to advance it among us 1. Whether since Christ's Kingdom is not of this World the Kingdoms of the World must have such Power in and over it as to deprive it and its Bishops of a Being and Existence in the World 2. Whether a Lay-Power purely such can operate upon Spiritual Persons in Matters purely spiritual so far at least as by their secular Laws and Sanctions to dissolve that spiritual Vnion that Christ hath made between them and their Church And whether it be not as absurd in them to attempt it and as great a Nullity in itself when effected as if the States of England should make Laws and enact Penalties for the States of Holland 3. Whether if the State hath such a Power to deprive a Bishop of his Church as they have put John upon William they may not put William upon John again and at length Jack Presbyter upon both as already they have done in Scotland 4. Whether the new made Bishops be not as much to be accounted State made as the other State deprived 5. Whether the deprived Bishops remaining Bishops of the Catholick Church as they are pleased to say they do they do not remain Bishops in and of the Church of England since that is a part of the Catholick Church 6. Whether if still Bishops in England there be not
Hebraei that whilst the Jews were governed De Success in Pontific l. 2. c. 5 6 10. Lond. 1636. by their own Laws the Legitimate Succession where no impediments prevented ever took place and that it was high injustice to reject or expell any to whom the Priesthood belonged unless some or more of those irregularities were really to be found upon him The Crime indeed of Abiathar being no less than a Crime of High Treason could not but be animadverted upon But then the Crime being Capital and the High Priest the Criminal we may well conclude that before ever Solomon thrust him from the Priesthood the Sanedrim had previously judged and passed their Sentence upon him And so it fared with Joab one of his fellow Criminals for it is plain if Josephus says true That before Ant. l. 7 8. c. 11. Edit Gen. 1634. ever Solomon sent Bennajah to fall upon him he first sent him to fetch him from the Altar in order to bring him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Seat of Judicature there to purge himself if he could And if this formality was used towards Joab before ever the command was given to have him slain it 's probable the like was used towards Adonijah the King's Brother before he was slain and the like also to Abiathar before he was thrust from the Priesthood Nay though it should be true as some assert That the Kings of Judah were more absolute in their Authority than the Kings of Israel and did not always so formally proceed by way of Justice as the other did and that this proceeding against Abiathar might be one of those extraordinary instances of their power yet this is certain that they had thâ—ir standing Courts of Judicature all the Land over for the right and full administration of Justice to all sorts and degrees of Men the chiefest of all which and to which the last Appeal was made was ever at Jerusalem as being most near unto the King Thus Jehosaphat having constituted Judges throughout all the fenced Cities of the Land is said to have done the same at Jerusalem setting Amariah the High Priest over all in the matters of the 2 Chron. 19. 11. Lord and Zebadiuh the Son of Ishmael for all the King's matters the Secular concerns to be transacted by the King through the assistance of his Secular Judges and the Ecclesiastical by the Ministery of his Ecclesiasticks In like manner David having set out the form of the Temple and given Solomon directions for the building and ordering of it leaves him to his Priests and Levites to be farther advised The courses saith he of the Priests and Levites shall be with thee for all the service of the House of God And I dare say this power so fixed and 1 Chron. 28. 21. managed cannot but be thought so just and reasonable that as the Church of England hath all along granted it to their Kings so there is not at this time one Church-Man of the old Foundation among us that will deny it them but wish that it were so are troubled that it is not so nay can say By the waters of Babylon we sit down and weep whilst we remember thee O Sion 34. I confess there are not instances wanting in History to shew that it hath often been the practice of Emperors and Kings by their own Authority and without concerning themselves at all with a Synod to depose Bishops and thrust them from their Bishopricks But then this hath been as Petrus de Marca observes in apertissima Canonem violati Lib. 4. cap. 6. Part 1. in such cases only where the Canons of the Church have been most notoriously and scandalously violated so notoriously that there needed no proof as to matter of fact nor any thing farther to be done but to apply the punishment And of this he gives us two instances in reference to the case in hand The one of Justinian the Emperor and the other of Zeno the first deposing Anthimus for that contrary to the Canon he had deserted his own Church and invaded the See of Constantinople the latter for doing the same thing to Peter surnamed Moggus for that contrary to the Canon he had seized upon the Patriarchship of Alexandria Timothy the lawfull Bishop thereof and under Banishment being not yet dead And referring us to the Acts of the Council held by Mena at Constantiople he farther tells us That such violations aut à Principe Loco citat aut a Synodo castigari posse may be punished either by the Prince or by a Synod But now for Emperors or Kings to take this power upon them when there is no breach of Canon nay when it is contrary and contradictory to all Canon and purely for their own Will and Pleasure or because it may serve their Interest to have others in their Places and Bishopricks that may lick their spittle and cry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to them in all their actions This certainly must be pernicious and fatal to the Church and can bode nothing less than an utter and speedy ruine to it Of what dismal consequences this kind of dispositions have been and what sad and deplorable mischiefs they have brought along with them to the most flourishing Churches in the World I shall in a more particular manner evidence from the Jewish and Greek Churches being provoked thereunto by some of the late Treatisers 35. And because the Jewish Church offers it self first to our View I shall consider it first and shew what Success it met with whilst it was thus rid Josephus tells us that the first that ever executed this deposing Ant. l. 15. c. 3. Power was Antiochus who depriving Onias put Jason into his place a fitting Priest for so wicked a Tyrant For no sooner was he made so Lib. de Mac. cap. 4. saith the same Author but he forced all the People to Impiety and to forsake Religion Nay such saith the Author of the Book of Maccabees was the height of Greek Fashions and encrease of Heathenish Manners through 2 Mac. cap. 4. 13 14. the exceeding Prophaneness of Jason that ungodly Wretch that the Priests had no courage to serve any more at the Altar but despising the Temple and neglecting the Sacrifices hastened to be partakers of the unlawfull Allowance in the place of Exercise not setting by the Honour of their Fathers but liking the Glory of the Grecians by reason whereof sore Calamity came upon them About three years after Menelaus had Jason laid aside and himself put into the 2 Mac. 4. 24. Jos Ant. l. 12. cap. 15. High Priesthood though he was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the race of the High Priests He saith the Book of Maccabees came with the King's Mandate having nothing worthy of the High Priesthood but having the fury 2 Mac. 4. 25. of a cruel Tyrant and the rage of a savage Beast And such an one he was for he stole certain
with the Deprivations in King Edward's days in number indeed six as are ours now and so far alike but in all things else altogether unlike 40. For had they been deprived on the first day they had been enstalled Bishops no wrong had been done them nay had the King taken away their Temporalities the next moment that he gave them no complaint could have been made For if it be true what the Reforming Historian saith That they had taken out Commissions as they had done before in the former Reign to hold their Bishopricks only at the King's Burnet part 2. lib. 2. p. 6. Edit 1681. pleasure and to exercise them as his Delagates in his Name and by his Authority and of which he gives us a Copy from Bishop Bonner's wherein he acknowledges the King to be fons scaturigo the Fountain of all Jurisdiction and Power as well Ecclesiastical as Civil and that he had it only of his Bounty eique quotiens ejus Majestati videbitur libenter Coll. 14. p. 267. concedere and would deliver it up again when it should please him to call for it it is evident that when ever or by whom soever the King was pleased to call back his Commission whether faulty or not they were eo facto to be unbishop'd and no less to be removed than those State Officers and Ministers were who held their Places only durante bene placito And to me it seems much the same thing whether these his doings were founded on the Determinations of his Convocation or on the Acts of his Parliaments or whether executed by Delegates or not his Royal pleasure only was sufficient though signified by the meanest Page or Groom that belonged unto him So that if Heath of Worcester if Day of Chichester if Tonstal of Duresme and if Voisy of Exeter provided he did not resign were deprived by the Secular Delegates and not by any Court consisting of Church-Men as the Histo Part 2. lib. 1. p. 203. 216. rian asserts it was no more than what their sordid compliance and their unpriestly condescensions justly deserved Secondly 41. There was nothing enjoyned to make them Criminals but what had antecedently been ordered and determined in the Convocation before ever the Parliament annexed their Penalties themselves all the while sitting acting and enacting to both in Convocation and Parliament Hence Fox p. 1189. Edit 1610. we are told by the King's Message to the Rebels in Devonshire that what ever was contained in the new Common Prayer Book the non advancement of which seems to be their original and fundamental crime was by the Clergy agreed yea by the Bishops of the Realm devised as well as by 〈◊〉 Parliament established and more fully by the Letter of the King and his Council to Bishop Bonner that after great and serious Debating and long Conference of the Bishops and other grave and learned Men in the holy Scriptures one uniform Order for Common Prayer and administration of the Sacraments hath been and is most godly set forth not only by the full assent of the Nobility and Commons of the late Parliament but also by the like assent of the Bishops in the same Parliament and of other the learned Men of this our Realm in their Synods and Convocations Provincial So that here is no exception to be made against the Legality Competency or Sufficiency of the Powers subscribing all being concerned that could or any ways had right to prescribe to the Government The Clergy in their Convocations the Laity in their Parliaments the King in both all unanimously declaring for and establishing the Book Neither can any thing be objected against the Book prescrib'd It 's called by the King a Devout and Christian Book said by the Parliament to be Fox p. 1235. St. Edw. 6. concluded upon by the Holy Ghost Day of Chichester one of the deprived was one of the Composers of it all of them * Heyl. Edw. 6. p. 57. had their Votes for the establishing of it Gardiner †St. Edw. 6. 2 3. c. 1. and Bonner ‡ K. Edw. 6. Journ p. 16. promised Conformity to it and the latter of them sent out his ‖ Fox p. 1186. Precept to have it published and used Nay so universally was it comply'd with that as their Friend Sanders tells us * Fox id eodem De Schis Ang. l. 2. Ed. 1610. ne unus quidem videbatur in Regno toto qui falsorum officiorum ac rituum communione non fuisset contaminatus That there was not one throughout the whole Kingdom the Lady Mary excepted that did not receive it and joyn in Communion with it so that methinks though they could not themselves minister in the Service so prescribed yet considering the fulness regularity and competency of the Prescription they ought as Christians quietly to have acquiesced and as Bishops to have yielded their Office unto others Again 43. Though what was enjoyned was legally established though by taking out their Commissions their Deprivations were Arbitrary and at the King's courtesie though by Act of Parliament they were for their 2 3 Edw. 6. cap. 2. disobedience ipso facto to be deprived of all their Spiritual Promotions yet was not that punishment inflicted till their Case were farther debated by persons appointed thereunto by the King to whom both Church and State the one in their Convocations the other in their Parliaments Annal. Brit. vit Warbam 25 Hen. 8. c. 21. 2. 6. c. 1. had justly given the Supremacy which shews that an ipso facto Deprivation without a farther judgment and decision to ratifie and put it into execution is irregular and wants both Equity and Precedent I have evidenced it in four of the deprived already who were thus dealt by and as for the other two I mean Bishop Bonner and Gardiner the Procedure will appear more Canonical because in a great measure transacted by Men of their own Order and the Sentence much more Authentick because given by the Archbishop their Metropolitane and Primate Hence for the depriving of Bonner which was the first of them all that felt the affliction there were commissioned two Bishops saith Master * Page 1194. Fox three saith †Edw. 6. p. 78. Edit 1670. Dr. Heylin whereof the Archbishop was one Dr. May Dean of St. Pauls and Secretary Smith Doctor of Laws For Bishop Gardiner the Archbishop and three other Bishops one Judge three Doctors of Laws and two Masters of Chancery Neither is the Commission Fox p. 1209. enervated or in the least to be blamed or esteemed less Primitive for having a mixture of Laity in it For so Constanstine directed his Letter to Aelian the Proconsul of Africa to examine and hear the Cause Optat. cont Parm. l. 1. p. 29. of Felix Bishop of Aptung the Ordainer of Caecilian as also to Zenofilus the Proconsul of Numidia to enquire into the carriage of Silvanus Gesta
Id. vol. 2. p. 6. and Edward VI. being * Heyl. Cat. of Bishops Bp. of Westminster in both their Reigns and no less misbehaving himself than the former had done As for Watson Oglethorp and Pool though they were consecrated after the Degradation of Cranmer and probably by the Consent of their Metropolitane Cardinal Poole being then Archbishop of Canterbury yet were the several Bishopricks so filled with uncanonical Bishops for the reason before mentioned that it cannot be otherwise imagined than that their Ordainers most or all of them were of that illegitimate breed It s certain that of the seven who consecrated the Cardinal Thirlby onely stood rectus in Curia the Mas de Minist l. 2. 4 17. other being either deprived as were Heath and Bonner or else were of the number of the ordained in the time of A. Bp. Cranmer as were Pate White Griffen and Goldwell all of them Intruders and upon that account as hath been shewn uncanonical and not qualified to make a good Ordination Nay considering how many such there were and many there must be since no less than fifteen of them were consecrated in a Burnet vol. 2. p. 276. Year neither Watson nor Poole nor any other Bishop afterwards nominated could probably be ordained without them 48. But were it not thus or had those Bishops been better entituled to their Bishopricks than it appears they had been yet such was their Offence so provoking their Crime that a lesser Punishment could not reasonably be awarded against them Dr. Burnet tells us That to refuse the Hist vol. 2. p. 386. Oath of Supremacy whereby the Papal Jurisdiction was first excluded the Land which was their fault brought the Refusers of it into a Praemunire and to deny the said Superiority and Supremacy to be and to reside in the Prince was Treason And Dr. Heylin tells us That it hath Ref. just pt 2. S. 1. been and still is the general and constant Judgment of the greatest Lawyers of this Kingdom That the Vesting of the Supremacy in the Crown Imperial of this Realm was not introductory of any new Right or Power which was not in the Crown before but declaratory of an old one which had been antiently and originally inherent in it Now though this Supremacy had been in Q. Mary's Reign revoked disannulled and delivered up unto 1 2 Ph. M. c. 1. the Pope again by her and her Parliament and the several Laws and Statutes ensorcing the same repealed yet both it and the Laws in Q. Elizabeth's Reign by an equal Authority were restored and reinforced though 1 Eliz. c. 1. not under the penalty of Praemunire or of Treason as formerly but nevertheless of Deprivation to all such of the Spiritualty Bishops or others that should decline the owning or confirming of the same with their Oaths And thus Mr. Cambden states the Matter quotquot jurare abnuerunt Beneficiis Dignitatibus Episcopatibus exuuntur as many saith he as refused Eliz. p. 36. to accept and take the said Oath were deprived and turned out of their Dignities and Bishopricks An Oath containing nothing in it * Burnet's Hist pt 1. p. 182 240. Edit 1681. but what had been determined in the greatest and most famous Monasteries of the Kingdom concluded †Fox p. 965 Burn. part 1. p. 182. and agreed upon by the Vniversities subscribed to ‡ Ant. Brit. p. 324. by all the Bishops and others of the Clergy in their Convocation penn'd by some of them sworn ⸪ Burnet pt 1. p. 18. unto by most or all of those very Bishops in some part or other of the Reigns of the two precedent Kings and by them then in being before ever there was a Law for the requiring any such Oath defended ‖ Ant. Brit. p. 330. both in Press and Pulpit and with as little reason to be declined in this Queen's days as in any of her Predecessors 49. For though Oaths be not hastily to be given to every one that either takes or usurps the Throne yet here was no possible Doubt or Scruple to be made against the Title of her Majesty she being declared by the Parliament then sitting to be * Cambd. Eliz. p. 1. veram legitimamque Haeredem the true and rightfull Heir de cujus certissimo in Successione jure cum nemo dubitare possit nemo debeat so true and rightfull saith Arch Bp. Heath in the Houâ—e of Ibid. Peers that as no body can doubt of the Truth of her Succession so no body ought and so far forth recognized and owned by the present Bishops †Heyl. Hist Ref. part 2. p. 102. that they all went to meet her and presented themselves before her upon their knees in testimony of their Loyalty and Affection So that here was no calling her Title in question no quarrelling the Authority either of her or her Parliament no remonstrating to the Matter of the Oath without condemning themselves nothing but their own Perverseness to pull this Deprivation upon them A Deprivation I confess not so regular as it should have been being executed altogether by a Lay Power but yet as regular as the Case would bear and not without a Commission neither according to Stow and others to examine and make out their Misdemeanours the utmost that could possibly then be done Stow p. 1082. Holling p. 182. How p. 639. the whole Order of them Kitchen of Landaff onely excepted being at that time under one and the same Guilt and lay alike open to one and the same Penalty And had they not for that reason been displaced till there was a College of Bishops or a Court of Episcopal Delegates to displace them they must never for all their Disobedience though never so wilfull and provoking have been displaced nor indeed have had their Crimes punished But what is that to us or wherein doth it concern the Bishops that are now deprived Had any of them taken Commission to surrender upon Demand Had they at any time before been deprived Wanted they either due Titles or canonical Ordination Were they â—rdained without the presence or Approbation of their Metropolitane Or was he himself ordained by such that were so ordained Was the Oath for which they were deprived ever formally tendered to them Or did it ever appear upon tender that they refused it Was it of their own framing Or had they before either taken written or preach'd for it Nay was it not contrary to their former Preachings Declarations and Oaths Was the Authority imposing it either in reference to Prince or Parliament an unquestionable Authority Were any delegated to make out the Disobedience Or were there not Bishops enough Nay Might not a Convocation of the complying Clergy have been summoned to have judged and determined of the Case whether Culprit or no When these things are proved and made out against them I cannot nay I shall not but confess their Deprivations
to be alike but till then I must be allowed to cry out O Tempora O Mores and with the Poet conclude that Aetas Parentum pejor avis tulit Nos nequiores mox daturos Progeniem vitiosiorem Carm. Hor. L. 3. Od. 6. 50. I am sensible that there are two grand Mistakes in the World which minister to and hasten on these fatal Proceedings Some think there is no such thing as Schism others that though there be such a thing yet an Act of Parliament will authorize the Fact and justifie all insomuch that through the Midwifery of a Vote or two of theirs God's Altar may be turn'd or overturn'd Aaron and his Priests deposed or forced to comply and a new Erection like that of Jeroboam's though of the worst of Men made as sacred and divine as if it were done by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a Voice from Heaven And from thenceforth if the Man of God happen as his Duty binds him to oppose or gainsay their Sanctions so as their Mightinesses become disobliged though he be sent of God as Aaron was though he ruleth well and laboureth in Word and Doctrine nay though he be doing the Will and Work of his Master yet a travelling Staff and a pair of ill clouted Shoes must pass for his double Reward But how contrary this is to Practice hath already been shewn and how diametrically opposite to the genuine Constitutions of this Church and State comes now to be demonstrated 51. Populus de Republica non de Ecclesia in Parliamentis antiquitus tractare consuevit Anciently saith the Author of Antiquitates Britannicae the People never meddled with Matters of religious Concern in their Parliaments De vit Cran. p. 339. but onely with Matters purely relating to the State Nay I find by the very Act of Submission it self which was in the Year 1530. That it was customary till then for the Clergy by virtue of the Authority they had in themselves without any Ratification or Confirmation from King or Parliament to make Canons declare Heresies convict and censure Criminals and to decree and do all other Matters as seemed good to them in relation to the Church and Clergy A Power thought too great to be in the hands of the Clergy whereupon saith Heylin The House of Commons aggrieved at the inequality and supereminency of the Power Ref. just part 1. S. 1. remonstrated and complained to the King that the Clergy should be permitted to act Authoritatively and Supremely in the Convocation and they in Parliament do nothing but as it was confirmed and ratified by the Royal Assent This in all probability hastened on the Submission for the Clergy soon after being met in Convocation as it is recorded in the aforesaid Book of Antiquities promised the King in verbo sacerdotis ne ullas deinceps De Vit. Warh in Synodo ferrent Ecclesiasticas leges that they would not henceforth enact or execute any Constitutions or Canons in their Synods or Convocations unless the King should cause their assembling and by his Royal Assent approve and confirm their Canons But then this only levels them with and not puts them under the Parliament it leaves indeed their Decrees and Sanctions to them to be farther guarded and secured by the addition of their civil Penalties and Inflictions but no ways subjects them to them in reference to the Validity Authenticalness or prior Establishment of them And this the learned Heylin hath elaborately and fully made out as to the two first Reigns both in reference to the points of Doctrine that were reformed and to the forms of Worship that were then enjoyned in his Book entitled The way of the Reformation of the Church of England declared and justified to whom for your farther satisfaction I refer you and the Reader 52. But not content to bring them down to their own level their next design and work was to bring them under and of this the aforementioned Antiquary complains Ecclesiasticarum legum potestate abdicata populus in Parliamento cepit de rebus divinis inconsulto Clero sancire the Submission says he being made the People in their Parliament as if the In vitâ Cranm p. 339. Submission had been made to them began to usurp upon the Church's Right and without ever consulting the Clergy to debate and agree such things as formerly were held peculiarly to the Clergy only But these saith Heylin were only tentamenta offers and undertakings only and Lib. p. cit no more And that they were so and no better nor otherwise approved of during the whole Reign of Q. Elizabeth under whom the Reformation received its full and perfect establishment will sufficiently be evidenced from the Journals of the Paliaments in her days handed down to us by Sir Simon D'Ewes And I shall give them in the order they lye in When a Bill was presented to the House of Commons for Reformation of the Common Prayer Book it was agreed upon by them that a Petition Ann. 13. p. 167. should be made to her Majesty for her License to proceed in the Bill before it be farther dealt in and to do otherwise saith the Treasure is to Page 166. meddle with matters of her Prerogative and as the Comptroller phrased it to run before the Ball. Mr. Strickland having pressed very earnestly the Reformation of the Book Page 176. of Common-Prayer and other Ceremonies was called before her Majesty's Council and commanded to forbear coming to the said House and when Page 130. the said Articles of Religion were afterwards presented to her she answered That she would have them executed by the Bishops by direction of her Highness's Regal Authority of Supremacy of the Church of England and not to have the same dealt in by the Parliament The Lord Keeper in his Speech to the Parliament by her Majesty's Command Ann. 14. p. 193. thus utters himself Because the proceedings of matters in Discipline and Doctrine do chiefly concern my Lords the Bishops both for their Understanding and Ecclesiastical Function therefore the Queens Highness looketh that they being called together in Parliament should take the chifest care to confer and consult of these matters and if in their conference they find it behoofull to have any Temporal Acts made for the amending and reforming of any of these lacks that then they will exhibit it here in Parliament to be considered upon and so gladius gladium juvabit as before time hath been used The Speaker declared to the House of Commons That it was her Majesty's pleasure That from henceforth no Bills concerning Religion shall be Page 213. preferred or received into this House unless the same should be first considered and liked by the Clergy Upon the presenting the Petition concerning the Reformation of the Discipline of the Church her Highness answered That her Majesty before Ann. 18. p. 257. the Parliament had a care to provide in that case of her own