HOW THE MEMBERS OF THE Church of ENGLAND Ought to behave themselves under A ROMAN CATHOLIC KING With reference to the TEST and PENAL LAWS In a Letter to a Friend by a Member of the same Church LONDON Printed and are to be sold by Randal Taylor near Stationers-Hall 1687. THE TITLES OF THE SECTIONS SECT I. THe Character of an old Loyalist of the Church of England Page 1. SECT II. How such behaved themselves during the Transaction of the Bill of Seclusion Page 4. SECT III. How the Bishops and Clergy behaved themselves in those times Page 14. SECT IV. The Calumnies against the Loyal Members of the Church of England in the foregoing times Page 18. SECT V. The Affrightments and Arts now used to make Subjects believe that the Protestant Religion is to be extirpated here Page 22. SECT VI. That the Church of England hath been in a disturbed condition under Protestant Princes Page 27. SECT VII That it is in a more flourishing condition now Page 33. SECT VIII The self-denial of the King in the Exercise of his own Religion Page 36. SECT IX The difficulty of effecting a change of Religion Page 40. SECT X. Two Objections answered Page 56. SECT XI That the Kings dispensing with the Test is no Argument of his design to Extirpate the Protestant Religion Page 62. SECT XII That it is not the Kings Interest to extirpate the Protestant Religion Page 72. SECT XIII Concerning the Test Page 78. SECT XIV Concerning Sanguinary and Penal Laws against Roman Catholics Page 143. SECT XV. The Inconveniencies that will attend the not Repealing of Penal Laws and particularly the Test Page 165. SECT XVI The Practicableness of Roman Catholics and Protestants living under one Secular Government Page 180. SECT XVII The Character of his Majesty Page 191. SECT XVIII The Conclusion Page 205. ERRATA PAge 15. Line 7. for assured read afraid P. 22. the last line but one for These r. There P. 31. l. 17. for confirmed too r. conformed to P. 40. The Title of the Section should have ended at the word Religion and the rest be placed in the Margent P. 79. l. ult for it r. them P. 94. l. 7. for naturally r. natural P. 113. l. 12. for But r. yet P. 117. l. 1. after we put in may P. 178. l. 7. for preached r. practised P. 182. l. 3. for attemps r. attempts P. 183. l. 11. for Budifir r. Budifin P. 185. l. 7. for Abby r. Abbot HOW THE MEMBERS OF THE Church of England Ought to behave themselves under A ROMAN CATHOLICK KING In a Letter to a Friend SECT I. The Character of an old Loyalist of the Church of England SIR SINCE our first acquaintance we have seen the Revolution of almost fifty years In all which time your unshaken Loyalty and steady Adherence to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England have been most conspicuous You equally hated the Flatterer who by stretching the Length of the Scepter made it unweildy and the Factious who by continual filing made it too slender and of no more force than a Reed or so shortned it that from a Sovereign Battoon it scarce equalled a Serjeants Mace. You valued him most who paid a just Deference to the Regal Prerogative and was infinitely thankful for all the gracious Enfranchisements of the Subject You knew too well the Injustice and Illegality of taking Arms against King Charles the First setled your Judgment so firmly then that none of the Designers Arts to cajole the Multitude made any impression on you And however great your Sufferings were then and thereby by your Disability to aid the Banished Prince yet you were as forward as any to assist him in all things serviceable to his Interest not only in confirming your Neighbours and Acquaintance in their Allegiance when their Enemies success made them dispond but in making Converts of those who had been deluded by the specious pretence of Liberty and Reformation So that you helped much to prepare Mens minds earnestly to wish and effectually to promote the late Merciful King's Restauration and when in his later time he was so Embarrassed with some of his Parliaments you were an eminent Abhorrer and as strenuous an Opposer of the Bill of Seclusion and though you were branded with the name of Papist in Masquerade and a Janizary for Arbitrary Power yet you kept your Post and assured those that conversed with you that Loyalty which you had been taught in the Church of England was so firm a Basis to you that the attacks of Slander and Obloquy should never remove you one hair's breadth from your Duty It was the very Polar Star to which you directed all your Actions without trepidation the Axis on which you designed to move SECT II. How such behaved themselves during the Transaction of the Bill of Seclusion GIVE me leave to remind you of some of those Answers you used to make to those Speeches were sent you from one of the Clerks of the Commons House when the debate was hottest about the Bill of Seclusion for it was at that critical Time the truest Sons of the English Church were discriminated from the Latitudinarian Protestants Non-Conformists and Common-wealth's Men. S. W. J. Collection of Speeches When that overgrown Lawyer said He took it for granted that it was impossible that a Papist should come to the Possession and quiet enjoyment of the Crown without wading through a Sea of Blood and without occasioning such a War as for ought he knew might shake the Monarchical Government You then reply'd This was more like the Bellowing of a Bull than a Responce from an Oracle of the Laws and that who ever lived to see the Duke Succeed as in course of Nature it was likely would find the True Sons of the Church of England so far from listing up an hand against him that if his Right were opposed they would with as much Zeal and Concern as any fight under his Royal Standard and if any such Bouteseu's as he raised a Rebellion they would only afford Trophies to his Victorious Sword and fall as Sacrifices to the Justice of his Cause When that bitter mans Speech was urged That a Popish Head on a Protestant Body would be such a Monster in Nature as would neither be fit to preserve or be preserved and it as naturally followed as the Night did Day that the Head would Change the Body or the Body the Head You answered That we ought to consider the Royal Headship abstractedly from the Subject-Body as we do the sublimed Animal and vital Spirits from the gross Blood and the grosser composition of the Body The Sovereignty being as a Presiding Coelestial Power fitted to govern Members of various Temperaments and Constitutions and that it was as easie to conceive how a Popish King might benignly govern his Protestant Subjects as it was for a Father to govern with Paternal Care and Indulgence his Children of different Humors and Inclinations and
which they would have grounded an Indictment of Treason And whoever considers all the Arguments of the Exclusionists will find they were bottom'd upon the severe Laws against Papists So that if his Royal Brother had been wrought upon to have consented it had been easie by the force of the penal Laws against Roman Catholics not only to have deprived our Sovereign of his Right of Succession but of his life also Since therefore it is so evident that the penal Laws against Roman Catholics as they now stand in force are not only destructive to the Subjects property but endanger as much the Rights of Hereditary Princes In my Judgment the King hath sufficient reason to require their repeal and all Lovers of our Monarchy reflecting upon the hazard his Majesty was in from them have reason to use their utmost endeavours to have such abrogated Surely we cannot but reflect how things were pushed on after the credit given to that perjur'd Man's Plot. How a traiterous party designed the late Kings Murther the overthrow of the Monarchy or at least the utter secluding of our Gracious Sovereign and never rested till they had formed the Rebellion in England and Scotland So that when we consider how these Laws were obtained in a time when the Affrights Heats and Ferments of the Nation were so great and the drift of the Enemies to Monarchy and the Kings person were not sufficiently discovered and when we consider that those so fair-blown Blossoms so delicately striped with the beautiful Colours of Religion and Property and Priviledges were succeeded by the most poisonous Fruits And that those men who pretended so much care of the Protestant Religion manifestly designed the Eclipsing at least if not the overthrow of the Church of England by their Bill of Comprehension whoever I say considers these things deliberately cannot think the King hath any reason to be in Love with these Acts which were made so Diametrically opposite to his Regality and which would so manacle his hands that he might have no power to bestow Places or Offices upon his Catholic Subjects Having premised these things in Gross I shall now proceed to give you some of the many reasons why I think the King hath just cause to insist upon the Repeal of these Acts and all other Sanguinary Laws Reasons why the Test ought to be repeal'd 1. That it chargeth the King and all Catholics with the detestable sin of Idolatry First If there were no other reason why he should earnestly endeavour the abolishing of them This one thing seems to me sufficient in that all his Subjects who are capacitated to serve Him must solemnly declare the King or the Church he is in Communion with Idolaters than which sin I think no Christian can be guilty of a greater except that of the so inexplicable sin against the Holy Ghost If I were a Military man I should be very diffident of success or that God would prosper my Arms while I fought a Princes quarrel whom I judged an Idolater And if I did not believe it as their whole Church so solemnly denying any properly Divine Worship to be given by them to any but God methinks should hinder me and yet were obliged so solemnly to declare it I should think I scandalized my Prince in the highest degree mocked God and gave a lye to my Conscience So that however useful it might be to deter persons of the Roman Faith from taking it and so to incapacitate them yet I cannot see how a Catholic Prince can countenance or need it And how either the King himself or his Catholic Subjects can digest such publick avowing them Idolaters I leave to any rational man to judge And especially the King being I doubt not throughly convinced in his own Conscience that he is no Idolater for I think gestures only without some kind of intention of paying Divine Honour to something that is not God will not make a person guilty of that damnable sin It cannot but concern him in Conscience to prevent as much as in him lies his Subjects averring so scandalous an untruth in his Majesties own belief at least and which assertion carries with it another ill consequence that every one is not aware of For the Ordination of our Bishops coming from the Church of Rome if that be Idolatrous it is no more a Church of Christ but a Synagogue of Satan And if it be no Damage I am sure it is no Credit to derive a succession from it Secondly 2 That one great end of the Test now ceaseth Another reason against the Test may be that now there is no use of the direct intendment of the Act because the end for which in great part it was made is now obsolete and totally ceaseth which I hope will be clear to them that consider that the power of the Militia and the disposing either directly or indirectly of all the places of Service and Trust are in the King So that though it was but rational that those persons to whom Protestant Kings committed Arms and Offices should be assured of them in fidelity which the being of the same Religion induceth a Prince to confide more in lest their Persons or Government might be in danger from any armed with power that were Catholics So that it was but consentaneous to the Sovereign Power in disposal of the Militia and Offices that a Protestant Prince might refuse to be served by Catholics and lest any such might get into Imployments he might be willing to consent to the most effectual discriminating Test that could be invented to debar them But now the King is secure from any apprehensions of the least danger to his Person and Government from Catholics and can have no more doubt of the Allegiance of Catholics without such Oaths or Declarations than a Protestant Prince could have of his Protestant Subjects under the engagement of those Oaths Here we may en passant observe a considerable difference betwixt the method of our King and those of former times Now we repine and are greatly alarum'd as if all were lost because here and there a Catholic Officer is Commissionated whereas the King imploys treble the number yea some say Ten Officers that are Protestants for one Catholic and the Soldiers are generally Protestants whereas before not one Known Catholic was capable of any Imployment We might have indeed some reason to murmur and repine if the King should commissionate none but Catholics yet that would be but Lex Talionis turning the Tables Therefore since he hath the power of dispencing with that Law as appears by the Sentence in the King's Bench we have reason to be thankful to the King for the distribution of his favours so liberally to Protestants which hath been so long denied to Unfortunate Catholics who if their Religion did not incapacitate them as Englishmen Fellow-Subjects and Gentlemen are as fit for all sorts of Imployment as Protestants And I doubt not but now that
Crown It is a known maxim in Law saith the learned q Coke Report 7 p. 7. ex Stat. 11. H. 7. c. 1. 2 Eliz c. 2 Judge that every Subject is bound to defend the King and to go with the King and to serve in his Wars as well without as within the Realm The Liegeance to the Prince saith a singularly well read r Majestas Intemerata Lawyer is immutable and absolute in all places It obligeth in all ubi's and the liege man ought in duty of this faith to perform to his Lord the Offices of a Subject when ever he shall need his assistance against all who mori possunt aut vivere can die or live This is clear by Law and Reason In the 48 Å¿ Claus 48. H. 3. M. 3. Tam militiâ—e quam liberi homines omnes alii ad defensionem Regis tenentur H. 3. the words of the Law are That the Knights and Free-tenants and all others were obliged to the defence of the King And so 12 E. 3. All and every single person are bound to defend the King. Thence it was that a t 4 Instit 7. In â—â—riâ—â—lo Hestium suorum Parliament judged it High Treason in Nicholas Segrave that he withdrew himself from the Kings Hoste leaving the King in danger of his Enemies The ground of all which is what u Lib. 2. c. 1. Bracton so long since hath noted that to receive Justice and Protection are the greatest benefits of this Life and there can be no use of w Com. 3.5 Rulers without these Attributes for if the Sovereign be abridged x Roll. Eritt 234. of the Prerogative to exact Obedience and Liegiance from his Subjects he hath but a small portion of the Sovereignty indeed his Kingship must be precarious as depending only on the good Nature of his Subjects Thence the Attorney y Pusw Col cer 〈◊〉 552 General in the Argument of Ship-money saith The King as Head of the Politic Body is furnished with intire Power and Jurisdiction not only to minister Justice in Causes Ecclesiastical and Temporal unto his People but likewise for defence both of the one and of the other Whence the Clause inserted in the Register Ad providendam Salvationem Regis Bracton z 2 Lib. 1. fol. 6. saith The Life and Members of every Subject are in the Power of the King And a a Pasch 19 E. 1. Rol. 36. North. Record saith Vita membra sunt in manu Regis both which are understood that the King hath sole Power to command their Service in his Wars or otherwise as he hath occasion The Lord Chief b Instit 149. West 2.39 1 R. 3. p. 2. c. 15. Rol. Brit. 85. Justice saith That if any Privy Councellor or other cause one to enter into an obligation to serve the King it is void every man being bound to serve him without it and such Writings are declared dishonourable being every man is bound to defend the King and his Realm and to do the service that appertaineth to him as his Liege Lord. The King c Com. pl. 316. is stiled the Sovereign and Chief Captain of Arms all Power is his no man may use Arms so much as in Turnament Tilt c. without the Kings License The d Rol. Parl. 5 H. 4. N o 24. Statute of Array is full in this tho' not printed This is further illustrated in that if a Sheriff return that he is resisted in serving the Kings Writ it is declared not to be good because it redounds to the Kings dishonour being presumed the King can command every one to obey and the Sheriff hath Authority from him to raise the Posse Commitatus In former Ages the Kings absolute Power in disposing the Militia was never disputed It was the black or bloody Parliament only that assumed to themselves coordinate Power and challenged the Power of ordering the Militia for preserving the Kingdom without and against the Kings consent which occasioned the first Parliament of King Charles the Second to declare in the preamble of the Act e 13 Car. 2. c. 6. 14 Car. 2. c. 3. That it is and ever was the Kings Prerogative alone to dispose of the Militia of the Nation to make War and Peace League and Truce to grant safe Conduct without the Parliament and that he may Issue out Commissions of Lieutenancy impowering them to form into Regiments and imploy them as well within their own as other Countries as the King shall direct Since the taking away Tenures it is true the Method of raising Men hath been something altered but before the imposing of the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance and now this Test we find no qualifications of the persons required but that they should be habiles Corporis of able Bodies sit to serve the King and Country And tho this Test doth not totally deprive the King of the service of his Subjects yet it diminisheth his Authority and takes away the corporal Service of a considerable number of his Liege people Thirdly Hew careful our Ancestors have been to preserve the Prerogatives I now pass to the third particular in which I shall in some few instances shew how careful the Houses of Parliament have been in preserving inviolable the Prerogative of the Crown or when by any pressing emergency they have been invaded that the Judges have determined that the Kings of England might by a special non obstante dispence with the penalty of them This Question about the Test being wholly new and such a weakening of the Prerogative as hath not been known in our Ancestors days you cannot expect any clear discission of it in the Books of the Law. All one can do in such a case is only to produce some Maxims Presidents or parallel Cases that may affect it most which without the help of any ones Collections as having never perused any of the Arguments in Sir Edward Hales Case I shall out of my own small reading offer these following to your consideration The Attorney f Rushworth's Collect 578. General affirms That an Act of Parliament doth not extend to take away the Common Right of the Crown and saith That hath been the exposition of the Judges of Acts of Parliament that have done so He instanceth in the Magna Charta of King Johns 17º Regni where it is said That no Scutage or Aid should be without assent of Parliament So that in this there was no exception of an Aid to Knight the Kings Eldest Son or marry his Eldest Daughter yet it was resolved in this case that by that Charter those Aids were not abolished they being due by the Law of the Land and so it was declared 25 E. 1. cap. 1. We find an Antient Statute in King g Westons c. 50. 2 Instit 263. Edward the First 's time wherein the King speaks thus That he bad done this for the Honour of God the Honour of
glorious an Enterprise it will be rowsing his slow and unresolved Thoughts with the Consideration what a perpetual renown it ever will be to King Henry the VII that he united the Houses of York and Lancaster and how glorious the memory of King James the I. ever must be who united the Kingdoms And how transcendent a Jubile it would cause over all the Roman World That his Grandson should reunite his Subjects to the Roman Catholick Church which will be so irresistable a Charm they say that it cannot be in his power to escape the Enchantment Nor could he want the Charity to wish it or neglect the essaying all means to effect it being prepossessed with a firm Perswasion that the undertaking of it would be an acceptable Service to God Almighty It is not my design to write any thing that may lessen the esteem and due regard Men have for the Church of England of which I own my self an unworty Member Neither shall I meddle with any Points in controversie but only offer my Reasons why I cannot conceive by the Proceedings of the King hitherto nor the consequences flowing from those steps he makes That the Protestant Religion is either in danger or designed to be rooted out or so eclipsed as we are invited to believe SECT VI. That the Church of England hath been in a disturbed condition under Protestant Princes BEfore I consider the present State of the Church of England which I think in many respects is as flourishing as it hath been since the Reformation I must shew its former condition During the Reign of Q. Elizabeth and the three succeeding Kings it hath been continually disquieted with Dissenters Fanaticks and other Sects who never gave over their Clamours for a more refined Reformation from Rome Every Year almost producing some bitter Invective or other grudging murmuring and calumniating the English Hierarchy to the great disquiet of the Secular Government Hence the necessity of severe Laws against Non-conformists ever and anon being made or reinforced Those that lived in the beginning of the late Wars cannot forget what Tumults were in some places about placing the Communion Table Altar-wise How many were scandalized at the Bishop's dignifyed Clergy and Priests Habit at the kneeling at the Sacrament at the use of the Cross in Baptism about bowing to the Altar and the Name of Jesus And tho' in Cathedrals a Solemn Order was observed yet it was much murmured at and was branded both in the manner of the Celebration of Divine Offices and the use of the Choristers and Organs with the name of down-right Popery and Superstition Who hath a mind to know the particulars of the disquieting of the Church of England by her Protestant Adversaries may peruse Bishop Bancroft's Dangerous Positions and Dr. Heylin's History of Presbyterianism Mr. Fowlis History of the Plots Conspiracies c. and such as relate the Church History of those times and they will find sufficient to convince them what Jars Conflicts Heart-burnings and Disquiets were amongst Protestants How the Clergy and the Liturgy were despised which grew every Year worse and worse till it was judged requisite by a strict execution of the Laws to master the Nonconformists and bend or break them to a complyance or silence But the success answered not the design for on the contrary the peoples minds grew strongly alienated from the Discipline of the Church and as soon as they had chosen a House of Commons to their mind the use of the Common Prayer Book Surplices and Habits of the Clergy and all things in use formerly and established by Law were voted down and the Souldiery and Rabble were encouraged to tear the Service-Book and Surplices to transplace the Communion-Table level the Steps pull up Fonts break down all the painted Glass-Windows especially where any representation of our Saviour or any Saints or Bishops or other in Religious Habits were The Copes Vestments and Chalices were all swept out of the Church by Order of Committies or the Rapine of Parishioners or Soldiers The Monuments and monumental Inscriptions were most of them defaced especially where a Religious Habit was represented an Ora pro Animâ annexed or the worth of the Brass tempted the Sacriledge none of the zealous Observers of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church were permitted to enjoy any Benefice or teach a School Bishops and Deans and Chapters Lands were sold and they were about resolving which of the Cathedrals should be demolished So that in conclusion there was no publick appearance of the Discipline of the Church of England tho' all the Pulpits were supplyed with Preachers who conformed to their new Directory and new Ordination by Presbyters This might indeed be called a Protestant Church but I am sure it was very different from the Church of England as established by Law which was so far from then being a flourishing Church that it had neither Vola nor Vestigium of one but such as was under as dismal a Persecution as a Church well could be It is true after the late King of immortal memory's Restauration It was restored again to a competency of Power and Order Yet the Dissenters Meeting-places were as much frequented as the Churches Everywhere Non-conformable Ministers had their Conventicles till a new Act of Uniformity was made yet the number of Dissenters then were so many that the King who loved ease and to have his Subjects minds composed that he might more freely have the Service of their Bodies and Purses was willing to grant them Indulgence till that was disliked by the Parliament and the Bishops and zealous Members of the Church of England whereby the King was prevailed with to revoke it Thus was the Church of England harrassed under Protestant Princes SECT VII That it is in a more flourishing condition now LET us now take a view of its present State and make a just paralel and we shall I think find it in no worse but in a better state than before Now our Clergy-men go publickly in their decent Habits are reverenced and respected no affronts put upon them All the Ceremonies appointed by the Canons and Rubricks are more exactly observed and more universally confirmed too than in any Age before we hear little of their Conventicles the greater number of former Dissenters flocking to our Churches conforming in all things answering to the Responses standing up at the Creed bowing at the Name of Jesus kneeling at the Prayers and with great attention and zeal hearing the learned Sermons delivered almost from every Pulpit the Ministers redoubling their pains in emulation to the Catholick Fathers that they may retain their Flocks firm to the Protestant Religion and we may judge by the crowding of the Churches That for one Dissenter that was won to the Church of England in the late Kings Reign there are now ten which is one of the Miracles the King has done to unite these at so great odds formerly So that to me it is a
employments whereby the Managery of the Government might solely be in the hands of Protestants yet what necessity was there for the outlawing of them in putting them out of the protection of the King and his Laws or of receiving any benefit by them so that they could not recover their just debts defend themselves from any injury done to their Persons or Estates nor have equity done them which is the priviledge all Subjects claim from their Sovereigns Justice As they must suffer all hardships so the Acts provide that no Protestant or other should be beneficial to them being deprived of all the usual ways whereby advantages accrue to any either by the Living or the Dead in that they might not be Guardians Executors Administrators or receive any Legacy or Deed of Gift Whoever considers these things with a sedate and composed mind undisturbed with Bigotry Suspition or Envy must think this punishment intended to keep the Roman Catholics in perpetual poverty and vassallage which no Roman Catholic Prince can take pleasure to see or endure Of the prohibiting Rom. Cathol to be in the Kings Court or Presence As to the prohibiting all Roman Catholics or any other resusers of the Oaths and Declarations advisedly to come into the Kings Presence or Courts there might be some colour for such a prohibition during the time that a Protestant Prince was thought to be in personal danger from Roman Catholics but surely at any other time it appears a strange ungentileness to retrench a Sovereigns attendance and shews a very unbecoming diffidence in the Wisdom of a Prince and his Privy Council as if they knew not whom and when to prohibit Access to their Royal Persons and Court which by direction to the Lord Chamberlain or by Proclamation might be done upon Emergencies It looks like a suspition that the hinderance of the Access of Roman Catholics was rather that they might not represent their sufferings explain their Religion more favourably make Proselytes or interceed for some accused which though not expressed in the Act fully yet may well enough be interpreted from the words preventing the increase of Popery I know there is a provision upon obtaining of licence but that could extend to very few who either could be at the expence or obtain the favour of an Order of Council for that purpose and so all indigent Catholics who for their sufferings for Kings Charles the Martyr might merit the late merciful Kings regard and benignity were utterly excluded Not fit now to continue But if we suppose these Acts as necessary and equitable as the greatest Sticklers for them could evince while the Plot was believed I think no person endowed with common civility will think it fit they should be imposed upon our present Sovereign nor will they think it equitable and just that any Roman Catholic King should deal in the same manner with his Protestant Subjects And I presume the Golden Rule to do to others as we would be done by our selves should influence publick as well as private affairs Concerning the King and Queens sworn Servants As to the Kings sworn Servants It must be very severe upon several of them whose fortunes were bottomed upon it and it was a very unbecoming restraint that a Sovereign should dismiss his Domesticks though never so experienced and faithful for that which it may be few Members of the Houses would discard a Trusty Menial Servant for As to the Queens Servants it had been contrary to the Law of Nations to have imposed such Oaths and Declarations upon such as were naturaly born Subjects of Portugal yet in that they were limited to so small a number as nine whereas her Majesty entertains near thrice the number of Religious it shewed but little consideration of the number of Servants in the Family of so great a Princess But I need not trouble you with the consideration of these as moving in a lower Sphere for what ever will induce the two Houses to reinstate the great Orbs in their places and capacitate them to exert their due Powers will prevail to restore the Satellites of the great Luminaries Therefore I shall now pass to the ejecting the Roman Catholic Lords out of their House and depriving them of their Birth-rights Concerning the Catholic Lords being excluded the House By the Kings Royal Prerogative the Power of Creating a Baron and Peer of the Realm is only in the King as the Original Donor of all Honours from whom all Dignities flow as from a Fountain to all his Subjects Conciliarii nati This Honour consists not only in obtaining a swelling Title and Degree of precedencie as special Marks to them and their Families of Princely Favours but likewise hath for many hundreds of years had annexed to it a right of being a Member of the House of Peers sitting and voting there and thence they are stiled frequently Hereditary Councellors who constitute the Kings Supreme Court of Judicature In the Saxon times and long after the Conquest we find none but Bishops Abbots Priors and these stiled Magnates or Proceres to constitute the General Councils which we now call Parliaments tho it seems by what we can collect from the Ancientest Authors the King summoned which of these he pleased and did not tye himself to continue it to their Posterities Mat. Paris 227. But in the Great Charter of King John we find he granted that he would by special Letters summon to these Great Councils in Assessing all Aids and Scutage the Arch-Bishops Bishops Abbots Earls and great Barons of the Realm Cap. 2.12.19.37.38 So in the Great Charter of Henry the Third those are first provided for and a severe Excommunication was wont to be pronounced by all the Bishops in presence of all the Lords and Commons against the Infringers thereof And it is obvious to all who know any thing of our Laws how Sacred an Esteem the Great Charter hath had being stiled The Charter of the Subjects Liberties and looked upon as the Standard of the Subjects Priviledges so that some are of opinion that even Acts of Parliament contrary to Magna Charta are void Et ut Barones tractentur teneantur reputentur c. eorum quilibet habeat teneat possideat sedem locuus vocem in Parliamentis publicis Comitiis et consillis nostris haeredum successorum nostrorum infra Regnum nostrum Angliae inter alios Barones Barones Parliamentorum publicorum Comitiorum Conciliorum T it 〈◊〉 Part. 2. cap. 5. This Right of Barons sitting and voting in Parliament is specially provided for in their Patents of Creation which may be seen at large in Mr. Selden And as to what relates to our purpose is contained in these Words after the Recital of the Words of Erecting and Creating them and their Heirs-males to the Name State Degree Stile Dignity Title and Honour of a Baron c. That they shall be treated held and
they are imployed will as Bravely Honourably and Circumspectly discover their abilities and I hope will keep so good a correspondence with Loyal Protestants that are their Fellow-Servants to so great a Master that the King may at least have that satisfaction that he can unite them in a Camp which he cannot do in a Church and shew his great wisdom in Government that he can be faithfully and effectually served by all his Subjects of different Religious Interests And though the endeavours of several to explicate the Roman Catholic Religion more approachingly to the sentiments of Protestants have not as yet had that effect they wished yet it may be useful to let us see that in affairs of State and Government such an intercourse and mixture may be as former Ages have not known and by the Conduct of our Gracious and Wise King may be laid a foundation for better accord in future times that we may not be at such feuds among our selves It is true that under a Protestant King there might be some reason to maintain the Protestant Church so as it might neither be indangered by the Roman Catholics or Protestant Dissenters and by Sanguinary Laws tho rarely put in use people might be deterred from being of any other Communion yet we cannot think that the same measures can be taken now such circumstances varying the methods of proceeding and in Government and Politicks new Emergencies may yea must render old Axioms obsolete Hence we take notice how imprudent these Informers are who in our King's Reign more out of pretence and impotent zeal than for any good concern to the Church of England tempt the Justices and instigate them to prosecute Catholics by binding them to Sessions and Assizes for what can be expected from this but it will exasperate the King and discover how desirous these are to persecute them tho they know he will pardon the Transgression in as much as it relates to himself Thirdly 3 It is against the Kings Prerogative Having thus far treated of the Natural and Religious Grounds the King hath to demand to have the Act repealed I come now to the politic and more necessary part as it relates to the legal constitution of the Government which by this Act of the Test suffers a great alteration in the abridging the King of an undoubted Prerogative of the Crown For the illustrating of which I shall first give you the opinion of the most Celebrated Writers of the English Laws of what nature the Kings Prerogative in general is Secondly That the Leigance of the Subject to his Sovereign is judged among the principal Prerogatives of the King. Thirdly How tender our English Ancestors have been of the Royal Prerogative Fourthly That the Test deprives the King of the Leigance and of that Fundamental Prerogative of having the service of his Subjects And Lastly Conclude with some Inferences from these Considerations The nature of the Kings Prerogative As to the first a L. 1. Instit 90. Sr. Edward Coke saith the Prerogative extends to all Power Preheminence and Priviledge which the Law giveth to the Crown b Lib. 1. Bracton calls it in one place the Liberty in another the Priviledge of the King. c Fol. 47. Bretton following the d Weston 1. c. 50. Statute calls it Droyt le Roy and the e 61. Register stiles it the Kings Right and the Royal Right of the Crown My Lord f 2 Instit 84. Coke saith the Prerogative of the King is given him by the Common Law and is part of the Law of the Realm g Prerog c. 1. Stanford saith the Prerogative hath its Being from the Common Law and the Statutes are but declarative Properly speaking the Prerogatives of the Crown are such powers as the Kings of England have reserved to themselves as most necessary for the support of their Dignity and the Government Therefore h Rusâ—w Collect. 555. Sr. John Banks in his argument about Ship-mony affirms that the Jura Summae Majestatis which are the Prerogatives are given to the person of the King by the Common Law and the Supreme Dominion is inherent in his Person Another judicious i Mr. White Majestas Intemerata p. 30. Lawyer out of the Authorities he there cites saith The Prerogative is inseparable from his Person not grantable over it is always stuck upon the King or Crown and being inherent to the Majesty of a King and part of the matter of that Majesty is no more grantable than the Majesty it self or a Royal member of the Imperial Stile These are the Characters given to the Kings Prerogative in general â— The Subjects 〈…〉 the Crown Let us now in the second place consider that among the Prerogatives of the Crown It hath been always accounted one of the eminentest principal and fundamental ones that the King and none but he may at his own pleasure command the service of all and every his Subjects in his Wars and other Ministerial Offices which they are bound to by their Natural Allegiance Hence k 2 Instit. 128. Sr. Edward Coke stiles Leigeance the highest and greatest obligation of Duty and Obedience that can be and defines it The true and faithful obedience of a Liege man to his Liege Lord or Sovereign and so calls it * Vinculum Fidei Leges essentia The Ligement or bond of Faith and the essence of the Law and in l 7 Rep. p. 9. amittit Regnum sed non Regem amittit Patriam sed non Patrem Patrie another place he affirms That it is not in the power of any Subject to dissolve this Obligation saying That he that abjures the Realm may loose the Kingdom but not the King may loose his Country but not the Father of his Country agreeable to what another eminent m Dyer fol. 300. Lawyer asserts That none can divest himself of his Country in which he is born nor abjure his due Allegiance nemo patriam qua natus est exuere nec ligeanciam debitam ejurare potest In Calvin's Case the famous n 7 Rep. p. 4. Chief Justice saith That Liegeance and Obedience is an Incident inseparable to every Subject For as soon as he is born he oweth by Birthright Liegiance and Obedience to his Sovereign therefore in several Acts of o 14 H. 8.61 43 H. 8. c. 3. Parliament the King is called The liege and natural liege Lord of his Subjects and his people natural liege Subjects So that the liegiance is due to the natural person of the King by the Law of Nature which is immutable is part of the Law of England and was before judicial and municipal Laws as the same great Author affirms Long before him p Lib. 1. Stanford Plea 54. Bracton saith That things which are annexed to justice and peace belong to none but the Crown and dignity Royal nor can they be separated from the Crown for they make the
the Church for the Common-weal and for the remedy disburthening and ease of them that be grieved yet this should not be prejudicial to him or to his Crown but that the Right which to him appertaineth should be saved Which Sir Edward Coke calls the Kings Right of his Crown and Prerogative It is declared by the Lords and Commons in full h Reâ—l Parliament 43 Ed. 3. No. 7. Parliament upon demand by the King That they would not assent to any thing in Parliament that tended to the disinhereson of the King and the Crown whereto they were sworn This makes the Chief i 4 Iuctiâ— 51. Justice censure as a great fault the omission in the printed Statute of 2 R. 2. in confirmation of Liberties these Words Saving to the King his Regality which are found in the Parliament k Roll. Parlam 2 R. 2. Stat. 2. cap. 4. Roll. A Lawyer l Davis Reports 86. of no small esteem saith The Commons of England have ever been exemplary for the tenderness of the Kings Honour and the maintenance of the Sovereignty But this was before they medled so much with Articles of Religion So in latter times 3º Car. 1. both Houses declared upon passing the Petition of Right that they have neither intention nor power to hurt the Kings Prerogatives Thus far as to the regard our Ancestors have had to the Royal Prerogative Now I shall in a few particulars shew the resolutions of the Judges in such Cases when Acts of Parliament have intrenched upon them In the 13th of m 4 Institu 42. How the Judges have resolved upon Acts of Parliament that Insringe the Preregative Richard the Second Stat. 2. cap. 1. it was enacted That no Charter of Pardon unless so and so qualified should be from thenceforth allowed by the Justices for Murther Treason or Rape and if it were otherwise the Charter to be disallowed Yet my Lord Coke saith This did not bind the King the granting of Pardon being the Kings Prerogative incident solely and inseperably to the Person of the King. The same Richard the Second bequeathed n Ibid. certain Treasuries to his Successor on condition to observe the Acts made the 21 Reg. This was held unjust and unlawful for that it restrained the Sovereign Liberty of the King his Successor And the same Reason saith a judicious o Majestas Intemorata Lawyer may serve to overthrow a Statute which shall unjustly and unlawfully restrain the same Sovereign Nor had saith he this bequest been of more strength had it been enacted by Parliament Injustice being Injustice and Vnlawfulness Vnlawfulness every where It was p Cokes Report 12. p. 14. enacted 23 H. 6. That no man should serve the King as Sheriff in any County above one year but the Grant should be void the person accepting it pay two hundred pound and it was expresly provided that the King by a non obstante should not dispence with it Yet it was agreed 2 H. 7. against the express provision of that Act That the King may by a special non obstante dispence with the Act because no Act could debar the King from the service of his Subjects which the Law of Nature did give unto him In the 37 H. 6. it was q Ibid. p. 18. enacted That none should be Justice of Assize c. in the County where he was born or did inhabit Yet saith the same judicious Lawyer the King with a special non obstante may dispence with it and gives the reason for that it belongs to the inseperable Prerogative of the King viz. his power to command to serve The same r Ibid. p. 18. Lord Chief Justice in the same report is more express and as full as if he had foreseen this present Case of ours where he affirms That no Act can bind the King from any Prerogative which is sole and inseperable to his person but that he may dispence with it by a non obstante and instanceth in the Sovereign Power to command any of his Subjects to serve him for the Public Weal For this saith he is solely and inseperably annexed to his Person and this Royal Power cannot be restrained continues he neither in Thesi nor Hypothesi but that the King by his Royal Prerogative may dispence with it For all which he gives this most unanswerable reason because upon the Commandment of the King and Obedience of the Subject doth the Government subsist I might add very many more Authorities as Edw. the Thirds repealing an Act of Parliament by Proclamation as consented to upon necessity But I shall leave that to those whose Province it is and close this Head with one Observation We are all commendably and justly tender of the preserving the Liberties and Enfranchisments we enjoy by the gracious Condescentions of our Princes and are vigorous maintainers of our Properties and ought we not to own that there is as good reason that the Kings of England should be as solicitous to preserve their Prerogatives which are their right For as a most judicious Å¿ Quicquid in Regalibus est Ita est Principibus privatum ut Subditis quod suum est Selden prefat Mare Clausum Antiquary and Lawyer expresseth Whatsoever belongs to the Kings Royalty he hath as much Propriety in it as the Subject hath in any thing that is his We must likewise consider that the King is as much sworn to preserve the Right of his Crown as the Liberties of the People Therefore we find that branch in t Majestatis Intemerata some Coronation Oaths that the King swears he shall keep all the Lands Honours and Dignities of the Crown righteous and free in all manner whole without any manner of minishment And the rights of the Crown hurt decay or lost to his power shall call again into the Ancient Estate Therefore my Lord u 12 Rep. 18 Coke praiseth King Henry the Second in that he was a great Defender and Maintainer of the Rights of the Crown Inferences from the premises Having dispatched these Heads I now come to the application of them to the Test which as the Case now is and ever will be so long as it stands unrepealed deprives the King of the Allegiance of such of his Subjects as either Conscientiously or Designedly refuse the taking of the Oaths and affirming the Declaration enjoyned The Inconveniency of which is double First In robbing the King of so necessary and fundamental a Right over his Subjects in commanding them to serve him in Offices Military and Civil without which he is but a very Impotent Sovereign and cannot exert that necessary Justice of Protecting Rewarding and Imploying his Subjects which surely is not only much to the dishonour of the Sovereign but an unsufferable restraint And if w 31 Eliz. c. 4. Imbezelling Purloyning and Conveying away the Arms Ordnance Munition Shot Powder Habiliments of War c. is declared Fellony what sort of Crime
shall it be in any to withdraw himself from the Allegiance and Duty to his Sovereign to serve him personally when he commands it This leads me to the Second viz. the Subjects part for this puts the Subject in a state and condition either of disability or denying to serve his Sovereign at his pleasure for those who are Roman Catholics cannot while such take the Oaths and make the Declaration they being so penned that none of that Faith can own them without renouncing their Church the Act containing nothing in its own Nature essential to Obedience but only controverted points of Faith. So many others who are not willing to serve the King in Military and Civil Imployments by pretext that they cannot with a safe Conscience take the Oaths c. Instantly obtain a Dispensation from their Allegiance which ought to be absolute and unconditionate and whatever may be the case of some few may be of many and consequently a Prince may be deprived of the necessary Aid of his Subjects even when any Rebellion or Invasion should happen for tho the King be willing to dispence with their not taking those Oaths c. Yet they may insist upon the penalty which they may pretend they cannot be secured from Here I must answer an Objection that I foresee will be urged that Contra Hostem publicum quilibet homo est miles against a public Enemy every man ought to be a Soldier and so it cannot be the intent of the Law that the King should be deprived of his Right to arm whom he pleaseth and can confide in in such a Conjuncture but only it was designed to hinder Catholics from being Commissionated and Imployed in times of Peace But who ever peruseth the Act will find no such Exception or Limitation which is a very rational plea against the equity of the Act that taking away so great a Prerogative makes no provision for the safety of the Crown even in such cases I remember my Lord Coke speaking of the statute 11 H. 7. saith It hath a flattering preamble pretending to avoid many mischiefs yet it was found that by colour of it Empson and Dudley did many enormous things therefore he observes that When any Maxim or Fundamental Law of the Realm is altered it is incredible to foresee what dangerous mischiefs follow It becomes therefore all Lovers of the Monarchy of England to be very careful to consider the dangerous consequences of taking out or undermining any Corner Stone of that Royal Fabrick and in this particular case to deliberate well of the dangerous sequels of such Laws as limit the Sovereign to use only persons so and so qualified For by the same president we cannot tell if a Prince should succeed that shall be a Calvinist or of any other perswasion opposite to the Church of England and obtaine a Parliament to his purpose but that he may make renouncing of the Episcopal Government or the Church of England a condition absolutely necessary to capacitate any to serve in any public Imployment and then we should find too late how cautious our Ancestors ought to have been to consider consequences of things We have a fresh instance of this in the Kings Supremacy which Act being purposely designed to abridge the Popes power here in matters Ecclesiastical hath heightned so much the Kings Power above what the Pope or any other Ecclesiastical Court ever had that now the Church of England finds how much they are at the Kings pleasure and must necessarily rely more upon the Kings clemency than upon any security they are in by that Act So that if some men had considered the extent of this it is probable they would have acted with more caution and observance SECT XIV Concerning the Sanguinary and Penal Laws against Roman Catholicks BEfore I proceed further I think it necessary to speak something to the Sanguinary and Penal Laws against Roman Catholics made upon the rejecting the Pope's Supremacy in Ecclesiastical Matters and for securing the Sovereigns that were Protestants and the Religion established since the Reformation For the clear illustrating of which I shall 1st Shew what the Principal of those Laws were 2ly The grounds and reasons why they were made And 3ly Shew that as to the security of the Civil Government the ends for which they were made now cease and then proceed to lay down the Inconveniences that will attend the not repealing of them An Abridgement of the Penal Laws As to the first In the 35 H. 8. c. 1. A Statute was made wherein it is declared Treason in any who refuse to take the Oath commonly called of the Supremacy of H. 8. to distinguish it from that of Queen Elizabeth The persons there appointed to take it are to swear that Neither the See nor the Bishop of Rome nor any foreign Potestate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power or Authority within the Realm c. 1 Eliz. That of Queen Elizabeth appoints all to swear that No foreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Prehemenency or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within the Realm And in the 5th of the Queen the refusers to take it are guilty of a Premunire And in the former Statute No man shall by Writing Printing Teaching Preaching c. maintain or defend the Authority Preheminency Power or Jurisdiction Spiritual or Ecclesiastical of any foreign Prince Prelate Person State or Potentate which was heretofore claimed c. within this Realm for the third offence shall suffer as a Traytor Anno 13 Eliz. cap. 2. It was Enacted That if any person use or put in use any Bull Writing or Instrument Written or Printed of Absolution or Reconciliation or if any shall take upon them by colour of any such Bull Writing c. to Absolve or Reconcile any Person or Persons or promise such Absolution or Reconciliation it shall be judged High Treason So bringing of Agnus Dei's Crosses Pictures Beads or such like vain and superstitious things from the Bishop or See of Rome or any authorized or claiming Authority from the Bishop or See of Rome to Consecrate or Hallow the same shall be guilty of a Premunire 27 Eliz. c. 2. All Jesuits Seminary Priests or other such Priests Deacons or Religious or Ecclesiastical Persons whatsoever born within the Queens Dominions made ordained or professed by any Authority or Jurisdicton derived challenged or pretended from the See of Rome unless upon some occasions allowed by the Act that shall be known to come into or remain in the Realm or Dominions shall suffer lose and forfeit as in case of Treason Also all such as shall willingly and wilfully receive relieve comfort aid or maintain any such being at liberty and out of Prison shall be adjudged Fellons Likewise to give or contribute any money or other relief to such out of the Dominion or for maintenance of any Colledge of Jesuits or Seminary Priests shall
incur the penalty of Premunire I need not mention the severe Laws of that Queen against convict Lay Recusants As confining them within five miles of their Habitation and the poorer sort that had none to Prisons or other Restraints and to the end that the Realm be not pestred and overcharged with the multitude of such seditious and dangerous people they must abjure the Realm King James the 1st 1º Reg. c. 4. Confirms all the Laws of Queen Elizabeth against Jesuits Seminary Priests c. and enjoyns the taking of the Oath of Obedience commonly called Allegiance which was more directly to oblige to Fidelity than in point of Faith and only enjoyned to repair to Church and continue there during the time of Divine Service and not to send any to Seminaries beyond Seas Cap. 4. But in the third of his Reign when the Gun-powder Treason was discovered the Laws were made more severe that If any shall put in practice to absolve perswade or withdraw any of the subjects of the King or of his Heirs from their Natural Obedience to his Majesty his Heirs or Successors or to reconcile them to the Pope or See of Rome it shall be High Treason and those that are willingly absolved or withdrawn as aforesaid or willingly reconciled shall be adjudged Traitors ◠5. At the same Parliament it was enacted that Recusants should not come to the Court that they should depart from London be confined within five miles of their Habitations Convict Recusants should be as Excommunicate Persons made incapable of most Offices Civil or Military of practising Law Physick c. Which no doubt gave rise to the Test and which in its full extent was never put in use and hath been connived at or dispensed with under Protestant Princes ever since Likewise under several penalties they were to Marry Baptise and Bury according to the Laws of the Realm The grounds of these Laws Now if we enquire into the grounds of all these Laws we shall find them expressed in the several Acts as in that of the 35º of H. 8. it is said to be made in Corroboration of that made in the 28th of the same King To exclude the long usurped Power Authority and Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome That of the first of Queen Elizabeth is to the intent That all usurped and foreign Power and Authority Spiritual and Temporal may for ever be clearly extinguished and never to be used or obeyed within this Realm c. In the 5th of the same Queens Reign the grounds are expressed For the avoiding both of such hurts perils dishonours and inconveniences as have before time befallen as well to the Queens Majesties Noble Progenitors Kings of this Realm as for the whole estate thereof by means of the Jurisdiction and Power of the See of Rome unjustly claimed and usurped within this Realm as also of the dangers by the fautors of the said usurped Power at this time grown to marvelous outrage and licentious boldness and now requiring more sharp restraint and correction of Laws c. 〈…〉 The Reasons for the passing the Act of the 13th of the same Queen is more full viz. That divers seditious and very evil disposed people minding not only to bring the Realm and the Imperial Crown thereof being indeed of it self most free into the Thraldom and Subjection of that Foreign Vsurped and Vnlawful Jurisdiction Preheminency and Authority claimed by the See of Rome but also to estrange and alienate the minds and hearts of sundry her Majesties Subjects from their dutiful Obedience and to raise and stir Sedition and Rebellion within this Realm and so mentions the Pope's Bull to absolve and reconcile all those that will be contented to forsake their due obedience whereby hath grown great disobedience and boldness in many not only to withdraw and absent themselves from all Divine Service now most Godly set forth and used in this Realm but also have thought themselves discharged of and from all obedience duty and allegiance to her Majesty whereby most wicked and unnatural Rebellion hath insued and to the further danger of this Realm for hereafter very like to be renewed if the ungodly and wicked attempts in that behalf be not by severity of Laws restrained and bridled Cap. 2. The 27th of the same Queen lays no stress upon Religion but only on the security of the State altho it was the first Act that prohibited Jesuits Priests to come over and stay here under penalty of Treason without whose Offices the Roman Catholics could no ways exercise their Religion The grounds in that Act are expressed That of late Jesuits Priests c. have come and been sent into the Realm c. of purpose not only to withdraw her Highness Subjects from their due obedience to her Majesty but also to stir up and move Sedition Rebellion and open Hostility within the same c. Cap. 2. The Act of the 35º of that Queen expresseth that For the better discovery and avoiding of such traiterous and most dangerous conspiracies and attempts as are daily devised and practised against the Queen by sundry wicked and seditious persons who terming themselves Catholics and being indeed Spies and Intelligencers c. hiding their Detestable and Devilish Purposes under a false pretext of Religion and Conscience c. Cap. 4. In the Act of the first of King James the first the grounds are For the better and more due execution of the Statutes heretofore made against Jesuits Seminary Priests and other such like Priests as also against all manner of Recusants be it ordained c. The third of the same King expresseth the Reasons thus For as much as it is found by daily experience that many his Majesties Subjects that adhere in their hearts to the Popish Religion by the Infection drawn from thence by the wicked and devilish counsels of Jesuits Seminaries and other like Persons dangerous to the Church and State are sō far perverted in their Loyalties and due Allegiance unto the Kings Majesty and the Crown of England as they are ready to entertain and execute any treasonable conspiracies and practices as evidently appears by that more than barbarous and horrible attempt to have blown up with Gun-powder the King c. Having thus given a short draught of the severe Laws against Roman Catholics and the Reasons and Grounds of them It is obvious that those for the Supremacy were enacted principally to exclude the Popes Authority in Matters Ecclesiastical which opposed King Henry the Eighth's Divorce and the Reformation of the Religion begun So that a Subject in point of Conscience and mere Matter of Faith that could not be induced to believe a King and Prince capable of being Head of the Church but shall be invincibly perswaded how erronious soever that the Pope is St. Peter's Successor and Christs unquestioned Vicar upon Earth and cannot without hazard of his Soul consent to acknowledge otherwise yet not
doubtful whether the Kings dispensing Power will be allowed or not I say if there were no other Reasons the King hath from hence sufficient cause to insist earnestly upon the repealing these Laws and the Test and it is probable almost to a demonstration that if this had been frankly granted it would have satisfied the King and have composed the minds of Roman Catholics who being placed in a condition of safety would have continued that esteem they had for the Church of England ever since the late Civil Wars when they were the only fellow-sufferers SECT XV. The Inconveniencies that will attend the not repealing of Penal Laws and particularly the Test HAving premised this I come to treat of the Inconveniencies the denial of the repeal of these Laws brings with it viz. First That it raiseth in his Majesties Royal Breast a prejudice against our Church and Religion and the effects of the unkindness it may beget appears to me of a much more dangerous consequence than the taking off the sanguinary and penal Laws can produce so that in stead of acting for the preservation of our Religion we expose it to more imminent and apparent danger and inconsiderately run upon the Rock we would avoid since such unaccountable obstinacy hath not only in all probability occasioned the enquiry into the Kings Power in dispensing with the penal Laws the displacing of Ministers of State and Officers in the Army and Commissionating a greater number of Catholics than otherwise would have been admitted the taking Catholic Lords into the Council and granting the Commission for Ecclesiastical Affairs but may oblige the King to make still greater Changes amongst his Officers Ministers and Judges than otherwise he intends All those holding their places only during his Royal Pleasure so that without violating any Law he may at one stroke remove most Protestant Officers from the Administration of Affairs of State under him And we know not what Changes and Alterations this wayward and unseasonable stiffness may induce his Majesty to make in the external Government and Polity of the Church by the Power of his Supremacy and Prerogatives And surely the extruding of Protestants from Power and Authority either in Church or State under the King is likely to be a vaster prejudice to our Religion than the repealing the Test can be Let us therefore think how much we are bound even in Christian prudence for the sake of our Religion not to provoke the King to withdraw his Indulgence to us in the Exercise of that Religion which he graciously offers to protect and which Grace we ought not to requite by urging the keeping up those severities against those of his Religion which most Protestants would decline to execute if they could and which we cannot if we would until we first renounce obedience to Gods Command and Submission to our Sovereign by refusing if not overthrowing his Sacred Authority and Power Whereas we are tyed by our Principles and Religion not to resist it being a chief and Essential Position and Doctrine of the Church of England to render Active and when we cannot do that Passive Obedience to our Sovereign and what ever we suffer it will not excuse us from the Guilt and Crime of indamaging and indangering our Religion by this unnecessary giving occasion to it when we might have saved not only our Reputations of being most dutiful Subjects but won so far upon the heart of our Royal Master that it would have been in the power of none to have estranged his Affections from us The Spirit of moderation becometh Christians and Calmness and Discretion becometh Subjects in all dealing with their Sovereign and we may be assured that the greater invitation we give our King by these Virtues the greater assurances we have of his Protection of our Religion and the preservation of the present Peace and Tranquility which we enjoy Let us not therefore by denying what we cannot hinder lose the greatest Blessings and Happinesses we may retain that King and People may live in that happy and good understanding which may continue and Crown the sweetness and easiness of his Royal Government over us and of our Tranquility Prosperity and Happiness under his Shadow The second Inconvenience Secondly Till these Laws be taken off it will continue those most dangerous of Evils that can befal the King and People when there is no good correspondence betwixt the King and the two Houses of Parliament On the Kings part first we may call to mind the miserable times of King John and King Henry the third and those more fresh and never to be forgot under King Charles the First Secondly However prudent and wise a Prince may be yet the watchful envy or designs of some Neighbour Potent Prince or State may necessitate our King to defend his Merchants or Plantations to succour his Allies or to secure his People from Damage or Hostilities whereby he may be forced to have recourse to his Parliament for Aid which while a good correspondence is wanting may render them slow to grant or upon unequal Conditions Thirdly This will give an opportunity to all sorts of Male-Contents and Enemies to the Monarchy to bestir themselves to embroil and ferment the People into some dangerous Defection Sedition or Rebellion On the Peoples side the mischiefs that will befall us by this want of a good understanding betwixt the King and his two Houses will be first that since our King by a mature Age and a great Experience of all affairs relating to Arms and Government is fitted and enabled more than most of his Royal Predecessors to aggrandize himself and give renown to his Subjects by buoying up whatever hath been sunk in the reputation of the World And is able to increase the Traffick of his people and inlarge their Commerce and his Empire and make as great a Figure in the World as any Crowned Head. All the Blessing we and our Neighbours might expect from so qualified a Prince will be utterly lost so that in stead of transporting his Cares Counsels and Arms into foreign parts he shall be necessitated to confine them within the Circle of his own Dominions only to keep them from Sedition or any worse mischief So that the hopeful opportunities which the World knows our King might have to hold again the Ballance of Europe and make us as flourishing a people as ever will be totally lost To the great satisfaction no doubt of some of his Neighbours and the general and irreparable loss to us and our Posterity who with sad reflections may lament the occasion of this dispute Secondly Such a want of good Correspondence betwixt the King and his two Houses will hinder us from obtaining such advantageous Laws for the benefit of the Subjects as this Remora being removed might rationally be expected among which most probably one or more might be a Corroboration of the Kings Gracious Promise of protecting the Church of England and whatever else
in Religion these readily divided their adherence either to the Crown or to the Seditious or Rebels But whoever got by such commotions I am sure the generality of the Subjects were sufferers and whenever God Almighty punished them in this kind yet we find in the upshot the Government was again setled more firm as we may learn even by our latest examples at the Restauration of King Charles the second And whoever consider the benefits that accrue to a people that live quietly under Government and the sad mischiefs that Faction and Sedition cause will chuse the one rather than the other and will find that all the stricter impositions on the Subject have been occasioned by the peoples disobedience and the displacing of Officers have been for the security of the Government Hence the Act of purgeing Corporations and the late Quowarranto's and some Acts of State of later date Distrust of a Princes good Intentions for his People and diffidence in his gracious promises above all things are to be avoided in Subjects It is that hinders them from yeilding to his reasonable desires Our gracious King hath multiplied his Assurances of his protection of our Religion and it is our Duty and Interest to be confident in and truly thankful for them and neither by insolency mistrust or peevishness to forfeit his Royal Favour Those who are well acquainted with the gracious and generous temper of his Majesty know that a diffidence in his Sacred Promises is so much the more disobliging as it is the questioning his veracity which is one of the chief and most valuable of his Royal Virtues This distrust touching so vital a part as the Justice and Reputation of any private person raiseth a deep resentment how much more must it be ill indured in so great a Person who hath that peculiar temper of Spirit suitable to his Birth and Dignity not to suffer his Methods to be thwarted or disputed especially where the constructions put upon them tend to the diminution of the Love and Honour his Subjects owe him and will occasion seditious withdrawing of the Subjects from their Duty and Allegiance which as they are most important mischiefs and hazard the Peace of the Government so they have in all humane probability been the rrue and only Motives that have induced his Majesty to withdraw his wonted kindness from some persons that I am confident out of mere inadvertency of these consequences and out of desire to serve him in other Methods have fallen under his displeasure Upon this consideration it is that our Loyal Divines should have a special regard that neither openly or covertly they increase their Auditories suspition or distrust of his Majesties kindness to our Church but rather inforce a free passage of the contrary to our very heart and souls so as first to be truly thankful for his grace and then to be confident of it They have liberty from the King to confirm their Auditors with the best Reasons they can without misrepresentations in their Religion But withal I think it likewise necessary they be taught not to harbour those doubts and apprehensions of any Intendment of the King by any power to inforce us to abandon it but rather incourage them in a firm and thankful belief that the King will make good his gracious Promise Some such Cordials would preserve our Religion better than all the bewailings of the afflicted State of the Church which will not secure us one Article of our Religion I can foresee no danger to the Church of England by this way of proceeding but am most assured it would incline his Majesty more chearfully to continue his protection of it in finding such grateful returns of his Favours Only it might produce one effect that some probably are not desireous to experience that it would again bring us to that Criterion and perfect distinction of those who are true Members of the Church of England from others that now wear the Badge and Livery only which they can as soon undress themselves of when they should judge it for their Interest We should then find them at their old Calumnies that the Clergy were going over to or meeting half-way the Church of Rome and even those who are so much applauded and followed would in a little time be accused of selling the Reversion of our Religion as in the late times they were scandalized with the Incumbering and Mortgaging of it Upon the whole let us seriously consider that where Loyalty obtains no people can be miserable let us trust God and the King. And tho there are differences in point of Doctrine betwixt the Roman Catholics and us Yet as we agree in Morals and in several indisputable Points of Christanity in the Creeds and several Articles of Faith as well as in some external Ceremonies rejected by other Protestants there is no reason we should keep up such inveterate Animosities be at perpetual strife not de finibus regundis but of exterminating one another But rather study how by an amicable accord in our common Duty of Christianity and Allegiance we may mutually and Cordially endeavour the defence and preservation of the King and his Government which ought to be every Loyal mans design and is the sole intendment of this my present writing to you FINIS