Master GEREE'S CASE of CONSCIENCE SIFTED Wherein is enquired VVhether the KING considering His Oath at Coronation to protect the Clergy and their Priviledges can with a safe Conscience consent to the Abrogation of EPISCOPACY AUG de Trin. l. 4. c. 6. Contra rationem nemo sobrius contra Scripturas nemo Christianus contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit CYPR. Ep. 27 Dominus noster cujus praecepta metuere observare debemus Episcopi honorem Ecclesiae suae rationem disposuit Dr. CORN BURGES Fire of the Sanctuary p. 68. Men now count it an high piece of zeal to direct their Directors and like Clock-makers to take the Church all in pieces at their pleasure By EDWARD BOUGHEN D. D. LONDON Printed in the yeare 1650. TO THE MOST EXCELLENT AND PIOUS PRINCE CHARLES KING of England Scotland France and Ireland Defender of the Faith and Guardian of the Church SIR IT may seem strange to some but my hope is not to Your Majesty that I make this Dedication at this time to Your sacred Person The matter of this Treatise is in Your behalf it justifies Your solemn Oath at Coronation the just necessitie of this Oath as also Your Crown and dignity and the goodliest Floure in that Crown Supremacy To whose hands then should I chiefly present it but to Yours The times affright me not from my faith and duty I remember well that during the Ecclipse of heaven and the King of heaven there was one that durst acknowledge our Saviours Kingdom and in the full assurance of his title preferr'd his petition to him as a King And shall I be ashamed to do the like I know You are my onely Soveraign here on earth I know You represent my Saviour in his kingly office though Your Crown be wreathed with thorns With all humility therefore I present this acknowledgement of my most loyall affections which are due to Your sacred Majestie from Your poore but most faithfull Subject Edward Boughen To the intelligent READER I Was intreated by a very good Friend to take Mr. Gerees Case of Conscience into consideration and to bestow some pains in disclosing the weaknesse and foulnesse of his arguing Truly I was willing to undeceive my seduced Countreymen and yee ded to his request The Treatise I finde to be small but dangerous It aims at the ruine both of Church and Kingdom It perswades the King that his Oath as Coronation is a wicked Oath and that he ought to break it And then wo be to his Soul and the Kingdoms safety Yea he affirms it to be Vinculum iniquitatis the bond of iniquitie Thus he hath knit up out most gracious Soveraign with all His religious Predecessors in the bundle of iniquity No sooner read I this but b my heart was hot within me and while I was musing upon this and the like blasphemies the fiâ—e was kindled within me and at the last I spake with my tongue Why should this Shimei blaspheme my Lord the King and slander the footsteps of those anointed of the Lord that have so long slept in peace Because he hath done this wickednesse the Lord shall return it upon his owne paâ—e And King Charles shall eblessed and his throne shall be established before the Lord for ever Consult I pray you with Dr. Cornelius Burges a feirce Assembly man and of great authority among them and he will tell you that God is tender not onely of the safety but also of the honour of HIS ANOINTED In so much that he hath made a law to all not to revile the Gods nor curse the Ruler of the people Which Law saith he not onely prohâ—biteth imprecations and seditious railings which are an HELLISH IMPIETY though it be but in word onely â—e the Prince never so impious but even all rude bitter and unseemly speeches And Mr. Nathaniel Ward in his Sermon upon Ezech. 19. 14. preached before the Commons June 30. 1647. affirmes that besides the male administrations of Government by Magistrates themselves there is no readier way to prostiâ—ute it then to suffer vile men to BLASPHEME AND SPIT IN THE FACE OF AUTHORITY All this Master Geree hath done most undeservedly If then I shall cleare the Kings Oath from these foule imputations I shall prove Mr. Geree to be involved in the bond of iniquity And he that is so his heart is not right in the sight of God he is in the very gall of bitternesse Just in Simon Magus case I shall therefore take up S. Peters words and advise him to Repent of this his wickednesse to pray God if perhaps the thought of his heart may be forgiven him If you conceivâ—â— I have ventered upon some questions not so fit to be handled without my Profession I beseech you take notice that this Minister hath led me into these undesired and unpleasant pathes He that undertakes to answer a book is bound to confute all but what he approves Silence in such passages speaks consent Good Reader let true reason Scripture and authority guide thee and then thou shalt be sure to judge impartially Take notice that J G. stands for Mr. John Gerees Case of Conscience I D. for Jus Divinum regiminis Ecclesiastici Sir Robert Cotton for his Treatise that the Soveraignes person is required in the great Councels or Assemblies of the State His Majesties Oath published by Himself in an Answer to the Lords and Commons in Parliament 26. May. 1642. SIR will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirm to the people of England the Laws and Customs to them granted by the Kings of England you Lawfull and Religious Predecessors and namely the Laws and Customs and Franchises granted to the Clergie by the glorious King S. Edward your Predecessor according to the Laws of God the true profession of the Gospel established in this Kingdom and agreeable to the Prerogative of the Kings thereof and the ancient Customs of this Realme Rex I grant and promise to keep them Episcopus Sir will you keep Peace and godly agreement entirely according to your power both to God and the Holy Church the Clergie and the people Rex I will keep it Episcopus Sir will you to your power cause Law Justice and Discretion in mercie and truth to be executed in all your Judgments Rex I will Episcopus Will you grant to hold and keep the Laws and rightfull Customs which the Commonaltie of this your Kingdom have and will you defend and uphold them to the honour of God so much as in you lieth Rex I grant and promise so to do Then one of the Bishops reads this Admonition to the King before the people with a loud voice OUR Lord and King We beseech you to pardon grant and to preserve unto us and to the Churches committed to our charge all Canonicall Priviledges and due Law and Justice and that you would protect and defend us as every
injoyned him to denounce Both Regall and Priestly power are the gift of God they cannot therefore but be good But the abuse of this power to other ends then God gave it is the viciousnesse of man and therefore bad Solomon made just use of this power when he despoiled Abiathar the High Priest not onely of his priviledges but also of his office and of all that belonged to his office The reason is because Abiathar for his treason deserved this and an heavier doom And I presume it was no usurpation in St. Paul when he delivered Hymeneus unto Satan that he might learn not to blaspheme nor yet when he anathematized and accursed those Preachers that taught otherwise then they had received If then our Bishops have made use of this power in silencing or depriving hereticall schismaticall or seditious Preachers they have done no more then they ought to do This therefore is no usurpation but a just use of that power which with their Orders was conferr'd upon them for this end and purpose 7. I have done with your Major now to your Minor But this Prelacy did as it stood in England What did it why it despoiled Christs â—fficers the good Presbyters that preached up the Scottish discipline and doctrine of their priviledges indulged and duty injâ—yned them by the Word of God If they deserved this censure it was no despoiling but a just deprivation If they deserved it not let it be proved I am sure Courts and Committees have been long enough open to receive large informations and easie proofs against them And I am as sure that our Saviour never indulged any such priviledge to his Apostles or any other of his â—fficers as to vent heresie schisme or sedition If any Bishâ—p be faultie I plead not for him I justifie Episcopacy not the Bishop Judas was bad cut his Episcopacy good Judas offended but not his office Judas was cut off not his Episcopacy the office is continued and a good man must be put into it So St. Peter And let another take HIS BISHOPPRICK So the Spirit of Prophecie Prelacy therefore is not in fault but the Prelate And it is as false a speech to say Prelacy despoils any as to say Judicature wrongs any Since we know that Judicature is blamelesse when the Judge is criminous And as improper a speech it is to say that a man is despoiled of his duty I may be forbidden my duty but not spoiled of it because I am bound to discharge it though forbidden if unlawfully forbidden 8. But what are these priviledges and duties whereof they are said to be despoiled The particulars are these Power to rule and to preach in their own congregations and this power they are indued with â—y Christs warrant Power to Rule and by Christs warrant sound high and raise attention And this they have as well as much as power to preach if we may beleeve you As if they had ruledome as you call it from Christ himself If this be doubted of you give us Scripture for it and that in foure severall texts The first is this If any cannot rule his own house how shall he take care for the Church Here is care to be taken for the Church but no rule given to a Presbyter in the Church unlesse you allow him as much power to rule in his Parish as he hath in his own house To which assertion no man I conceive will subscribe It is required indeed if any Lay-man desire to be a Presbyter-Bishop that before he be ordained he be known to be such a one that could rule his own house well But what is this to prove that by Christs warrant in Scripture a Presbyter is indued with power to rule in his eongregation Alas this government as your learned brethren confesse is but domesticall in private families not Ecclesiasticall in the publick congregation In like manner Deacons must be such as rule their houses and children well And yet ye allow them no ruledome in the Church but set Lay-Ruling Elders to over-top them No warrant here for this Presbyteriall ruling power what may come hereafter shall be examined 9. The next proof is from the same Epistle the words are these I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect Angels that THOV OBSERVE THESE THINGS without preferring one before another and do nothing partially This is something were it to the purpose Here is a large authoritie given to Timothy in this Chapter and a charge in this verse that he be carefull to discharge his office with integritie But what is this to the point in question Alas you are clean mistaken in your mark It rests upon you to prove that this power in Scripture is given to a Presbyter-Bishop whereas it is here given to an Apostle-Bishop who is clean of another an higher order If I should justifie that a Sergeant at Law hath power to hear and determine Suits in Westminster-Hall because the Justices of the Kings Bench and Common Pleâ—â— have such a Commission you would think I were beside the cushion and so are you 10. In the third place you produce a text of the same Apostle to the Hebrews where-in he commands his brethren to obey those that have the over-sight of them and to submit themselves unâ—o them No question but they ought to do so But who are these Praepositi these Rulers here mentioned Are they Presbyters onely Presbyters are not mentioned here and it is impossible to prove that Presbyters onely are intended here unlesse they be the onely Church-governors It is rather to be beleeved that all Church-governors or else the chief Governors were here intended That he speaks of Presbyters I deny not but that he speaks of Presbyters onely I utterly deny When you can prove that onely Presbyters watch for the souls of the people and that they onely must give an account for those souls then shall I readily acknowledge that the Apostle speaks only of Presbyters in this place 11. If the Kings Majestie should command his Souldiers to obey their Commanders could any man imagine that he spake of the Lieutenants and Captains onely No wise man can have this imagination but this must reach to Majors and Collonels and all other in authority Thus when the Lord commands his people to obey those Governors that watch for their souls he means not onely Deacons and Presbyters but Bishops also For as in an Army there are Captains over souldiers and Commanders over Captains so in the Church which is aciâ—s ordinata a well-ordered Army there are Praepositi populo Praepositi Presbyteris Spirituall Governors of the people and some set over both people and Presbâ—ters Such were the Apostâ—â—s in Scripture and such their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their copartners in labour and successors in office whom we now call Bishops Such were Timothy and Titus who
King For the time that is already manifested to be at his Majesties pleasure And for the matter that is prescribed and limited by the King super praemissis tractare to consult and advise upon such things as the King nominates and prescribes And if credit may be given to Iohn Speede he tells us that the great Lawyers Judgments in King Richard II. time concerning orderly proceedings in Parliaments run thus That after the cause of such assembly is by the Kings Commandement there declared such Articles as by the King are limited for the Lords and Commons to proceed in are first to be handled But IF ANY SHOULD PROCEED VPON OTHER ARTICLES AND REFVSE TO PROCEED VPON THOSE LIMITED BY THE KING till the King had first answered their Proposals contrary to the Kings Command such doing herein contrary to the rule of the King ARE TO BE PUNISHED ASTRAITORS And he cites the Law books for what he saies Truly I am the rather induced to beleeve what Speed delivers because Sir Edward Coke gives us the reason why and how far forth the King relies upon his Parliaments The King saith he in all his weighty affairs used the advice of his Lords and Commons so great a trust and confidence he had in them Alwaies provided that both the Lords and Commons keep them within the Circle of the Law and Custom of the Parliament The reason why the King useth their advice is because he hath a great trust and confidence in them But alwaies provided that they keepe themselves within the Circle of the Law and Custome of Parliament But how if they deceive the Kings trust and abuse his confidence How if they break the Lawfull Circle and transgresse the Customs of Parliament How then What Speede hath recorded I have shewn you But what the King may do in this case I shall leave to the Masters of the Law to determine 13. Last of all the King regulates their consultations For in his breast it is whether their Bills shall become Laws or no. Observe though the advice and assent be theirs yet the power of Ordaining Establishing and Enacting is in the Soveraigne The Statute books shall be my witnesses THE KING by the advice assent and authority aforesaid HATH ORDEINED AND ESTABLISHED And again BE IT ENACTED BY THE QUEENS MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTIE with the assent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and the Commons c. Hence is it that they are called The Kings Laws And the King is called the head of the Law because from him it is derived from him the Law receives both life and force His breast is the Shrine or deske wherein all the Laws are stored up and preserved If any man make question of this present experience will satisfie him For do not the Houses at this day Petition His Majestie to make that a Law which they have voted Take their own words in that high Message sent to Holdenby house in March last We the Lords and Commons assembled in the Parliament of England c. Do humbly present unto your Majestie the humble desires and Propositions agreed upon by the Parliaments of both Kingdoms respectively Vnto which WE DO PRAY YOUR MAJESTIES ASSENT And that they and all such Bills as shall be tendered to your Majestie in pursuance of them or any of them may be ESTABLISHED AND ENACTED FOR STATUTES AND ACTS OF PARLIAMENT by your Majesties Royall assent Which words though very high do manifest that there is neither Majesty nor Supremacy nor power in this or any other Parliament to make or repeale Laws It is at the Kings pleasure to establish and enact them for Laws and Statutes or not This our neighbour Scotland sees and confesseth that Regall power and authority is chiefly IN MAKING AND ENACTING LAWS Declarat of the Kingd of Scotland p. 18. 14. From hence it appears first that there is no Supremacy in the Parliament without the King Secondly That the Supremum jus Dominii the supreme right of Dominion which is over laws to establish or disanull them is in the King alone For a Bill not established is of no force it is no Law 3ly that the King is the supreme Magistrate as you are pleased to call Him from whom all power of execution of Laws is legally derived And 4ly if the power of execution be derived from the King much more is the power to regulate For he that gives them power by his Commission to put the Laws in execution he gives them rules in the same Commission whereby they must be guided and sets them bounds which they may not passe If they transgresse either the King hath a legall power to revoke their Commissions and to dispose of them to whom and when he pleaseth Hence is it that all Courts and the Judges of those Courts are called the Kings Courts and the Kings Ministers of Justice And when we are summoned to appear in any Court of Justice the Processe runs Coram Domino Rege before our Lord the King because the Kings person and power is there represented And though His Majestie be over-born and against all Law and reason kept from his Courts of Justice yet in all Writs you are fain to abuse his Name though he be no way accessary to these lawlesse and illegall proceedings How these Courts have been regulated since His Majesties forced departure this Kingdom is very sensible and laments to consider it God amend it 15. Upon these grounds I argue thus They that are Subjects they that are suppliants they that owe obedience to an higher they that cannot lawfully convene or consult till they be called by another they that must dissolve their meeting at anothers command they that are to be regulated by another they that can onely advise perswade entreat but not enact a Law have no Supremacy But the whole Parliament sever'd from the King are Subjects are suppliants they owe obedience to an higher they cannot lawfully convene or consult till they be called by His Majestie at his command they are to dissolve their meeting by him they are to be regulated and without him they cannot enact a Law The Major is evident to every intelligent eye The Minor is demonstrated Sect. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. I must therefore upon these premises necessarily conclude that the Parliament in that sense you take it hath no Supremacy 16. That nothing may be wanting I shall give you the resolution of our Sages at Law concerning the Kings unseparable and incommunicable Supremacy that so all mouthes may be stopped Bractons resolution is this Rex habet potestatem jurisdictionem super omnes qui inregno suo sunt The King hath power and jurisdiction over all within his own Kingdom Plowden saith as much The King hath the SOLE GOVERNMENT of his Subjects Here is no man no Societie of men exempted all under the King and solely under the King Where then is the Parliaments
take it well that you complain so much of one lay Chancelour in a Diocese and yet enthrall them to so many lay Elders Parochiall Classicall Provinciall and Nationall Say not that there be preaching Elders joyned with them least it be returned upon you that the lay Chancelour is but the Bishops Officer in such cases of Judicature as belong to his profession and to the Bishop he is accountable But you can endure no loy Judges over you on any hand And whereas you charge the lay Chancelorship with usuâ—pation contrary to Gods direction I am certain ye have made use of it against Gods direction For how many of you have been instituted into Benefices by lay Chancelours Quâ— jure comes not now to be scanned Thus ye can abuse them and yet use them But I shall turn you over to the Doctâ—rs of the Commons them it concerns they are well able to argue the case with you and to wash off these aspersions 18. Your first argument is I hope sufficiently confuted in the eye of indifferent and judicious men I shall not therefore any longer insist upon it but observe at how low a rate you value authority Nor Bishop nor King nor your Idolized Parliament shall be a Power but an usurpation against God and his Word if they deny you any priviledge indulged or debarre you any dutie which ye suppose to be injoyned you by the word If they sequester you from the Pulpit or from ruling in your congregations farewell my great Lords and Masters at Westminster And when they have sold the Bishops and Chapters lands they shall no longer be a Parliament but an Vsurpation because they have despoiled you of those lands which ye lay claim to and which they ought to have disposed of to supply you and your predicant brethren with such maintenance as your selves hold sufficient CHAP. IV. Whether the King may consent to the abrogation of Epiâ—copacy if so that calling be laâ—full 1. SAving your argument in the first place this is certain â—f Episcopacy be lawfull then the Kings Oath at Coronation was not as you would have it vinculum iniquitatis a bond of iniquitie And hereupon it follows quod non obligatur in contrarium that he is not bound to break this oath Take this by the way You must then seek some other way to cleere it to us that it is lawfull for his Majestie to wave this oath But your own conscience seemes to check you for your former resolution you therefore confesse that this way of invalidating the Kings is most satisfactory but to some 2. Surely if to some it be satisfactory those some are such that are either very weak or wilfully blinded with avarice Whose gaine is godlinesse But the end will prove thâ—t Godlinesse is prâ—fitable to all things That is as the Geneva Note hath it he that hath faith and a good conscience is promised to have all things necessâ—ry for this life and to injoy life everlasting This would be seriously layed to heart 3. But though your former argument seem satisfactory to some yet to some it will not hold namely to those that are not câ—nvinced of the UNLAWFULNESSE OF EPISCOPACY What so satisfactory and yet not hold Alas alas what creatures have you to deale with Pitie it is that you have to deale with learned and rationall men and not with Ignoramus and his Dull man What shall now become of your Case of Conscience Why It will cast the resolution of this doubt upon another question From one question to an other And what 's that The lawfulnesse of Episcopacy This is a large field that you are not acquainted with And yet to satisfie the conscience of your Reader you have already concluded that Episcâ—pacy is an usurpation against the word of Gâ—d and therefore sinfull and unlawfull How Conclude first that Episcopacy is unlawfull and then grant it to be lawfull But this is granted onely for argument sake That is because your argument is so loose that it proves just nothing againâ—â— Episcopacy For a firme demonstration admits of no contradiction it leaves no doubt behind 4. Well be it lawfull yet not withstanding that his Oâ—th thâ— King without impeaâ—hment may in this circumstance consent to the abâ—â—gâ—tion of Episcopacy What mean you by circumstance Is the Kings Oâ—â—h or Episcopacy or the abrâ—gaâ—iâ—n of Episcopacy but a circumstance A circumstance is that which is not substantiall or essentiall to the point in question but comes in upon the by at most for illustration The question is Whether the King notwithstanding his oath may consent with a safe conscience to the abrogation of Episcopacy All these then I take to be essentiall to the question unlesse a safe Conscience be with you and with your brethren but a circumstance And yet it is such an ingredient that a man may neither swear nor consent to nor act but what he may undertake with a safe conscience For if our heart if our conscience condemn us God is greater then our heart and knoweth all things His Majesty I make no question hath sadly thought on this 5. That he may abrogate that which is lawfull you say and we deny not since God hath given Kings a power nt onely over things indifferent but even in such things as are lawfull and honest and in their kind necessary for the preservation of a Common-wealth This is evident in Jonadab the sonne of Rechab who commanded his posterity that they should neither drink Wine nor build House nor sow seed nor plant Vineyard nor have any And yet as lawfull and necessary as these things were they obeyed their fathers voice God approves of their obedience and crowns it with a blessing And what a father is in his own familie that is a King at least within his own Dominions 6. But here the case is different for the question is concerning Christs own Ordinance and Institution which the King hath sworne to maintaine This then being lawfull and legally sworne the oath may not in any wise be dispenced with Nay if we say that the King or any authoritie upon earth may alter or abolish any one Ordinance of our Saviour we contradict our selves and complie with the Papists What reason bring we against the halfe Communion but Christs own institution who commanded it to be deliver'd and received in both kinds And Calvin deservedly reproves Bishop Cardiner for attributing this power to a King Now if Episcopacy be our Saviours institution then may no humane power root it up least they that do it be rooted out of the land of the living But that this very order which we now call Episcopacy is Christs own institution is already proved cap. 2. 6. 7 8. 7. Besides if this be the onely Order to which Christ hath given power to ordaine Presbyters and Deacons who shall confer these Orders when Bishops are taken away and utterly extinguished
hearted Englishmen observe this that are lovers of their Countreys liberties 21. We have seen what the King hath granted sworn as also in what order and that the Oath is but one And yet Mr. Geree goes forward as if it were certain without question that this to the Clergie were a severall Oath from that to the people Confidently therefore he presseth it that the King cannot afterwards ingage himself Whereas he ingaged himself alike to his people at the same instant that he would preserve the priviledges both of Clergie and Commonaltie because both his people Now why His Majestie should be bound to maintain the priviledges of that one estate rather then of the other I cannot conceive Especially when I consider that the priviledges of the Clergie are granted to God without whose blessing nor privilege nor people can be preserved The King then herein non câ—â—sit jure suo hath not yeelded up the Clergie or his right to any other neither can he with a safe conscience do so But since Magna Charta hath been so often confirmed even by 32. severall Acts of Parliament the Parliament in that sense you take it hath parted with that right it had by these severall Grants and Confirmations and we ought in justice to enjoy our priviledges and they to maintain them unlesse they mean to affront and subvert so many Acts of Parliament and that main Charter and honour of this Kingdom As if they onely had the judgement of infa 〈…〉 ibilitie which Scotland denies Declarat of the Kingdom of Scotland p. 19. CHAP. IX How far forth and wherein the Clergie is subject to a Parliament and to what Parliament 1. THe net is prepared the snare layed danger is at hand and yet we must not forsake or betray the truth in time of need The noose layed by our Church adversary is this The Clergie and their priviledges are subject to the Parliament or they are not To this we must say yea or nay and the man thinks he hath us sure enough But the man is mistaken one mesh is not well made up and I must tell him that we are subject to the Parliament and we are not Subject we are to the Parliament consisting of head and members but not to the members without the head not to the members alone since we are subject to the members meerly for the heads sake and in those things onely wherein he subjects us to them Set apart the head and we are fellow members fellow subjects For Iowe no temporall subjection to any or many Subjects but onely for the Kings sake Though the Parliament be a great a representative an honourable body yet it is but a body And that body with every member thereof owe obedience and service to the head not one to another I say nothing if I prove it not by Scripture Submit your selves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake Whether it be to THE KING AS SUPREME or unto Governors AS UNTO THOSE THAT ARE SENT BY HIM by the King As if he should say Submit your selves to the King for the Lords sake and to other Governors for the Kingâ— sake For Kingâ— have their Commission from God but all State Governors from the King and Iowe them no subjection beyond their Commission If then it shall please the King to give the members of Parliament power over us we must submit either by doing or suffering Either by doing what they shall command or by suffering what shall be inflicted on us 2. Subjection is not due to them as they are great or rich men but as they are the Kings Ministers This is evident because all Commissions breath and expire with the King Upon death of the King follows necessarily the dissolution of Parliament None of us that are meer Subjects have at such a time power one over another but onely by advice none of us authority but onely as this or that man hath gained esteem by his wisedome and integritie Onely the Preisthood never dyes because Christ ever lives from whom the Preist hath his Commission But all other subordinate powers expect a new Commission from the succeeding Prince This experience taught us upon the death of Queen Elizabeth 3. Though this be truth yet no truth can charge us that we claime exemption from secular power You see we acknowledge our selves subject to the King as also to those Ministers that he sets over us But as these may not exceed their Commissions given by the King neither may the King exceed his Commission granted him by God The Kings Commission is like the Preists ad aedificationem non ad destructionem for upholding the Church and service of God not for the ruining of either And the King may not grant a larger Commission to his ministers then himselfe hath received from the King of Heaven His Commission is to be a nursing father to the Church not a step-father to preserve to her all her rights and dues to see that she be provided with necessaries and to protect her against her profaine and sacrilegious enemies Surely if our Soveraigne hath intrusted the Parliament with any power over the Church and Church-men it is but with some part of that wherewith God hath enriched him and no other 4. Well if we be under Parliamentary power it cannot rationally be conceived to be the meaning of the King so to subject us to the Parliament as to forget or renounce his hath by destroying the priviledges of the Clergie which he hath swoâ—ne to preserve against or in dishonour to that power to which they are legally subject How far we are legally subject to this Parliament I know and how far we are or may be under Parliamentary power I have alreadie declared The power we are legally subject to is his Royall Majestie and it is not it cannot be the meaning of the Kings oath to preserve our priviledges against his own power or to exempt us from his Iurisdiction Let the world judge whether your or our priviledges and principles be distructive of legall power We are bound by Canon faithfully to keepe and observe and as much as in us lieth to cause to be observed and kept of others all and singular Laws and Statutes made for restoring to the Crown of this Kingdome the ancient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiasticall AGAINST ALL USVRPED and forraign POWER Marke that it is not onely against forraign but it is against usurped and all usurped power Shew me if you can one such loyall Canon or resolution from any Presbyteriall Assembly This Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall is by the Lawes and Statutes restored to the Imperiall Crown of this Realme and not upon the Parliament because it is by Gods Word settled upon the Crowne 5. This authority in causes Ecclesiasticall was in the godly Kings amongst the Jews Christian Emperors in the primitive Church and hath been exercised by the
Rights of the Clergie As if this were a sound and unanswerable argument It is lawfull for the King to abrogate the Rights of the Clergy Ergo It is lawfull for him to abrogate Episcopacy It is for all the world as if one should say It is lawfull for the King to take away the Rights of Lawyers Ergo he may also take away Judicature Yet all men would say that this were flat tyrannie since without Judicature no man can compasse or enjoy his own with peace 2. But I shall return your argument so upon you as shall concern you more neerly It is lawfull for the King to abrogate the Rights of the Clergie it is therefore lawfull for him to abrogate Presbytery How like you this Is it not your own argument changing terme Episcopacy into Presbytery Ye have strooke out the former set up the latter in the place of Episcopacy And your scholers by the same argument may live to root up thut too if any lands be annexed to this great Diana of Geneva Thus you have made a rod to scourge your selves with 3. But you will say that though it be legall for the King to take away the Rights yet he may not destroy the Order And why so Because the Rights are granted by man but the Order was settled by God And what God hath ordained is not lawfull for man to abrogate I must return you the same answer since t is sufficiently justified C. 4. 5. That the Order of Episcopacy is the immediate institution of our B. Saviour and Ministeriall root from whence all Orders spring Though then this be the usuall way of cleering this your assertion and you conceive it to be a sound resolution yet learned men see that you have said just nothing unlesse you confesse that the Order of Presbyter may likewise be exâ—iâ—pated by Royall authority 4. But return we to the Rights of the Clergie and take notice upon what grounds you suppose it lawfull for the King to abrogate those Rights which he hath vowed so solemnly to maintain The King say you is sworne to maintaine the Laws of the Land in force at his Coronation Yet it is not unlawfull for him after to abrogate any of them upon the motion or with the consent of his Parliament I am glad that you acknowledge it to be the Kings Prerogative to maintaine the Laws of the Land and that it is not unlawfull for him to abrogate any of them with the consent of his Parliament If he be bound by Oath either he hath power to maintain these Laws or not If he hath not power it is a senselesse Oath If he hath power where is it What is become of it Hath he resigned it We know the contrary Hath he forfeited it To whom To his subjects He can no more forfeit his Regall power to his subjects then a father the right of fatherhood to his children He is no more a King upon condition then a father is a father upon condition His power he hath not from the people but from God Per me Reges regnant by me Kings reign saith God And I hope God speaks no untruth His substitute the King is for He sits on Gods not on the peoples throne and King he is for the Lord in his stead 5. If you object misdemeanours or bearing armes against His Parliament your self say that He is sworne to maintain the Laws of the Land The Laws Liberties and Properties were all at stake they were trampled upon by his faithlesse but potent Subjects This enforced him to take up that sword which he ought not to beare in vaine but to execute wrath as the Minister of God upon them that do evill upon such as plunder his good subjects and turn them out of house and home For the King is made by God the Supreme Governor for the punishment of evill doers as also for the praise of those that do well But suppose the King were a tyrant as bad as bad may be yet we ought from our hearts to give him all due honour so Beza and not to rob him of his just power If he sin it is against God onely and to him onely he must account not to his Subjects 6. Well bound he is by Oath to maintain the Laws while they are Laws As yet then the rights of the Church are safe and the King is bound to maintain them But how long are these Laws in force Till they are abrogated BY JUST POWER IN A REGULAR WAY They are your own words and we subscribe them But the just power is in His Majestie by your own confession both to maintain and to abrogate Laws And the regular way say you is at the motion or with the consent of HIS PARLIAMENT But with all our loyall Predecessors we say at the petition or humble suit not at the motion of His Parliament And His it is his they are all though Members of Parliament since the Parliament is His. They are not then a Parliament of themselves at their own choice or disposing nor yet without him His they are I am sure they should be so I would to God they were so The King is the fountain of honour and power within his own Dominions And who may say unto him What doest thou Why doest thou honour this man and not that Why doest thou call a Parliament at this time and not at that Impius est qui Regi dixerit inique agis He is impious that saith unto the King thou dealest unjustly or unequally So the Fathers read that place No obbraiding no controulling of a King He can do no wrong So the Law 7. His the Kings they are when they are met and set in Parliament His great Councell Magnum Concilium Regis His Houses His Parliament And therefore called so that they may Parlar la ment speak their minds freely for the generall good Him they may entreat not controul advise not command perswade not enforce Suppose the King grants them power and authoritie he grants them none either over or against himself this he cannot do This were to set the Members above the Head and to make his Subjects superior to himself This were to despoil himself of the power of the Sword But this he may not do since God hath made him supreme and given him the charge of the Sword And His Majestie may not invert that order which God hath set neither may he repeal Gods ordinance or make it void God hath laid the charge upon him and he cannot with a safe conscience decline it or neglect it 8. Observe I beseech you though Pharaoh set Joseph over his house and over his people to rule and arm them at his pleasure though Joseph were so made Ruler over all the land of Egypt yet without him no man might lift up his hand or foot within that land
lesse then God onely That he is in the power or under the Command of God onely from whom he is the second and after whom he is the first Optatus saies as much Super Imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit Imperatorem There is none above the Emperor but God alone who made him Emperor And what the Emperor was in the Empire the same is the King of England within his own Dominions For the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in subjection to no Realm but IMMEDIATELY SUBJECT TO GOD AND TO NONE OTHER Hence is it called an Empire and the Imperiall Crown of this Realm 7. The Greeke Commentators are so full for obedience to Kings that they will not yeeld that an Apostle may be freed from this subjection This doctrine S. Paul justifies I stand saith he at Caesars Judgment seat WHERE I OUGHT TO BE JUDGED And after this appeal he resolves that no man not the President himself may judge him or deliver him to be judged by any other Nay after this the President himself might not release him So King Agrippa Had not this man appealed to Caesar he might have been set at liberty Are not these strong evidences of the Kings Supremacy That learned Grotius gives a sure rule whereby to know on whom the Supremacy is settled That saith he is the Supreme civill power cujus actus alterius juri non subsunt whose actions are not subject to any other mans censure or Law But such is the King Qui sub nullo alio sed sub solo Deo agit who lives in subjection to none but to God onely For who may say unto him what doest thou When therefore David had sinned he cries out unto the Lord In te solum peccavi against thee onely have I sinned thou onely canst call me to account Hence is that resolution of all the learned of this Church in the time of King Henry VIII among whom were Bishop Carnmer and Bishop Latymer Although Princes do otherwise then they ought to do yet God hath assigned NO JUDGES OVER THEM in this world but will have the judgement of them reserved to himself And the judgement of the great Lawyers in France is this Rex solus THE KING ONELY IS THE SUPREME LORD of all the Subjects aswell Lay as Ecclesiasticall within his own Dominions All other men live under judgment cum deliquerint peccant Deo peccant legibus mundi and when they offend they sinne against God and against the Laws of the Land 8. But I know you relye more upon the Laws of this Land then upon the Laws of God and upon our Lawyers rather then the Fathers and out best Divines I shall therefore transgresse my profession shew you what their opinion is This Realme say the Statutes is an Empire whereof the KING IS THE SUPREME HEAD and consisteth of the Spiritualty and Temporaâ—ty OVER WHICH THE KING HATH WHOLE POWER AND JURISDICTION Are you of this Realm or are you not Iâ—â—on be then are you either of the spiritualty or temporaâ—ty And if of either then wholly under the Kings power The whole power is his Why seek you to rob him of it Of this Realme the King not the Parliament is the Supreme head One head not two He that makes two Supremacies makes a Bul and he that seâ—â— two heads upon one body frames a monster 9. Indeed they are so far from having any Supremacy that they are Subjects as well in as out of Parliament When King Edward the Confessor had all the Earles and Barons of the Kingdome assembled in Parliament he cals them all his leige men My Lords you that are MY LEIGE MEN. Perchance you may say the King calls them so but that makes them not so You shall therefore have their own acknowledgement in Parliament thus We your most loving faithfull and obedient SUBJECTS REPRESENTING THE THREE ESTATES OF YOUR REALME of England Thus the whole Parliament united into one body False therefore is that proposition that the King is Major singulis sed minor universis greater then any and lesse then all the Inhabitants of this Realme For here the representative body of the three Estates of this Kingdome assembled in Parliament in their highest capacitie acknowledge themselves to be the Queens Subjects and her most obedient Subjects because to her they thus assembled did justly owe both subjection and obedience which none that are supreme can owe. And these are due to his Majestie à singulis ab universis from one and all from every one singly and from all joyntly 10. Secondly when they are assembled in Parliament they Petition as well as out of Parliament This is evident by the Acts themselves wherein we read that our Soveraigne Lord the King by the assent aforesaid and at the PRAIER OF HIS COMMONS The same words are repeated 2 Hen. 5. c. 6 9. And in Queen Elizabeths time the Parliament humble themselves in this manner That it MAY PLEASE YOUR HIGHNESSE that it may be enacted c. I might come down lower but I shall satisfie my selfe with Sir Edward Cokes report who assures us that in ancient times all Acts of Parliament were IN FORME OF PETITIONS Mr. Geree himselfe acknowledgeth they should be so now The King saith he may passe a Bill for the abolition of Episcopacy when HIS HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT think it convenient and PETITION FOR IT Either then the Houses have no Supremacy oâ— else they humble themselves too low when they Petition His Majestie But this Supremacy of Parliament is one of the new lights that were lately wafted into this Land in a Scottish Cookboate 11. Thirdly what Supremacy can there be in those that may not lawfully convene or consult till the King summon them and must dissolve and depart when the King command The Writ it self runs thus prelatis Magnatibus nostris QUOS VOCARI FECIMUS To the Prelates and our Nobles WHOM WE HAVE CAUSED TO BE CALLED And Sir Robert Cotton out of Elie Register tels us that Parliaments were assembled at first as now Edicto Principis not at their own but at the Kings pleasure And Sir Edward Coke assures me that None can begin continue or dissolve the Parliament but BY THE KINGS AUTHORITY And let me tell you that if his Majestie shall withdraw himself from Parliament it is not for your great Masters to inforce him to return but to pray his presence and to inform his Majestie that if he forbear his presence among them fourty dayes that then by an ancient Statute they may return absque domigerio Regis to their severall homes This is all they ought or may do 12. Fourthly whereas according to your words the Parliament is to regulate all other Courts the Court of Parliament is to be regulated by the
no other â—â—nâ—e I G p. 7. a This Oath to the Clergie must not be intended in a sense inconsistent with the Kings Oath to the people first taken for their protection in their Laws and Liberties I. G. p 7. b S. Mat. 22. 21. c Rom 13 7. d Ib. v. 1. e Lex divina sicut Deoâ—â—rtur â—â—rtur ita à solo also tolli aut abrogaâ—i poâ—est Lex autem humanâ— sicut per hominem conâ—tituitur ita ab homine tolls aut abrogaâ—i potest Franc. à Vâ—ctor Relect 3 n 16. f Tho. 1. 2â— â— 96. 4. g Tho. Ib. h I b. i Gul. Ockam de Jurisdic in causis matrimon k Fitzherbert nat brev tit Protection p. 28. l Gal. 1. 10. m Rom. 13. 4. n For then the latter Oath would be a present breach of the former and so unlawfull I. G. p. 7. o Ib. p Eccles 8. 4. q Ib. v. 3. r Lex terrae p. 14 15. Å¿ Eccles 8. 2. t Gen. note in loc u 1 Iâ—c 1. x Lexterrae p. 29 y I D. p. 33. z I. G. p. 6. a Ib. b Deut 25. 2. Exod. 23. 2. d Num. 32. 23. e Iosh 7. 18. f Ib. v. 21. g Iosh 6. 19. h Gen. 4. 7. i Exod. 23. 2. k Levit. 5. 17. l Ib. v 19. m Ib. v. 15. 16. n Ib. v 15. o Rom. 2. 22. p 1 Reg 12. 31. q 2 Chron. 11. 13. 14. r 1 Reg. 13. 33. Å¿ 1 Tim. 3. 2. t Tit. 1. 9. u 2 S. Pet. 3. 16. x S. Mat 15. 14. y Bp. Laâ—ymeâ— Ser. 5 before K. Edw VI. z Sir Edw Coke Reports 2d part Levesque de Winchesters Case fol. 44. a I. G. p. 7. b Ib. c The Kings Oath taken at Coronation I. G. p 1. d The Kings Oath to the people first taken for their protection c. I G. p. 7. e Mag. Charta â—â— These words are added to avoid all scruples that this Great Parliamentary Charter might live and take effect in all successions of ageâ— for ever Sir Ed Coke in loc g Sir Edw Coke Proeme to Magna Charta h Ib. i Ib. k Sir Ed Coke in Mag. Chart c. 1. l Mag Cha c. 14. m Ib. c. 1. n Sir Ed. Coke in Mag. Chart. c. 1 Sect. Et habe bunt o Sir Ed. Coke in Litleton l. 2 Sect. 201. p Ib. in Sect. 136 q Ib. in Sect. 201. r Nulluâ— aliâ—â— praeter Regem potest Episcopo demandare inquisitionem â—â—ciendaÌ„ Bract. l. â— 10â— Å¿ Sir Ed. Coke in Mag Chart c. 1. Sect Eâ— habeat t Sir Ed Coke instit part l 4 c 1. Sect Oâ— what persons u Mag. Cha. c 38. x Sir Ed Coke Proeme in Mag. Chart. y He cannot afterwards inâ—age himselâ— to any particular estate to exempt it frâ— this power for by that Oath at least cessit â—â—re suo I G p 3 z Conceâ—â—imo Deo quod Ecclesiâ— Aâ—glicana libera â—it Mag. Cha. c. 1. a Sir Ed. Coke Proem in Mag. Chart. b I. G. p. 7. c 1 S. Pet. 2. 13. 14. d Lex terrae p. 8. e Ib. 7. f I hope they will not now claim an exemption from secular power I. G. p. 7. g 2 Cor. 13. 10. h Es 49. 23. i Meaning that Kings converted to the Gospel shall bestow their power and authoritie for the preservation of the Church Gen note in Is 49. 23. k But if theâ— be under Parliamentary power how can it â—ationally be conceived to be th 〈…〉 meaning of the Kings Oath to prâ—sâ—rve the priviâ—edges of the Câ—erâ—â— against that power to which they are legally subject I. G. p. 7. l Canons Eccles â—an 1. m 1 Eliz. 1. n Ib. o Can Eccles can 2. p 1 Eliz 1. q Or how were the Oath in that sensâ— consistent with the pâ—ivilâ—â—â—e of the Nation formerly â—â—orn to â—y the King I. G. p. 8. r Thou shalt count the Priests holy and reverence them Gen. note in Levit. 21. 8. Å¿ If the Oath had such a sense in the times of Popery when the Clergy were a distinct Corporation yet when that exemption was abolisht as a branch of Antichristian usurpation the change of their condition must needs change the intention of the Oath I. G p. 8. z Bâ— Latymers Serm. before K. Edw. VI. March 8 1549. a Ecclesia est infra aetatem in custodiâ Domini Regis qui tenetur jura haereditates suas manu tenere defendere Sir Ed Coke in Mag Chart. c 1 b Ib. c Vnlesse they will say that the Crown stands still ingaged to them to maintain such priviledgeâ— as by Act of Parliament were long since abolisht which is to make his Oath to them contariant to that taken before for the maintenance of the Laws I. G. p. 3. d Gen. 41. 4 e It s apparent then to make the intention of the Oath to be against legall alteration of their priviledges by ParliameÌ„t makes it unlawfull and so not obligatory And if it be not intended against legall alteration the King may passe a Bill for the abolition of Episcopacy when his Houses of Parliament think it convenient and petition for it without violation of his Oath I. G. p. 8. g I. G. p. 9. h Ib. p. 7. i Ib. p. 5. k He that hath power to consent hath power also to dissent l 1 Cor. 7. 37. m Lex terrae p. 14 15. n I. G. p. 2. o Ib. p Ib. q Prov. 8. 15. Cujus iussu nascuntur homines huius iussu Reges constituuntur Iren. l. 5. p. 601. r 2 Chron. 9 8. Å¿ Ib. t I. G. p. 2. u Rom. 13. 4. x Ib. y 1 S. Pet. 2. 13 14 z Magistratibus ex animo deâ—erendus est honor 〈…〉 etiam tyrannis Beza in Act. 23. 5 a Psal 51. 4. b I. G. p. 2. c Ib. d The King is sworn to maintain the Laws of the Land in force at his Coronation Yet no man questions the constant practise shews that it is not unlawfull after to abrogateany upon the motion or with the consent of HIS PARLIAMENT I. G p. 2 * Declarat of the Kingd of Scotland p. 22. e Eccles 8. 4. f Ib. g Lex terrae p. 19 h Sir Ed. Coke in Litleton l. 2. Sect. 164. i I. G. p. 8. k Ib. p. 2. l Sir Ed Coke in Litleton l. 2. Sect. 164. m 1 S Pet. 2. 13. n Rom. 13. 4. o Gen. 41. 40. p Ib. v 43. 44. q Ib. v. 40. r Gen 45. 9. Å¿ Ib. v 8. t Ib. v 19 21. u Lex terrae p. 27 x 1 S. Pet. 2 13 14. y I. G. p. 2. z Ib. a Prov. 24. 24. b 2 Cor. 10. 8. c S. Matth. 26. â— d Christ is the head of his body the Church Col. 1. 18. 24. e S. Joh. 12. 6. f Rom. 11. 13. g 1 Cor 9. 1. c. 2 Cor. 10 4 c. 2 Cor. 11. 7. 8. h I. G. p. 4. i Ib. p. 4. 5. k Ib. p. 4. l Ib. m I.