inrollment of that Charter until 2 Ric. 2. will not admit of so great Antiquity thereof And the same Sir Edw. Cook there alledgeth the Red Book of Hen. 1. De general Placitis Comitatuum Cap. 8. extant in the Office of the Kings Rememb in the Exchequer wherein in the Sheriffs Tourne Court is said Ibi agantur primo debita verè Christianitatis jura Secundo Regis placita postremo causae singulorum dignis satisfactionibus expleantur There let be handled first all due Laws of Christianity or Court-Christian Secondly Pleas of the King Lastly Causes of particular persons c. Whereupon they that is others conclude that Ecclesiastical causes were handled in the Tourn in H. 1. long after the said supposed Charter Then he addeth And certain it is the Bishops Consistories were erected and causes Ecclesiastical removed from the Tourn to the Consistory after the making of the said Red Book But let the Antiquity thereof be what it will it is most certain that however the Popes and their Agents did often intrude and usurp Authority within this Realm yet the King and Parliament ever held the Bishops and Clergy of England within the verge of the Laws of the Land never permitting them either by colour of Magna Charta or otherwise to exercise any Authority but with submission to the Municipal Laws So that whoever shall endeavour to put them into any further power in case they have a mind to restore them to former Jurisdictions doth put to his hand to make them so many Popes which this Realm even in times of Popish Religion here would never endure And whereas some are pleased to affirm that by the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. cap. 19. there was a stricter restraint laid upon the Bishops and Clergy than in the times before when they sate in Convocation viz. No Canons should be made and put in exercise that were contrariant or repugnant to the Laws of the Land it is manifest that the same limitation was long before set upon them For Sir Edw. Cook ibid cap. 74. pag. 323. saith That the King did often appoint Commissioners by Writ to sit with them at the Convecation and to have cognizance of such things as they meant to establish that nothing should be done in prejudice c. and for this he citeth 51. Ed. 3. nu 42.46 Edw. 3. prem 8.21 Ed. 4.45 Rot. Parl. 1 Ric. 2. nu 114. from which he concludeth that the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 is but Declaratory of the old Common Law And so strict were the Kings anciently over Bishops and Archbishops too that when the Clergy petitioned in Parliament 51. Edw. 3. 4 Instit ca. 74. of Archdeacons p. 339. num 83. that of every Consultation conditional the Ordinary may of himself take upon him the true understanding thereof and therein proceed accordingly that is without appeal to the King whereupon Delegates by Commission under the Great Seal might hear and determine the same The Kings answer was that the King cannot depart with his right but to yeeld to his Subjects according to Law To which Sir Edw. Cook subjoyns an Item to all his Readers Nota hoc stude bene Nay this is not all For so far did the Kings of England engage in the over-ruling of Bishops that they did not onely limit their Jurisdiction but allowed them not liberty to make a Will without licence from the King till they made composition with him as the same Author telleth us saying Ibid. p. 338 It appears by many Records in the reigns of H. 3. Edw. 1. as taking some one or two examples for many that by the Law and custome of England no Bishop could make his Will of his Goods or Chattels coming of his Bishoprick c. without the Kings licence The Bishops that they might freely make their Wills yeelded to give to the King after their deceases respectively for ever six things 1. Their best Horse or Palfrrce with Bridle and Saddle 2. A Cloke with a Cape 3. One Cup with a Cover 4. One Bason and Ewre 5. One Ring of Gold 6. His Kennel of Hounds For these a Writ issueth out of the Exchequer after the decease of every Bishop Whether this be still in use we meddle not but mention it onely to shew what a strict eye our Kings have ever had upon Bishops so as the Law allows them not power so much as of their own personal Estates much less of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction without the King What power they had in the High Commission Court is needless to mention the Court being happily laid aside by the Statute of 17 Car. 1. cap. 11. But whereas they insisted upon sole Jurisdiction and now begin to exercise it or at least to renew their claim thereunto it is very well known that by the Statute of 1. Edw. 6.2 they could hold no Courts but in the Kings name nor that without Commission under the Great Seal which power was indeed revived and re-established by the Act of 1. Eliz. after it had been repealed 1. Mar. 2. Howbeit all that power is again repealed and made void for ever by the same Act of 17. Car. 1. and now no Commissions to be granted them any more To make this out we shall rehearse the words of both those Acts of Parliament which run thus 1. The Act of 1. Eliz. cap. 1. having first united and annexed all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom it after addeth what power shall be given by Commission under the Great Seal to exercise the same in this following Clause onely viz. And that your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings or Queens of this Realm shall have full Power and Authority by vertue of this Act by Letters patents under the Great Seal of England to assigne name and authorize when and as often as your Highness your Heirs or Successors shall think meet and convenient and for such and so long time as shall please your Highness your Heirs or Successors such person or persons being natural born Subjects to your Highness your Heirs or Successors as your Majesty your Heirs or Successors shall think meet to exercise and use occupy and execute under your Highness your Heirs and Successors all manner of Jurisdictions Priviledges and Preheminencies in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within these your Realms of England and Ireland or any other your Highnesses Dominions and Countries And to visit reform redress order correct and amend all such Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever which by any manner Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power Authority or Jurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of Vertue and the Conservation of the Peace and Vnity of this Realm And that such person or persons so to be named assigned authorized and appointed by your Highness your Heirs or Successours after
the said Letters Patents to him or them made and delivered as is aforesaid shall have full power and authority by vertue of this Act and of the said Letters Patents under your Highness your Heirs or Successours to exercise use and execute all the premises according to the tenour and effect of the said Letters Patents any matter or cause to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This is one entire Clause of that Act nor is there any Branch or Clause in that whole Act that gives more or other Jurisdiction to Bishops or any other Ecclesiastical persons whatsoever 2. Now the Act of 17. Car. 1.11 having repeted this Clause at large addeth Be it Enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty and the Lords and Commons in this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same That the aforesaid Branch Clause Article or Sentence contained in the said Act and every word matter and thing contained in that Branch Clause Article or Sentence shall from henceforth be repealed annulled revoked annihilated and utterly made void for ever any thing in the said Act to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This as we humbly conceive puts a period to all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of Bishops Deans and Chapters and Archdeacons whatsoever And even before that Act of 17. Car. 1. that Government which they exercised was without yea contrary to Law For whereas by the Statute of 1. Edw. 6.2 it was Enacted that all Summons and Citations or other process Ecclesiastical in all Suits and Causes c. should from the first day of July thence next following be made in the name and with the stile of the King as it is in Writs Original or Judicial at the Common Law And that the Teste thereof be in the name of the Archbishop or Bishop or other having Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction who hath the Commission and grant of the Ecclesiastical Authority immediately from the Kings Highness And that his Commissary Official or Substitute exercising jurisdiction under him shall put his name in the Citation or Process after the Teste And that they in all Seals of their Office shall have the Kings Highness Arms decently set with certain Characters under the Arms for the knowledge of the Diocess and shall use no other Seal of Jurisdiction c. upon pain of his Majesties displeasure and imprisonment during his Majesties pleasure * So also it is Enacted 1. Edw. 6.12 that they should make their Process and Writings in the Ks. name and not under their own names and that their Seals should be the Kings Arms. In which Act nevertheless they were allowed to use their own Seals in admission and ordering all their own Officers in all Certificates in all Collations Presentations Institutions and Inductions of Benefices Letters of Orders or Dimissories as formerly was accustomed But under colour of this last Toleration they have used their own Names and Seals onely in all Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions for many years last past without taking the least notice of King or Queen or taking any special Commission from them for ought hath appeared in any of their pretendedly juridical proceedings which are therefore apprehended to be all void in Law albeit they had obtained in secret Letters Patents so to act as they have done For that Statute being repealed in 1. Mar. 2. was again in general terms revived and re-established in 1. Eliz. 1. and never since made void And whereas our Bishops and Archbishops in England and Wales are in all but twenty six in number which being far too few to be able to execute the Office of Bishops as by the Word of God they are bound to do there was in the 26th year of Hen. 8. cap. 14. an Act of Parliament made for adding six and twenty Suffragan Bishops more unto them which that Statute saith hath been accustomed to be had in this Realm It was Enacted that Thâ—tford Ipswich Colchester Dover Gilford Southhampton Taunton Shaftsbury Molton Marleborough Bedford Leicester Glocester Shrewsbury Bristol Penreth Bridgwater Notingham Grantham Hull Huntington Cambridge and the Town of Pereth and Barwick St. Germans in Cornwal and the Isle of Wight shall be taken and accepted for Sees of Bishops Suffragans to be made in this Realm These to be chosen thus Every Archbishop and Bishop that would have Suffragans must for each place nominate two persons to the King whereof the King to chuse one and to give him the name title and dignity of Bishop of such of the Sees aforesaid as he should be nominated unto and he to be called Bishop Suffragan of that See And the King by his Letters Patents is to present him to the Archbishop of the Province where this Suffragan is to be requiring the Archbishop with two Bishops or Suffragans more to be procured by the Bishop that names him to Consecrate the said person to the same name title stile and dignity of Bishop as to the Office of a Bâ—shop Suffragan appertaineth and then to execute such power and authority as by the Archbishop or Bishop within whose Diocess he is to be he shall be Commissionated to do but no other under pain of a Premunire but not to partake any of the Profits of the Bishoprick of the Diocess But our Bishops like none of this although heretofore used which Act being repealed by Queen Mary was revived in 1. Eliz. 1. by name and is still in force Therefore in stead of twenty six Bishops to desire fifty two is no Puritanical request but a legal and just demand For there are so many allowed by Law already Yea if two hundred Bishops should be setled in England they would be too few to execute all the duties which by the Word are incumbent on a Bishop And verily we are perswaded in Conscience that this must be done if there be any due care of Souls by such as have power to do it if Episcopacy be again set up in England And we speak thus because we apprehend that by Act of Parliament all their power and jurisdiction is absolutely taken away and therefore by consequent the Office it self although the Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament of October 9. 1646. had never been For when their power of Jurisdiction is gone for ever what of the Office of a Bishop as such remaineth This was the sense of both Houses of Parliament as appears by that Ordinance which makes all their Grants since 17. Car. 1. to be null and void because their Office then expired If it shall be thought fit to set up Episcopacy again We most humbly pray that it may be no other but that Primitive Episcopacy agreeable to the Apostles rules in that form method and power mentioned in the Book of Reduction of Episcopacy composed and published in the year 1641. by Dr. James Vsher late Archbishop of Armagh always provided that there be such a competent number of Bishops set up as may be able faithfully and profitably to discharge the Office of
License from the Bishop under his hand and seal appoint or keep fasts or be present at them either publiquely or in any private Houses other then such as by Law are or by publique Authority shall be appointed he shall for the first offence be suspended for the second excommunicated and for the third deposed from the Ministry Lastly the 73. Canon excommunicateth ipso facto all Ministers and others meeting in any private house or elsewhere * What if in Parliament or in Convocation to consult upon any matter or course to be taken by them or upon their motion or direction by any other which may any way tend to the impeaching or depraving of the Doctrine of the Church of England or of the Book of Common-prayer or of any part of the discipline now established What is that Now this sentence of Excommunication being to be pronounced by a Minister onely and after to be publiquely denounced by other Ministers and the persons excommunicated upon the 2 3 4 5 9 and 11th Canons not to be restored but by the Archbishop and every such person not restored is liable to the Writ De excommunicato capiendo or else the excommunication signifies nothing we appeal to all whether these Canons if executed be not against the Stat. of 5. Eliz. 23. which Enacteth that if in the Significavit of the Ordinary for obtaining a Writ de excom capiend it be not contained that the excommunication doth proceed upon some cause or contempt of some original matter of Heresie or refusing to have his or their child baptized or to receive the holy Communion as it is now commonly used to be received in the Church of England or to come to Divine-service now commonly used in the said Church of England or Errour in matters of Religion or Doctrine now received or allowed in the Church of England Incontinency Vsury Simony Perjury in the Ecclesiastical Court or Idolatry Then all such Writs and Significavits to be void in Law And whether such Ministers as in Court or in Churches pronounce or publish such excommunications or for non-appearance non-payment of Fees c. too too commonly practiced in those late Courts be not liable to be punished by an Action at Law for doing such illegal Acts as are not justifiable by the Laws of the Land Or if such a Writ will lye against any man for Heresie not declared such by Parliament according to 1. Eliz. 1. for not receiving the Communion kneeling or for not coming to the Common-prayer as now used it being already made out that it is not established by Law or for dissenting from any of the Articles of Religion of An. 1562. when it hath been shewed that some of them are doubtful some defective and disagreeing from one another c. is it not high time to Reform these things especially when by the Canons not kneeling not coming to Common-prayer are declared to be Schism and any dissent from those Articles being adjudged errour in doctrine the party shall be punished with excommunication yea with imprisonment by Writ out of Chancery and not be absolved but by the Archbishop Can. 5. nor by him till he shall have repented and openly revoked that his dissent as a wicked errour how just and necessary soever such dissent was Again the 14th Canon appoints Divine service to be said not only on the Holy-days appointed by the Book of Common-prayer but on their Eves Which observation of Eves is taken away by the Books of Common-prayer and so this Canon is herein contrary to the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. Moreover the same Canon enjoyneth Ministers to observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer which by referring to these in 2. Edw. 6. admits of a Surplice only so doth that of 5.6 Edw. 6. yet this enterferes with the 58. Canon of which before And whereas that 14th Canon forbids diminishing any part of Common-prayer in regard of preaching or in any other respect or adding any thing in the matter or form thereof the Book of Common-prayer it self doth warrant us to diminish that is to omit all that men now call the second Service when there is no Communion as hath been also shewed The 17th Canon enjoyneth all Fellows Scholars and Students though Boys as well as Masters of Colleges and Halls upon Sundays Holy-days and their Eves to wear Surplices at Divine service pretending for it the Order of the Church of England and Graduates to wear the Hoods of their degrees Whereas the Order in the Liturgy enjoyns Surplices only to Ministers in the times of their Ministration not to others And this of Boys wearing Surplices doth countenance that fond conceit so much cryed up in Popery that all once entred into Colleges ought to receive primam tonsuram and therefore to wear Surplices * Ham. le Strange in Affin of Div. Serv. The 24 Canon enjoyneth Copes which are forbidden in the Rubrick before Common-prayer in 5.6 Edw. 6. of which before The 27th Canon requireth Ministers not to administer the Communion to any but such as kneel under pain of Suspension whereas we have before demonstrated out of 2. Edw. 6. that kneeling is left arbitrary And if any person not kneeling be refused the Communion with what justice can he be punished with Excommunication which may end in imprisonment upon a Writ De excom cap. by vertue of the forementioned Statute of 5. Eliz. 23. even when he desireth to communicate with that Liberty in gesture which the Law alloweth him Yet both Minister Church-Wardens and Quest-men the Office and duty of which last in Ecclesiasticals we know not must take notice whether every Parishioner come so often to the Communion as the Law requireth Can. 28. which if he do not he is to be presented c. which makes way to Excommunication and imprisonment as aforesaid albeit it be not his fault that he received not unless it be an offence to claim and make use of the liberty which the Law affordeth him The Explanation of the lawful use of the Cross in Baptism undertaken in Can. 30. is very defective for whereas it undertakes to remove all scruples of Conscience therein it produceth not one Scripture nor Father to that end but only indefinitely talks of both which without better arguments and more distinct proofs can never in common reason quiet much less satisfie any mans Conscience that maketh scruple thereof Nor can we submit thereto till we see it proved as well as affirmed The 31. Canon forbiddeth the making of any Deacons or Ministers save only on the four Sundays after the Ember-Weeks appointed for prayer and fasting and so continued in England by what Law when the Stat. of 5.6 Edw. 6.3 declares the contrary and this to be done in the Cathedral or Parish-church where the Bishop resideth in presence not onely of the Archdeacon but of the Dean and two Prebendaries at least if not by any lawful cause let or hindred or of
four other learned and grave Persons Masters of Art at the least and allowed for publique Preachers What Law for confining Ordination to four times a year If there be a Law do Bishops now observe it Is it not usual to ordain in other mens Diocesses which they can no more legally do then a Sheriff execute his Office when he is out of his County How often do Deans and Prebendaries assist at Ordinations And why must all other Assistants be Masters of Arts at least What Law or Rule for any of these things unless for being Assistants to and Co-ordainers with the Bishop which this Canon doth tacitely deny when it saith such and such shall be present but not a word of their Laying on of Hands according to the Book of Ordination And whereas by the 36th Canon Subscription is enjoyned to the Books of Common-prayer and of Ordination not only upon all Ordinations and Institutions to Benefices c. which by Can. 37. is required also of all Lecturers Catechists Readers yea by Can. 77. of all School-masters too unless to the last clause of Art 2. touching using the book of Common-prayer whereas the Statute of 13. Eliz. 12. requires no subscription but to the 39. Articles nor that save only of such as are to be instituted to a Benefice not at Ordination or at taking Licenses to Preach only The 38th Canon touching Revolters after Subscription hath been spoken to before The 40th Canon enjoyning an Oath against Simony is necessary yet against Law and particularly against the Petition of Right This therefore we say no more of but humbly pray such an Oath may be imposed by Law But whereas the 49th Canon prohibiteth Ministers not to expound Scripture c. if not Licensed by the Bishop this is expresly contrary to Law 8. Eliz. 1. which confirmeth the Book of Ordination in and by which every one ordained a Presbyter hath the Bible delivered into his hand by the Bishop with these Words Take thou Authority to preach the Word of God c. Yet must every such ordained Minister be compelled to be at the charge of taking out a further License from the same Bishop at the same time to preach in the same place or else not to perform that duty which he promised solemnly to the Bishop and by him was authorized to perform at his Ordination Nor may any Ministers be suffered by the 51. Canon to preach in any other Church without shewing such License although otherwise well known to be sufficiently authorized thereunto And whereas the 62. Canon alloweth Ministers to celebrate Matrimony between other persons without asking the Bannes in Churches if he have a License for doing of it from the Bishop Archdeacon or their Officicals this is expresly contradictory to the Book of Common-prayer Rubrick 1. before the form of Matrimony and so contrary to Law of 1. Eliz. 2. if that Book be confirmed thereby There be sundry other Exceptions justly to be taken to the Book of Canons as namely to such Ecclesiastical Offices besides Bishops and Presbyters as be admitted to bear a share in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction albeit they be Lay-men while yet they abominate Lay-Elders in the Presbyterian Government beside many other all which we at present forbear not as approving of them but as hoping for a Reformation of that as well as of other things We therefore shall now only with all humility propound a few Queries very necessary as we conceive to be seriously considered 1 Quere Whether if there be any thing of substance altered in or added to the Articles of Religion or Books of Common-Prayer or Ordination and those Alterations or Additions not expresly mentioned and confirmed by Parliament this doth not make those Books to be void in Law if pleaded at Law The Grounds of this Quere are the Acts of 13. Eliz. 12. as touching the Articles that of 1. Eliz. 2. as to the Book of Common-prayer and the Statute of Eliz. 8.1 and of 5.6 Edw. 6.1 as to Ordination Which last named Act saith that the Books therein mentioned were annexed to the said Statute yet are they not to be found inrolled therewith no more is the other Book of Articles in 13. Eliz. inrolled with that Act. 2 Quere Whether the Statutes which are said to confirm any of the things named in the former Quere mentioning only the Titles but not reciting the matter of the Books themselves do make those Books or the things contained in them which have been several times altered although never so much as said to be inrolled nor found so to be do make those things to be established and good in Law because now commonly reputed received and generally used as ratified by Law The Ground of this Quere is that clause in 1. Eliz. 2. which after mentioning some Alterations but not particularly naming them in the Common-prayer-book prohibiteth all other Alterations saying And none other or otherwise 3 Quere If any man be indited or sued at Law upon the Statute of 1. Eliz. 2. for not reading of or coming to hear the Book of Common-prayer or upon the Stat. of 13. Eliz. 12. for not reading the Articles of 1562 and the Defendant plead Not guilty and deny these Books to be those confirmed by those Laws till the Plaintiff prove them to be of Record whether is not the Plaintiff bound to prove that and in the mean time the Defendant not punishable by those Statutes The Grounds of this Quere are first that there are no Records of these to be found secondly the Books have been several times altered since those Acts and thirdly many punished upon the said Acts because those Books have been generally received and used as established by Law 4 Quere Whether notwithstanding the Royal Licence before and Assent after any Canons made in Convocation be valid in Law before they be ratified by Act of Parliament as the Service-book and Articles of Religion were said to be and whether by consequent the Canons of 1603. be now binding The grounds hereof are first that all other Constitutions are or are reputed to be ratified in Parliament Secondly the Statute of 1. Eliz. 2. which gives power to the Queen her Heirs and Successours to grant Licence to Commissioners Bishops and others to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction when it speaks of withdrawing or altering any Rites and Ceremonies or adding new the power is there given to the Queen alone without mention of Heirs and Successours And when any thing is ordered or authorized by the King although under the Great Seal yet the enforcing thereof before ratification by Parliament is held to be contrary to the Petition of Right We shall now close up all with this humble Advertisement that whereas it is pleaded by some that Liturgies and among them the substance of ours are ancienter then the Popish Mass-Books by many hundreds of years whence they infer the weakness and folly of their Objections who say that all or most or any of the things contained in our Service-Book are taken out of the Mass-Book and so are Popish and upon that account would have them abolished and for that purpose produce some passages out of Ignatius Clem Alexandrinus Justin Martyr Tertullian Cyprian Chrysostome c. wherein sundry things in use among us are found mentioned in them and by some the Liturgy of St. James Peter c. are also urged although by many Learned men censured as supposititious Yet none of these Authors do mention any Publick Form the same for substance with ours although they speak of Publick Prayers made in the Congregation which none ever denyed Publick Prayer is one thing a Publick Form another Nor are we against all Liturgies but onely against that which is liable to such material Exceptions as necessitate us to desire a new Form And albeit some of the Rites and Ceremonies now in use may be mentioned in sundry of the Fathers within the first 600 years after Christ yet the mentioning of them is no evidence of the lawfulness of them or that they are not Popish although of latter times espoused by that Synagogue of Rome for as much as Popery was in the Egge and the mystery of iniquity began to work although under disguises and other names even in the time of St. Paul himself 2 Thes 2.7 Yea some of those very Fathers have sundry passages in them which condemn those very things which are now cryed up upon the very authority of their venerable names We shall for brevity give but one instance which every Reader may find in the Preface touching Ceremonies before the Book of Common-Prayer which albeit it hath been before alledged we here briefly touch upon again for better satisfaction of such as cannot consult the Author himself The particular mentioned in that Preface is a passage out of St. Augustine who was so far from approving such a number of Ceremonies yet not to be compared with the multitude in after-times that he complained that hereby Christians were in worse case then were the Jews and therefore counselled to take off that yoke and burden so soon as it might quietly be done And this was one of the Grounds and Reasons there alledged of the cutting off of so many superstitious Ceremonies in the first Reformation under that blessed King Edward the sixth which of late our Arminians and Grotian Divines and Prelates have sought to recal under the colour and guise of Antiquity for which they produce onely some bits and scraps of Fathers to prove their Antiquity but no solid Arguments to make out their lawfulness and conveniency and yet seek to impose them on those who hold themselves bound to hate the garments spotted with the flesh as well as the flesh that is the corruption it self We therefore conclude That it is not bare Antiquity but Divine Verity that must be the onely Rule and Standard of all Doctrine Worship Rites and Ceremonies Ordination Jurisdiction and Discipline among all that intend Conformity to the Mind of Christ FINIS Page 2. line 7. read 4 Car. p. 7. l. 4. r. them in print p. 34. l. 18. r. that and another p. 43. l. 26. r. Presbyteris l. 30. r. qui.
within two moneths after his Induction c. upon default hereof to be ipsofacto immediately deprived And if any Ecclesiastical Person shall advisedly maintain or affirm any Doctrine contrary or repugnant to any of the said Articles and being convented shall persist therein or not revoke his errour or after revocation return again to it he shall be deprived of his Ecclesiastical Promotions This is the effect of that Statute as to this Point But these Articles are both Doubtful and Defective 1. Doubtful 1. Because it appears not that they were all or any of them confirmed by Parliament in the 13 Eliz. for as much as they are not therein in expresly inserted nor so much as their number but onely the Title-Page of them mentioned Nor is it known where the Original is enrolled 2. Of those 39 Articles there were 36 of them set forth yet not ratified by Parliament in Edw. 6. his reign the other were added by the Convocation in An. 1562. 3. In the Books of Articles now printed and ever since 10 Caroli 1. there is a Declaration of that his late Majesty prefixed thereunto by the advice and procurement of the then Bishops after Arminianism began to perk and to be openly preached by the rising Party to this effect viz. 1. That those Articles contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods Word all therefore are required to continue in the Vniform Profession thereof and the least difference from them prohibited 2. That the Bishops and Clergy from time to time in Convocation upon their humble desire should have licence under the Broad * This shews who did pen it Seal to deliberate of and to do all such things as being made plain by them and assented unto by his then Majesty shall concern the setled continuance of the said Doctrine as well as Discipline then established from which no variying or deparing in the least degree should be endured 3. That all curious search and disputes touching any points contained therein be laid aside and shut up in Gods Promises as generally set forth and in the general meaning of these Articles And that no man shall either print or preach to draw any Article aside any way nor put his own sense or Comment upon it but shall take it in the Literal and Grammatical sense of it This Declaration is published with the said Articles by Command If this be still continued and confirmed then all these sad Consequences must needs follow 1. That no Minister shall have so much liberty to interpret any one of those Articles as is not onely allowed but required of him in his Ordination to expound the Word of God it self But this is a notorious truth that after that Declaration was printed and published as also a Proclamation to the same effect issued those of the Prelatical Party had their Spies every where to see who durst to preach a word against any Arminian Tenet or to explain any one Article as not making for but against any of those Opinions If any were found so to do he was sure to be Convented for breach of the Kings Declaration and Proclamation yea some have been brought into the High Commission-Court for this very cause While in the mean time that other Party took liberty to vent and preach up those points without controul Which no Anti-Arminians durst call into question for that the then Bishops of greatest power who might by that Declaration obtain licence to explain all things as they thought fit favoured those Advocates of Arminianism and must have been their Judges if they had been complained of 2. That where in Art 16. it is said Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is a sin against the Holy Ghost We may not dare to open the nature of deadly sin nor to say that all sins are deadly contrary to the Popish distinction of sins into mortal and venial Nor may we presume to explain the next part of that Article viz. After we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from grace given c. which Clause Bishop Montacute and after him others allege to prove falling from grace and thereby pretend that this is the Doctrine of the Church of England which is contrary not onely to Art 17. but to 1 John 3.9 1 Pet. 1.5 3. That it being said Art 20. The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of Faith we may not enquire what is meant by the Church whether the Church Catholick or of England nor what the Church of England is what Rites or Ceremonies it may ordain or how far her Authority extendeth in Controversies of Faith And if she do happen to ordain ought contrary to Gods Word or expound one place of Scripture repugnant to another or to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of salvation that is beside the Word no man may question it but we must if a Convocation once declare for it assent and subscribe unto it in the Literal and Grammatical sense of it or be deprived of all Ecclesiastical Promotions 4. That whereas the 34 Article treateth of the Traditions of the Church we must not curiously search what is here meant by Traditions and whether it be meant of the Traditions of the Church of Rome or of any other Church But we must rest in this General That whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly as offending against the common Order of the Church hurting the Authority of the Magistrate and wounding the weak Whereas this Church hath no where set forth what she meaneth by Traditions whether distinct from Ceremonies or the same with them how a Tradition may be said to be ordained and what is meant by common Authority Yea if power be given to the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation when and so often as they shall desire it to ordain any more Traditions which seems to be a strange Expression and new Ceremonies and the Royal Assent pass thereupon all Ministers must subscribe thereunto before they know what they be yea before they be ordained after which it will be too late to dispute them or to vary from them in the least degree upon any pretence whatsoever It will be too late then for any man to say They are repugnant to the Word of God 5. That all being by Art 35. to admit both Books of Homilies to contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine necessary for these times and therefore to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently men must subscribe to false Doctrines or assertions Take instance in but one or two particulars for brevities sake Par. 2. Hom. 2. Of the place and time of Prayer pag. 147. Pluralities of wives was by special Prerogative suffered to the Fathers of the Old Testament not for
Law it being no where Recorded and in sundry things beside those mentioned in the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. varying from that which was once Recorded as hath been before demonstrated To say the Book in what remaineth still bindeth in tanto at least is but a mistake for any Record or Deed vitiated in any one part makes void the whole in Law And as for those Rites enjoyned in the Book of Canons we shall forbear to speak of the Legality of them till we come to shew the necessity of Reformation in Discipline a great part whereof is contained in that Book Nor is it our purpose to insist upon the unlawfulness of those Ceremonies so as to make any dispute thereupon nor to justifie or condemn those who hold them simply unlawful in themselves But we taking it for granted that they are in themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or things indifferent do humbly pray that these things may be duely considered in the general 1. That being such they ought not to be imposed on those who cannot be fully perswaded in their own minds and Consciences that they are lawful and therefore must sin if they use them This is St. Paul's own Doctrine and Practise touching things of this nature notwithstanding his own judgement of the lawfulness of them In his days many godly Christians both in Rome Corinth and elsewhere made scruple of sundry meats forbidden in the Levitical Law and of omitting days enjoyned by it Others satisfied of the lawfulness of both did eat those meats and omit those days at which others were scandalized some by adventuring through other mens example to do the like albeit they were not fully satisfied of the lawfulness thereof and thereby sinned others took offence and were grieved and thereupon censured all that used their Christian Liberty in those things of which they that used it were fully satisfied and hereupon the weak for censuring sinned also and by both these the weak were in danger to be destroyed Rom. 14.15 Now what was our Apostles Doctrine and Practise herein His Doctrine was this I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of it self but to him that esteemeth any thing unclean to him it is unclean Rom. 14.15 And All things indeed are pure but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence It is good neither to eat flesh nor to drink wine nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth or is made weak vers 20 21. His Practise was this 1. Touching himself If meat make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend 1 Cor. 8.13 And as toward others he straitly chargeth on all these two things 1. To take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak ibid. vers 9. that is by using that Liberty before others not satisfied in the lawfulness of it 2. If the one will yet use this liberty and the other will take offence then his charge is Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth Rom. 14.3 But as for enjoyning the eating of what himself held to be lawful on those that doubted the lawfulness of it although he had more Authority then all our Bishops and Clergy in Convocation to make Canons we never find that he did it but warned and forbade all the very use of it before any that through weakness took offence at it If then Authority will follow the Apostles rule they will find a necessity not onely of taking off all Impositions already made but the taking away of all the things so imposed at which so many able and godly peaceable Ministers and People do take offence and for which so many thousands have deeply suffered to avoid sinning against God by conforming to them For whatsoever is not of faith is sin 2. If it be said The instances last given concern onely private things and private practises what is this to Publick Order in the House of God where the Service and Worship of Almighty God by the Hedge of Ceremonies is preserved from lying open to all profaneness as a confident stickler for Ceremonies groundlesly pretendeth To this it is answered That Ceremonies are no such Hedge unless to keep out such as have as good right to the Ordinances as they who do impose them for which they must one day give a sad account and that it is much more dangerous and sinful to enjoyn things of this nature for Publick use in the Administration of Publick Ordinances Because those private meats c. may be avoided by such as take offence at them for what necessity to be present at the use of them But there is a necessity of being present at the other which he that neglecteth is lyable to punishment by the Law The Law tyeth all to come to the Common Service every Sunday and Holy-day to receive the Holy Communion thrice at least in every year and imposeth a sharp penalty for neglect hereof So that while these are imposed or used where weak Christians take offence at them many godly men are forced to offend either against God by submitting to that they are not satisfied in the lawfulness of it or against the Laws of the Land by not conforming to them which they cannot do without sin So that the imposing of them upon all or the using of them before all who cannot without sin submit to them is the abusing of Authority and the making it to sin against Christ by putting it upon the forcing those for whom Christ died to sin against their own Consciences and to drive them on to destruction in Hell as a man would force a Beast into the water or fire that will surely devour him It is then a groundless put off to say that such things being commanded by just Authority the indifference by that command determineth and they become necessary which is quite contrary to the Apostles rule 3. If these be retained in some places where no offence is taken at them yet there is no reason to impose or use them in other places where any are offended at them For 1. to plead Imposition for order and unity in the Church of England is to no purpose because there is no necessity of the same in all places no more then of all the same Orders and Practises in all Corporations in England and of every Company within those Corporations who all have different Orders and Rules to preserve Order and Unity in the Civil Government of the Kingdom 2. Our very Articles of Religion as hath been shewed say Art 34. That it is not necessary that Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of Countries times and mens manners 3. If it be said These refer to different Countries not
here which the same Doctor confesseth they did although the want of the Kings Assent made it not valid in Law For the Proviso doth not say the old Canons shall be used till the King Assent but onely till such time as they be viewed searched or otherwise ordered and determined by them or the more part of them Nor doth that Act in any Clause mention any other Canons or Constitutions but such as are Provincial or called by other names always presumed and mentioned to be made in Convocations in England not in the Popes Conclave And to the end it may yet further appear that he who so confidently taketh upon him to improve his knowledge to whom he wrote that Epistle hath mis-informed him and wrested the Laws also take notice that the Canon-Laws of England are onely such as are or have been made in England These are of two sorts legatine or Provincial The Legatine were 77 Canons and Constitutions whereof 26 were made by Otho the Popes Legate President of a Synod here in England the other 51. in another Synod after holden under Othobone Legate of the Pope in 32. Hen. 3. An. 1248. The Provincial Constitutions were such as in several places of England were made under the Archbishops of Canterbury in all 212. whereof the first 48. were made under Stephen Langhton in the reign of King John and the last three were made under Henry Chichley in the reign of Hen. 5. These Provincial Constitutions about the year 1422. were digested into a Body by William Lindwood who also wrote a Commentary upon them the other by Johannes de Aton Canon of Lincoln who likewise Commented upon them all which are yet extant Now we must understand the Act of 25. H. 8.19 speaks onely of Canons Constitutions Ordinances Provincial or other or by whatsoever name they be called in their CONVOCATION These and no other were to be reviewed and out of these such as by the thirty two persons chosen by Hen. 8. or Edw. 6. should be viewed ordered and determined to stand were onely to be in force as is evident to every impartial eye that shall consult the Statute And these having been in 4. Edw. 6. viewed and thereupon by Gualter Haddon under Archbishop Cranmer and four Classes into which the said thirty two persons were divided that Book called Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum saith the Preface thereunto were compiled And these being so composed and published that all might object what they could if they had ought against them before Confirmation the King died before his Royal Assent was given and so they never were confirmed But yet the very viewing ordering and determining of those old Constitutions be they what they could were by the closing Proviso forementioned in 25. H. 8. all void and of none effect And albeit divers Canons or Constitutions were made in Q. Elizabeths reign beside those Injunctions and Articles for Visitations in her first year yet none of them being for ought we know confirmed by the Royal Assent under the Great Seal are now by any reputed Obligatory It be then onely the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical treated upon by the Bishop of London President of the Convocation for the Province of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops and Clergy of the said Province and agreed upon with the Kings Majesties licence in that Synod begun at London An. Dom. 1603. in the first year of King James his reign over England and after published by his said Majesties Authority under the Great Seal of England which can now be so much as pretended to be of any force And here we shall not dispute their validity after that Kings death ' they being not after re-established by King Charles the first but we shall onely speak to the Legality of them as they were once ratified and as they are any of them contrariant and repugnant to the Laws or Customes of the Land As for Customes which the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 referreth to as well as to the Laws we shall say little because this is more proper for Lawyers upon Prohibitions granted out of his Majesties Civil Courts to confider and debate We therefore consider of the Canons or such of them onely as are repugnant to any of the Laws in force This is a large Field Those Canons being no less than 141. in number which are more then heretofore were ever made in any three Synods by whomsoever held in England We shall therefore keep onely to such as we find most contrariant to those Laws which we are in duty bound chiefly to take notice of As for instance Of those twelve Canons under the first Head or Title viz. Of the Church of England there be eleven of them the breach of any of which is to be punished with Excommunication ipso facto not to be revoked till such as breake them after repent and publickly revoke their wicked errours The persons to be excommunicated are I. Impugners of the Kings Supremacy Can. 2. II. All that affirm the Church of England is not a true and Apostolical Church teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles Can. 3. where it is not defined what the Church of England is III. Impugners of the publick Worship of God established Can. 4. which few know to be established IV. Impugners of the Articles of Religion agreed upon 1562. Can. 5. the establishment whereof is doubtful V. Impugners of the Rites and Ceremonies established Can. 6. of which there is no certainty VI. Impugners of the Government of the Church of England by Archbishops Bishops c. Can. 7. there being none such VII Impugners of the form of consecrating and ordering Archbishops Bishops c. or that any thing in it is repugnant to the Word of God Can. 8. there being in the form no such Words as ordering of Archbishops and Bishops and it having been made out that there be contradictions in it one of which is repugnant to the Word VIII Authors of Schism Can. 9. IX Maintainers of such as the Canons call Schismaticks that is who affirm such Ministers as refuse to subscribe to the Book of Common-prayer c. Can. 10. which is hard to prove X. Maintainers of Conventicles Can. 11. that is of such as maintain that there are in England other Meetings Assemblies or Congregations of the Kings born Subjects then such as by the Laws are allowed which may rightly claim the name of true and lawful Churches XI Maintainers of Constitutions made in Conventicles without the Kings Authority and submit to them Can. 12. So all the Rules confirmed by Parliament for Church-Government make the Parliament lyable to Excommunication and the Assemby too and all the Presbyterians in England Besides these there is Can. 59. for excommunicating Ministers refusing to Catechise every Sunday after a third offence herein complained of So Can. 68. decreeth Ministers refusing to Christen or Bury to be excommunicated Majori Excommunicatione And Canon 72. ordaineth that if a Minister without