in Queen Maries time for Religion and Abolished most of the Statutes made by Cardinal Pool and restored those of King Edward the Sixth To omit other things in the Visitation Earl of Arundel Chancellor quits his Office. besides that the Earl of Arundel did quit the Chancellorship these following Heads of Colleges or principal Members were removed and some of them Imprisoned §. 3. The Heads of Colleges and others Expelled of Christ-Church As Dr. Richard Marshal Dean of Christ-Church for denying to own the Authority of the Visitors was not only Expelled but sent Prisoner to London Also Dr. William Tresham Canon of the same for denying the Oath of Supremacy was Expelled as also Dr. Richard Smith Canon there Of Merton College Dr. Thomas Raynolds Warden of Merton College was by the Queen then at Hampton Court deprived of his Wardenship 4 o. September and three Days after the Sentence was declared by three of the Commissioners and after a short time he Died in Prison Thomas Coveney President of Magdalen College was Expelled Of St. Mary Magdalen College for that he was not entred into Orders and Dr. William Cheadsey President of Corpus Christi College was Expelled from that and his Canonship of Christ Church and Robert Banks who had been Ejected in Queen Maries Reign because he was Married was substituted in his place Also Dr. William Wright Of Baliol College Master or President of Baliol College was Expelled and Dr. Babington substituted in his place Mr. John Smith Provost of Oriel College was Ejected Of Oriel College tho' he had liberty to live in the House after but in the next Year he lost the Lady Margarets Lectureship Of Queens College and Mr. Hugh Hodgson Provost of Queens College two Years after either relinquished the place Of Trinity College or was Expelled Mr. Thomas Slythurst President of Trinity College was Expelled and Mr. Yeldard placed in his room Mr. Alexander Belsyre Master of St. Johns College and Canon of Christ-Church was also Expelled Fol. 283. a. St. Johns College and Mr. William Ely lately put in his place a little while after was Expelled so a few Years after Mr. William Marshal Principal of St. Albans Hall was forced to surrender and so Mr. William Alan Principal of St. Mary Hall as also George Ethridge Regius Greek Professor and James Dugdale Master of University College two Years after was Expelled by the Visitors and Thomas Key put in his place Besides these Heads of Colleges in New College Fol. 283. b. two Doctors and three Bachellors of Civil Law one Doctor of Physic one Bachellor of Divinity and fourteen Fellows were Expelled some removing to Religious Houses beyond the Sea and Mr. John Munden returning being discovered to Secretary Walsingham was Executed at Tyburn In St. Johns College seven Fellows were Expelled besides several others Imprisoned at Wisbich and many others not named Those that have a mind to see the Names of Great numbers of the rest Expelled from other Colleges Reg. G. G. fol. .26 Reg. I. fol. 198. 199. Reg. Coll. Magd. fol. 29. and suffering Death for returning into England may consult the Register I shall now give a short account of what Dr. Parker advised from Cambridge concerning the Visitation there §. 4. Paper Office Ecclesiastica 1550. to 1559. I find Two Letters from Dr. Mathew Parker afterwards Arch-Bishop to Sir William Cecyl then Secretary and Chancellor of the University of Cambridge Dated 1 o. March and Endorsed on the back Dr. Parker 1 o. Martii 1559. Among other Expressions he hath these words The Colleges needed a Visitation that Queen Mary immediately upon her quyet gave out Authority to the Chancellor Bishop Gardiner he forthwith sent his Chaplain Watson with Instruction to every College and as then I could gather to report to him in what State every College stood and further peradventure upon cause to have the Masters and others assured de coram sistendo Interim bene gerendo till further Order By this and some other Letters I find to and from Sir William Cecyl who was the great Minister of State in Queen Elizabeths time I observe that what was done in Oxford by the Visitors was likewise pursued in Cambridge and that the Masters Governors and Fellows had a very hard time in the Reigns of King Edward the Sixth Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth Conformableness to the Religion of the Prince being the Touch-stone and the prime Capacitating Qualification that secured Honors and Places in the Universities The other Letter is Dated March the 30th and Ticketed 30 Martii 1559. Dr. Parker to Mr. Secretary Which I shall Transcribe at length that the Reader may take notice of his way of Writing and the Dialect of that Age. Pleaseth yt your Honorables goodnes upon th' occasion of sending up to your Honor for the matter which Mr. Vice-Chancellor Wryteth of I thought it good to signifie to you that the matter which ye have Delegated to us is in hand with as good Expedition as we can make by reason of th' absence of some who were meet to be Commoned with Though some dout is made whether your Authority of Chancellorship extendeth to College Statutes for any beyond Lymitation conteyned in them so may they dout of your Delegatum Though Bishop Gardyner wold not so be restreyned in his doyings whether upon warrant of the Quenys Letters of Commission the Copy * * This I cannot find tho' I have searched diligently whereof I sent to you or by Authorytie of his Office I leave that to your Prudence to Expond Our Statutes and Charters Prescribe here to Officers that they must in Plees proceed summariè de plano since strepitu Judiciali that Scholars may be soner restored to their Bokes Yet here be Wytts which being thereto admitted w'd entangle matters extremis Juris apicibus that Controversies might be Infynyte and perpetual never to have an end but according to our old Ancyent Customys we shall procede to hearyng with cutting of all such superfluous and perplex Solemnyties of their Cavillations and so refer the matter to your understanding to be resolutely determyned as the last Clause of your Letter pretendeth to wil us And yff I shall perceyve any like Incydent to be signified to your Honorable wisdom I shall be bold in secretys to Wright it Less things borne bi parcyalyties might prevayle under your Authorytie not rightly instructed and to avoid som Stomake that ellys might be taken Without dout Sir th' Universitie is wonderfully decayed and if your Visitation entendyd be too stoutly Executed in some like sorts as hath been practised that wil I fear so much rustle the State thereof that it will be hardly recovered in Years and yet Authorytie must bridel willfull and stubborn Natures and hie time it is here I trust the prudence of the Visitors for good wil toward you wil diligently note how ye receyved the Universities after others
Queens Mandà te refused at first but after obeyed The College of Corpus Christi made some disturbance about the Election of a President the Story in short is thus One Mr. Robert Haryson sometimes Fellow of the College there was Expelled in King Edward the Sixth's time Anno 1552. and Thomas Greenway was made President who resigning the Fellows Elected Haryson for their President tho' the Queen by her Mandate appointed Mr. William Cole who had been Fellow there and banished in Queen Maries time This Mandate they slighted and Elected as aforesaid with which the Queen being acquainted she declared the Election void and expresly Commanded them to Admit Cole The Fellows reply'd that they had done nothing but according to their Oath The Queens Mandate to the Bishop of Winchester to Admit Cole President of Corpus Christi College contrary to the Election of the Fellows upon which the Queen being provoked that her Mandate was not obeyed she sent Dr. Horn Bishop of Winchester their Local Visitor and Commanded him to see Cole Admitted The College shut their Gates against the Bishop who caused them to be opened and going to the Chappel and calling the Senior Fellows Admonished them forthwith to Admit Cole and they resisting he openly pronounced them Expelled putting others in their places who he knew would obey the Queens Command and so placed him President and the Queen Commanded the Chancellor of the University In fasciculo Chartarum in Abba Aula the Bishop of Winchester Sir William Cecyl Secretary of State The Queen appoints Visitors Thomas Cooper and Lawrence Humphrey Doctor of Divinity and George Achworth Doctor of Laws that they should Visit the College and against the ill deserving they should proceed either by lighter punishments or by Expulsion by which they Ejected the Romanists and placed Protestants in their Rooms saith my Author The like method the Visitors took in other Colleges Expelling all that Renounced not the Roman Religion Suspending or Imprisoning others who offended less Reg. Coll. Exon fol. 96. and Mr. Wyot Sub-prior of Excetor College was expelled and Imprisoned Mr. John Neal Rector Expelled §. 8. What the Earl of Leycester did as Chancellor Anno 1569. K. K. fol. 8. Regimen Academicum omni propemodum ex parte Immutavit non nullos quidem in meliorem rebus vero plerilque in pejorem formam redactis Wood Antiq. Oxon lib. 1. fol. 290. b. 291. a. 12 Eliz. Robert Dudley Earl of Leycester being Chancellor he altered much of the Government of the University saith my Author changing something for better but most what for the worse he abolished the old Form of choosing Proctors he Named the Vice-Chancellor not consulting the Convocation which seldom was done in Ancient times he was the first that appointed that the Vice-Chancellor Proctors and Heads of Houses should Convene and Confer about any matter that was under consideration before it was proposed to the Senate of the University and Decreed that all public matters especially those of greatest moment should be expedited secretly by Scrutiny and not as Anciently openly and by Suffrages before the Proctors In this particular it is to be noted that Mr. Wood saith the Visitation is to be ascribed to this Earl and it is most clear that whatever the Chancellor did or could do was only as his power was derived from the Crown SECT IV. A further Account of the Visitations of the Vniversities or single Colleges together with the Alteration Abrogating or new Imposing of Statutes of the Vniversities by the Sovereigns §. 1 The account of what is to be Treated of in this Section IN pursuance of my designed Method I shall with what brevity I can give an account of the more Modern Visitations of the Universities or single Colleges so far as I Judge they may conduce to the matter under consideration The Critical Reader is however desired not to censure me tho' in this Section I intermix some observations of the Royal power in Abrogating Correcting Amending or new framing of Statutes accordingly as it was Judged more convenient to the better ordering of the Body of the University as to their distinct Oeconomy or the conformableness of their Members to the public Laws of the Realm or the Political Government of the Prince Upon all which considerations besides the Influence of private Councils those that are conversant in the Histories of former Ages will find that not only Visitations have been appointed but that several Princes have been Induced to alter the Statutes ☞ The true and adaequate Reason of all which hath been and ever will be because the Influence that the Universities have over the whole Kingdom is so great upon the account that they are the Nurseries not only of the Divines but also of the Eminentest Gentry and of the Professors of the Laws So that if those Instructors of the Learned hopes of the after Ages be not conformable to the Laws of the Government they may Create great disturbances to it which it is the Wisdom of all Princes to avoid Whence the fundamental Reason may be given why the Sovereigns have reserved this power of Visitation of the Universities and giving Laws to themselves solely as being most conducible to the Tranquility of their Reigns The Judicious Reader is likewise desired to consider why I intermix not only this particular super-intendency of the Prince over the Statutes of the Universities with the Visitation of them or the Colleges but likewise some matters more particularly relating to St. Mary Magdalen College the reason of which is because I would not disorder the Series of time and likewise that I would render this Section as Introductory to the next Chapter wherein I shall particularly Treat of the Kings dispensing with University Statutes for it seems to me a very natural consequence that since the Sovereign can disannul alter or amend Statutes he may justly upon Emergencies Suspend the Execution of them by Mandate There being no greater difference betwixt the Will and Pleasure of the Prince in both but that in the one he declares his pleasure under his Broad Seal by Commissioners of his own sole appointment to inspect and alter them and in the other he by his Royal Fiat Commands the Execution of his pleasure And what I bring in as to St. Mary Magdalen College I do that the unreasonableness of some of their Statutes may appear if there were no dispensing power in the Crown Having promised this I now proceed §. 2. Queen Elizabeths Letters Patents for confirming the Statutes of the Vniversity of Cambridge ELizabetha Dei Gratia Angliae A Transcript of Queen Elizabeths Letters Patents Communicated to me by the Learned Dr. Brady Franciae Hiberniae Regina fidei Defendor dilectis nobis Cancellario Magistris Scholaribus Universitatis Cantabrigien Salutem Quanta rerum vestrarum cura nos perpetuo sollicitat dum utilitati Academiae vestrae Studemus non tam privilegia a nostra benignitate
Books say it was Robbed or derived Because such powers being taken away from the Pope and such as had Authority under him and neither settled in any Court or person by the Statute can re-vest or re-sult to none other but the King as Supreme in all Ecclesiastical as well as Temporal Causes which by Sufferance or Usurpation as the Act saith the Pope had excercised Fifthly By the several Acts and Instances whereby the Kings of England since the making of this Act of the 25th King Henry the 8th have exerted their Supreme Authority it is clear that the Crowns Re-assumption of what the Pope had exercised hath been according to the Laws in being of which I now proceed to give Instances in the Kings dispensing with College Statutes of which I shall give some few in several Cases of many hundreds which are to be found in the Paper Office or Secretaries Books §. 7. An account of the Queens Mandate about Electing of a Master of St. Johns College in Cambridge The first Instance I think fit to Insert is as followeth The Course that was held in the last Election of the Mastership of St. Johns College in Cambridge First Bundel Ecclesiastic Universities Paper-Office The Statute of that College appointeth the Twelfth day after the Vacation to be the day of their Election and no other Secondly The greater part of the Fellows of the College were made for Mr. Alvey a Senior Fellow Thirdly The Lord Treasurer being Informed that Alvey was an unfit Man set down an Inhibition in the Queens Name to defer the Election which Inhibition was obeyed Fourthly The 12th day being passed and no further power left to the Fellows to Elect The Lord Treasurer sent a Letter the second time in the Queens Name Nominating Dr. Clayton and Dr. Stainton Commanding the Fellows to choose one of them and no other Fifthly By Authority of those Letters they choose Dr. Clayton By this proceeding it is manifest that the King may not only by a Mandate of Inhibition stay the Electors from making any choice but nominate the person to be Elected altho' by College Statutes the day of the Election and the Electors were appointed §. 8. The Bishop of Londons Testimony that the King hath dispensed with College Statutes Before I enter upon the particular Mandates I shall produce the Testimony of George Montague Bishop of London in his Letter a Copy of which the Honorable Sir Joseph Williamson afforded me out of the Paper-Office directed to Sir Edward Conway Principal Secretary of State as followeth Right Honorable THe Noble and Vertuous Lady the Lady Denbigh hath layed a Command upon me to deliver my knowledge whether the King hath at any time by his Letters dispensed with the Local Statutes of any College by a Non-obstante and upon a search it appears that his Majesty hath sent Letters of that nature to divers Colleges If this Information may promote her desires and give you satisfaction I shall be right glad and will ever remain London Decemb. 10th 1623. Your Honors Friend to Command and humble Servant Geo. London §. 9. A Mandate dispensing with Incapacities to receive Degrees I now proceed to give some Extracts of Mandates wherein the King dispenseth with College Statutes in one of which Dated December the 11th Anno 1624. the persons within named being some ways Incapacitated to take their respective Degrees were dispensed with as followeth Trusty and Well-beloved We Great you well In a Bundel Docketed Ecclesiastic Universities in the Paper-Office at Whitehall We are Graciously please of Our Royal Favor to Gabriel More Harrington Butler George Bursey and Michael Gilbert to advance them to such Degrees as they are capable of and well deserve by their Learning and diligent Studies tho' in some respects not qualified Therefore Our pleasure is that notwithstanding any Statute or other Ordinance to the contrary you forthwith Create Gabriel More a Dr. in Divinity and you also admit Harrington Butler and George Bursey to the Degree of Master of Arts and Michael Gibert Bachellor of Arts in such Form as is usual in like Case and these Letters shall be your Warrant In a Mandate for one William Morley to be a Schollar of the College of St. A Mandate for a Schollar of St. Mary Winton College without examination Mary of Winton College Oxon without Examination are these words and tho' we have a favorable Eye to your freedom that are the Electors yet in this Our so Extraordinary Recommendation We expect your Dutiful respects to this Our Princely Pleasure and Command so that this Our Will be not dis-appointed for any respet whatsoever Directed to Our Trusty and Well-belove Dr. Princock Warden of St. Mary Winton College in Our University of Oxford and Our Trusty and Well-beloved Dr. Love Warden of St. Mary Winton College near Winchester the under Warden School-Master of the College and two Posers of the Schollars for the Election In a Mandate Dated 3 o. Regni Caroli 1. A Mandate dispensing with the Incapacity by reason of the County For one Gregory Isham I find these words But because We understand that the Country where he was Born layeth some formal Incapacity upon him We are pleased hereby to Dispense therewith and do require that his Country may not be any Impediment to him in that Election Ibid. notwithstanding any Statute or Order to the contrary And these Our Letters shall be sufficient Warrant in that behalf §. 10. The acknowlegement from St. Johns College in Cambridge of the Kings power in dispensing with College Statutes March the 28th Bundel Eccles Universities 1630. c. 1633. In a Letter of the Master and Fellows of St. Johns College to the Earl of Holland the Chancellor about their choosing Dr. Digby according to his Majesties Letters Dr. Beale being then Master I find they allege that he was not capable by some Statutes having not performed some things the Statutes required They write thus Yet his Sacred Majesties Request would have been tye enough upon his most Dutiful and Obedient Servants to have endeavored the accomplishment of his Royal desire had we been enabled thereunto by Dispensation with those opposite Statutes which otherwise we stand obliged by Oath to observe Which plainly shews that if a Dispensation had been obtained or inserted in the Mandate the King had been obeyed I find that the Master and Fellows of Christ College in Cambridge In the Paper Office Ecclesiastica Academica without date being desirous to Capacitate one Norton then but Senior Sophister for a Fellowship sent him with Letters Testimonial to Oxford whereupon he obtained his Bachellors Degree and so was Elected Fellow A Senior Sophister may take Bachellor of Arts Degree by dispensation The Relation saith that the Arch-Bishop hearing of it expressed some displeasure and said he would call him to an Account for his taking the Oath for Bachellor having not full time and being not dispensed with
quod totum Archiepiscopatum in Dominium meum Redigam nec illum pro Archiepiscapo ultra recipiam Idem fol. 38.10 from the King that if he went he should for certain know that he would seize his whole Arch-Bishopric into his hands nor would he receive him for Arch-Bishop any more like as now the Writ no exeat Regno is used with a Penalty specified After this the Bishops of Winchester Lincoln Salisbury and Bathe with several Barons sent to him by the King tell him that he had troubled the King with many complaints How that at the Parliament held at Rockingham he had (d) Pollicitus es per te usus ac leges suas usque quaque deinceps servaturum cas sibi contra emnes homines fideliter defensurum Idem fol. 39.27 In this whole Relation of matter of Fact it is to be owned that it was the personal repair of a Peer or great Man to Rome to Appeal that was forbid without the Kings leave but Appeals by Proctors were Anciently used in several Cases promised for the future The promise of an Arch-Bishop in all respects to keep and observe the Customs and the Kings Laws and to defend them faithfully against all Men which was an Oath of Fidelity used in that Age and bound him in Allegiance by reason of his Temporalities but no ways like the present Oath of Supremacy upon which they tell him the King believed he would have been quiet for the future But that he had openly contravened his promise and Faith by threatning to go to Rome without the Kings leave Which was a thing altogether unheard of before and against the usages of the Kingdom that any of the Great Men and especially himself should presume any such thing and lest the King should either be wearied or importun'd with him any more or with any other who being aggrieved might follow his Example The King (a) Jubet ut quatenus jure jurando promittas quod nunquam amplius sedem St. Petri vel ejus Vicarsum pro quavis quae tibi queat ingeri causa Appellas aut si sub omni celeritate de terra suâ recedat Idem 39.36 Commands that by Oath he should promise that he would never Appeal to the See of St. Peter or his Vicar for any cause that might befall him or if he did that he should speedily depart out of the Kings Territories But the Arch-Bishop persisting in his resolution to go had not only his Arch-Bishopric seized but the Pope being shewed how his Carriage here was resented did not afford him either (b) Idem fol. 52.17 53 28. Consilium or Auxilium yet the Writers of that Age censure that as an exorbitance of the Kings power however it may be a Document to some not obstinately to oppose their Prince ☞ By this Relation of matter of Fact it is evident The Inference from this History These are to be understood of matters Political and of Government not in matters of Doctrin and Faith. that in the time of these two Kings whatever was directed from Rome hither or was done by the Arch-Bishop was to have the Kings Approbation otherwise it was not suffered to be executed so that the Kings allowance before made public as now used in France was requisite to give them a practicableness here §. 3. Of the Investitures of Bishops It is allowed by our Historians (c) Ingulphus fol. 500. vid. literas Paschaâ—lis 2 Henrico 2. apud Eadmerum fol. 113. 115. generally that the Receiving Investitures of Churches from our Princes their calling of Synods determining Causes Ecclesiastical without Appeal to Rome their Translating of Bishops c. have been practised here in Ancient times the Canons and Popes reclaiming sometimes quitted and resumed by our Kings as State Interest required It is clear in History This was no conferring holy Orders but in relation to their Baronies that Bishops received Investitures from the King by delivery of a Staff as an acknowledgment of a subjection to the King at least for their Baronies which was after yielded not to be done by Lay Hands yet King Henry the First at one time Writ to the Pope that he would (a) Nec pro Amissione Regni sui passurum se perdere Investituras Ecclesiarum Idem fol. 73.13 not for the loss of his Kingdom lose the Investiture of Churches and another time he threatned that without doubt he would resume his Investitures because he held them in Peace However I do not find that this went any further then Swearing Fealty to the King Oath of Fidelity which seems to have long continued and which was a sufficient badge of subjection So we find a Writ (b) Gervac Dorob 4.1187 Col. 1503.36 from R. de Glanvil to the Abbot of Batle c. wherein he Commands him on the part of the King by the Faith which he owes him and by the Oath which he made to him to do what he then enjoyned ☞ As to the Legatine Power Concerning the power of Legats it is apparent by several Instances that none Exercised any here without the Kings leave whether by the Grant of Pope Nicholas to Edward the Confessor I dispute not I shall only note some few King Henry the First had an Interview at Gisors with Pope Calixtus and obtained of him that he should Grant him all the Customs which his Father King William the First had in England and Normandy and especially (c) Maxime ut neminemaliquando Legati Officio in Anglia fungi permitteret si non ipsa aliquâ praecipuâ quaerelâ exigentur quae ab Archiepiscopo Cantuariorum Caeterisque Episcopis Regni terminari non possint hoc fieri a Papa postularet Kidm fol. 125.53 that he would permit none at any time to exercise the Office of Legat in England unless the King upon any special Plea should require it and the thing could not be determined by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and the Rest of the Bishops of the Kingdom and that the King should desire it of the Pope How the Popes Legats were received may be best known by some Instances Instances how the Popes Legats were received The Wars betwixt France Scotland England might make this caution When Guido Arch-Bishop of Vienna Anno 1100. In the beginning of King Henry the First 's Reign by the Popes Authority was appointed Legat as he gave it out Eadmerus saith that it was an admiration to all in England for all knew that it was (a) Inauditum scilicet in Brittannia cuncti Scientes quemlibet hominum super se vices Apostolicas Gerere nisi solum Archiepiscopum Cantuarierum Idem fol. 58.40 unheard of in Brittain that any Man except the Bishop of Canterbury had the Popes power Therefore as he came so he returned being received by none as Legat neither did he perform the Office of a Legat while here The words of my Author are a nemine pro
§. 6. An account of the whole matter as in the Parliament Roll. I shall now give an account of the matter as it appears in the Parliament (d) Rot. Parl. 13 H. 4. N. 15. Roll. First there is the Arch-Bishops Petition to the King that with the Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons Assembled in the said Parliament the Schedule Annexed might be confirmed Which Schedule contains the Declaration of King Richard the Second as it is to be found in Mr. Pryn wherein it appears that the ground of the Contest and differences was about a Bull of Exemption pretending to exclude the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and his Successors and all other Ordinaries and Founders of the said University and Colleges from Visiting and all other Ordinary Jurisdiction which Bull by a venire facias was brought into the Chancery at Westminster and the Chancellor and Proctors shewed a sufficient Warrant under the Universities Seal to produce the Bull in Chancery and to answer there and to do and receive what should be ordered and determined by the late King Richard the Second and his Council as appears by the Records of the Chancery and after the Chancellor and Proctors for themselves and the University submitted themselves in the foresaid matters (a) Ordinationi definis ioni dicti nuper Regis to the Ordinance and Determination of the said King. ☞ The King after mature and fuller deliberation with his Council clearly considering that the Bull was procured in prejudice of his Crown and to the revoking or enervating of the Laws and Customs of his Realm and in favor and emboldning of Heretics and Lollards Murtherers and other Malefactors Ordained and by his Breve or (b) In fide Logeancia dilectione quibus sibi tencbantur Ac sub poena amissionis privilegiorum Universitatis praedictae sub forfeitura omnium aliorum quae sibi foris facere potuerunt ne dictam Bullam in aliqua sui parte exequi seu excercere seu Beneficium quoddam Exemptionis per Bullam illam aliqualiter reportare seu recipere presumerent Mandate Commanded and forbid the Chancellor Masters Doctors and Scholars of the said University on their Faith Allegiance and the love that they ought him and under the penalty of losing the privileges of the said University the forfeiture of all other things which they could forfeit that they presumed not to execute or exercise the said Bull in any part of it or any ways to presume to enjoy or receive any benefit of Exemption by the said Bull But to renounce all the Exemptions and Privileges contained in it before Richard Kendall the Kings Clerk and Notary and should transmit an Instrument for that purpose under the Seal of the said University by the said Clerk under the Penalties aforesaid After which follows the Kings Sentence as before In this part it may be observed how the King discovers his Authority and Prerogative over the University in injoyning them to renounce the Popes Bull and not to Execute c. The King may deprive the University of all privileges for disobedience it under the penalty there mentioned which demonstrates that for contempt and dis-obedience the King may not only Suspend and Deprive any Member of the University but take away all their Privileges c. which would be well considered by those who obstinately refuse to obey the Mandate of a King of England §. 7. The account of the latter Visitation Then follows the account of the later Visitation of the Arch-Bishop in the 12th 12. H. 4. of Henry the Fourth as before related where Richard Courtney the Chancellor and Benedict Brent and John Birch the Proctors opposed him and he and the University submited themselves to the Arbitrament Judgment Ordination and Decree of the King and the King Summoned them to appear before him at Lambeth upon the 17th of September where hearing all things and having consideration of the Submission made to King Richard and the Ordination Judgment and Determination of the same the King Confirmed and Ratified the same And further ordered if they obeyed not the Arch-Bishop c. all their Franchises Liberties and all the Privileges of the same University should be seized into the hands of the King and his Heirs till they performed it and the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor and Proctors of the University for the time being and their Successors and the University shall pay to the King and his Heirs 1000 l. Then follows that this Schedule being seen and examined and understood with mature and diligent deliberation Note here the Kings peculiar power in passing an Act of Parliament The King in full Parliament affirmed and declared that all and every thing contained in the same Schedule were done Arbitrated Ordered Considered Decreed and Adjudged by him And the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in the said Parliament who had full deliberation likewise of the same approved ratified and confirmed it Upon the whole matter of this great contest about the arch-Arch-Bishops Visitation I think the King and the Parliament were at that time the more Inclined to confirm the arch-Arch-Bishops power because that kept the Visitatorial power within the Kings Dominions and Excluded Exemptions which the State of England was rarely inclined to favor as being mostly as prejudicial to the Crown as the Bishops And Wickliffs Doctrin spreading the King was more willing the Arch-Bishop should Visit the University because it was his proper Office to see to the preservation of the Establish'd Religion and if the University had been left to the Visitation of the Chancellor the opinion of Mr. Wickliff might have the more encreased since the temper of the Members might have been changed from the Doctrin professed since so many in the University were then said to have embraced it §. 8. The reasons why the Author hath given so large an account of this I have insisted the longer upon this particular for two Reasons first to shew that the Government ordering and reforming of Universities were then Judged to be of Ecclesiastical Cognizance especially in those matters which appertain to the Doctrins taught in them which even in their Philosophical Disputes in some measure effected Religion even the taking of Degrees except in the faculty of Physic was in Ordine ad Spiritualia as appears in those Constitutions which prohibit any from having Benefices but such as had taken Degrees in Universities a further Illustration of the former of these Inferences I shall clear when I speak of Bishop Rippingdons Visitation Secondly The misapplication of Mr. Pryn. To shew the mis-application of Mr. Pryn who finding by the Transactions of King Richard the Second and King Henry the Fourth and those of King Charles the First concerning Arch-Bishop Lauds Visitation that those Kings determined the matter in favor of the Arch-Bishops thereby would Infer that the Visitation of the University of Oxford appertained to the Black
appoint Visitors and the giving this power to the King is Cumlative not Privative as appears 2 H. 7.6 B. 5 Coke 5 B. and it leaves a concurrent Jurisdiction as is clear in F. N. B. 21 C. and 51 B. and 80. which is sufficient to Answer the Objection of the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College that the Bishop of Winton being their Local Visitor if he were satisfied to confirm the Election they could not be adjudged faulty by any other Visitors Here cap. 7. sect 3. of which point I shall have occasion to Treat hereafter ☞ But to proceed (a) Idem Patricks Case Hill. 18 19 Car. 2. Keebles Reports fol. 164. 2d part Thirdly By 10 H. 7.18 and the Bishop of Winchesters Case the King may exempt any Ecclesiastical Corporation from Ordinary Visitation and consequently hath the power in himself ☞ Fourthly If there be no (b) Idem fol. 166. Visitor properly appointed by the Founder the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor have the Government of any College who are the proper Officers of that distinct Common-wealth of Learning and they are Established or fortified in that by the Kings Letters Patents Fifthly Altho' King James the First (c) Id. fol. 168. 3 Regni gave the Chancellor of Cambridge power of Visiting Queens College there yet the King remains Visitor as Heir to King H. 6. Husband to Queen Margaret that Founded it as the Judge there Asserts but if it had been a private Founder the King shall not lose the Right of Visitor as Sovereign since the Licence for the Foundation is from the King of what private Foundation soever so if there were no Visitor appointed by the Charter of a Founder the Chancellor is Visitor and Superior to him is the King. Sixthly In the same Case it is laid down (d) Idem fo 169. Statutum de as Argument that there is a Visitor Temporal as the Founder and Ecclesiastical to examin correct and amend things done contrary to the Rules of their Order which were declared by the Canons of the Church whereof the Bishops were the Natural Visitors and it is plain that (e) Asportatis Religiosorum 35 E. 1. Anno 1307. cap. 2. no Abbot Prior Master Warden or any other Religious person of whatsoever condition State or Religion he was being under the Kings power or Jurisdiction should depart into any other Country for Visitation or upon any other color by that means to carry the Goods of their Monasteries or Houses out of the Kingdom It is also in the Argument laid down as the Reason why the claim was made in the time of King Richard 2d and the Act 13 H. 4. for the Arch-Bishop of Canterburies Visitation of the University of Oxford that it was only about matters of Faith by Reason of Heresie and Lollardism But in matters of breach of Statutes c. the Founder or Visitor Communi Jure had the right and tho' the King granted the power which the Founder had yet he never intended to grant away his own Supreme Authority thereby or could grant the Right of his Successors ☞ These matters I have noted in this Case that the Ingenuous Reader may know that what I have discoursed of in this Section is agreeable to the sentiments of the Reverend Judges an expression of (a) Judge Windham Patricks Case fol. 166. ut supra one of whom I find in these words Both Jurisdictions Lay and Spiritual are derived from the King as the Sun and Moon take light of God. I lay no stress upon any Analogy of the comparison further than that it thereby appears how fundamental a matter it is in our Laws that all exercise of Authority Discipline Government and external Oeconomy in Church and State are derived from the King as having a Creative and annihilating power in several things that depend solely upon his good pleasure which if any thing do in his whole Dominions it is in the disposal of matters of the Universities as I now shall make more evident in the following Chapter CHAP. VI. Concerning the Kings of Englands dispensing with the Statutes of the Universities by their Mandates SECT I. Concerning the Kings dispensing Power in General and in several particulars to the beginning of King Charles the Seconds Reign §. 1. Concerning the Kings dispensing power in General HAving given a large account of the Kings power in Visiting the Universities and in Abrogating old and making new Statutes by his absolute and Supreme Authority To clear the point yet more I shall shew by particular Instances wherein our Kings have dispensed with the Statutes of the Universities or particular Colleges For there can be no greater Argument of the Right and Prerogative of any power than the un-interrupted excercise and usage of the same Before I descend to particulars it may be expected that I should discourse something of the Kings dispensing power in General but the point being determined by the Judges and the Arguments for it being so generally known I shall be the shorter upon this head ☞ This power of dispensing seems to be a most necessary Prerogative that no Sovereign whether Ecclesiastical or Civil can want whence we find in a (a) Omnibus autem à nobis dictis Imperatoris excipiatur fortuna Cui ipsas Deus Leges subjecit Legem animatam committens hominibus Novel 105. circa finem Constitution of Justinian de Consulibus a reservation of that power which he thus expresseth from all these things which have been said by us Let the Emperors State be excepted whereunto God hath subjected the very Laws themselves sending him as a living Law to Men as it is Translated from the Greek Agreeable to which is what Aeneas Sylvius (a) Convenit Imperatori Juris Rigorem Aequitatis fraeno Temperari cui soli Inter aequitatem jusque interpositam interpretationem licet incumbit Inspicere de Ortu Authoribus Imperii observes that it is the part of the Emperor or Sovereign to attemper the Rigor of Law with the Bridle of Equity to whom alone it is lawful and a duty to see to the Interpretation which lyeth Interspersed betwixt Law and Equity since no Law can sufficiently Answer the varieties and un-thought on plottings of Mans nature and in Tract of time Laws at first just and equitable become unprofitable and harsh and this moderating of Laws saith he is so annexed to the Prince that by no Decree of Man it can be taken from him This is also agreeable to the Opinion of the most Learned Primate (b) Ushers power of Princes pag. 76. of Ireland whose Judgment most of our Judicious Protestant Divines have ever held in high esteem His words are positive Laws as other works of Men are imperfect and not free from dis-commodities if the strict observation of them should be pursued in every particular Therefore he saith it is fit that the Supreme Governor should not himself only be exempted from subjection
and right Information probably the King would have rejected That the King might have a fit Testimony of the Person before he granted any such Mandate it pleased his Majesty to make this following Order Having taken into Our serious consideration how much it will conduce to the Glory of God Our own Honor and the welfare both of Our Church and the Universities that the most worthy and deserving Men be favored and preferred according to their Merit and being satisfied that the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London are the most Competent Judges in such Cases We have thought fit and do hereby declare Our pleasure to be that neither of Our Principal Secretaries of State do at any time move Us on the behalf of any person whatsoever for any Preferment in the Church or any Favor or Dispensation in either of Our Universities without having first Communicated both the person and the thing by him desired unto the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Bishop of London or one of them now and for the time being and without having their or one of their Opinions and Attestations in the Case and if at any time We be moved in like manner by any other person whatsoever Our pleasure is and We do hereby declare that neither of Our said Principal Secretaries shall present any Warrant unto Us for Our Royal Signature in such a Case until the said Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and Bishop of London or one of them have been acquainted therewith and have given therein his Opinion and Attestation as aforesaid By this we find that the King resolved to have perpetuated this yet it was Revoked as also a later Mandate as appears by the following Mandate And that this Our Declaratión may stand as a lasting and inviolable Rule for the future Our further Will and Pleasure is that the same be Entered not only in both the sides of Our said Principal Secretary of State but also in the Signet Office there to remain upon Record Given c. the 27th of February 1680 / 1. §. 12. The Re-calling of a Mandate after the former I Insert this out of the Series because I may joyn the Revocation of another Order as followeth Whereas We did by Our Warrant under Our Signet Manual bearing Date at Windsor the 12th of August 1681. Signifie and Declare Our pleasure to be that neither of Our Principal Secretaries of State should at any time move Us on the behalf of any Favor or Dispensation in either of Our Universities without having first Communicated both the person and the thing by him desired unto the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury for the time being John Earl of Radnor George Earl of Hallifax Lawrence Viscount Hyde the Lord Bishop of London for the time being and Edward Seymour Esq and without having the Opinion and Attestation of them or any Four of them in the Case and that if at any time we should be Moved in like manner by any other person whatsoever Our pleasure was and We did thereby Declare that neither of Our Principal Secretaries of State should present any Warrant unto Us for Our Royal Signature in such a Case until the said Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury c. had been acquainted therewith and had given their Opinion and Attestation as aforesaid and whereas We have thought fit for special Causes Us thereto moving to Revoke and determin Our said Warrant We do accordingly hereby Revoke and determin the same and all the Authority thereby Granted and Our pleasure also is that Our Order be Entred not only in both the Offices of Our said Secretaries but also in the Signet-Office Dated the 20th of September 1684. By this mandate it appears that it is in the Kings power to Revoke his own Constitutions at his pleasure §. 13. I might add to these the King 's dispensing with Statutes of Cathedral Churches about Leases annexing the Revenues of Prebends to a Deanry ordering the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury to Grant Dispensations for a Bishop to hold Rectories in Commendum of which I could produce many Instances but I keep my self to the business of the Universities In which I hope by a sufficient enumeration of particulars I have made it clear beyond all possibility of Dispute that the Kings of England have dispensed in all the Cases before recited with Statutes of Colleges yet it is as manifest that all the Members of the Universities and of particular Colleges upon their taking of Degrees or being Elected into Fellowships c. take an Oath to observe the Statutes of the University or particular College and yet by the power of the Kings Dispensation are no ways Involved in the Sin of Perjury I shall now proceed to give such Answers as I Judge requisite to those arguments I find couched in any of the defences made by the Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College and begin with that of the obligation of their Oaths CHAP. VII The Answer to the Arguments used by the Vice-President and Fellows of St. Mary Magdalen College in defence of their proceedings SECT I. Answer to what is urged in their Justification from the Obligation of their Oaths to observe their Statutes §. 1. THe most plausible plea the Vice-President and Fellows used in Vindication of their Electing Dr. Hough and dis-obeying the Kings Mandate was that they were under the obligation of their Oath to observe the Statutes of their Founder in the Literal and Grammatical sense of them And the persons Nominated by the First and Second Mandate of the King were not Qualified according to those Statutes so that in obeying the Kings Mandates they should either be Perjured or forfeit their Rights in their Fellowships if they Elected or Admitted any person not Statutably Qualified and that they were under the like obligation neither to procure accept or make use of any dispensation from that Oath or any part of it by whomsoever procured or by what Authority soever granted To which in Aggravation and Improvement was urged See p. 6. here p. 75. where the King's Declaration is urged which I shall consider in its place the disagreeableness of being pressed to forswear themselves at a time when his Majesty had been Graciously pleased to Grant Liberty of Conscience Finding this Argument looked upon by the favourers of the Ejected Fellows as unanswerable I think my self obliged to clear the point not only by producing the Opinions of Casuists but likewise by the Authority of Bishop Sanderson who deserves the greater respect and credit for that he Adorned the Divinity chair in that University long before he did the Episcopal §. 2. Definition of an Oath In this matter we may consider what an Oath is which is generally defined to be the Invocation of God to be (a) Mart. Bonacina Tom. 2. Disp 4. q. 1. puncto 2 fol. 214. witness of the plighting of our Faith that we will do or suffer to be done such or such a matter by Bonacina