any other way then by the established and received Laws of the Nation where mens vices and depraved manners do not require new ones I designe no more then to demonstrate that it was not your Majesties Father's and your own adherence to the established Laws but the iniquity of the times which made him a Victim and your Sacred self an Exile Nay in reason as well as justice it had been a most imprudent thing in either of your Majesties to have given up the Laws to the arbitrary lusts of your Adversaries or any one Faction For should either of your Majesties have indifferently renounced the Laws to your Adversaries being compounded of such different and contrary humors and affections then there was no visible means under Heaven to have cemented them and by consequence your Adversaries hostility and confusion continued and your own conditions no ways bettered or secured Or should either of your Majesties have renounced the Laws to have advanced any one Faction so above the rest and all your loyal Subjects that their arbitrary wills and lusts should have been the laws of all the rest and your other Subjects also yet should you not only have failed to have contented that Faction it being the nature of Faction never to bear any grateful acknowledgment for benefits received but on the contrary always abuse them to their prejudice from whom they received them and never rest until they have made themselves all and their Benefactors nothing at all or vile and miserable but have animated all the other Factions against your Majesties and it To the fulfilling of all singular and glorious Virtues in Your Sacred person is added Your being a Christian King and a Nursing Father of the Church of Christ and as if immediately sent from Heaven to cure and repair the wounds of this most miserably distracted Church although Your Majesty is descended from innumerable Royal Ancestors who have been Nursing Fathers of Christs Church yet are you not derived from any who have had the least hand in the late Sacrilege thereof And though Sir You are and ought to be a Nursing Father of Gods Church and a Patron and Defence against her ravenous and devouring Adversaries yet none of mortal men have been more Religious Sons of the Church then Your Majesty and Your Saintlike Father How unequal and how unjust then have been the sufferings of Princes so just so religious caused by Christians Your natural Subjects and these pretending Conscience whereas no School teaches men a better lesson of obedience to Princes then the Christian faith whenas the first principle or foundation of Subjects obedience to rightful Princes is founded in the Law of Nature however popular Orators and Atheists have against all sense reason nature and all authorities of sacred and profane History resolved it into the pacts and wills of men And conscience always supposes some superior law informing men to do or not do a thing or suffer when any subordinate power commands contrary to it whereas Your persecutors pretending concience trod underfoot whatsoever might be called sacred to the attaining their seditious and sacrilegious ends That God in his providence doth often permit the good and just to suffer persecution is evidently seen in all ages and places But in reason and prudence neither Your Majesties Father's nor Your own adherence to the established Government of the Church and the Rites Liturgy and Means thereof in Your adversities when they were so zealously persecuted by its and Your adversaries could be any cause thereof Neither would the desertion of it have any ways conduced to either of Your Majesties advantage for should either of Your Majesties have renounced the Church and rites thereof so as to have been a Christian King of such Miscreants who besides that they would not be of any Christian Church or society had by undue ways devoured the patrimony of the Church yet no man in his right wits could have imagined such men would long have been governed in peace or that all other men of their factions would have been content who had not made a prey thereof and there was not sufficient to content all nor indeed any at all or that the canine appetites of those men who had devoured the lands of the Church would not also have hungred after those of the Crown Or should Your Majesty have advanced any one Faction so above the rest that it should not only have tyrannized over the rest of the Factions but also Your Majesty and the rest of Your subjects yet could it not in reason have been expected that this Faction who by all Divine and Humane laws were subject to a Government founded upon our Saviour and his Apostles and by a continued series dispersed over the face of Christianity until of late it became violated in some places of Europe by seditious and sacrilegious men should so unjustly cast off their obedience so rightfully due and yet expect that their wills and lusts should long be received for Laws by the rest of the Factions and all other of their fellow-subjects But certainly Your constant adherence to the Church did proceed from the power and grace of God in You before any prudential or moral cause Notwithstanding that your Majesty is so constant a Preserver of Christs Church and Propagator of Christian religion and that your own conscience hath been so often attempted to be violated by men of none at all indeed yet so tender is your Maiesty of other mens that you will not force the conscience of any of your subjects pretending it A strange condescension any one will judge who considers the parties granting and expecting For should your Majesty command your Subjects any thing in derogation to the Majesty of God or forbid them the worship and service of God your Subjects might then justly plead conscience because the duty and allegiance which they owe to God is in the first place to be paid by all his creatures Or should your Majesty command any thing which were immoral or unjust as that your Subjects should dishonor your Majesty or their Parents c. they might justly plead conscience because that for Subjects to honor their King and children their Parents is founded in Nature and is a Law of God engraven in the minds of all mortal men or should your Majesty have lived in the Primeve times of Christianity when men by the light of Humane Nature apprehending a Deity to be publickly Worshipped and Served yet being ignorant of the manner misplaced it in Osyris Isis Iupiter Apollo an Oak c. then to have compelled them to have Worshipped God after the manner of Christians had been unconscionable and unchristian because they paid an acknowledgement of that Worship due to God by Nature and could not by Nature apprehend this but must wait upon God until that by the ordinary means of the Church or supernaturally inspired by God they should be converted thereunto Or should your Majesty command any thing
and for the reason De terra vero Salica nulla portio haereditalis mulieri veniat sed ad virilem sexum tota terrae haereditas perveniat Bodin de rep p. 745. 13. For the authority of it the learned do not agree by whom it was The authority of it by D'-Avila made nor whether any French King ever made any such or not D'avila in the beginning of the first book of the Civil wars in France recites the most probable conjecture which is That the French when they left their habitation to seek fresh quarters sate down at the river Sala which divides Misnia Westward from Turingia and there forsooth did agree to choose themselves a King and did make Constitutions which should be fundamental and unalterable ever after and those Constitutions being made at the river Sala are called Salique Laws 14. There is no story of Guy of Warwick Amadis de Gaule or the Dun How probable Cows rib but is of as much authority and probability as this For can it be imagined that a company of Rogues and Thieves going to rob and thieve at Gads-hill should agree at Greenwich to make unalterable Laws for their government and succession before they were possessed of any thing and what they make their Laws of is nothing but what they shall rob and cheat other men of 15. But Bodin will not undertake to tell by whom or when it was made Bodin's opinion it is strange you will say that making up his discourse almost of Histories he hath nothing to say for this he only saies it is not new as many men think but engraven in the most ancient tables of the Salians in these words De terra vero salica c. ut supra So Bodin names neither by whom nor when Para. 12. this Salique Law was made Did ever man infer so fondly that because the Salian women did not inherit therefore the French Crown cannot descend to women But mark now if this be a consequence The women of the Land of Salia do not inherit and therefore no female can inherit the French Monarchy then if the men of the Land of Salia will alter this constitution the descent of the French Monarchy is altered by an Act of the men of Salia for Cessante ratione legis cessat lex and sublata causa tollitur effectus In their contest with the Popes the Kings of France say they hold their Crown of God whereas if Bodin says true they hold it by a Law written in the Tables of the Salians I can say no more for the authority of this Law unless I should repeat the same things again out of De Serres and other learned French Historians 16. This Law cannot be altered by the King and Estates general The eternity of it I had thought that only the Laws of Nature had been unalterable It is a rule that Unumquodque dissolvi potest eo ligamine quo ligatum est And if this Salique Law be a constitution of Man by that power which made it a constitution by that power it may be altered 17. De terra vero Salica nulla portio haereditatis mulieri veniat sed ad virilem The reason of it sexum tota terrae hereditas perveniat Now let any man that is in his wits or understands any thing of the nature of a Law judge whether there be any shadow of reason in this For a Law is the rule or direction of him who does govern to be observed by them who are governed How then can the Crown of France descend according to the customs of the Salians if the French Crown be not subject to the men of Salia and they had given the King and his successors this unalterable Law of not descending to the female but where this country Salia should be I could never find so much as the name in any Geographer or Historian ancient or modern Sure the Romans so curious in searching and describing of Countries would not have overseen it especially the Emperor Julian warring so long in those parts of Germany not above sixty years before they suppose Pharameund departs out of Salia for to seek better quarters in Gaule 18. The two main parts of the Salique Law are That the Crown shall The two main parts of the Salique Law descend to the next heire male and if the heire be ana infant that the next Prince of the blood who is a Major shall during his minority be his Guardian and Regent Yet Bodin is fearful that the Salique Law was not bar enough against our Ed. the third being never before heard of saies Hailâ—n he saies pag. 745. Whenas the controversie concerning the Crown of France was between Philip Earl of Valoys and Ed. the third King of England Philip defended the Salique Law by the Voconian which ordained by the consent of the Fathers and Princes that in that controversie no man should use the authority of forrain Lawes but every one should study for his profit the Salique Law But when the question was 1563 whether Charles the ninth were a Major at fourteen years of Age currant or compleat the Parliament of Paris would have taken upon them to decide it when Charles sends them word I do not mean that you should deale in any thing but with the administration of good and speedie justice to my subjects understand hereafter that you are not confirmed in your offices by me to be my Tutors or Protectors of my Realm nor Governors of my City of Paris as hitherto you have perswaded your selves Besides Charles the seventh Anno 1420. was adjudged to banishment and unworthy to succeed in any of the signories of France by all the Courts of the Parliament of Paris And so about 7 years since was the Prince of Condi and so was Henry the forth by all the three Estates at the general assembly at Bloys Anno. 1588. So that is is evident that this immutable Law is not so inviolably kept by the French themselves when it does not serve their turn How should the Voconion Law oblige against Ed. the third and not the Acts of Parliament of Paris and general Assembly at Blois oblige against Charles the seventh and Henry the fourth for ubi eadem est ratio ibi idem est jus 19. There cannot be a more imprudent act then to make any one Ward The imprudence of the Salique Law to him who is his next heire especially to a Crown which frees any one from all attainders what then can be more imprudent then this part of the Salique Law which gives the pupil King into the hands of the next heire who murthering him makes way for himself to the Kingship By our Country Laws no man could be Guardian to the person of a Ward but the next of blood to whom the inheritance could not descend But this part of the eternal Law has not of late been observed by the French Nation whereas the contrary hath been
as Judicial The end of the Fourth Book The Contents of the Fifth Book HAving before treated of the Causes of all Regal and Ecclesiastical power and having in the last Chapter of the Third Book treated of the Laws and Civil Government of this Nation being the exercise of Regal power in reference to the publick preservation of Peace and Society in it In this First Chap. we shall treat how far Ecclesiastical power has been exercised in this Nation and by whom Whether originally the Britanick and English-Saxon Churches were free or subject to the Papal power quoad exercitium And whether as well before the Conquest as after the Kings of this Nation were not Nursing Fathers to the Church of Christ And whether always before the Conquest the Royal Government did not extend as well to the Persons as Possessions of Ecclesiastical persons And whether all Bishopricks were not originally of the Kings foundation In the reciting the Ecclesiastical Laws made by the Kings and Queens of this Realm we shall observe three periods viz. The Ecclesiastical Laws made by the Kings of England before the Conquest The Laws made by the Conqueror and subsequent Kings until Henry the Eighth And lastly the Laws made by him and the Kings and Queens after him until the end of King Charls his Reign Note good Reader that in the reciting of these Laws I do not affirm that these Laws made by the Kings of this Realm did never incroach upon that Ghostly power which our Saviour by Divine positive institution left only to his Church and therefore make no construction upon them but only when they are recited and objected as Authorities against that Power My designe is to shew having already demonstrated that by the Law of Nature the persons of all Subjects born in the dominion of rightful Kings are their natural Subjects which is an indelible character and can never be washed out and therefore Subjects being Ecclesiastical persons cannot free them from it And that all priviledges and endowments which Ecclesiastical persons enjoy besides their ghostly power is created by the King That the exercise of the Kings power over the persons and possessions of Ecclesiasticks as also Laws made by them for the order and preservation of the extern peace of the Church is no new thing as hath been by some objected THE FIFTH BOOK CHAP. I. How far the Kings Popes and Bishops of England have exercised their Spiritual Jurisdiction in England before Henry the Eighth IT cannot sure be reasonably denied Apology by any man but that Ignorance is the mother of all Error nor is any man better in any kind whatsoever for being innurtured or ignorant We daily see no where more feuds If learning or knowledge were the cause of dissentions or distractions how then comes it to pass that all dissentions are determined by learned and knowing men or else they would be endless and dissentions then among ignorant and mean men which were there not Laws to decide their difference would be endless and Mankind left in a worse condition then any other creatures Nor is Education and Learning any cause of the dissentions and debates which arise among learned and better educated men but some internal cause proceeding from pride or some other appetitions or affection in them And though Education and Learning does not totally alter mens natures from bad to good yet does it soften mens manners and makes them not to be so bruitish as those who are destitute of Learning and Civil breeding For Didicisse fideliter Artes Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros It is true indeed that in that state in which God hath placed all men here they do not see all things truly but men are and always were and will be subject to humane error and frailty and in many things notwithstanding all the arts and helps which can be devised men will never be reconciled But that men should therefore condemn all Science and Learning is like to a man that if he sees and hears not all things distinctly and clearly although it may be he sees and hears well enough to do things which are necessary for his conservation that therefore he will put out his eyes and have his ears always stopped Nor shall ever ignorance of any mans duty totally excuse him for his not observance of Laws be they Divine or Humane Nor shall the blind belief of Subjects in their Superiors whether Ecclesiastical or Temporal ever totally excuse them from those things which are due and they believe that they owe to God I am not so very a Hobbian as to believe that it is impossible for Supreme powers to command any thing contrary to the Law of Nature nor yet so very a Papalian as to think that the Pope is infallible Especially since it is evident that Aarons joining with the people in their idolatry did not excuse Exod. 32. the Israelites of old nor did the command of both King and Priests ever under the Old Law excuse the subject Israelites from Gods judgments upon them for their idolatry Nor is this very opinion of them in the Church of Rome of the Popes infallibility believed by themselves however urged against others who are not of her communion For then were not only General Councils supervacaneous and useless things but also there could be no difference among them which is superior a Pope or General Council Nor do they less deny it in their practice then their opinion For when Sixtus Quintus had excommunicated 9 Sept. 1585. the King of Navar and Prince of Conde and as he affirmed made them uncapable of succession to the French Monarchy yet were most part of the French troubled at it doubting the Priviledges of the Gallic Church would be trodden under foot which they needed not have doubted or feared if they had believed the Pope to have been infallible and all the Parliament of Paris who were all of the Church of Rome desired the King Henry the Third to have the Bull torne in pieces as you may read Davila 575. And the Parliaments of Chalons and Tours did not only decree the Bull of Gregory 14. to the Prelates and Catholiques of the Kings party under pain of Excommunication of being deprived of their Dignities and Benefices and of being used as Hereticks and Sectaries that within a certain time they should withdraw themselves from those places that yielded obedience to Henry of Bourbon and from the union and fellowship of his Faction to be publikely burnt but it was so far rejected and scorned by the very Prelates and all other Catholiques of the Kings party that it did extreamly confirm them all in the Kings obedience being before unsetled and inclining to the Cardinal of Bourbons faction as you may read more at large in the Twelfth book of Davila's History But it may be they will say That this was not in matter of Faith and that the Popes infallibility is affixed to Faith
and impossible things to come from Men otherwise so learned For though Mr. Hobbs does lay down his Principles and persue his method much more clearly then Grotius does yet his Principles are so monstrous That to me it is impossible any ingenuous Man should assent to them Indeed if Mr. Hobbs would have supposed that the state of Man had been either in Society or out of Society and that out of Society Men had been in such a state as he makes them in his state of pure Nature I should never have stumbled at it But he forsooth requires it for a Yet thus much I will tell Mr. Hobbs he may as wel suppose a Brute an intellectual or rational Creature or a man no intellectual or rational Creature as no sociable or out of Society Principle That all Men jure naturali are in a parity and equal condition and may kill one another without any offence or sin and that Men continue in this estate until by their civil Pact they oblige themselves to one another that the will of the civitas shall be the will of them all Notwithstanding this I must needs say of Mr. Hobbs That if Men have so little understanding as to make Jus naturale to be contrary to Lex naturalis and so little grace as to believe that the civitas hath all its power from the Pacts and wills of Men and yet impossible to command any thing contrary to the Law of Nature which he says is the Law of God and tyranny to be onely ab exercitio when as it is impossible for Kings to command any thing contrary to the Law of Nature and all Faith and Ghostly Power which our Saviour left in his Church to be instrumental and subservient to it and never look how little he understands a Pact or from whence Men become obliged to it the cives of this Vtopia may do well enough If I edified but little by Mr. Hobbs yet I received much less satisfaction from Grotius for Mr. Hobbs defines his terms so clearly as to me he was easily understood whereas all Grotius his Principles are so perplexed and equivocal that it is not possible for any Man to understand any thing clearly from him As the first thing in his Preface he confounds is Societas Communitas whereas Societas is as different from Communitas as black is from white Societas according to the definition of Aristotle being Pol. lib. 1. cap 5. Vnum quid it a constans ex diversis personis ut sit unum quod imperet alterum quod pareat Society is one thing so made up of divers persons that one may command another obey Whereas community is where any company of Creatures are without the offices of commanding and obeying Well but having got out of his Preface after some Propositions of his Method c. he in the Tenth Paragraph of the First Chapter of the First Book De jure Belli Pacis defines Jus Naturale in a tedious general thing to be dictatum rectae rationis c. and this to be the Law of God and about the middle to be immutable by God himself and towards the latter end to continue but for a certain space and towards the beginning he makes the Dominion which is now in use to be brought in by the will of Man and this to be Jus Naturale too Now let any ingenuous Man judge what can be clearly deduced from Jus Naturale which is the Law of God and immutable by God and yet to continue but for a certain time until a Dominion brought in by the will of Man should abrogate what was immutable by God and this Dominion thus brought in against this Jus Naturale to be Jus Naturale too If I have slandered Grotius let any Man see the Paragraph aforesaid It was to me an admirable thing to consider that men so learned should one of them define the Law of Nature to be Dictamen rectae rationis the other Dictatum rectae rationis Well I will therefore see what Ratiocinatio is and what Dictamen or Dictatum rectae rationis which is the same thing and whether this can to any ingenuous man be any probable definition of the Law of Nature Aristotle Eth. Lib. 6. Cap. 3. makes Ratiocination and by consequence every dictate of Reason to be from Universals and that there are some Principles which do constitute the Ratiocination of which there can be no Ratiocination These Principles for which no Reason can be given and yet the reason of all those things which can be deduced from them are called Axiomata Dignitates or Communes Notiones and from these men by Ratiocination or Right Reason do infer Arts and Sciences a Scientia est actio ars effectio Eth. l. 6. c. 4. Both begotten by right Reason Ars est habitus ad faciendum idoneus cum verâ ratione conjunctus Nay all Ratiocination or Right reasoning whatsoever may be resolved into somewhat which is superior to this Ratiocination for which no reason can be given * These things thus premised I say it is impossible the Law of Nature should be the dictate of Right Reason and thus I prove it Every Principle which does constitute Ratiocination and for which no Reason can be given is no dictate of Right Reason But the Law of Nature is a Principle which does constitute Ratiocination and for which no reason can be given Therefore the Law of Nature is no dictate of Right Reason If Mr. Hobbs denies the Minor Proposition set him shew into what it can be further resolved or what can prove it For though God be the prime and efficient cause of all things but what proceeds from the will of man and into which all things may be ultimately resolved yet by Principles Aristotle and all Philosophers understand those things which immediately proceed from God and the Law of Nature could not be the Law of God if it did not immediately proceed from him but the Law of that thing from which it did immediately proceed the Law of Nature therefore is a Principle Well but let us suppose the Law of Nature to be the dictate of Right Reason and see the consequence Every dictate of Right Reason is of less Dignity Authority and Excellency then the Right Reason viz. The Effect then the Cause But ex hypothesi the Law of Nature viz. the Law of God the Creator is the dictate of Right Reason Therefore is the Law of the Creator of less Dignity authority and excellency then the faculty and attribute of the creature viz. Right reason then which what can be more monstrous and blasphemous Nor is this definition less ridiculous then impossible and blasphemous For the dictates of Right reason are understood by one man and not by another and may be learned and taught Suppose now one of these Masters of Reason should come to the most plain and ignorant man in the world who is
be esteemed as the greatest goddess and that the greatest power ought to be ascribed to her overcoming and triumphing over all the oppositions of Men and verisimilitudes Nor can any reason be given that Polybius Livy Plutarch c. did either write such Histories or that such Histories written by them were truer then those which are lost and rejected by Men but only a kind of divine ayre informing Men of their truth whereas those books which are falsely and factiously written are exploded and neglected in a very short time and yet whether they were truly or falsely written few or no Men can judge from any thing known to the outward sence I say few or no Man can so judge of them for in that time when they were written there were many more false and factious Historians to delude Men then true and just to inform them Nor can Men in subsequent generations from any thing in their outward sences judge or discern whether any thing they record be true or false Nay further no Historian except Caesar and Xenophon and some very few others who recorded infinitely more things not known then known to them to be true did ever know whether what he recorded were true or not To evidence this yet more fully there was scarcely except Caesars Xenophons ever any History truly written in those times wherein the things were done that men might take information from their outward senses but Men were so carried by Faction or Interest that in recording of things they record things not as true or false but as advancing their Faction and Interest whereas Men in the subsequent generation not having those Passions and Appetitions nor any sense of these things subjecting all their Passions and Affections as it were assisted by a divine Election do make Election of those things which are true and reject others which the Malice or Faction of Men had imposed upon the World And a Man is as certain that there have been such Men as Caesar Hanibal Alexander c. and as assured of their Actions as if he had seen them 46. Since all things which proceed from God immediately and for Faith is an extraordinary Gift of God which no reason can be given by any Creature may be justly required for principles by intellectual and reasonable Creatures and since the Scriptures proceed immediately from God or they could not be the Word of God are therefore the principles of Faith And since there is nothing within man naturally which may assure him that those things revealed in Scripture were Gods Revelation it does necessarily follow That Faith or the Belief of God in the Scriptures is Gods gift supernaturally and extraordinarily Nor can all the Arguments of Tradition Church Excellency of stile Truth c. move one stone to the proof of them For they were the Word of God before any Church or Tradition c. was And if they had not been the Word of God before the Church received them and delivered them to posterity their Reception and Tradition could never have made them so Besides the Church having its being from the Scriptures it can never prove the cause of its being And what was it less then the power and grace of God extraordinarily given to Moses That the Bush burned and was not consumed And of all the miracles done by him and the other Prophets and more then those done by our Saviour and the Apostles and blessed Martyrs since And that by the Preaching of a few Fishermen against all the Temporal Powers in the World Christianity should be propagated generally over the face of the Earth and that I without any thing in me or desert of mine am baptised into this Faith And he that shall dispute the truth of the grace and power of God in the Old and New Testament and since recorded in Ecclesiastical and Prophane History ought as much to be confuted with clubs and hissing as he that denies or disputes his Principles in any Art or Science 47. All Principles are true or false just or unjust good or bad either All Principles are prime and necessary either necessitate absoluta or necessitate medii necessitate absoluta or necessitate medii Principles that are true or false necessitate absoluta are so that they are immutable by God himself as that two and two added should not make four or that things equal to the same thing should not be equal to one another or that any being should be superior to the cause of its being or that contradictions should be true or else true or false good or bad just or unjust necessitate ex hypothesi And these though they are necessary and principles to those to whom they are given and immutable by them yet are they not principles and necessary to them who made and gave them As the Laws of Nature and Gods revealing himself in the Scriptures are principles necessary and immutable by all the Men in the World yet are they not principles necessary or immutable by God but he might if it had pleased him made something else the Law of Nature or otherwise revealed himself in the Scriptures So Humane Laws must be prime necessary and immutable by Subjects or their conforming or not conforming their actions to them could not be just or unjust But they cannot be prime and necessary or immutable by the Legislator but as he sees occasion may alter or make something else which was not before Laws for the Subjects to conform and direct their actions to It is therefore absurd and wilde to suppose that the Law of Nature is Annotat. simply necessary and immutable by God or that the will of Men can make it mutable 48. All Science all Learning all Reasoning and all Conclusions by Contra negantes Principia non est disputandum the Authority of Aristotle is begotten from pre-existent principles for which no reason can be given by the Learner which being granted do nemonstrate the Conclusion but by the Authority of Aristotle and all Philosophers no Science or Conclusion can demonstrate the Principles Where therefore either by a defect in the Understanding Men cannot or by a stubbornness in the Will they will not apprehend Principles there all Reasoning Learning or Discourse is at an end If therefore I would learn a Man Geometry and he either cannot or will not apprehend the Axioms or common Notions of it it is impossible I should ever make him understand the constitution of an equilateral Triangle Or if a Man denies the Laws of my Countrey I cannot teach him whether such an action be just or unjust Or if a Man denies the Law of Nature I cannot prove that he ought to honor and obey his Superior and to deal justly and uprightly with all Men Or if a Man denies or disputes the Authority of the Scriptures there cannot be any Conclusion or Inference from them whether as Christians any thing ought to be or not to be done or believed
deceive them who take not heed whenas the Law of Nature which is immutable is not changed but the thing of which the Law of Nature does work receives some mutation For example If a Creditor to whom I am obliged takes what Lowe him now I am not bound to pay not because the Law of nature leaves to command to pay what I owe but because what I did owe ceases to be And to prove this he brings Greek in Epictetus Observ It is true that universal causes in nature produce nothing but as meeting with particular material causes the law of nature therefore of it self produces nothing but as meeting with particular material causes apted and disposed for the law of nature to work upon and therefore when these particular causes cease the obligation which the law of nature creates ceases also As Thou shalt honor thy Father and Mother is the law of nature but then there must be Parents Children or the law of nature creates no obligation and therefore when the particular cause ceases the obligation of the law of nature ceases also as when Parents are dead the law of nature in that particular can have no obligation upon their Children And so in the instance which Grotius gives a Debtor is by the law of nature obliged to pay his Creditor but this Debt being paid the particular cause ceasing the obligation of the law of nature ceases also What need therefore was there of Arrianus his Greek out of Epictetus to prove a prime and necessary truth which is of more authority then forty Arrianuses and all the Greek in Epictetus Grotius and all his Authors and Poets to boot Grotius goes on So if God commands any man to be killed or to take away any thing that is anothers It is not lawful that Murder or Theft be done which terms involve vice but it is not Murder or Theft which is done by God the Author of life and all things They say Nulla similitudo quatuor pedibus currit I am sure this similitude Observ 2. runs not upon one foot for in this last the particular cause remains whereas in the former it is taken away and if the law of nature be immutable by God and Thou shalt not kill or steal be from the law of nature then it is Murder and Theft although commanded by God Thus hath Grotius instead of clearly propounding his principles and orderly reasoning from them thatched a company of equivocal and contradictory principles with Poets and Authors brought in by head and heels so as not any one proposition is clearly stated and disputed but the whole Treatise a most perplexed and unsignificant thing God conferred upon Mankind generally Jus Right immediately after Lib. 2. cap. 2. Para. 2. the Creation and again when the world was repaired after the flood over all the things of this inferior nature There were as Justin saies all things common Lib. 43. Lib. 1. Para. 16. de jure Belli c. and undivided to all Men even as one Patrimony should be to all Men. God was pleased peculiarly to give rights dare jura to one only people viz. the Hebrews Observ Which is absurd and impossible by the ninth Notion of the first Book of Euclid viz. a part equal to the whole the Hebrews not being all mankind but a part Grotius goes on Hence it came to pass that every man gathered whatsoever Lib. 2. cap. 2. Para. 2. he could snatch to their own uses and consume what could be consumed and whatsoever any man had so snatched that could no man take from him but by injury but this State could not long continue Observ How 's this This is more monstrous and absurd then the other what God gave a Right to Mankind and that so immutable that it is unalterable by God himself and yet not possible long to continue To prove this first Common Right of all things common and undivided to Mankind he refers to Gen. 1. 29. 30. And God said I have given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Septuagint has it to you in the plural number when Adam only was created every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of the earth and every tree in the which is the fruit of a tree yeelding seed to you it shall be for meat c. Now how could God speak to Adam in the plural number when Adam only was created It is said verse 27. So God created Adam in his own Image in the Image of God made he Man Male and Female created he them And therefore God speaks here to Adam and Eve Now whether God gave this Right to Adam and Eve in Community to both alike as Grotius would have it or to Eve in subordination to Adam I refer it to any Christian Man to judge Let the Woman learn in silence with all subjection c. and the 1 Tim. 2. 11. reason the Apostle giveth is Man was first made then Eve But suppose that God gave this Right not only to Adam and Eve but to all Mankind in Adam verse 13. and Eve yet by the authority of the Holy Ghost had Adam dominion over all Mankind because Adam was first made and therefore God at the Creation of Man made Government with Mankind Let us see whether Grotius has any better luck with his common and undivided Right of all things c. immediately from the time of the world repaired after the flood which to prove he refers to Gen. 9. 2. 3. And the feare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast c. every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green herb have I given you all things Observ Now then if this were not given to Noah his Wife and Noahs Children in subordination to Noah but as Grotius would have it in community to all alike then had Sem as much Right to all things as Noah Ham as Sem Japheth as Ham Sems wife was an intercommoner with Noah Ham with Japheths wife and Noahs wife with them all if this be true Mr. Hobbs makes Noahs Sons in an ill case where he saies filium in statu naturali intelligi non Annot. art 10. cap. 1. posse no Son can be understood in the state of nature and Sem Ham and Japheth are Bastards and not Noahs Sons Well if Noah and his Wife his Son and their Wives had all things in common that is every one of them get what they could snatch to their own uses and consume what might be consumed from whence did Noah snatch his Vineyard and drank the wine thereof untill he was drunken If you beleeve Grotius it was Sems Vineyard Verse 20. as much as Noahs Japheths Wives as much as Sems and Hams Wife had as much right to it as any body else Poor Noah thou hast taken great pains here to little purpose if Hugo be thy Judge Well Mr. Hobbs rather then he
but our Saviour Patriarchs and Kings were the Lords anointed Nor is Gods anointed peculiar to them not the material anointing and the receiving and believing Gods revelation of him-self in the Scriptures is essential to the making of Gods anointed here but all rightful Kings are so whether they be materially anointed or believe Gods revelation of himself in the Scriptures or not For not only Cyrus was not Isa 45. 1. materially anointed and an unbeliever yet Gods anointed but Nabuchadnezzar also a cruel persecutor and destroyer of Gods people But Lam. 4. 20. God calls them Mortal Gods too Psal 82. 6. And is it not strange that our Saviour should say No power can be but from above data desuper and that Joh. 19. 11. Men should be so impudent as to affirm that there is no power unless data de subter and that against all sense and reason as well as faith For it is impossible that any Power should be superior to the cause of its being or that any thing should give that to another which it self hath not How then can an imaginary rout of Men give a power of life and death and of creating property which not any of them nor all of them together have to another 3. Humane Laws being the accidents or effects of Regal Power they Regal power not made by Humane laws cannot be superior to give or create a being to the cause Regal Power therefore cannot be made or created by Humane Laws 4. That in Regality as well as in Subjects estates jus proprietatis The possession or exercise of Regality does not create Regal power possessionis have been divided and Regal power usurped and exercised by them who had no right thereunto is not only testified by infinite Authorities out of prophane History but also many times in Sacred Writ as in the cases of Absolom Adonijah Athaliah c. It is true indeed that there is no visible power under Heaven but only Mens Consciences that can judge between an Usurper and a rightful Prince Yet ought men principally to have a care how they offend herein for God no where denounces a more dreadful sentence nor shewed a more terrible judgement then upon such Rom. 13. Men Num. 16. And if in Regality possession alone did create a just title then were summa injuria summa justitia it being no question the highest injury to invade the highest authority or dominion of another 5. If possession conjoyned with the submission and acknowledgement Possession with the Subjects acknowledgment and submission does not create Regal power of the Subjects did create regal power or right of command which Kings have over their Subjects then were the dominion of Theeves and Pirates where others submit to them just and Jeroboams title good to the kingdom of the Ten Tribes nor the Children of Israel Rebels but true Subjects after they had quietly submitted themselves to Jeroboam But this is false for God does denounce them Rebels to the house of David unto this day 1 Kings 12. 19. And Jeroboam himself a Rebel after he was quietly 1 King 12. 19. possessed and acknowledged by the Ten Tribes 2 Chron. 13. 6. It is a very remarkable thing that the Subjects of this Nation although Annot. pretending to be Christians have against all rules of Christian Faith placed all power in Government to be from the people and their obligation to it to be from their own submission to it and have by their often forswearing themselves to this and that Government not only habituated themselves into a belief that there is no such thing as right or power in Government but only possession but also taken away all Religion and Obligation of an Oath in things lawful and indifferent God no doubt permitting it that they who would not stand and be protected by his ordinance and institution should fall into all infidelity and perjury and never be true to any thing they sweare to and set up instead of it 6. If the Law of God or Nature did create Regal Power by the acknowledgement The Law of God or Nature does not create Regal power by the submission or any act of the Subject or submission of Men thereunto or that Subjects were the essential instruments by which Regal Power was originally created and yet is continued in the world then were not Men only free from Regal or Higher Powers before they did submit thereunto but also free to make whom they would their Prince and so by consequence there can be no such thing as Hereditary Monarchy in the world which for many Hundred nay Thousand years where God was not pleased to reign himself immediately over his peculiar people was in the old time the only Government in the world For above 3000 years after the Creation was neither Aristocracy Democracy or Elective Monarchy ever heard of in the world and yet Hereditary Monarchy is in above 19 of 20 parts in the world the only Government Nor would any Government that ever was or is in the world grant this liberty to any one born in their dominion but upon resisting it or renouncing it whether he ever submitted to it or not proceed against him not as an Enemy but as a Rebel and Traitor To suppose therefore that Subjects acknowledgment and submission is previous the essential means by which God does create Regal or Higher Powers is upon the matter to give the Lye to all the Powers and Governments that are or ever were in the world 7. None of these things therefore but some higher cause must create Regal power and that Regal Power is the Ordinance of God the Apostle Regal Power is the Ordinance of God and created by the Law of Nature saies expresly where he saies Rom. 13 that he which resisteth the Higher or Regal power resisteth the Ordinance of God And that this is not Gods Ordinance only to them who receive and believe his revelation of himself in the Scriptures is evident by his ordaining of Hazael Cyrus Nabuchadnezer c. and to put all out of question the Apostle here calls Higher or Regal Power Gods Ordinance and at that time whenas there was no King in the world which did receive the Scriptures for the revealed word of God Besides Kings reign by God c. Pro. 8. 5. and that Kings reign by God not only where he is believed as having extraordinarily revealed himself in the Scriptures Job in the state of nature long before the Job 3. 6 7. Moral Law was given by Moses saies Reges in solio collocat in aeternum Regal power therefore is Gods Ordinance and from the Law of Nature 8. Regal power being Gods Ordinance and created by the Law of Adam had Dominion over all Creatures and not as Father Husband or Master of a Family Nature there was never any time wherein Men were borne out of subjection to it not but that the Laws of Nature
or at least ought to be a Presbyter but every Presbyter is not a Bishop For St. Paul saies Against an Elder or Presbyter receive not an accusation but before two or three witnesses 1 Tim. 5. 19. But equals cannot judge equals therefore Timothy as a Presbyter could not judge a Presbyter therefore he should judge him as being Bishop and so by consequence Presbyters are subject to the judgment of Bishops that is in Episcopal jurisdiction Besides Bishops have power of ordination of Presbyters in every City 1 Tit. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 22. but it is no where found that ever Presbyters did ordain Bishops It is not therefore Ecclesiastical practice only that is the universal practice of all Christians in all ages untill John Calvin but the institution of our Saviour by which Bishops do excell and govern Presbyters It was after the destruction of Jerusalem that Episcopi Presbyteri caepere appellari Pontifices sacerdotes as the most learned Estius observes and that the name of Priest is not a Jewish Distin 24. l. 4. pag. 35 36. word is evident for Melchisedech was not a Jew and yet a Priest and our Saviour a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech 11. What St. Paul in the end of his Epistle to Timothy calls Bishop of An Apostle and Bishop the same the Ephesians St. John Revel 2. 1. calls Angel of the Church of the Ephesians So St. Paul and St. John understand the same thing by Angel and Bishop but Angelus and Apostolus are the same and therefore Episcopus and Apostolus are the same But what need that be proved by deduction which the Apostle Gal. 1. 19. expresseth For James was none of the twelve yet being Bishop of Jerusalem St. Paul testifies him to be an Apostle Besides it is evident Episcopatus is the office as well of an Apostle as a Bishop Act. 1. 20. There is therefore no difference between an Apostle and a Bishop only Apostles constituted by our Saviour had their function universal whereas the Bishops or Apostles ordained by the Apostles had but a Topical function that is the exercise of their power was restrained to their City or Diocess And all Ecclesiastical writers do affirm that St. James did preside in the Council of Jerusalem although St. Peter with other of the Apostles were Members of it 12. Our Saviour having promised the ghostly power of Confirmaion Ordination The Power of Bishops which Priests have not c. to be with his Church to the end of the world and the power of Ordination Confirmation and Excommunication being bequeathed only to the Apostles the power of Ordination Confirmation and Excommunication descend only to the Apostles successors viz. Bishops rightly ordained 13. Not the voice and letter but the genuine and true sense of the Of the interpretation of Scriptures Word of God is the Canon of Christian Doctrine for the minde cannot be governed by Scriptures unless understood It is necessary therefore that Scriptures be interpreted before they be made a rule It will therefore follow that either God hath left a Power which may interpret Scripture or else that God hath revealed himself to Men without sense or meaning but the latter of these is most false and blasphemous therefore it is true that God hath left a power upon earth which may interpret the Scriptures 14. If the Scriptures were as Arts and Sciences which are derived from The Scriptures cannot be interpreted by themselves that is one place by another higher Principles or Axiomes which though they cannot be proved but are as Aristotle calls them indemonstrable propositions yet are so clear and manifest that no exception can be taken to them then indeed the Scriptures as well as Arts and Sciences might be proved one place by another untill they were resolved to their first Principles which though granted cannot be proved But it is far otherwise with the Scriptures for there is no Scripture which is not of like Authority with any other every Scripture being the Word of God one place of Scripture therefore cannot be interpreted by the consequents which may follow from another any more then the consequents which follow from Quae eidem sunt aequalia inter se sunt aequalia may be interpreted by Omne totum est majus sua parte 15. There is no prophesie of the Scripture of any private interpretation Not all they who do translate the Scriptures are the intepreters of them 2. Pet. 1. 20. It is not therefore every one who can translate the Scripture out of one language into another with his own private conceptions upon them which renders them to be interpreted by him What then hath God revealed himself to mankind in general without sense or meaning No it does not follow for as in temporal Laws no man can interpret them but he that made them either by himself or them whom he shall constitute yet every man may by his reason and discourse direct his own actions in conformity to those Laws but if he shall do any act upon misconstruction or interpretation of his own his mistaking the meaning of the Law shall not excuse him So private men may endeavor to direct their actions accordingly as they suppose God hath directed them in the Scriptures yet if upon their own heads they undertake to interpret the Scriptures although in order only to their own actions their misunderstanding the Scriptures shall never excuse any unjust act 16. Every Law of God is the Word of God but every Word of God is not the Law of God as Jacob went into Egypt is the Word but not the To whom the Authority of the interpretation of Scripture doth belong the Law of God The Scriptures contain Political Historical Moral and Natural things which are not rules of the mystery of Christian Faith and Religion Those things which concern Morality and Temporal power and Government our Saviour made no alteration in them for he saies St. Matth. 5. 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil And therefore quid est homicidium quid furtum quid sit meum vel tuum c. belongs to the Temporal power as much since our Saviour as before and truly I do not think I should do the Church of England any wrong if I should with Lindwood affirm that not only the Probate of Wills but also the cognisance of Tithes was in the Church ex consuetudine Angliae but those things which relate to mysteries of Christian faith as our Saviors being the Son of God took humane nature upon him and was born of a Virgin preached repentance died upon the cross for the sinnes of the world rose again the third day c. God to make his power known by the preaching of a few mean men and Fishermen and from the mouths of babes and sucklings all Temporal power not only not permitting but
St. 27 H. 8. cap. 15. Spiritual and sixteen Temporal to examine the Laws and Constitutions heretofore made according to the Statute of 25 H. 8. 9. But no Laws or Constitutions shall be made without the Kings assent nor contrary to the Kings Prerogative or the Laws of the Land If any person shall extoll the Authority of the Bishop of Rome he shall 28 H. 8. c. 10. incur the penalty of a Praemunire provided Anno 16 Ric. 2. Every Ecclesiastical and Lay-Officer shall be sworne to renounce the said Bishop and his Authority and to resist it to his power and to repute any Oath taken in maintenance of the said Bishop or his Authority to be void And the refusing of the said Oath to be Treason Makes all Bulls and Dispensations from the Bishop or See of Rome to 28 H. 8. c. 16. any of the Subject of this Realm void The King may nominate such number of Bishops Sees for Bishops 31 H. 8. c. 9. Cathedral Churches and endow them with such possessions as he will 1. If any person by word writing printing ciphering or otherwise do preach teach dispute or hold opinion That in the blessed Sacrament 31 H. 8. c. 14. called the Statute of the Six Articles of the Altar under form of bread and wine after the consecration thereof there is not really the natural body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ conceived of the Virgin Mary or that after the said consecration there remains any substance of bread or wine or any other substance but the substance of Christ God and man Or that in the flesh under the form of bread is not the very blood of Christ Or that with the blood under the form of wine is not the very flesh of Christ as well apart as though they were both together Or affirm the said Sacrament to be of other substance then is aforesaid Or deprave the said blessed Sacrament Then he shall be adjudged a Heretick and suffer death by burning and shall forfeit to the King all his lands tenements hereditaments goods and chattels as in case of High Treason 2. Or if any person preach in any Sermon or Collation openly made or teach in any Common School or Congregation or obstinately affirm or defend That the Communion of the blessed Sacrament in both kinds is necessary for the health of mans soul or ought to be administred in both kinds Or that it is necessary to be received by any person other then by Priests being at Mass and consecrating the same 3. Or that any man after the Order of Priesthood received may marry or contract matrimony 4. Or that any man or woman which advisedly hath vowed or professed or should vow or profess chastity or widowhood may marry or contract marriage 5. Or that Private Masses be not lawful or not laudable or should not be used or be not agreeable to the Laws of God 6. Or that Auricular confession is not expedient and necessary to be used in the Church of God He shall be adjudged suffer death and forfeit lands and goods as a Felon If any Priest or other man or woman which advisedly hath vowed chastity or widowhood do actually marry or contract matrimony with another Or any man which is or hath been a Priest do carnally use any woman to whom he is or hath been married or with whom he hath contracted matrimony or openly be conversant or familiar with any such woman both man and woman shall be adjudged Felons Commissions shall be awarded to the Bishop of the Diocese his Chancellor Commissary and others to enquire of the Heresies Felonies and offences aforesaid And also Justices of Peace in their Sessions and every Steward Under-Steward and Deputy of Steward in their Leets or Law-day by the oath of twelve men have authority to enquire of the Heresies Felonies and offences aforesaid See the 7. Chap. of B. Bramhalls Just Vindication of the Church of England where he endeavours to shew that not only the Emperor the King of France nay and the King of Spain have in effect done the same things with Henry the Eighth upon occasion or at least plead for it although for their interests they have not continued the exercise of their Jurisdiction as the Kings of England have done A short view or reflexion upon Henry the Eight and his Reformation How zealous a Defender of the Pope and See of Rome Henry the Eight K. H. 8. a zealous defender of the Pope and Papacy was in the beginning of his Reign is evident by his book written against Martin Luther For not being born Henry the seventh's eldest son his Father being a wondtrful frugal Prince and observing good natural parts in him bred him up in literature and destinated him to the Archbishoprick of Canterbury as being the cheapest and highest preferment he could give him But his elder brother being dead and after him his father The King esteeming it a great honor to imploy himself in so famous a controversie as was then maintained by the Wits of Christendom in defence and opposition of the Church of Rome wrote a book of the Seven Sacraments defending also the Papacy and oppugned the Doctrine of Luther This thing was so grateful to the Pope that Leo 10. honored him with the Title of Defender of the Faith But after he had been married to his brothers wife above twenty years and inflamed with lustful affection to Anne Bullein a Paragon and Minion From what cause the King became estranged from the Pope of the Court he became he said troubled in conscience for having married his brothers wife and therefore desired that the Pope would examine the case and satisfie his scruple of conscience It is a very remarkable thing that this ungodly Dispensation of Julius 2. for H. 8. his marrying with his brothers wife should be the cause of the King and Kingdoms defection from the Papacy under Clement 7. The Pope to satisfie the King gave the Cardinals Wolsey and Campeius a power Legatine to hear and determine the validity or invalidity of the marriage but the Queen refusing to submit to their determination appealed from them to the Pope The Pope had now a Wolf by the ears whom he could neither keep nor well let go For in pronouncing the marriage void he feared to incense Charls the Fifth being Nephew to Queen Katherine and the most potent Prince in Christendom and in confirming it he feared to lose Henry the then most beloved Son of the Church and great Defender of the Papacy not only in writing but also in joining with and assisting the French King Francis the First for freeing him from captivity being a prisoner under Charls The Pope therefore desires the advantage of time and proceeds slowly towards a determination The King as impatient in his desires expects a sentence from the Pope which not being to be had he procures Instruments from the Universities of Cambridge Oxford and Paris together
after them Gunthramn Clowis Carloman and Pepin at Masscon first and second at Chalons That which is called Francia and that which is in Vernis Twenty of them at least in France In Spain by ten several Kings in two Councels at Braccara and in ten at Tolledo by the space of three hundred years together And how under what terms Peruse the Councel themselves their very acts spake Ex praecepto Imperio Jussu Sanctione Nutu Decreto Ex evocatione Dispositione Regis One saith Potestas permissa est nobis another facultas data est nobis a third Injunctu est nobis á rege and this for about eight hundred years after Christ Then arose another Empire here in the West under Charls the Great and he called six several Councils at Frankfort Arles Tours Chalons Mentz and Rhemes And what says he in them In that at Rhemes In conventu mere priscorum Imperatorum congregato à piissimo Domino nostro Carolo That he called that Convention by no other right then as the manner of the antient Emperors had been to do After him Ludovicus Pius Lotharius Ludovicus Balbus Carolus Calvus Carolus Crassus and Arnulphus at the several Councils of Aken Mentz Melden Wormes Colen and Tribur and so held it nine hundred years after Christ for about that year a year or two over or under was holden the Council at Tribur in Germany by the Emperors decree and himself President in it Nor are the Kings of England less absolute then either Emperors Kings of Spain or France And see B. Bramhalls Just Vindication of the Church of England cap. 7. how the Emperors Kings of France Spain and Portugal have by their own authority convened National and Provincial Councils which have not only determined without the Papal authority but very often in contradiction to it Nor are either the English or British Churches or ever were less free then the Gallicane the liberties whereof in the Chapter aforesaid are set down viz. 1. The Pope cannot command or ordain any thing directly or indirectly concerning any Temporal affairs within the Dominions of the King of France 2. The Spiritual authority and power of the Pope is not absolute in The priviledges of the Gallican Church France but limited and restrained to the canons and rules of the antient Councils of the Church and received in that Kingdom 3. No command whatsoever of the Pope can free the French Clergy from their obligation to obey the commands of their Soveraign 4. The most Christian King hath had power at all times according to the occurrence and exigence of affairs to assemble or cause to be assembled Synods Provincial or National and therein to treat not only of such things as concern the conservation of the Civil estate but also of such things as concern Ecclesiastical order and discipline in his own dominions and therein to make Rules Chapters Laws Ordinances and Pragmatique Sanctions in his own name and by his own authority Many of which have been received among the Decrees of the Catholique Church and some of them approved by General Councils 5. The Pope cannot send a Legate à latere into France with power to reform judge collate dispence or do such things accustomed to be specified in the autoritative Bull of his Legation except it be upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King Neither can the said Legate execute his charge until he hath promised to the King in writing under his oath upon his holy Orders not to make use of his Legantine power in the Kings dominions longer then it shall please the King and that so soon as he shall be admonished of the Kings pleasure to forbid it he shall give it over And that whilst he doth use it shall be exercised conformable to the Kings will without attempting any thing to the prejudice of the Decrees of General Councils or the Liberties and Priviledges of the Gallicane Church and the Universities of France 6. The Commissions and Bulls of the Popes Legate are to be seen examined and approved by the Court of Parliament and to be registred and published with such cautions and modifications as that Court shall judge expedient for the good of the Kingdom and to be executed according to the said cautions and not otherwise 7. The Prelates of the French Church although commanded by the Pope for what cause soever it be may not depart out of the Kingdom without the Kings commandment or licence 8. The Pope cannot by himself or his delegates judge any thing which concerns the state preheminence or priviledges of the Crown of France nor any thing pertaining to it nor can there be any question or process about the state or pretensions of the King but in his Courts 9. Papal Bulls Citations Excommunications c. are not to be executed in France without the Kings command or permission and after permission only by the authority of the King and not by authority of the Pope to shun mixture and confusion of Jurisdictions 10. Neither the King nor his Realm nor his Officers can be excommunicated or interdicted by the Pope nor his Subjects absolved from their Oath of Allegiance 11. The Pope cannot impose Pensions in France upon any Benefices having cure of souls nor upon any others but according to the canons according to the express condition of resignation or ad redimendum vexationem 12. All Bulls and Missives which come from Rome to France are to be seen and visited to try if there be nothing in them prejudicial in any manner to the estate and liberties of the Church of France or to the Royal authority 13. It is lawful to appeal from the Pope to a future Council 14. Ecclefiastical persons may be convented judged and sentenced before a Secular Judge for the first grievous or enormous crime or for lesser offences after a Relapse which renders them incorrigible in the eye of the Law 15. All places of France are obliged to swear fealty to the King and to receive from him investitures for their fees and manors 16. The Courts of Parliament in case of Appeals as from abuse have right and power to declare null void and to revoke the Popes Bull and Excommunications and to forbid the execution of them when they are found contrary to Sacred Decrees the liberty of the French Church or the Prerogative Royal. 17. General Councils are above the Pope and may depose him and put another in his place and take cognisance of Appeals from the Pope 18. All Bishops have their power immediately from Christ not from the Pope and are equally successors of S. Peter and of the other Apostles and Vicars of Christ 19. Provisions Reservations Expective graces c. have no place in France 20. The Pope cannot exempt any Church Monastery or Ecclesiastical body from the jurisdiction of the Ordinary nor erect Bishopricks into Archbishopricks nor unite them nor divide them without the Kings licence 21. All those are not Hereticks
Queen Mary to be born in lawful Matrimony and all sentences Stat. An. Pri. Cap. 1. sess 2. Mariae of divorce to the contrary repealed particularly the sentence of Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury touching the Kings marriage with Queen Katherine and the two Acts of Parliament of the 25 H. 8. 22. 28 H. 8. 7. confirming the same A Repeal of the Statute of 1 Ed. 6. 2. made against such as speak unreverently St. An. Pri. Ma. sess 2. Cap. 2. of the body and blood of Christ and of the Statute of 1 Ed. 6. 2. touching Election of Bishops and the 2 Ed. 6. 1. concerning the uniformity of service and administration of the Sacraments and of 2 Ed. 6. 21. made to take away all positive Laws ordained against the marriage of Priests and of the 3 Ed. 6. 10. made for the abolishing of divers books and Images and of the 3 Ed. 6. 12. made for the ordering of Ecclesiastical Ministers and of the 5 Ed. 6. 1. made for the uniformity of common Prayer and Administration of Sacraments and of the 5 Ed. 6. 3. made for the keeping of Holy days and Fasting days and of the 5 Ed. 6. 12. touching the Marriage of Priests and legitimation of their children All such divine service and administration of Sacraments as were most commonly used in England in the last year of H. 8. shall be used through the Realm after the 20 day of December Anno Dom. 1553. and no other kinde of service nor administration of Sacraments It is Enacted That if any person or persons of their own power and authority after the 20. of December shall willingly and of purpose by open or St. An. 1 Mariae Sess 2. Cap. 3. overt word fact c. maliciously or contemptuously neglect vex or disturb c. any Preacher or Preachers licensed allowed or authorized to Preach by the Queens Highness or by any Archbishop or Bishop of this Realm or by any other lawful Ordinary or by either of the Universities of Oxford or Cambridge or otherwise lawfully authorized by reason of his Cure or Benefice c. in any open Sermon Preaching or Collation in any Church Chappel or Churchyard c. Or if any person shall wilfully disturb c. any Parson Vicar Parish-Priest Curat or other lawful Priest saying or celebrating the Mass or other divine service sacraments or sacramentals as was commonly frequented and used in the last year of H. 8. or afterward should be allowed and set forth or authorized by the Queen Or if any person shall contemptuously unlawfully or maliciously deface spoil abuse or unreverently handle or order the most blessed comfortable and holy sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ commonly called the Sacrament of the Altar being in any Church Chappel or other decent place or the Piece or Canapy wherein the same Sacrament is or shall be or pull down deface spoil or otherwise break any Altar or Altars or any Crucifix or Cross in any Church Chappel or Churchyard That then every such offender his ayders and abettors shall be apprehended c. by the Constable or Churchwarden of the place wherein the said offences shall be committed Which persons so apprehended c with convenient speed shall be brought and carried to any Justice of Peace within the said Shire c. where the said offence shall be committed and the said Justice of Peace upon due accusation shall forthwith commit the said person or persons to safe custody as by the discretion of the said Justice shall be thought meet and within six days next after such accusation the said Justice with other Justices of Peace in the said Shire City c. shall diligently examine the acts and offences aforesaid And if two of the said Justices of Peace shall upon examination finde the person or persons so accused guilty of any of the said offences by two sufficient witnesses or by confession the said Justices of Peace shall commit the person or persons so accused to the Gaol of the County City Burrough c. where the said offences were committed without bail or mainprize by the space of three moneths and further to the next quarter sessions to be holden in the said shire city burrough c. next after the end of the said three months which quarter sessions the party offending upon his repentance and reconciliation shall be discharged out of prison upon sufficient security for his good behaviour for one whole year but if he or they will not repent and be reconciled then to be committed again to the said Gaol there to remain until he or they shall repent and be reconciled for their offences If any person shall receive the offendor or disturbe the arrest he shall forfeit to the Queene her Heires and Successors for every such offence the summe of five pounds If any offendor bee not taken but escape hee shall forfeit to the Queene for every such escape five pounds The Justices of Peace Justices of Assize Justices of Oyer and Terminer all Mayors Bayliffs Justices of Peace within any City Borough or Town-corporate have power and authority to enquire into heare and determine the offences and misdemeanors aforesaid and to set fines and amerciaments therefore This Act doth not take away any authority jurisdiction c. of Ecclesiasticall Lawes then in force This Statute repeales all Statutes made against the Church of Rome particularly Anno 1 2 Phil. Mar. cap. 8. the Statute of 21 H. 8. 13. made against plurality of Benefices taking of Farmes by Spirituall men and non residence The Statute of 23 H. 8. 9. That no person shall be cited out of his Diocess wherein he or she dwelleth except for certain cases Stat. 24 H. 8. 12. That Appeals in such cases as had been proved in the See of Rome should not from henceforth be had nor used but within this Realm Stat. 25 H. 8. 19. entituled The submission of the Clergy to the Kings Majesty Stat. 25 H. 8. 20. concerning restraints of Payments of Primates and First-fruits of Arch-bishopricks Bishopricks to the See of Rome Stat. 25 H. 8. 21. concerning the exoneration of the Kings Subjects from exactions and impositions before that time paid to the See of Rome and for having licences and dispensations within this Realm without suing further for the same Stat. 26 H. 8. 1. concerning the Kings being supreme head of the Church and to have Authority to reform and redresse all errors heresies and abuses in the same Stat. 26 H. 8. 14. for nomination and confirmation of Suffragans within this Realm Stat. 27 H. 8. 15. whereby the King should have power to nominate 32. persons of his Clergy and Lay Fee for making Ecclesiasticall Lawes Stat. 28 H. 8. 10. Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome Stat. 28. H. 8. 16. For release of such as then had obtained pretenced licences and dispensations from the See of Rome Stat.
shall incur any forfeiture or losse for travelling or making appearance accordingly Every person so restrained as aforesaid shall be bound to yeeld their bodies to the Sherif of the County upon Proclamation in that behalfe made nor shall incurre any penalty for so doing If any person which shall offend against this Act shall before he be thereof convict come to some parish Church on some Sunday or Festivall day and then heare divine Service and at Service time or at the reading of the Gospell make open submission and declaration of his conformity to the Queenes Lawes as hereafter is declared that then every such offendor shall be cleerly discharged The forme of the submission is I A. B. doe humbly confesse and acknowledge That I have grievously offended God in contemning her Majesties godly and lawfull government and authority by absenting my selfe from Church and from hearing Divine Service contrary to the godly Lawes and Statutes of this Realm and am heartily sory for the same and doe acknowledg and testifie in my Conscience That the Bishop or See of Rome hath not or ought to have any power or authority over her Majesty or within any of her Majesties Dominions or Realmes And I do promise and Protest without dissimulation or any colour or meanes of dispensation That from henceforth I will from time to time obey and performe her Majesties Lawes and Statutes in repairing to Church and hearing Divine Service and doe my utmost endeavor to maintain and defend the same The Minister or Curate of every parish where such submission shall bee made shall presently cause the same to be entred into a booke to be kept in every Parish for that purpose and within ten dayes after shall certifie the same to the Bishop of the Diocess Every offendor that shall after such submission relapse and become Recusant in not repairing to Church to heare Divine service as aforesaid shall lose all benefit he might have enjoyed by such submission Every woman married shall be bound by every article branch and matter contained in this Act other then the branch or article of abjuration nor shall any woman married be compelled to make abjuration Of the Reformation made by Queen Elizabeth QUeen Mary dying upon the 17. Novemb. 1558. the same day both The Pope did reject the Queen before the Queen rejected the Pope Houses of Parliament without any contradiction did acknowledge and receive Elizabeth to be the true and undoubted Heir to the Crown of England and without delay with sound of Trumpet dissolved the Parliament for that being called by Queen Mary could have no being or continue after her death The Queen caused an account to be given of her assumption to the Pope who was Paulus Quartus with letters of Credence to Sir Edward Cerne who was Ambassador to her Sister and not departed from Rome But the Pope was so far from acknowledging her that he answered that that Kingdome viz. of England was held in Fee of the Apostolick See that she could not succeed being illegitimate that he could not contradict the Declaration of Clement the Seventh and Paul the Third that it was a great boldness to assume the name of Government without him that for this she deserved not to be heard in any thing yet being desirous to shew a fatherly affection if she will renounce her pretensions and refer her self wholly to his free disposition he will doe whatsoever may be done in the honor of the Apostolick See * And afterwards he commanded Sir Edward Hist conc Trint 411. Cerne who had continued Ambassador at Rome for Henry the Eighth Queen Mary and then for Queen Elizabeth to lay down his office of Ambassador that I may use his own very words sayes the Author by force of a Mandat made by Lively voice from the Oracle of our most Holy Lord the Pope by virtue of holy obedience and under pain of the greater Excommunication and also of losse of all his goods that he should not depart out of the City but undertake the Government of an Hospitall of the English * It is true Indeed that Pius 4. a man of much more moderate disposition Camb. Eliz. Keg Pag. 28. then his Predecessor did in the year 1560. by Letters sent by Vineentius Parpalia Abbot of St. Saviours to her full of humanity not only acknowledge her Queen of England and invited her to return into the bosome of the Church but also as the report went promised to recall the sentence pronounced against her Mothers Marriages as unjust to confirme the book of Comon-prayer in English by his authority and to permit the use of the Sacrament in both kinds to the People of England in case she will joyn her self to the Church of Rome and acknowledge the Primary of the Roman See * And afterwards in the year 1561. in Letters full of affection by Abbot Camb. Eliz. Reg. 58. 59. Martinego he invited her to the Councell of Trint Camb. Eliz. Reg. 68. 69. but matters were so far thrust off the hinges that not only Parpalia returned without any fruit but Martinego was denied access into England Not only the Arch-bishop of York but all the other Bishops except The Bishops except Carlile refuse to crown her Carlile did refuse to Crown the Queen both because she had been instructed in the Protestant Religion and because she had forbidden the Archbishop of York a little before he was to celebrate Divine service to elevate the Host for adoration and had suffered the Letany with the Epistles and Gospel to be used in the popular tongue It is no wonder therefore if the Parliament which happened immediately after and the Commons especially who once usually swayed only by passion and affection and much averse from the Religion of the Church of Rome did endue the Queen with such plentifull power as to make her supreme Governor the title of Head was waved in all causes as well Spirituall as Temporall This power the Queen well understanding what advantage would be How far the Queen did declare her Power in Ecclesiasticall matters made thereof by her adversaries did by Proclamation and after by her Injunctions declare that she took nothing upon her more then what anciently of right be longed to the Crown of England to wit that she had supreme power and jurisdiction under God over all sorts of people within the Kingdome of England whether they be Ecclesiasticall or Lay persons and that no forrein Power hath or ought to have any jurisdiction or authority over them Camb. Eliz. Reg. 39. 40. In the 37. Article of the Church of England she declares We give to How far the Church of England declares the Prerogative of Princes Our Princes that Prerogative which we see in holy Scripture alwayes given to all godly Princes by God himself to rule all estates and degrees of men committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or Temporall and to restrain
Nor was that less abhorrent to me which men in this factious age beg for a Principle viz. That all men by Nature or the Law of Nature are in a like equal condition and that the Laws of Nature are eternal and immutable even by God himself And yet by a continued violence upon these eternal and immutable Laws men should every where in the world live in Society or in the mutual offices of commanding and obeying Yet did not I so confidently resolve these things as to exclude what I could argue against them I therefore did suppose in my self a company of such men as were in a parity of condition yet could I never conceive it possible that ever any Civitas or Supreme power could be derived or created by them For either this Civitas must be superior to the Cives or People that made it or not If it were not superior to it then could it not govern or rule them for dominion is always placed in the superior part If superior to it then was the Creature or Instrument superior to the Cause and Creator which is most absurd Nor was it to me less monstrous to imagine that any thing could give or transfer that to another which it self hath not but this people or multitude who should make this civitas had neither Jus vitae or necis nor Property seperately nor conjunctly they could not therefore endue another with that power which none of them nor all of them together had and without which there can be no supream power which may protect and defend Subjects But I did not insist onely upon this but supposed that the cives could make a civitas which should be superior to them and endew it with a power which none of them nor all of them had yet was I no less perplexed then before who these cives which should make this civil Pact should be and who should be subject to it If onely those be the cives who made this civitas and they onely subject to it then were Women and Children who were none of the cives that made this civitas free and independent from it Nor could all the people or multitude of both Sexes and all Ages in such an imaginary state be the cives which must constitute this civitas by virtue of the civil Pact For many must necessarily be so yong as not being compotes mentium they could have understanding sufficient for the doing such an act And if no Laws oblige Men to their Pacts and Contracts done under such an age then sure it must be unreasonable that Children and Infants should be obliged to their act if they then did it or therefore obliged because others had done it upon whom they had no dependence Well but suppose these men in such a condition to be qualified to do such an act yet did another doubt arise which I could no ways salve viz. Who should define at what age the Men should be who should constitute this civitas Well I went yet further I supposed it granted That it should be agreed at what age Men in such a condition might give up their wills and constitute a civitas yet was it not in reason probable that this civitas should be of one days continuance For being formally constituted of such individual cives it could not be of any longer continuance then the cause Sublata causa tollitur effectus but the next day some of the cives would be probably dead and others grown up to be of age who were none of those individuals which did constitute the civitas Well but I supposed the cives who made Formae rerum sicut numeri consistunt in indivisibili They could not therefore be the cives that did constitute the civitas and by consequence no such could remain as the civitas this civitas to be immortal and no posterity yet could not I in reason expect it to be of any continuance for cujus est velle ejus est nolle and not onely all just and legal actions but all Arts and Sciences may truly and ultimately be resolved into their first Principles without any diminution to them The People therefore constant in nothing but inconstancy could not in reason be expected constant and obedient to their Creature the civitas onely and yet so in nothing else Besides I always did believe and yet do that all Mens Pacts and Wills must be conformable to the Laws of every place and where they are against them then do they oblige no further then to Repentance Much more therefore ought all mens Wills and Pacts to conform and submit to the Laws of Nature and never transgress that and that all Pacts and Acts of mens Wills made against it oblige to nothing but Repentance Nor is there any thing more abominable then to conceive that the Acts of mens Wills should irritate the Law of Nature which they say is immutable by God Hence it is I conceive that Mr. Hobbs will not have all men to be of a like and equal condition lege naturae but jure naturae and therefore most absurdly makes jus naturae to be contrary to lex naturae and yet oftentimes in his Preface and Cap. 8. Art 10. confounds jus with lex and that the Acts of mens Wills to make them in a better estate then God hath made them should be the Law of Nature or of God Whereas on the contrary If no man that ever was born in the World which was not a Posthumus King but was born in subjection not onely to his Parents or as a Servant in a Family but to something superior to these then cannot the will of that man nor all the men in the World alter or make that man in another condition then that whereof neither any act of his will nor the will of any man else was the cause But yet did not I conclude things onely as I was an intellectual or rational Creature but being a Christian I submitted all my Reason and Understanding to the most high Authority of sacred Scripture in those plain places which admit of no Controversie where both in the Old and New Testament the first causes of supream Power are owned to be Gods Ordinance Rom. 13. By God Kings raign and Princes decree Prov. 8. Justice and there can be no power but from above Joh. 19. 11. And all power is in relation to something subject to it But because I would not seem to see only with mine own eyes I desired yet to be better informed of these things and from whom better then Mr. Hobbs and Hugo Grotius Men no doubt of as eminent learning and parts as any this last Age hath produced these Men both derive their civitas from such Principles as is before spoken of viz. From the Pacts and contracts of Men in a parity and equal condition but so far was I from being convinced that if I understand them aright I was amazed to see such inconsistible
The Tenth GROUND Why a Man is to hazard himself for the Common good INdeed herein for ought I know may be much Treasure and Learning and there let it be for I never intend to look into it The Twelfth GROUND Who is such a Governor and the Subjects Duty towards him Author WE have long talked of a Supreme Governor it is time we should point him out that he may be known And since all agree that there are three sorts of Government Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy when they are simple there can be no doubt who is the Supreme Magistrate Now mingled they may be either continually as when all parts mixed are so often engaged that their Authorities run joyntly or else some are continual others but at certain terms Observ Our Author has talked long indeed and to very little purpose of his Supreme Governor and now he thinks it high time to point him out that he may be known and he thinks he has already so sufficiently described him that any Ingenious Rational Man may easily discern him and so takes leave of him and tells us All agree there are three sorts of Government Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy and that they may be mixed May they so Then sure they may be more then three viz. Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy Monarchy mixed with Aristocracy Monarchy mixed with Democracy and Monarchy mixed both with Aristocracy and Democracy Aristocracy mixed with Monarchy Aristocracy mixed with Democracy and Aristocracy mixed with both and so Democracy mixed with Monarchy Aristocracy and both So that either these three sorts of Government will admit of no mixture or else there may be above three sorts of Government Author The next stumble for steps our Author makes none is What Monarchy is if it be mixed but if it be mixed how can it be Monarchy for Regia Majestas est indivisibilis with Aristocracy or Democracy so that they be continually joynt Actors the Monarch is but a Servant and the other part the Master Observ Could any Man give a name to this Government it must be either Aristomonarchy or Demo-monarchy in plain English the chief Government of one Man alone or the People-Government of one alone but this is our Author saies but only when they are joint Actors and then the Monarch is but a servant Did ever any Man talk so senselesly as if he understood neither words nor meaning for Monarchy is the Government of one Person alone which is impossible if it be subservient to the Government of any Court or People unless our Author can make a Court or People not consisting of Men. Nor is the Instants he gives of the Italian Dogs and Lacedemonian Kings any thing to the purpose for who in the World ever heard of the Monarch of Venice Genoa or Lacedemon It is true indeed that Euristhenes and his Brother Procles the Sons of Aristodemus Grandchildren of Cleodaeus Great Grandchildren of Hyllus Adnepotes of Hercules were the first two Kings of Lacedemon Anno mundi 2848. and out of their two Families called the Eurypontidan and Agidan the Kings of Lacedemon did joyntly reign until that about the year of the world 3777. Eurydamadas was the last of the Eurypontidan family descended from Procles and almost at the same time Cleomines the last of the Agidan family descended from Eurysthenes was overcome by Antigonus King of Macedon Yet could not this Government be properly called Monarchy but Duarchy Author Nor less childish is his mixture of Aristocracy and Democracy for these will as little admit of mixture as any other But see what a wise observation he makes viz. The quarrel to be more ballanced because the Government is divided in its self and therefore dangerous Observ So then the mixture of Monarchy with either or both the other Governments makes no division or to what purpose does our Author take notice of this dangerous mixture only in these two and then our Author makes no doubt but if Aristocracy gets power enough she is in posture of Supreme Authority Very wittily observed and a very great doubt wisely resolved Author Monarchy and Democracy can hardly be so mixed that Democracy be perpetual and Monarchy by spurts for that is not Monarchy the said Monarch being not long enough in Power to be accounted a setled Magistrate as we see in the Decemvirs Tribunes and Dictators among the Romans Observ So then here is Monarchy mixed with Democracy and not mixed and why not mixed because forsooth it is by spurts and not long enough to be accounted a setled Magistrate no how long then settles a Magistrate our Author no where saies but if he had learned a very little Logick he might have known that majus minus non variant speciem and a Magistrate of an hours settlement is as much a Magistrate as if he had been one never so long And then see the wild instance of the Man for although in the Roman Dictators there were some shadow of Monarchy yet in the Tribunes being two and the Decemvirs being ten there could be no possible colour thereof unless our Author by his Logick can make two Men and ten Men to be but one Man alone But stultum est stolidas opiniones accuratius refellere I will referr my self to the censure of any Ingenuous and Judicious Reader that has patience to read any one Ground in this whole book if there be more sence or reason in it then in this and the foregoing Grounds of this Mans Obedience and Government The Thirteenth GROUND Of the Qualities of Laws and Commands in respect to Obedience HE that can find any good in this Ground of our Authors let him take it for me I will not hinder him The Fourteenth GROUND In what conditions the Subject may resist Government Observ WE left our Author Ground 7 wondring at a Jack-a-Lent of his own making and here we find him throwing stones at it to beat it down again as who indeed may so well marre it as he that made it But why does our Author say the Subject may resist for resistance is usually taken in an ill sence as when the subordinate resists his superior Why if his absolute Governor has no power but what those Laws which the People as he calls them gave him if he does transgress the People might remand him to his Duty and if he does not obey he resists the People Author Then our Author saies It is evident if it be rational to resist Government it will be lawful also to break and remove it Observ So that now all the fat is in the fire all that our prudent Architector has been all this while a building is blown away with this small wind It may be a question hereafter where our Author shall next fetch his fire now his Ignis fatuus is out Plut. in the life of Themistocles recites That Themistocles making himself merry with his Sons insolent usage of his Mother and his Mothers like usage of his
least Liberty and that which in other men is termed Anger in them is called Pride and Tyranny Besides in private men it is enough that they themselves do well but Princes must have a care that neither they nor their Ministers do ill 6. Tibi soli peccavi says the Psalmist Psal 50. Humane Laws are the The Supreme power is not obliged by his own Laws organs or instruments of the Power that governeth they cannot therefore extend themselves to bind him from whom they are derived for Omnis potentia activa est principium transmutandi aliud Besides the Prince may free other men from the obligation of the Laws and therefore much more himself And if Supreme Princes were obliged by their own Laws then were Humane Laws as well as the Laws of Nature eternal and immutable which is absurd nor could Humane Laws protect Subjects when any thing happens which comes to pass every day that was not foreseen at the making of the Laws Humane Laws are made to oblige and preserve the governed necessitate coactionis but they cannot have any obligation upon Lawgiver who is the Supreme power unless a man will grant that an Effect may be prime and superior to the Cause Nor were ever other Governments subject to their own Laws No man hath any thing proper against the Supreme power 7. No Subject hath any Property except Ecclesiasticks but by the Laws of his Country But by the precedent Proposition no Supreme Prince can be obliged by his own Laws and therefore no Subject can have property against him If any Subject had property against the Supreme power then could not the Supreme power impose a Forfeiture of Goods in case of Praemunire Attaint Conviction of Treason or Felony But the Consequence is false and therefore the Antecedent is false That any man hath any property against the Supreme power Besides there could no Fine nor Fine and Recovery be levied or suffered if he in Reversion or Remainder had property against the Supreme power Nor could an Act of Parliament enable Tenant for life to make sale of his Estate It is remarkable that the Children of Israel should not be content to Annot. have God to reign over them immediately who did himself give them Laws being enquired of by the High-Priest Samuel might well say therefore unto them Ye shall cry in that day because of your King which not ye shall choose but which ye shall have chosen you and the Lord shall not hear you in that day 1 Sam. 8. 18. For Gods ways and actions are always perfect whereas by the reason of humane frailty the best mans actions are subject to imperfections But if it seems grievous to any man that he holds his goods at the will of another let him consider that God since Adam did never give any Nation but only the Children of Israel Property but always used the mediation of his Vicegerents And since Property must be derived from some Humane act for the Law of Nature gives none but to Supreme Princes and therefore the possessions of Kings are called Sacra patrimonia because Kings have no Superior but God Almighty Proedium Domini Regis est directum dominium cujus nullus Author est nisi Deus How Sir Ed. Co. Com. on Lit. p. 1. 6. much better is it for Subjects to hold of one Man then of many For nothing can be objected against one but will have more force against many And let any man shew me in these last five hundred years any Subjects estate taken from him without due and legal proceeding by the act of any of the Kings of England and I will shew him five hundred who not being liable to any punishment by Law have been ruined themselves and their families in seven years and that for observing the Laws and against the will of the King Obj. But many Actions have been brought against the King which if no Annot. 2. man hath Property against him may seem inconsistent Answ But the question here is not what the King may do but what he hath done Not what the King may declare Law but what he hath already declared Law 8. Majesty is from the Law of Nature immediately but the power Power of Magistrates from him of Magistrates is not so but mediately that is from him who hath the Supreme power Magistracie is the instrument or organ by which Majesty is conveyed to every place whither its own power is extended And as Majesty is restrained to the Laws of Nature and is accountable to God for all the omissions and transgressions of them so Magistrates are restrained to Humane Laws and ought to give an account of their actions to him that hath the Supreme power And as no man can offer violence or contempt to Humane Majesty but it is a contempt and violence to the Majesty of Heaven so no man can offer violence to or contemn Magistrates but it is done to Humane Majesty from whence their authority is derived Wherefore Subjects must submit to Governors who are sent by Kings 1 Pet. 2. 14. By this Proposition it is evident that although Supreme power cannot Annot. be divided yet the exercise of it may For where a King is an Enfant he cannot exercise his power who can neither act any thing nor expres what he would have done nay it is impossible for the best and wisest King that ever was to exercise his power every where for one body can be but in one place at once though the power thereof may be diffused every where as the light and influence of the Sun is diffused every where although the body of it can be but in one place And the exercise of power by Magistrates is like Gods governing the world by natural causes who being the first Mover of all things produceth natural effects by the order of second causes Jethro his counsel to Moses therefore is to be taken Thou wilt surely weare away both thou and this people that is with thee for this thing is too heavy for thee thou art not able to perform it thy self alone Exod. 18. 18. 9. Quando lex aliquid alicui concedit concedere videtur id sine quo res The Right of calling Assemblies belongs to Christian Kings ipsa esse non potest where any Law Divine or Humane does give any thing it gives all the means by which this otherwise could not be had And that God by the Law of Nature has given Kings a power to protect their Subjects we have sufficiently demonstrated but it is impossible Princes should protect and govern their Subjects if they might not rule their actions Now all actions and motions are either regular or irregular All regular motions and actions may be reduced to one certain beginning where the beginning is not one and certain there they may be called commotions or confusions rather then motions or regular actions But all Assemblies are motions and therefore they
Temporal Dominions and therefore may punish disturbers of the peace of the Church as well as the State Yet when the Temporal Magistrate shall arrogate to himself a power which our Saviour only left to his Church and make all Ecclesiastical rights and constitutions depending and subordinate to the Civil whereby the Enemies of our Church have taxed our Religion not for Christian but Parliamentary no doubt but it is a crying sin and I wish there had never been any such thing among us 19. And as God is to be obeyed before men in all things which concern Or the Laws of Nature Faith and Religion so in the observance of the Laws of Nature is God to be obeyed before men As if a King commands me to dishonor my parents this can be but a Humane law but to honor my parents is a law which God hath written in my heart and therefore ought to be preferred If a King commands his Subjects to dishonor him or to deny obedience to him this is but a Humane law whereas by the law of Nature I ought to honor and obey my King I therefore ought not to obey such a law Amurath the Second of that name King of the Turks upon a Vow resigned his Kingdom to his son Mahomet yet upon the League made by Uladislaus King of Pole and Hungary with other Christian Princes against him he resumed his Regal authority and so kept it until his death And so might Charls the Fifth if he had pleased nor was Philip any other then an Instrument of his Fathers during his Fathers life The King makes a Law giving the succession of the Crown from the right Heir This ought not to be received for Princes inherit by a higher Law then Humane 20. The King commands a Judge to pervert Judgment the Judge Or to pervert Judgment ought to give true Judgment for all Humane Laws in peaceable times ought to be â priori and proclaimed that all men after such a time should observe them This verbal command of the King wanting this formality and it being impossible for the Judge to observe both these commands he ought notwithstanding this verbal command to give Judgment according to Law The King when there is no necessity or publick danger commands me Quaere who am no publick Executioner without any Judicial sentence to put a man to death for which he can make no compensation As Davids commanding Joab to murder Uriah although we find David only reprehended and punished therefore yet sure if Joab had not fulfilled Davids wicked command he had not sinned But you may object Who shall judge whether this thing commanded be repugnant to Gods Majesty Mans faith Religion or the Law of Nature the King or the Subject I say though the Subject hath not an equal right of judging with the King whether this thing should be a Law or not yet every Subject hath a Conscience as well as the King which must dictate Whether Kings divest themselves of Regality by commanding what they ought not to him whether he ought to do or not to do such a thing 21. But if the King commands things contrary to Gods Majesty and Divine Laws ought he not to be obeyed in those things which do not contradict them It is so mad and wild an objection as it is scarce worth an answering unless a man will affirm that my doing of an act which I ought not to have done does divest me of Humane nature or that a Fathers or Masters commanding his Son or Servant what he ought not doth annihilate the relations of Father and Son Master and Servant or that Humane acts may dissolve Humane relations A Prince therefore ought to be obeyed in those things which he ought to command as Prince although he command such things as he ought not 22. It may be it will be objected That Temporal punishments being Though inflicting punishment for not observance the usual concomitants for not observing Humane Laws a good and conscientious man may be punished for what he ought not to have done I say his case is the same with his Lords and Saviours and all those blessed and glorious primitive Christians and Martyrs who suffered for the testimony of a good conscience Nor hath God made Heaven so easie a prize that it should be always won easily and delicately but many times by suffering and martyrdom 23. It is the most usual thing with seditious men before they enter Whether Princes ought to be resisted where they are not to be obeyed into open sedition to prepare mens mindes with certain Cases wherein Princes commanding things derogatory to Gods Honor or the Subjects Liberty that then in the preservation of themselves and Gods honor they ought to defend themselves from the raging Tyrannie of Princes and to be sure that whatsoever they command these good men will judge contrary to Gods Honor and the Liberty of the Subject It is worth the while if a mans patience will give him leave to look back upon the thing calling it self Parliament how after they had made the King grant whatsoever they could think might be beneficial to the Subjects though I might be sworne they never intended as plainly appeared afterward the good benefit or liberty of the Subject what pious ways they invented to make themselves great and so good a Prince nothing and odious to his Subjects As the demanding of six men holding intelligence with his Subjects who had been in open hostility and rebellion against him an affront not to be endured by any King to an ordinary and Legal Trial this was not only denied but Voted a Breach of the Priviledge of Parliament whenas the Priviledge of Parliament extends not to so much as breach of the Peace much less to Treason They pretend though most falsly that in case of extreme danger and necessity the Militia is in the Parliament meaning themselves excluding the King And then create Dangers and write Letters how great Fleets of Danes Swedes Hollanders c. were seen at Sea It must be from Westminster then for there were the Letters written and the Fleets never since heard of Then permit if not command the most insufferable affronts and indignities that ever were offered to Majesty yet if the King but offers to increase his Guard this is Voted no less then a raising of War against his Parliament and Subjects whilst all the while against the Lex consuetudo Parliamenti Inst par 4. 14. without any cause moving them they maintain an illegal Rout of men for their Guard and go armed themselves Nay what needs a man instance particulars All the Kings commands in prosecution of the Laws were Voted breaches of the Priviledges of Parliament and the Liberties of the Subject We will therefore shew that this Assertion is not only contrary to all Faith in both Testaments but also destructive to all Humane Society 24. There is no man sure will deny but
pretended Salique Law 30. Delegata potestas non potest participari No man can participate No Prince can give sell or transfer his power much less alien the power which he is intrusted with But supreme power is delegate from God to every Prince and therefore no Prince can give sell or bequeath his power to any other The King is Gods Lieutenant upon earth Coke 3 par Inst cap. Deodands fol 57. 31. It may be the Electors are the Instruments by which the Elected Elective Monarchy King or Monarch receives his power but I do not understand how such a King can be a Supreme Prince Yet this by the way Neither now nor heretofore was ever such Prince chosen either by the people in general or by the Masters in families nor the Electors chosen by them 32. Aristocracy is when a company of men met in Councel ascribe Aristocracy to themselves whatsoever power is due to any rightful Monarch not being chosen by the people in general but have places either by birth or as they are chosen by the Council such is the state of Venice such were the Roman Senate and Ephori of Lacedemon 33. Democracy is when they who being free of the City do meet at a Democracy time and place appointed where they choose Ministers and Officers make and alter laws and do whatsoever they think good or what shall appear good to them as represented to them by popular Orators But because business might so fall out that there might be a necessity of making War or Peace raising mony for defence of the Commonwealth c. besides the times and places appointed the Athenian Archon and Tribunes of the Roman people had liberty given them to assemble the people when they thought fit I think no man can well tell whether the Roman Government before Caesars dictatorship were Democratical or Aristocratical For though men might appeale from the Consuls to the Tribunes yet by an Act of the Senate after the suppressing of the Gracchi the Consuls might provide that the Common-wealth should receive no detriment which is as general and high a power as can be given No wonder then if Marius pretending the power of the Common wealth and Sylla the authority of the Senate should reduce both Rome and Senate to so lamentable a condition and that Julius Cesar assisted by Lucius Antonius and Quintus Curio the Tribunes of the people and Pompey by the Senate should raise such War and commotion every where to the utter subversion of the absolute power as they called it both of Senate and people CHAP. IV. Of the three Species of Government viz. Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy 1. IMperium est duplex solutum legibus and astrictum legibus this is There are but 3 species of Government and all compounded Government is either supervacantous or destructive to the Governors and Governed Empire restrained to the Laws and is of Magistrates who although they command private men yet they themselves are bound by the laws and command of their superiors which is the power of our Judges Justices c. That is Majesty an Empire which is the Arbitrator Moderator Controuler and maker of all laws and who justly has it is accountable only to God and this Empire is so essential to all Government that without it there can be no Kingdom or Commonwealth there cannot be any property any meum or tuum but what this Empire gives no man has any security of his life or estate but as he is preserved and protected by this power or command And though government do differ as it hath been and yet is in many places of the world in specie viz. Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy yet in all of them this power or command is the same and equal viz. Supreme And this power or command must be in one thing viz. in one man in one court in one people but if it be divided into two or more it is either supervacaneous or destructive for those two or more in whom this divided Empire does consist must either agree or disagree in the same thing if they agree to will or nill the same then it is supervacaneous for it had been all one if but one part had willed it and frustra fit per plura c. but if they disagree in willing or nilling the same thing it is destructive for it is impossible for the Subject to obey because the Law it self is a contradiction and if the Subject obeys one he disobeys the other and to obey neither brings Anarchy and confusion upon all the governed What is left then but the Subject to be divided aswell as the power and a Kingdom divided in it self cannot stand St. Mar. 3. 24. Neither are the Governors in whom this divided power or command does consist in any better case then the Subject for Nulla fides regni sociis omnisque potestas Lucan Impatiens consortis erit It were infinite to enumerate the sad consequences which division of Kingdoms have brought upon those Kingdoms where they were made Let any man look upon the Estate of the Roman Empire when it was divided by Constantine the Great among his three sons Constantinus Constantius Constans Nor did ever the Empire retain the name and dignity after the division made by Theodosius to his sons Arcadius and Honorius Nor was the Western Empire ever raised again to near the greatness it had in Charlemaines time after the division made by Lotharius Lewis and Charles sons of Lodovicus Pius and what horrible confusions followed upon the divisions is easie to be imagined whenas in the first Battel between the brethren was slain the greatest part of the Nobility of France and more men died in it then in any other battle that hapned in France since that fought between Ecius and Attila King of the Huns in the fields of Catalonia But that we may not go so far and yet find examples neerer home Rodry Maure or Rodry the great King of Wales Son of Mersyn Frith had issue three Sons Mervin Anarawd and Cadelh In the yeare when he dyed viz. anno dom 877. King Alfred alias Alured then reigning in England this Great Rodry divided his Kingdome of Wales into three Principalities The First he called Guyneth the English Northwales the Latinist Venedotia The Second Principality was called Powisland in Latine Powisia of some Westwales bordering upon England The Third he called Deherborth the English Southwales in Latine Demetia The First Principality some say he gave to Mervin others to Anarawd The Second to Anarawd some say to Cadelh The Third to Cadelh some say to Mervin The First was the best because it was quietest The Second often invaded and troubled by the English Into the Third often incursions were made by the English the Norman and Fleming The division of this Kingdom however it was wrought in process of time such a division between these Princes as it was never quiet untill it
this opinion are all Christian Princes made in a worse condition then Infidel or Mahumetan and subject to the Spiritual powers in their Temporal jurisdiction But mutato nomine a new generation of men have sprung up and changed Bonum temporale sequitur in ordine ad bonum spirituale into The wicked have no right to their goods and It is lawful for the children of Israel to rob the Egyptians 11. The King is greater then the Singulars and less then all his Subjects Rex major singulis c. is a seditious opinion is a Fools bolt shot at such random that it is not worth the measuring whether it be near the mark or not For not only all Subjects owe their obedience as much as every one but never was any Prince universally rejected or disobeyed by his Subjects 12. See Sir Ed. Coke 3. par Inst pag. 9. On si homme leva guerre encontre That Subjects may upon any prerence levy war without consent of the Supreme power a seditious opinion See Calv. case 11 12. nostre Seignieur le Roy This was High Treason by the Common Law for no Subject can levy War within the Realm without authority from the King for to him it only belongeth And a little after If any levy War to expulse strangers to deliver men out of prisons to remove Councellors or any other end pretending Reformation of their own heads without warrant this is a levying of War against the King because they take upon them the Royal authority which is against the King 13. Let no Prince ever hope for obedience from his Subjects who Negligence in the worship of God takes no care that God be duly served by them For where the fear of God is not men will not honor their King but are disposed to sedition 14. Honor is nothing else then the estimation of anothers power Contempt of the Regal power disposes men to sedition viz. That a man hath power to protect reward and punish another And prudent Princes ought so to maintain the reputation of this in their Subjects that it may be received and believed of all For besides that ill men will where there is no fear of punishment become more licentious generally all men ambitiously where they are not restrained by fear desire to insult over their Superiors Aesop gives an Item of this last in the Fable of the Logg which Jupiter gave the Frogs for their King when they became fearless of it every one jumped insultingly upon it And examples of the former are clearly seen in men who condemned for offences to death they penitently acknowledge their faults and desire forgiveness of that Power that puts them to death whereas scarce any offender fearless of punishment did ever submit and ask forgiveness for it Princes therefore ought principally to take care how either by their vices remiss Government or otherwise they make their persons or power contemptible for when power is contemptible the exercise of it is never permanent 15. If the Age tends to worse and men of this latter Age have been Concessions of Princes to their Subjects disposes them to sedition worse then in the precedent as men generally hold and if Princes power in Ages when Mankind did not so fast degenerate into all forbidden wickedness were not sufficient at all times to restrain the seditions and disorders of their Subjects then is it a most unreasonable thing in Princes to indulge this ambitious desire of their Subjects by granting them liberties and priviledges which they had not before And if any man can shew that ever any where in the world Princes did make their Subjects better by granting them a more then usual liberty but only made them more arrogant to demand more until their Majesties and Authorities became so contemptible that in stead of governing their Subjects they must be content to have what terms their Subjects please to impose upon them or to reject them which in the end they will assuredly do I will be content to believe Princes do prudently by granting to their Subjects all their real Prerogatives and retaining only or some small matter more then the empty Title 16. It is not only the office of a Prince that good Laws be made but If Laws be not carefully executed that they be carefully put in execution There is no man who does not will and desire to be happy but few men who are daily sollicitous and industrious to attain to happiness It is the part of foolish men only to will and wish but the part of prudent men to do wisely A man shall see it in a family where the Master only commands and never looks to the doing that in a short time though he commands much he will have little performed And where Subjects have gotten a licentious habit of neglecting or transgressing Laws it will prove a hard thing to reclaim them whereas they might have been easily preserved in their obedience by careful execution of the Laws 17. There is nothing more dangerous in Church or State then Innovation Alterations of Laws It is therefore the most secure way of governing when mens manners and vices do not require new Laws by the antient and received Laws of a Nation This will secure the Prince from the imputation of Tyranny he may better hope to preserve a strong house built upon a sure foundation then by destroying it to undertake to build another which he either knows not how to finish or having built it cannot hope it will be better then the other or cannot tell whether it will be of any continuance but falling will overwhelm him in the ruine of it Besides the Subjects from the example of their Prince will become studious of innovation and censure whatsoever Laws he prescribes in lieu of the old ones Those he gives if they please one will displease another it will be the only talk of the City Country and Market If he punish any opposer for it is not possible but disadvantage will be to many and the loser will speak he shall by all his faction be cried up for a Martyr and Patriot of his Country and Laws It will make Subjects diffident of their condition and fearful that having Property by the old Laws they shall lose all by new ones Yet there is nothing in this world can secure men and make their condition permanent For what is usually objected by seditious men against their Prince viz. the invading and not suffering freeborn Subjects to have the benefit of their antient Laws and Customs was imputed a crime to our late King who was persecuted by his own Subjects because he adhered to the known and received Laws of the Land for after the year 1642. there was not any Petition presented to the King by one or both Houses of Parliament but was against the established Laws of this Nation But no question it was not the Kings adherence to the Laws but the iniquity
institution and therefore incommunicable or alienable yet after it pleased God that Kings should be nursing fathers and Queens nursing mothers to his Church the exercise endowment priviledges and immunities of Christian power is of positive humane institution The obedience therefore or subjection due to them who have oversight over us in the Lord is not formally due to such Bishops and Priests who have once had the oversight over us but to such Bishops and Priests who are legally constituted to exercise the jurisdiction or function in such Dioceses or Parishes where they are so constituted which exercise is alienable or transferrible though not at the will of the Incumbent yet at the will of Supreme powers and legally at the will of the Donor CHAP. II. Of Inheritance and Succession 1. NO humane law can create a humane right Jura sanguinis nullo jure No Humane law can make a Royal heir civili dirimi possint Nor is this right of succession from Divine positive laws but observed as well where Gods revelation of himself is not received as where it is And if according to the resolution of all the most learned and reverend Judges in Calvin's Case subjection is from no humane law but from the law of nature Then of necessity must Regal right and inheritance be from the law of nature for no man supposeth subjection where he does not presuppose power The Will therefore of Henry the Eight where for want of issue of Edward Mary and Elizabeth he gives the English Monarchy to the issue of Frances and Elianor daughters of Mary his younger sister before the right heirs of Margaret his eldest sister wife of James the Fourth of Scotland was void and not to be allowed and so was that of Edward the Sixth who did disinherit his sisters Mary and Elizabeth and gave the Crown to Jane daughter of Frances the French Queen aforesaid by Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk and so were the Acts of Parliament made by H. 4. 5. and 6. which entailed the Crown upon their Heirs so was the Acts of the last of Henry the 6. which entailed the Crown upon him and the heirs males of his body and so were the Acts of the first of Rich. 3. and H. 7. which entailed the Crown upon them and their heirs Neither is succession and inheritance of Crowns declared by any humane Law in the world that I know of but only the pretended French Salique Law which we shall examine afterwards 2. None but God can make an Heire to a Crown solus Deus haeredem None but God can make an Heire to a Crown facere potest non homo Co. Lit. Sect. 7. And this Heire which Sir E. Co. here speaks of is but heire in fee to Lands or Tenements according to common Law or Custom if then only God can make such an Heire then sure none but God can make an Heire which makes humane Laws and permits Customes 3. It is not only humane Laws which say a bastard is filius terrae None can inherit not born in Matrimony Gen. 22. 2. quasi nullius filius Et qui ex damnato coitu nascuntur inter liberos non computentur but God calls Isaac Abrahams only Son although at the same time Abraham had his Son Ismael by Hagar his Handmaid or Concubine And Abraham gave all he had to Isaac but to the Sonns of the Concubins which Abraham had he gave gifts Gen. 25. 5 6. So though Ismael were Isaacs elder brother yet in comparison of Isaac born in wedlock God himself did not account him Abrahams Son Nor can one instance be given that ever by Gods either command or permission any born out of marriage did inherit By the Law therefore of God aswell as humane Law none can inherit which are born out of matrimony 4. That which no humane Law prescribes and yet is observed by all The Issue male shall inherit before the Issue female in Royalty men generally in all ages is from the Law of Nature But no humane Law prescribes the male to inherit before the female in regality yet it is observed by all men generally therefore that the issue male shall inherit before the female in regality is from the Law of Nature 5. If primogeniture had not been a sacred thing and inheritance annexed Of the Issue male the first born is to be preferred to it by the Law of Nature then could not Esau have been pronounced a prophane person for selling his birthright Heb. 12. 16. although he did it to save his life Gen. 25. 34. but being due by the Law of Nature I say Esau by his sale could not transfer it to Jacob yet because Esau did despise it Gen. 25. 34. it was just with God to transfer it to Jacob neither can it be shewed any where in sacred writ but that alwaies primogeniture in royal descent was a good title where God did not interpose 6. Only the King can inherit and succeed because his Royal capacity is Why only the King is said to inherit and succeed and Subjects do either inherit or succeed but never both affixed and inseparable with his person In the Oath therefore of Ligeance Subjects swear to beare faith to the King his Heirs and Successors but no Subject can both inherit and succeed because there is no succession can be affixed to the person of any Subject by vertue of inheritance All Corporations therefore do not descend by inheritance but are acquired as they are nominated or elected in such manner as is granted by the King or supream power 7. There are but two waies by which hereditary or successive Monarchies How many waies hereditary Monarchies descend do descend the one is Lineal descent the other Lineal Agnatical Cognatical or Collateral or as we say the one descends to the heire general the other to the heire male This latter by vertue of a Salique law takes place only in France we will therefore see what may be said and objected against the former and how the latter hath been observed in France and of what Authority it is 8. That cannot be against the Law of God which he has owned and Gynococratia or inheritance of Women not unnatural nor against the Law of God given a blessed president of but that God has owned Gynaecocraty and that in a great and miraculous delivery of his own people is evident in Deborah And that Women may inherit when the daughters of Zelophehad made their plea for their inheritance Numb 27. They first pleaded negatively Our Father was not of the company of them that gathered themselves against the Lord in the company of Corah which is a plain argument that rebellious Subjects have no property against supream powers but forfeit their goods aswell as lives for God saies ver 7. the daughters of Zelophehad spake right why should the name of our father be done away from his family because he has no Son And God himself
saies ver 8 9. 10. If a man dye and have no Son then shall the inheritance pass to the daughter and if he have no daughter then shall the inheritance go to his brethren and if he have no brethren then ye shall give the inheritance unto his fathers brethren c. And that inheriting by the daughter when there is no Son in Britain consonant to the Law of God is as old as any record we can find when Voadicea led the Britans against the Romans it was alwaies a thing observed among them Neque enim sexum in imperiis discernunt Tacit. Lip in vita Agric. 457. Wherein Regality differs in descent from Estates by Civil Laws 9. Although Gynaecocraty be neither against the divine Law of God or Nature yet it is only to be understood that in regality the female shall inherit when she is the eldest sister and lineally descended from the Ancestor which has no Heir male of his body lawfully begotten For in Regality possessio fratris non facit sororem esse haeredem But if a King or Queen by inheritance have issue by several venters or extractions and by the latter a Son who does inherit who dyes without issue yet shall the Heir male descended from the Father although but of half blood to him inherit before his sister and the elder sister descended from the Father shall inherit before his sister although she be of whole blood to him from the reason aforesaid and therefore Queen Mary and Eliz. although but of half blood to Ed. the 6. did inherit before the Queen of Scots or the issue of the Queen Dowager of France by the Duke of Suffolk Charles Brandon although they were of whole blood to him and thus much does Sir Ed. Coke testifie Com. Lit. cap. 1. Sect. 8. p. 15. 10 Before we examine the authority and observance of the Salique Law First Charge let us see the heinous charge which Monsieur Bodin brings against Gynaecocatry Bodins charge and incommodities against Gynaecocatry cap. 5. lib. 6. pag. 738. de rep He says Gynaecocraty is inimicitious to the laws of Nature which gives prudence strength magnanimity of mind force to command to Men takes them away from Women Answ A fine general charge this If I can form an argument out of it this is it All Government wherein prudence strength magnanimity c. do not command is inimicitious to the Laws of Nature But in Gynaecocraty neither prudence c. do command Therefore Gynaecocraty is inimicitious to the Laws of Nature Now the Major proposition requiring strength prudence and magnanimity in command the Conclusion will be as strong against all Government as Gynaecocraty for he hath not defined what strength prudence c. is nor who shall be Judge what it is and so any man who will but deny that there is strength prudence c. in the Governor may by the Laws of Nature not obey nay it is against the Laws of Nature to obey But in what case are all Pupil Kings Sure the man intended to make good Pepins and Hugh Capets Titles from this Proposition against Childerick and Charls of Lorrain But that which is most monstrous and impious is that it is inimicitious to the Laws of Nature for any Child to obey and honor his Mother because she hath not prudence magnanimity and force of command The Law of God not only took from Women the Government of Common-wealths Second charge but also of Families whenas he deservedly subjected them to the command of their Husbands The argument out of this is Whom God hath subjected to the command of their Husbands cannot by the Law of God command in Families But God hath subjected Women to the command of their Husbands Therefore by the Law of God Women cannot command in Families Answ Yes such Women as never were married nor subject to their Husbands may granting the Major proposition But I deny the Major proposition for sure it is no where against the Law of God for a Widow to govern her Family As often as God testifies that he will take terrible vengeance against the enemies Third charge of his Name he threatens them to be subject to commands and laws of Women for this he cites Isa 8. although I cannot find any such thing there as if that were the utmost of evils and extremity of calamities Answ That this is false is evident by Gods miraculous delivery of the children of Israel by the leading and command of Deborah Besides how can God command Women to command and give Laws if it be against the Law of Nature Which is all one to say God does command against the Law of Nature that is his own Law The Roman Laws did seclude Women from all Civil offices and Publique Fourth charge employments Answ But though the Roman Laws did forbid it yet if the Laws of France did not allow it how came Blanch the wife of Lewis the Eighth Katherine de Medici wife of Henry the Second and Mary de Medici wife of Henry the Fourth and Anne the Mother of the present King to manage the Regencie of France as imperiously during the minority of their Sons as if they had been absolute Princes That in Gynarchy the Wife is not subject but superior to her Husband Fifth charge Answ So heavy bodies will against their nature ascend to supply a Vacuity Answ His sixth charge is an Invective against Vasti Joan of Naples called the Sixth charge Wolf Athaliah Cleopatra Zenobia Hirene As indeed telling of stories is usually the greatest part of his reasoning and that he will do so amply that Scaliger justly reprehends him with making not writing Histories Now if I should fall into the commendation of Ruth Hester Judith Deborah c. I am quit with him It is true indeed that 't is a great blessing to any Nation that God gives them a Masculine Heir endued with all those qualities he speaks of But when God doth give a Child which he pronounceth a woe to that Nation Eccles 10. 16. or a Female Subjects must be content and submit themselves to Gods pleasure For in going about to alter what God hath done they will make themselves in a much more woful condition Nor could that be a judgment of God upon a Nation to give Fools and Children or Women for Heirs if Subjects at pleasure might alter them and set up others in their stead 11. The Salique Law took its name either from the Country Salia The etymologie of the Salique Law or the River Sal or from contraction of Si aliqua so often mentioned in the Law 12. There are three things observable in the Salique Law the authority A short view of the authority and observance of the Salique Law of it the eternity of it and the reason of it For the authority of it it was made by the Lord knows whom for the eternity of it it shall end the Lord knows when
in the regencie of the Queen mothers Blanch the mother of St. Lewis of Francis the second Charles the ninth Lewis the thirteenth and Lewis the fourteenth 20. Neither have the French better observed the other part of the It has been ill observed by the French Salique Law for the descending of the Crown to the heirs male for Pepin having put King Childerick into a Monastery had not any colour of title but as he was chosen by the Parliament of Paris so that it seems the Parliament of Paris may do what the King and general Assembly cannot and alter the most fundamental constitutions of France which forsooth at other times are immutable and Hugh Capet to make his title good against Charles of Lorrain the right Masculine heire of Pepin did derive his pedigree from one of the daughters of Charlemain son of Pepin Nor could Lewis the ninth a most religious Prince be resolved in conscience till he was satisfied that by his Grandmothers side he was descended from the right heirs of Charles of Lorrain But I wonder with what face these Frenchmen can urge the Salique Law against others and yet practise the contrary themselves For Charles the eight having married Anne the Dutchess of Brittain and by that title possessed the Dutchy by whom he had Claude married to Francis the first who had issue Henry the second who had issue Francis the second Charles the ninth Henry the third and Hercules Elizabeth married to Philip the second of Spain and Margaret married to Henry the fourth Now Francis Charles Henry and Hercules dying without issue legitimate I would know how against the Salique Law Charles and his posterity should have a title to Britain and yet King Philip and his posterity be debarred of it by vertue of this pretended Salique Law CHAP. III. Of the Municipal Laws of England before 1640. 1. TEmporal or Secular Laws are made to preserve men so long as Of Temporal Laws and incidently of the Municipal Laws of this Nation they live in this world in unity and peace one with another and these do not bind in conscience only but injoyn corporal and pecuniary mulcts for not observance or transgressing them The Municipal Laws of this Kingdom are either the Common Law which are general usages of that long continuance that they have quite lost their prime institution That they were not brought in by the Conqueror is most evident Common Law or Generall usage for the Conqueror swore to observe the good approved and antient Laws of this Kingdom and that the Subjects might the better observe Proem 8. part of Sir Ed. Cokes Reports their duty and the Conquerors Oath he caused twelve the most discreet and wise men in every shire throughout all England to be sworn before himself that without swerving either ad dextram or ad sinistram they should declare the integrity of their Laws without concealing adding or in any sort varying from the truth and Aldreb the Archbishop that crowned him and Hugh the Bishop of London by the Kings commandement wrote that which the Jurats had delivered and these by Publick Proclamation he declared to be authentick and under grievous punishment to be inviolably observed And that 441 years before the incarnation of Christ Mulumutius of Preface 3. report some called Dunvallo M. of some Dovebant did write two Books of the Laws of the Britans the one called Statuta Municipalia and the other Leges judiciariae which is as much as to say the Statute-Law and Common-Law And 356 years before our Saviour Mercia Proba Queen and wife of King Gwintclin wrote a book of the Laws of England in the British tongue calling it Marchenleg King Alfred or King Alured King of the West-Saxons 871 years after Christ wrote a book of the Laws of England calling the same Breviarum quoddam quod composuit ex diversis legibus Trojanorum Graecorum Britanorum Saxonum Danorum In the year after our Saviour 653. Sigabert or Sigisbert Orientalium Anglorum Rex wrote a book calling it Legum instituta King Edward of that name the third before the Conquest ex immensa legum congerie quas Britanni Romani Angli condiderunt optima quaeque selegit ac in unam coegit quam vocari voluit Communem legem But whether these latter were the Laws which are now used in England under correction may be question made because the Authorities cited are from such obscure and uncertain Authors that no great credit is to be given to them nor are those Books except Alfreds and Edwards which are obsolete and out of use with us and so have been these 600 years any where to be found whereby it may appear that they have any affinity with the Common-Law But it does most certainly appear out of most authentical Records that time out of mind before the Conquest there had been Sheriffs for the Writ of Assise and every other Original Writ to whom they were directed except to the Coroner in special cases who stands in place of the Sheriff and for Trials by the Oath of Twelve men and that the Writs of Assise and other Original Writs were retornable into the Kings Courts and that there had been a Court of Chancery for all Original Writs to issue out and none other and that those Mannors that were in the hands of S. Edward the Confessor are to this day called Ancient Demesne All which does more copiously and fully appear in this Proeme to the Third Part of the Reports And that the Chancery Kings Bench Common Pleas the Exchequer be all the Kings Courts and have been time out of memory of man so as no Proem Rep. 8. man knows which of them is antientest Afterward in the Proeme to the Ninth Part of his Reports out of the Mirror of Justices which treats how the Land was governed almost twelve hundred years since having spoken of the Courts of Parliament Chancery Kings Bench Common Pleas and the Exchequer he descends to the Justiciarii Itinerantes or Justices in Eire The Kings do right to all men by their Justices Commissioners itinerant assigned to have Conusance Justices Itinerant sec 6. of all Pleas. In aid of such Eires the Sheriffs Turns and View of Frankpledges are necessary c. Then he treateth of the Sheriffs Turn That the Sheriffs of antient Sheriffs Turn sec 7. Ordinance do hold general Assemblies twice a year in every Hundred whither all the Freeholders within the Hundred are bound to come by the service of their Feifs or Fees that is to say once after Michaelmas and another time after Easter c. Leets or Courts of View of Frankpledge are Assemblies ordained Leets or view of Frank-pledge sec 8. once a year not only of Freeholders but of all in the Hundred as well Denizens as others except Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors and all Religious people and Clerks Earls Barons Knights Married women Persons dumb and deaf diseased Bastards and Lepers and
those that are Deciners elswhere to enquire of the offences personal and of all the circumstances of offences done in those Hundreds of the wrong done by the Kings or Queens ministers and of the wrong done to the King and the Commonalty But this ought not to be done by Bondmen or Women but by the Oath of Twelve Freemen The County-Court which the Sheriffs hold from moneth to moneth County-court sec 9. or from five weeks to five weeks according to the greatness or largeness of the County Of Court-Barons and Hundred Courts Court-Baron c. sec 10. The other mean Courts are the Courts of every Lord of the Fee c. Pipowders sec 11. Courts of Pipowders And that from day to day speedy Justice be done to Strangers in Fairs and Markets as of Pipowders according to the Law of Merchants Court of Admiralty The King hath soveraign jurisdiction upon Admiralty sec 12. the Sea Courts of the Forrest The Kings Ministers of his Forrests have Courts-Forest see 13. power by authority of their office to swear men without the Kings Writ for safeguard of the peace and the Kings right and the common good c. He treats of the Professors of the Law as Counters who are Serjeants and Pleaders Of Attornies Of Ministers of Justice as Viscounts Coroners Escheators Bailiffs of Hundreds c. And also by the antient Kings Coroners were ordained in every County and Sheriffs to keep the Peace when the Earls were absent from their charges and Bailiff in lieu of the Hundredors c. Of the Prerogatives of the King as of Deodands Alienation to Aliens Teeasure found Wreck Waif Estray Chattels of Felons and Fugitives Honors Hundreds Soakes Gaoles Forrests chief Cities chief Ports of the Sea great Manors These held the first Kings as their right and of the residue of the Land did enfeoff the Earls Barons Knights Serjeants and others to hold of the King by Services provided and ordained for defence of the Realm It was ordained that the Knights Fee should come to the eldest by succession of heritage and that Socage Fee should be partable between the Male-children and that the Liege-Lords should have the Marriage He treateth in the first Chapter of Crimes and their divisions of the crime of Majesty of Fausonnery of Treason of Burning of Homicide of Felony of Burglary of Rape c. In the second of Actions of Judges of Actors c. In the third of Exceptions dilatory and peremptory that is Pleas to the Writ and in Bar c. of Trial by Juries and by Battel of Attaints of Challenges of Fines c. In the fourth of Judgments and therein of Jurisdiction of Process in criminal causes and in Actions real personal and mixt So as in this Mirror you may perfectly and truly discern the whole Body of the Common Laws of England Thus far Sir Edward Coke Mr. Lambert in his unfolding the difficult things and words in his translation of the Saxon Laws says King Alured when he had made a League with Guthrun the Dane having followed the most prudent counsel given by Jethro to Moses first divided England in Satrapias Centurias Decurias He called Satrapiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to divide He called Centuriam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Decuriam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a company of Ten men and by those names they are called to this day And that no man might be ignorant the Decuria did consist of Ten men whereof all of them were pledges that every one should be forth-coming to any Action in Law and if any one did any damage the other were bound to make it good and from hence the other nine were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Free-pledges we in the Pleas of Courts call them Francos plegios The tenth man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called the Decurio or Tithingman by which name he is most known to the Eastern English at this day Others call him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others call him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the first or chief Surety or Pledge The Kentish men call him Borsholder corruptly for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the first Surety Centuria or a Hundred was made up of ten Decuria's as one Hundred is made up of ten times ten This viz. Hundred the men beyond Trent called by another name not unknown to the common people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wapentac Alured then further ordained That every man of free condition should be enrolled in some Hundred and be conjoined into some Ten-men company That of lesser businesses the Decurions or Court-Leet might judge and if any weightier matter were it should be deferred to the Hundred or County-Court Lastly that the Alderman and Sheriff I take it he calls them Senator Praepositus should compound the most difficult Suits and of greatest moment in that frequent Convention from all parts of the Shire or County And what the manner of judging was King Etheldred in the fourth Chapter of his Laws which he enacted in a full Senate or Parliament at Vanatnigum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Woodstock expounds almost in these very words In all and every Hundred let there be Assemblies and that Twelve elderly men of free condition together with the Sheriff Praeposito be sworne that they will not condemn the Innocent or absolve the Guilty So that Mr. Lambert seems to be of opinion that the Common-Law had its origination from King Alured or Alfred who was King of all England and a most victorious pious prudent and glorious Monarch about the year of our Lord 890. And from a most deplorable condition by reason of the Danish invasion and robbery reduced it to a most quiet calm and laid that foundation upon which the body of the Common-Law is since builded But whosoever was the first Founder and Establisher of them certain it is they were antient and Laws which better suit to the nature and disposition of English-men then any other that are or ever were in the world would do 2. As those general Usages or Customs which are generally observed Particular Usages are called the Common-Law so there are almost infinite particular Usages Prescriptions and Customs in several parts of this Nation which are observed as Laws by the Inhabitants of those places and to all intents and purposes have the effect of Laws 3. Statute-Laws are Acts of Parliament which are neither general Statute-Law nor particular Customs but are Laws made by the Kings of this Land in Parliament upon sundry and diverse occasions according to the then occasions as they represented themselves For although all innovations are dangerous and therefore if it were possible no doubt it were best that humane Laws as the Laws of Nature might be immutable and eternal but as God hath created all things transitory and nothing in this world the same the next
at all So that it may be rather termed a Representative of the Free Corporations then a Representative of the Freeborn people of England The House of Commons therefore cannot be a Representative of the Freeborn people of England But suppose them the Representatives of the Freeborn people of this Nor the Supreme Authority of the Nation Nation yet cannot they be the Supreme Authority of it for no power can act beyond the power of its being I say therefore that no Representative can be supreme or superior to the cause of its being The House of Commons therefore cannot be granting it the Representative of the Freeborn people of this Nation the Supreme Authority of the Nation But if the house of Commons be not sent by the people and their Representatives Who creates them and by what right do they make a house of Commons Before we answer this Quaere wee will see of what sorts of men a house Of what sorts of men the house of Commons is compounded of Commons is compounded A house of Commons is compounded of three sorts of men viz. Knights of Counties Citizens sent by Cities and Burgesses of Corporations Barons of the Cinque Ports are the same thing differently expressed with Burgesses of Corporations Now that all Cities Burroughs Corporations and Cinque Ports are not so jure naturali nor by any inherent birthright but from their Charter which is nothing else but the Kings grant is so manifest that I think no man in his wits will deny But all Cities and Corporations are not alike in priviledges but more or less as they are impowred by their Charter or Grant of the King Some Corporations have Liberties Priviledges and are impowred to send Burgesses others have Liberties and Priviledges but not qualified to send Burgesses nay some Cities have Liberties and Priviledges but not endewed with this right of having Representative in the house of Commons as the Cities of Durham and Ely And as neither Cities nor Burroughs are endewed with these their Liberties What creates the house of Commons and Priviledges by any inherent birthright so neither are the Counties nor Inhabitants endewed with any right of sending Knights of their Counties by any inherent birthright for then had all the Counties a like right one as another and all the Inhabitans a like vote and they mighr create representatives as often as they should see occasion But all these are most evidently false for we have shewed before that not only the division of this Nation into Counties was an act of the Kings but all Counties are not alike endewed with this Priviledge some Counties in Wales sending but one and the County of Durham none at all Nor have all men a like vote in electing and yet as much subject to Laws made in Parliament as other men but men only who have 40 s. yearly freehold rent nor can these 40 s. a year men when they will send their representatives What then does impower these to send representatives Why let Sir Ed. Coke say Inst 4. p. 1. Knights of Shires Citizens of Cities and Burgesses of Burroughs are respectively elected by the Counties Cities and Burroughs by force of the Kings Writ So that the Kings Writ is the first and efficient cause of the pag. 28. house of Commons as well of the Knights as Citizens and Burgesses the Commons cannot begin nor be dissolved without the King in person or representation If then Rebellion be as the sin of Witchcraft as the Holy Ghost saies Annot. and if crimen lesae Majestatis be the highest crime and impiety as all Lawyers hold and if Gratitude be one the chief of all Moral virtues as all men hold for si ingratum dixeris omnia dixeris no man who is an ingrateful man but has rendred himself as if he had committed all manner of wickedness How impious then is it for men only from the Kings grace endewed with this high favor to convert it in opposition and derogation of that power and person from whence they originally received it But they say if the Commons did it then was it done by the people and so just and not to be questioned as if the people were not a thing to be governed and all as much subject to the King and Laws as every one or that a thing just or unjust in it self were more just or unjust because more or fewer did it Will any man say the crucifying of our Saviour was therefore just because many of the Jews did it or that a rout or riot is therefore lawful because done by many men or that it is not paricide or regicide if many Sons and Subjects kill their Parents and King As all the Members of both houses are created by the King so cannot The Parliament cannot begin but by the King these Members be formed into a body but by the King either by his Royal presence or representation By representation two waies either by a Guardian of England by Letters Patents under the great Seal when the King is in remotis out of the Realm or by Commission under the great Seal of Inst 4. p. 6. England to certain Lords of Parliament representing the person of the King he being within the Realm in respect of some infirmity This House is so far from being the Supreme Authority of the Nation The Jurisdiction of the Commons House that they are not a Court of Judicature nor can impose an Oath or take any mans Examination Yet Sir Ed. Coke says Inst 4. 28. that the House of Commons is to many purposes a distinct Court because he says they cannot be prorogued or adjourned but by its self yet gives no more It is true indeed that to many purposes among themselves they do judge their Members and Elections and have a Committee for Religion but these things are more of custom whether good or bad I cannot tell then of any original right that I know or ever heard of And Sir Ed. Coke Inst 4. 11. says They being the general Inquisitors of the Realm have principal care in the beginning of Parliaments to appoint Committees of Grievances both in Church and Commonwealth of Courts of Justice of Priviledges and of Advancement of Trade They have been wont too ever since the Statute de Tallagie non concedendo of course to grant the King Aids in extraordinary cases The House of Peers assisted as aforesaid are the Supreme Court of The Jurisdiction of the House of Lords Judicature in this Nation not only to judge whether matters presented to them by the Commons be fit or requisite for the King to pass into Laws as Monsieur Bodin well observes who disputes this better then any of our English Lawyers that I know of has done but also of Writs of Error and of matters of Fact either not determinable in other Courts or else when though they are determinable in other Courts yet in regard of nicety or
Essex and Edmund Earl of March the true and undoubted Heir of the Crown of England both condemned unheard and without tryal in Parliament when as he might have instanced twenty Sir Thomas Seimer Admiral of England and Brother to the Protector Anno 1549. the third year of Edward the Sixth was condemned to death unheard by a Law in Parliament Henry the Third after all the Acts of Grace of Magna Charta Charta de Foresta c. instead of means Good Governors are the Preservers or enlargers of the Government Parliaments have ever been the bane of the greatness of the English Monarchy given him by Parliament for the recovery of his right of the Dutchy of Normandy usurped and taken by the French King from his Father King John and the Dutchy of Guienne and Earldom of March the year before usurped and taken from him by the French King had all the exercise of Regal Government taken from him and given to the Twelve Peers by the * Insanum Parliamentum Mad Parliament whereof ensued the Barons Wars to the destruction and confusion of so many English-men as nothing but a Parliament could have done Henry the Fourth in the first year of his usurped Reign had the Crown entailed upon him and his Heirs in Parliament from whence ensued all the Wars of the Houses of York and Lancaster At a Parliament holden Anne Dom. 1470. begun at Westminster 26 November the Crowns of England and France were entailed upon Henry the Sixth and the Heirs male of his body lawfully begotten and for want of such Heirs unto George Duke of Clarence being the yonger Brother of Edward the Fourth the undoubted Heir of the Crown of England whereby a double injustice was done first to Henry the Sixth excluding his Heirs general then to Edward the Fourth to prefer his yonger Brother Clarence before him in case of want of Heirs male to Henry the Sixth See the Factious Conspiracy of the Commons together with the consequence against the Duke of Suffolk Speeds History Henry 6. p. 675. Para. 47 48. The Parliament in the First of Richard the Third his Reign though a bloody Usurper presented a Bill for the entailing the Crown upon his Heirs Ann. 1 Hen. 7. Nor was the Act of Parliament less injurious which entailed the Crown upon Henry the Seventh and the Heirs of his body he having no colour of title to it but in right of his Wife and because he suspected his title and reigned in his own right to the wrong of his Wife and after her decease to the wrong of his Son Henry the Eighth in the eleventh year of his Reign he got an Act of Parliament to pass which should protect all Subjects who should assist the King be he so by right or not for the time being So that other offences should be punished but he that perpetrates the highest villany by invading a Crown should be protected by Law Henry the Eight by authority of Parliament an 1533. Bastardized Queen Mary and so soon as he had cut off Anne Bullens head by authority of Parliament Bastardized Queen Elizabeth smally to his credit one would think Add hereunto the ridiculous yet cruel Act of Hen. 8 his Headship of the Church So that a stranger being one day in Smithfield and seeing one burnt for denying the Six Articles and another hanged for denying his Headship cried out Bone Deus quo modo hic agunt vivi hic comburuntur Papistae ibi suspenduntur Antipapistae The bloody Laws passed in Parliament in prosecution of the Six Articles in the time of Henry the 8. and the bloody Parliamentary Laws for Religion in Queen Mary's reign c. and all those Sacrilegious Acts made in the reigns of Hen. 8. and Ed. 6. and sure no man can imagine such horrid acts could be perpetrated but by Parliaments Nor have the General Assemblies in France who were wont to be assembled once or twice a year demeaned themselves much better then the Parliaments in England but in stead of providing good Laws fell into such Factions and used such affronts to the Regal power that Lewis the Eleventh a most subtile and cunning Prince was wont to say It was time to put the French Kings horce de page out of their minority and from being Pages any more and so he did And since his time they have been rarely convented in France For since the General Assembly at Bloys anno 1587. by Henry the Third where the famous Duke of Guise was killed there hath been but one anno 1614. in the fourth year of the reign of Lewis the Thirteenth and that succeeded so ilfavoredly that there is no probability of ever being another 4. Besides the general and particular Customs and Acts of Parliament there are almost infinite Corporations Colledges and Companies who have divers and sundry priviledges which are granted by the Kings Letters Patents and are observed as Laws and to all intents and purposes have the effect of Laws 5. But in all Maritime cases the Kings of England being Soveraigns of the Narrow Seas whatsoever Grotius says to the contrary and all actions done upon a Navigable river are judged by the course of Civil law and so the Probate of Wills and Letters of Administration are determinable by the Civil law Judge Jenkins a learned Gentleman and a stout Champion for the Laws of this Nation in the first page of his Lex terrae divides the Laws of this Nation into three grounds or species viz. 1. The Customs 2. Acts of Parliaments and 3. Judicial Records and that the two latter are declarations of the former touching Royal government so that he makes Custom to be the ground of Royal government and Acts of Parliament to have but a declaratory power of the Common Law touching Royal government and Judicial Records to be equivalent to Acts of Parliament In all which he is most manifestly mistaken For first there are an exceeding many Acts of Parliament which have no manner of dependence or affinity with the Common-Law and so cannot be declarations of it nay there are many Acts of Parliament which are so far from being declarations of the Common-Law that they do annihilate it and create other things in lieu thereof as the Statute of West 2. cap. 1. called the Statute de donis conditionalibus annihilated all the Conditional estates in Fee at Common-Law and created estates in Tail in lieu thereof At Common-Law no Lands or Tenemers were deviseable by Will but the Acts of 32 34 H. 8. create a power of devising Lands and Tenements in Fee by Will and Tenants at Common-Law might choose whether they would attorn to any Grant of the Lord but now the Lords Grant is good without it by 27 H. 8. cap. 10. Sir Ed. Coke com on Lit. sect 574. says Stat. 32. H. 8. takes away the reason of the Common-Law so that that cannot be a declaration of what it takes away the reason It were tedious
all Humane Laws and their rightful Superiors There neither is nor ever was any Government in the World good or bad just or unjust that did ever permit subjects without authority from it to take up arms And by our countrey-Countrey-Laws If any man levy war to expulse strangers to deliver men out of prison or against any Statute or any other end pretending Reformation of their own head this is a levying war Nota. against the King because they take upon them the Royal Authority which is against the King Inst 3. p. 9. 10. All Stipulations Oaths Promises c. made by Subjects against All Oaths Promises c. made against Prince or Laws are void Husbands by right may command their Wives their Prince or Laws are void and not to be performed for they were Subjects and obliged to their Prince and Laws before they made such Oath Stipulation Promise c. 11. God is not onely the Author of Government and Obedience of Order and Society in Nations and Kingdoms but also in Man and Wife for being reasonable and sociable Creatures does imply a necessity of mutual commanding and obeying God first created man and by so creating him gave him the power and dominion over the woman It is therefore an act 1 Tim. 2. 13. Justice and injustice in a Wife of Justice in every Wife uprightly to fulfil the Law or Command of her Husband to the benefit of him or another he commanding nothing derogatory to the Laws of God or his Countrey and a sin of injustice in the Wife to falsifie or abuse any Law or Command of her Husband to the hurt or prejudice of her Husband or another 12. God is not less the Author of Power or Right of Command in Of Justice and injustice in Wives and Children Parents then in Husbands As therefore it is an act of Justice for Wives and Children uprightly to do any act which is commanded them by their Husbands and Parents they not commanding contrary to the Laws of God or their Countrey so it is injustice in Children as well as Wives to falsifie any Command or Law of their Parents to the hurt or prejudice of another 13. Suppose the Father and the Husband command the Wife contrary Whether the Wife ought to obey the Father or Husband things whereby it becomes impossible that the Wife should serve both Which ought she to serve I say the Husband For though the Fathers power be from God and so inseparable by any act of Man yet is not God obliged to his own Laws but may give that which he gave the Father to another And Matrimony being an Institution of God in Paradice and the Husbands power from the Law of Nature that is from God the Wife becomes subject to her Husband retaining notwithstanding her piety and observance which is always due to her Father 14. All Societies that is all companies of Men whether of Master Masters of Families by right command their Servants Cicero lib. 1. de leg and Servants of Father and Children of Husband and Wife of King and Subjects are contained in the mutual Offices of commanding and obeying It is true that Cicero says Cum dico legem à me dici nihil aliud intelligi volo quam imperium sine quo nec domus ulla nec civitas nec gens nec hominum universum genus stare nec rerum natura omnis nec ipse mundus potest Where therefore the Laws of Nature are not sufficient there must be a supply of Humane Laws Object We have shewed before that the Power or Right of Command which Kings have over their Subjects which Husbands have over their Wives which Parents have over their Children is from the Law of Nature that is from God immediately I say they command by the Law of Nature For all right of command which is not from any Humane Law is from the Law of Nature but Kings Parents and Husbands have a right of command and not from any Humane Law they have it therefore from the Law of Nature Sol. But though Masters of Families have a right of command over their Servants yet formally they do not command by the same right that Kings Fathers and Husbands do For I deny that ever any Master of a Family had his power from any Law of God I except the Israelites or Nature but that ever since there were Families the Masters or Mistresses of the Families derived and had their power or right of command over their Servants from their Countries Laws If Adams Family be objected I say that Adam commanded not as Master of a Family onely but as a Universal Monarch not onely over all the Creatures irrational that God had made but also over his Wife and Posterity as King and not as Father and Husband onely For no Father or Master of a Family can create any property in his Son or Servant nor had ever any Subject who was not an Israelite property from any Law of God or Nature But it is evident that Cain had property in the Fruit of the Gen. 4. 3 4. Ground and Abel in his Flocks they therefore derived it from Adam as King 15. Since Humane Laws are necessary for the conservation of all Of Justice and injustice in Servants Societies of Men and the Masters power not being contrary to any Law of God or Nature the Master of every Family hath right of command over his Servants by the Laws of his Countrey he commanding nothing repugnant to the Laws of God or his Country It is therefore Justice in every Servant uprightly to execute such commands of their Masters and injustice to falsifie or abuse such commands to the hurt or prejudice of another 16. Suppose the Father makes his Son a Servant for every Father hath Whether the Son ought to prefer the commands of of his Father or Master the same right over his Childes person that a King hath over his Subjects and the Father and Master command the Son contrary things Which shall the Son serve I say the Fathers power being from the Law of Nature and so inseparable by any act of Man the Son ought to serve the Father but the Father being as much in the power of his Soveraign as the Son in his Fathers the Father shall make good to the Master whatsoever he shall be damnified by such command the Laws of the Fathers Countrey obliging Subjects to perform their Contracts 17. Suppose the Master command contrary to the Laws of God or his How far the Servant owes his Master subjection Country and the Servant executes such command shall this excuse the Servant No for being a Servant does not free him from the obligation of the Laws of God or his Country as a Subject Well but if the Master commands upon corporal punishment for the Masters power obligeth to corporal punishment to do something contrary to the Laws I answer That jus vitae necis which Masters had
have their origination from God we Introduction have already in its proper place asserted And that these Kingdoms thus created by God have periods alterations and conversions set by him which cannot be foreseen or prevented by man is certainly as cleer and evident as the former and often owned by God himself in Sacred Writ as well over his own people as others But that therefore any man or men should therefore endeavour to make alterations in Kingdoms is like to a man who becaufe all men naturally die thinks he may kill any man and father the fact upon God And if God even over his own peculiar people did for the sins of the Kings and people especially the Israelites so often convert the line of the Kings then can it not in reason be expected in this Iron and much more sinful Age that God should every where continue a fixt and certain succession of Kings according to the ordinary course of Nature viz. Primogeniture But that therefore the Pope or any other creature may arrogate to themselves a right or power superior to the Law of Nature is no less absurd then that a Son may kill his Father because all Fathers have periods set by Nature which they cannot pass And that all Subjects do by birth owe a natural subjection to rightful Princes in whose dominion they were born which relations can never be dissolved but by God himself we have in their proper places demonstrated Yet may the exercise of this power be suspended so long as such Subjects come into the power of other Princes whether it be by conquest or otherwise and do owe them a temporary obedience so long as they continue there and their posterity born in their dominions owe such Princes a natural obedience which can never be dissolved And also that since there is no other Judge under Heaven to decide the controversie of Princes but their swords which can never be alledged by any Subjects who have Laws to decide their differences such decision is good as to the exercise of any Princes power over all them who fall under ir and all Subjects born in such exercise of power or dominion become natural Subjects to any Prince who by conquest acquires the dominion of another we have also demonstrated in its proper place Yet whether it were of old that Popes did arrogate to themselves this right of deposing Temporal Princes or debarring them of their right which about this time was frequently asserted by and practised by the Popes and which Pope Alexander was pleased to confer upon the Conqueror against all Right and Law to the manifest prejudice of Eadgar Athelin let us see the Epistle of S. Eleutherius to King Lucius as it is cited in chap. 17. of S. Edovards Laws In the year from the passion of Christ 169. or 156. our Lord Eleutherius the Pope wrote to Lucius King of Britain at the Petition of the King and Peers of the Kingdom of Britain You have required of us that the Roman Laws and of Cesar be transmitted to you which you would use in the Kingdom of Britain We can always reprove the Roman Laws and those of Cesar but not at all the Law of God For ye have by Gods mercy of late received into your Kingdom of Britain the Law and Faith of Christ you have of your self in your Kingdom sufficient Authority from whence through Gods grace by the advice of your Kingdom to make a Law and by it through Gods patience you shall rule the Kingdom of Britain And you are the Vicar of God in your Kingdom according to the Kingly Prophet The earth is the Lords and the fulness of all the world and all who inhabit therein And again according to the Kingly Prophet Thou hast loved Justice and hated iniquity and therefore thy God hath anointed thee with oyl of gladness above thy fellows And again according to the Kingly Prophet God is thy Judgement c. Therefore neither the Judgement nor Justice of Cesar for they are sons of the King Christian Nations and people of the Kingdom who live under your Protection and Peace and Reign and are according to the Gospel Even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings c. But they are Nations and your People of the Kingdom of Britain and who divided you ought to congregate recall nourish hold with your hand protect and rule into one for concord and peace and to the Faith and to the Law of Christ and his holy Church and always to defend it from evil doers and malitious men and its enemies Wo to the Kingdom whose King is a boy and whose Princes eat together in the morning I Do not call a King because of his small and tender age but because of his folly and iniquity and rage according to the Prophet King Men of blood and deceitful shall not live out half their days c. By eating we understand the Pallat by the Pallat Luxury by Luxury all things filthy and evil according to King Solomon Wisdom shall not enter into the soul of the evil doer nor shall dwell in a body subject to sins Rex dicitur à Regendo non à Regno A King thou shalt be so long as thou rulest well which thing if thou wilt not do the name of King shall not remain in thee and thou shalt lose the name of King which God forbid God Almighty grant to you so to Rule your Kingdom of Britain that you may Reign with him for ever whose Vicar you are in the Kingdom aforesaid who with the Father and Son c. Of the Right and Ecclesiastical freedom of Asylum's Cap. 1. That is to say Peace to the holy Church Of whatsoever forfeiture any one is guilty this time and he can come to the holy Church let him have peace of life and member and if any one hath set his hand against that which the Mother-Church shall require whether it be an Abby or Church of Religion let him restore that which he hath taken out and one hundred shillings for forfeiture and concerning the Mother-Parish-Church twenty shillings and concerning a Chappel ten shillings And according to the peace of the King in the Laws of the Mercians he shall make amends with En perchenâ—laâ— one hundred shillings accordingly as of Heinefare and prepensed lying in wait Of Peter-pence or Romescot Cap. 18. A Freeman who hath Field-Beasts valued at thirty pence shall pay a Peter-peny For four pence which the Lord shall give all his Borderers and his Boner and his Servants be quit A Burger who hath of his proper goods so much as shall be esteemed half a Mark let him pay a Peter-peny He who in the Law of the Danes is a Free-man and hath field-cattel which are valued worth half a Mark in silver ought to give a peny to St. Peter and for that peny shall all be quit who reside in his Demains Of them who do not pay the Roman
Dissolution of Abbies and all were easily passed and assented to in Parliament But whatsoever the King were otherwise yet sure the Popes passion The Pope was more unjust in his censures then the King was in excluding the Papal jurisdiction against him carried them to greater extravagancies and exorbitancies then were on his part against them For suppose that the Pope had de facto the Investitures of Bishops Peter-pence Annates and First-fruits paid them and did exercise a jurisdiction over all the Church and Clergy yet no question all these things were by the grants and permission of precedent Kings and if Kings may grant and permit these things then what hinders but that they may recall them for Cujus est velle ejus est nolle Besides we have already shewed that although there were not that bitter personal spite between the Kings of England and and the Popes formerly as was between Henry 8. and Clement 7. and Paul 3. yet did many of them ascribe as little to the Pope as Henry did But for a Pope to deprive a Christian Prince of his kingdom over whom he had no manner of right his Adherents of whatsoever they possessed to command his Subjects to deny their obedience to their Soveraign and Strangers not to have any commerce in the kingdom and all to take arms against him and his followers granting them their estates and goods for a prey and their persons for slaves is so unlike to the example and precept of S. Peter whom they pretend to succeed who not only suffered death under Temporal power but inspired by God does command so expresly obedience to Kings not as subordinate to himself 1 Pet. 2. 13. but as supreme And of our Saviour himself who both suffered himself under Temporal power and paid tribute to Caesar and took not away but fulfilled the Moral Law which commands obedience to Princes and Higher powers and whose kingdom was not of this world that sure no Turk or Infidel was so much an enemy to Christians or indeed rather to mankind as to have desired it The state of the Church and of the Ecclesiastical Laws made by Edward the sixth THe time of this Kings reign being a Child and therefore woful and of his Father were perillous days The Father in his Laws scarce ever took advice but from his passion lust or avarice the Son although a Prince of infinite hope and goodness yet wanting the authority and reputation requisite in a Soveraign was either not able to restrain or else perswaded it was beneficial to give reins to a company of Sacrilegious Harpies and Courtiers to make a total prey not only upon all Colledges Free-Chappels Chantries and all their Lands except them of the Universities and some few other which by the Statute of 1 Ed. 6. cap. 14. were given to Camb. pref Eliz. Reg. Life of Ed. 6. the King upon specious pretences but the Lands of the Bishops generally became a prey unto them So much worse is it for every thing to be lawful then that any thing should be Law It was enacted That if any man spake irreverently or contemptuously An. 1. Ed. 6. c. 6. of the Sacrament of the Altar he should be imprisoned and fined at the Kings will and pleasure and that Justices of Peace might enquire of offenders Yet should not the person offending be arraigned or tryed unless the Bishop of the Diocese or his Chancellor or Deputy learned were required to be at the Quarter-Sessions to which purpose a new Writ was made Rex c. Episc L. salutem Praecipimus tibi quod tu Cancellarius tuus vel alius deputatus tuus sufficienter eruditus sitis cum Justiciariis nostris ad pacem in com nostro B. conservand assignat apud D. tali die ad sessionem nostram tunc ibidem tenend ad dand consilium advisament eisdem Justitiariis nostris ad pacem super arraiment deliberationem offendet contra Formam statuti concernend sacrosanctum Sacramentum Altaris And by this Satute it was Enacted that the Sacrament should be delivered to the people under both Kindes viz. of Bread and Wine From thenceforth no Conge deslier shall be granted nor any Election An. 1 Ed. 6. Cap. 2. shall be made of any Archbishop or Bishop by the Dean and Chapter but when any Archbishoprick or Bishoprick shall be voided the King by his Letters Patents may confer the same to any person whom he shall think meet c All summons citations and other proces Ecclesiastical shall be made in the name and with the stile of the King as in the Writs of the common Law and the test thereof shall be in the name of the Archbishop or Bishop c. All persons that have the exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction shall have in their Seals of Office the Kings Arms with certain characters under them for the knowledge of their dioces but the Archbishop of Canterbury shall use his own Seal and his own name in all faculties and dispensations A man speaking against the Kings Headship of the Church shall being An. 1 Ed. 6. Cap. 12. thereof attaint or convict forfeit all his Goods and Chattels to the King and suffer imprisonment during the Kings will and pleasure for the first offence and for the second offence forfeit to the King the whole issues and profits of all his Lands and all his Goods and Chattels and suffer perpetual imprisonment and for the third offence shall be adjudged a Traytor and suffer death and forfeit all his Goods and Chattels Lands and Tenements as in cases of High Treason And it shall be deemed Treason for any by Printing Writing or Deed to affirm the King not to be Head of the Church An Act for uniformity of Service and administration of Sacraments being An. 2 3 Ed. 6 Cap. 1. before divers and different viz. of Sarum of York of Bangor and of Lincoln and divers and sundry forms and fashions were used in Cathedrals and Parish-Churches of England and Wales as well concerning Mattens or Morning Prayer and the Evening Song as also concerning the holy Communion commonly called the Mass with divers and sundry rites and ceremonies concerning the same and in the administration of the Sacraments of the Church The Statute does inflict upon every Parson Vicar or other whatsoever Minister that ought or should say or sing the said Common Prayer mentioned in the said Book Entituled the Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and other rites and ceremonies of the Church after the use of the Church of England and shall refuse it or use any other form or shall Preach Declare or speak any thing in derogation of the said Book or any thing contained therein and be thereof lawfully convict by a Jury of twelve men or by confession shall forfeit to the King for the first offence the profit of all his Spiritual benefices and promotions arising in a whole year and
28. H. 8. 7. for the establishment of the succession of the Imperiall Crown of this Realm that concerneth a Prohibition to marry within the Degrees expressed in the said Act. Stat. 31 H. 8. 9. authorising the King to make Bishops by his Letters Patents Stat. 32 H. 8. 38. concerning precontracts of Marriages and touching degrees of consanguinity Stat. 35 H. 8. 3. for ratification of the Kings Stile The corporall oath made in the Stat. of 35 H. 8. 1. that every Subject of this Realm should be bound to take against the power authority and jurisdiction of the See of Rome Stat. 37 H. 8. 17. That the Doctors of the Civill Law which were married might exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction So much of that Statute of the first Ed. 6. 1. as contains certain Provisions Pains Penalties and Forfeitures for and against such as should by open preachings expresse words sayings writing printing overt-deed or act affirme or set forth That the King of this Realm for the time being is not or ought not to be the supreme head in earth of the Churches of England and Ireland nor of any of them or that the Bishop of Rome or any other person or persons other than the K. of England for the time being is or ought to be supreme head of the same Churches or any of them as in the said Act more at large may appear It is enacted that these clauses and other of the foresaid Act concerning the Supremacy and all and every branch article words and sentence in the same sounding or tending to the Derogation of the supremacy of the Popes Holiness or the See of Rome and all pains penalties and forfeitures made against them that should by any means set forth or extol the said Supremacy should from thenceforth be utterly void It did moreover generally repeal all clauses sentences and articles of every other Statute made since the 20 H. 8. against the supreme authority of the Popes Holiness or See Apostolick of Rome The Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons professing themselves reduced and received by their Majesties intercession to the unity of Christs Church and obedience of the Apostolick See of Rome and the Pope governing the same did make humble suite to their Majesties to be Intercessors that by authority of the Popes Holiness and by the ministration of Cardinall Poole by dispensation tolleration or permission respectively as the case shall require be abolished these Articles following and generally all others when any occasion shall so require may be provided for and confirmed 1. That all Bishopricks Cathedrall Churches Hospitalls Colledges Schooles and other such foundations now continuing made by authority of Parl. or otherwise established according to the order of the Lawes of this Realm since the Schisme may be confirmed and continue for ever 2. That Marriages made infragradus Prohibitos consanguinitatis affinitatis cognationis spiritualis or what might be made void propter impedimentum Publicae honestatis justitiae or for any cause prohibited by the Canons only may be confirmed and children born of those Marriages declared legitimate so as those Marriages were made according to the Lawes of the Realm for the time being and be not directly against the Lawes of God nor in such case as the See Apostolick hath not used to dispence withall 3. That institution of Benefices and other promotions Ecclesiasticall and dispensations made according to the form of the Act of Parliament may likewise be confirmed 4. That all Judiciall Processes made before any Ordinaries of this Realm or before any Delegates upon any Appeals according to the order of the Lawes of this Realm may likewise be ratified and confirmed 5. That the Lands and Goods of Bishopricks Monasteries Chanteries c. dispersed abroad to sundry persons by gift exchange purchase c. according to the Lawes of the Land for the time being shall so continue It was enacted that the title of supreme head of the Church never was nor could be attributed to by any King or Governor It was enacted that all Bulls Dispensations and Priviledges obtained before the 20 year of H. 8. or any time since of the See of Rome and not containing matter prejudiciall to the Imperiall Crown or Lawes of this Realm should be put in execution This Statute did restore the Pope and Apostolick See together with the Jurisdiction the Bishops had in the Realm to all the Authority they had before the 20 of H. 8. It is a very remarkable thing that this Statute does affirme that nothing done or moved in this Statute should be prejudicall to the Liberties of the Crown before the 20 of H. 8. and that the Statute of 24 H. 8. 12. and the Statute of 25 H. 8. cap. 20. which takes away all Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction from the Pope and vests it in the King should be but declaratory of the ancient and common Law of this Land See Coke de jure Regis Ecclesiastico 28. a. b. 31. one of these must necessarily be false Thus did Queen Mary restore by Parl all the Papall Jurisdiction which Description of Queen Mary was exercised before the 20 of Henry the 8. and would have restored all the Abbey and Chantery Lands taken away by her Father and Brother had it been in her power but many alienations descents and purchases having been made of them she was not able to performe it being a Princess no doubt wondrous free from sacriledge zealous and constant in her Religion mercifull when her Religion was not concerned and just Her mercy appears in her not only pardoning all the Councell who had subscribed to her disinheriting but it was thought she would not have taken away the life of the Lady Jane although guilty of so high a crime as having actually invaded the Crown if the Duke of Suffolk her Father formerly pardoned by the Queens meer grace had not most unjustly and unthankfully excited her Subjects against her which together with Wiats Rebellion for her own security did necessitate her for her own security to execute her Her justice appears in this the Lord Sturton having been at variance with one Hargill and his Son Gentlemen knocked the poor Gentlemen on the head and after cut their throats and buried their bodies in a Pit 15. foot deep hoping this villainy would never come to light or if it did he assured himself of the Queens favour being zealously addicted to the Popish Religion which did him not good for the Queen abhorred and rejected all mention of Pardon for him only he had this grace that the other Murderers were hanged in a hempen but he in a silken halter Ecclesiasticall Lawes made in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth IT is declared that in the Reign of H. 8. divers good Lawes and Statutes Anno 1. Eliz. cap. 1. were made as well for the utter extinguishing of all usurped and forrein Powers and Authorities of this Realm and other her dominions and Countries as also for the restoring and
uniting to the Imperiall Crown of this Realm the ancient Jurisdiction Authorities Superiorities and Preheminencies to the same of right belonging and appertaining By reason whereof her most humble Subjects from the time of the 25 H. 8. were continually kept in good order and were disburdened of divers great and intollerable charges and vexations before that time unlawfully taken and exacted by such foreign Power and Authority as before that was usurped * And to the The Statute of 1 2 Ph. Ma. cap. 8. which restored to the Pope all which this Stat. takes away declares that nothing was done prejudiciall to the Crown in so doing intent that all usurped power Spirituall and Temporall might for ever be extinguished and never be used or obeyed in this Realm or any other her Majesties Dominions It was therefore by the Authority of that Parliament enacted That no forrein Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate Spirituall or Temporall should at any time after the last day of that Session of Parliament use enjoy or exercise any manner of Power Jurisdiction Authority Preheminence or Priviledge Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall within this Realm or within any other the Queens Dominions or Countries that then were or hereafter should be but from henceforth the same should be clearly abolished out of this Realm and all other her Dominions for ever And it was then also established and enacted That such Jurisdiction Priviledges Superiorities and Preheminences Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall as by any Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Power or Authority had heretofore been or might lawfully be exercised or used for the visitation of Ecclesiasticall state and persons and for reformation order and correction of the same and of all manner of errors heresies schismes abuses offences contempts and enormities should for ever by authority of that Parliament be united and annexed to the Imperiall Crown of this Realm And that the Queen her Heirs and Successors Kings or Queens of this Realm should have full power and authority by virtue of that Act by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England to assigne name and authorize when and as often as the Queen her Heirs and Successors shall think meet and convenient and for such and so long time as should please the Queen her heirs and successors such person or persons being naturall born Subjects to the Queen her heirs or successors as the said Queen her heirs or successors should think meet to exercise use occupy and execute under the said Queen her heirs and successors all manner of Jurisdictions Priviledges and Preheminences in any wise touching or concerning any Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction within these Realms of England or Ireland or any other her Dominions and Countries and to visite reform redress order correct and amend all such errors heresies schismes abuses contempts and enormities whatsoever which by any manner spirituall or ecclesiasticall Power Authority or Jurisdiction could or might lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God the encrease of virtue and conservation of the peace and unity of this Realm And that such person or persons so to be named assigned authorized and appointed by the said Queen her heirs and successors after the said Letters Patents to him or them made and delivered as is aforesaid should have full power and authority by virtue of that Act and of the Letters Patents under the said Queen her heirs and successors to exercise use and execute all the premisses according to the tenor and effect of the said Letters Patents any matter or cause to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This Statute doth create the oath of Supremacy to be taken by all men who hold any Office or take from the Queen her heirs and successors any Fees or Wages within this Realm or other her Highnes Realms or Domiminions the form and tenor of it is I A. B. doe utterly testifie and declare in my conscience that the Queens Highness is the only supreme Governor of this Realm and all other her Highness Dominions and Countries as well in all Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes as Temporall and that no forrein Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realm and therefore I doe utterly renounce and forsake all forrein Jurisdiction Powers Superiorities and Authorities and do promise that from henceforth I shall bear faith and true allegiance to the Queens Majesty her Heirs and lawfull Successors and to my power shall assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the Queens Highness her Heirs and Successors or united and annexed to the Imperiall Crown of this Realm So help me God and the contents of this Book If any person dwelling or inhabiting within this Realm or any other of the Queens should within 30. dayes after the determination of the Session of that Parliament by Writing Printing Teaching c. maintain any forrein Power or Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall or shall advisedly put in use any such forrein Power or Jurisdiction within any of her Highness Dominions he and his Aiders Abettors Counsellors c. shall forfeit to the Queen her Heirs and Successors all his goods and chattels as well reall as personall If any person so convict be not worth in Goods and Chattels the summe of 20 s. every such person upon conviction over and besides the forfeiture of his Goods and Chattels shall suffer imprisonment by the space of a whole year without Bail or Mainprise And that all and every the Benefices Prebends and other Ecclesiasticall promotions and dignities of every person spirituall so offending and being attaint shall be utterly void and the Patron and Donor may present as if the Incumbent were actually dead For the second offence the party offending shall incur the danger of a Premunire For the third offence after conviction and Attainder the party offending shall suffer death and forfeiture of all his Goods as in case of High Treason The offender must bee impeached for preaching teaching or speaking any thing against the Premisses within a yeere after such preaching teaching or speaking and if any person shall be imprisoned for preaching teaching or speaking against this Statute and if be not indicted within the space of one half yeer next after his offence that he be discharged and set at liberty No matter of Religion or cause Ecclesiasticall made by this Parliament shall be judged Error Heresie Schism or schismaticall opinion Such Persons as shall bee authorized by Letters Patents under the Broad-seale of England shall have jurisdiction power or authority spirituall to visite reform order or correct any errors heresies schisms abuses or enormities But by virtue of this Act they have not authority to determine or adjudge any thing to bee heresy but only such as heretofore have beene determined by Canonicall-Scripture or the 4 first generall Councells or any
of them or by any Generall Councell wherein the same was declared heresie by expresse and plaine words of Scripture or such as should be determined Heresie by the high Court of Parl. with the assent of the Clergy in their Convocation This Statute revives the 23 H. 8. 9. 24 H. 8. 12. 25 H. 8. 20. 25 H. 8. 21. 26 H. 8. 14. 28 H. 8. 16. So much of the Act of the 32 H. 8. 38. concerning precontracts of Marriages and touching degrees of Consanguinity as by the 2 Ed. 6. 23. was not repealed the 37 H. 8. 17. the 1 Ed. 6. 1. This Act repeales the Statute of the 1 2. Ph. M. 6. the 1 2 Ph. M. 8 except those things touching the Premunire in the said Statute It repeales the 5 R. 2. 5. the 2 H. 4. 15. the 2 H. 5. 7. made for the punishment of Heresies by fire and faggot This statute repeales the statute of the first of Mary and the 2 and revives Stat. 1 Eliz. cap. 2. the statute of the 5 6 of Ed. 6. for the uniformity of Prayer and administration of the Sacraments with the alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used every Sunday of the yeere and the forme of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences only added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the Communicants If any Parson Vicar or other whatsoever Minister that ought or should say or sing Common-Prayer mentioned in the said Booke in such Cathedrall or Parish-Church or other places where he should Minister the same in such manner and forme as is mentioned in the said Booke refuse to doe the same or use any other forme or shall preach declare or speake any thing in derogation of the said booke or any thing therein contained or any part thereof and shall thereof be lawfully convicted according to the Lawes of the Land by the Verdict of 12 men or confession or notorious evidence of the fact shall forfeit to the Queene c. for the first offence the profits of one whole yeere next after such conviction of all his spirituall Benefices and suffer imprisonment for the space of six moneths without Bayle or Mainprize If any such person once convicted concerning the Premisses shall after such conviction offend and be thereof lawfully convict shall suffer imprisonment for the space of one whole year and be deprived ipso facto of all his spirituall promotions and that it shall be lawfull for all Patrons and Donors of such Spirituall promotions to present or collate to the same as if the person or persons so offending were dead If any person be convicted the third time of the premisses he shall ipso facto be deprived of all his spirituall promotions and shall suffer imprisonment during life Any person that shall offend and be convicted inform aforesaid concerning any of the premisses not being beneficiall or having any spirituall promotion shall for the first offence after such conviction suffer imprisonment for the space of one whole year without Bail or Mainprise and for the second offence after lawfull conviction shall suffer imprisonment during life If any person shall doe or speak any thing in derogation of the book of Common-prayer or disturb or interrupt any Parson Vicar or other Minister in any Cathedrall or Parshi Church or Chappel in the celebration of the Common-prayer or ministration of the Sacraments or shall compell or cause any other Service to be celebrated being thereof lawfully convict shall for the first offence forfeit to the Queen c. the summe of one hundred Marks and for the second offence the summe of four hundred Marks and for the third offence he shall forfeit all his Goods and Chattels and suffer imprisonment during life If any person shall for the first offence be convict of the premisses in form aforesaid and shall not pay the sum to be paid by virtue of his conviction that instead thereof he shall suffer imprisonment for the space of 6. moneths without Bail or Mainprise and he that shall not pay for the second conviction shal suffer imprisonment for the space of 12. moneths without Bail or Mainprise Every person shall having no lawfull or reasonable excuse to be absent diligently and faithfully endeavour to resort to the usuall places where Common-prayer and such Service of God shall be used upon Sundayes and other dayes appointed to be kept holy and there abide orderly and soberly during the time of Common-prayer Preaching and other Service of God upon pain of punishment by censures of the Church and twelve pence to be levied by the Church-wardens to those of the poor of the Parish by way of distress The Ordinaries and all other Officers Ecclesiasticall as well in places exempt as not exempt within their Diocess have power and authority by this Act to correct and reform and punish by Church censures all who shall offend within their Jurisdictions The Justices of Oyer and Determiner or Justices of Assise in open and generall Sessions have power to hear determine and punish these offences yet so that every Arch-bishop and Bishop in their severall Diocesses by virtue of this Act may associate or joyn themselves with the said Justices No person shall be molested for any offences abovesaid unlesse he be indicted at the next generall Sessions next after such offences are committed All Lords of Parliament for their third offence shall be tried by their Peers Chiefe Officers of Cities and Boroughs have the like authority to hear and determine the offences aforesaid as the Justices of Assize and Oyer and Determiner have Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellors Commissaries Arch-Deacons and other Ordinaries having any peculiar Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction have by virtue of this Act power in their Visitations Synods and elsewhere within their Jurisdictions to enquire and take the accusations and informations of all the offences aforesaid and to punish the same by Admonition Excommunication Sequestration or Deprivation and other censures in like form as heretofore has been used by the Queens Ecclesiasticall Laws Any person offending in the premisses and punished therefore by the Ordinary having a testimoniall thereof under the Ordinaries Seal shall not for the same offence be convicted before the Justices and likewise punished for the first offence by the Justices he shall not again receive punishment of the Ordinary Such Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers shall be reteined Anno 5 Eliz. cap. 1. and be in use as was in this Church of England by authority of Parliament in the 2 year of the Reign of Ed. 6. untill other Order shall be taken by authority of the Queen with the advice of the Commissioners appointed and authorised under the Great Seal of England for causes Ecclesiasticall or of the Metropolitan of the Realm It was enacted That whatsoever person inhabiting in the Queens Dominions who by word or deed should maintain that the Bishop of Rome had any authority or jurisdiction in any of the
Queens Realms or Dominions should incurre the danger of a Premunire If any man shall the second time maintain the Pope to have any jurisdiction or authority in any of the Queens Dominions it shall be Treason The Oath set forth in the first Eliz. cap. 1. shall be taken of all Ecclesiasticall Orders of all degrees in the University of School-masters Utterbarristers Benchers Readers Ancients Pronotaries Atturneys Philizers Sheriffs Escheators Feodaries Officers of the common-Common-Law Officers of any Court but none above the degree of a Baron may be compelled The Bishop may tender the oath to any spirituall person in his Diocesse The Lord Chancellor or Keeper shall direct Commissions under the Broad-seal to any person or persons giving them authority to minister the oath to any such persons as by the aforesaid Commission the said Commissioners shall be authorised to tender the oath unto Any person aforesaid refusing to take the Oath and being thereof legally convicted within one year shall for the first offence incur the danger of a Premunire and for the second shall suffer as in case of High Treason Every Knight Citizen Burgess or Baron for any of the Cinque Ports shall take the said Oath and in case of refusall shall be deemed no Knight Citizen Burgess or Baron It was enacted That if any person in the Queens Dominions should use Anno 13 Eliz. cap. 1. or put in use any Bull of absolution or reconciliation formerly had or afterward to be obtained from the Bishop of Rome his successors or any claiming under him or if any person shall by virtue of such Bull take upon him to grant or promise to any person any such absolution or reconciliation or if any person shall willingly receive such absolution or reconciliation or shall obtain from the Bishop of Rome any manner of Bull Writing or Instrument containing any thing whatsoever or shall publish any such Writing or Instrument shall be adjudged a Traitor The aiders comforters and maintainers of the offendors after offence shall incur the pains and penalties of a Premunire Every person to whom such Absolution Reconciliation Bull Writing or Instrument shall be offered moved or perswaded to be put in use and shall conceal such motion or perswasion and not disclose the same within six weeks following to some of the Queens Councell or to the President or Vice-President of the North parts or in the Marches of Wales shall incur the danger and penalty of a Premunire The bringers into the Realm or using any Agnus Dei Crosses Pictures Beads c. from the Bishop of Rome or any claiming authority from the Bishop of Rome to consecrate the same as well the parties bringing as the parties receiving shall incur the danger of a Premunire But if any person to whom such Agnus Dei c. shall be tendred shall apprehend the person tendring the same and bring him to the next Justice of Peace within the County where the said tender shall be made if it be in his power or for lack of ability shall within three dayes disclose the names of the person so tendring or his place of resort to the Bishop of that Diocess or to any Justice of Peace of that Shire where such persons are resiant or if any person receive such Agnus Dei c. and shall within one day after receipt deliver the same to any Justice of Peace within the same Shire that then every such person shall not incur the penalties abovesaid All they who within three moneths after dissolution of the Parliament shall bring in and deliver all such Bulls Writings Instruments of Reconciliation to the Bishop of the Diocesse wherein such absolution had been made to be cancelled and confesse and acknowledge his offence and desire to be received into the Church of England shall be clearly pardoned of such offence And every person who had received any absolution from the Bishop or See of Rome or any reconciliation unto the Bishop or See of Rome since the first year of the Queen and shall within three moneths after any Session or dissolution of the Parliament come before the Bishop of the Diocess where such absolution or reconciliation was made and publickly acknowledge his offence therein and humbly desire to be restored and admitted into the Church of England shall be clearly pardoned of such offence If any Justice of Peace to whom any matter or offence before mentioned shall be uttered doe not within 14. dayes after signifie and declare the same to some one of the Queens Privie Councell that then such Justice shall incur the danger of a Premunire Noble-men shall be tryed by their Peers Saving to all persons Bodies politique and corporate their heirs and successors others then the said offendors and their heirs all rights titles possessions c. as they or any of them had at the day of committing the offence aforesaid or before Stat. 23 Eliz. cap. 1. makes it Treason for any who shall have or pretend to have power or shall by any means put in practice to absolve perswade or withdraw any of the Queens Subjects from their naturall obedience or with-draw them for that intent from the Religion now by her Highness authority established to the Romish Religion Or if any person shall by any means be willingly absolved or willingly be reconciled or shall promise any obedience to any forrein pretended Authority Prince State or Potentate and be thereof lawfully convict shall suffer as in case of High Treason The aiders maintainers and concealers who shall not within twenty daies at furthest disclose the same to some Justice of Peace or higher Officer shall suffer as in case of Misprision of Treason Every person who shall sing or say Masse shall forfeit 200 marks and suffer imprisonment during one whole year And every person who shall willingly hear Masse shall forfeit one hundred marks and suffer imprisonment for a year Every person above sixteen years of age who shall not repair to some Church Chappel or usuall place of Common-prayer and forbear the same contrary to the Stat. 1 Eliz. for uniformity of Common-prayer shall forfeit 20 pounds for every moneth and over and besides if he or she shall forbear for the space of 12. moneths after certificate thereof in writing made into the Kings Bench by the Ordinary a Justice of Assise and Goal-delivery or a Justice of peace of the County where such offendor shall dwell or be shall for his obstinacy be bound with two sufficient Sureties in the sum of 200 pounds at least to the good behaviour and so continue bound untill such time as he shall conform himself and come to Church according to the true intent of the Statute of the said 1 Eliz. Every person Body politique or corporate who shall maintain a School-master who shall not repair to the Church as aforesaid or be allowed by the Ordinary of the Diocesse where such School-master shall be kept shall forfeit for every moneth ten pound And such
convict shall be committed to prison without bail or mainprise untill they conform to come to Church and hear Divine Service according to Law and make such submission and declaration as in this Act is afterward declared and appointed If any person who shall offend as aforesaid shall not within three moneths after they be convicted conform themselves to the obedience of the Laws in comming to Church to hear Divine Service and in making such publick confession and submission as in this Act is appointed being thereunto required by the Bishop of the Diocesse or any Justice of Peace where the person shall happen to be or by the Minister or Curate of the Parish that in every such case every such offendor being thereunto warned by any Justice of Peace of the County shall upon his or their corporall oath before the Justices of Peace in the open Quarter-sessions or at the Assises abjure the Realm and all other the Queens Dominions for ever unless her Majesty shall licence the party to return and shall depart out of the Realm at such Port and within such times as shall be appointed by the said Justices before whom the said abjuration was made unlesse the offendor be letted by such lawfull and reasonable means as by the common Lawes are permitted in cases of abjuration of Felony and in such cases of let or stay then within such reasonable time after as the Common Law requires in case of Abjuration for Felony the Justices of Peace before whom any such abjuration shall be made shall cause the same to be presently entred into record before them and shall certifie the same to the Justices of Assizes and Goal-delivery of the said County at the next Assizes If any such offender which by the tenor of this Act is to be abjured shall refuse to make such abjuration and shall not goe to such Haven within such time appointed and depart out of the Realm or after such departure shall return without licence that in such case the party offending shall suffer as in case of Felony without benefit of the Clergy If any person offending against this Act shall before he be required as aforesaid to make such abjuration repair to some Parish Church on some Sunday or Festivall and then and there hear Divine Service and before Sermon or reading of the Gospell make publick and open submission and declaration in conformity to the Lawes according to this Act that then every such penalties inflicted by this Act be discharged The submission to be made is I A. B. doe humbly confess and acknowledge that I have grievously offended God in contemning her Majesties Godly and lawfull Government and Authority by absenting my self from Church and hearing Divine Service contrary to the Godly Lawes and Statutes of this Realm and in using and frequenting disordered and unlawfull Conventicles and Assemblies under pretence and colour of exercise of Religion And I am heartily sorry for the same and do acknowledge and testifie in my conscience that no other person hath or ought to have Authority over her Majesty And I doe promise and protest without any dissimulation or any colour or means of any dispensation That from henceforth I will from time to time obey and perform her Majesties Lawes and Statutes in repairing to the Church and hearing Divine Service and do my uttermost endeavor to perfom the same The Minister of every Parish where such submission and declaration shall be made shall presently enter the same into a book to be kept by every Parish for that purpose and within ten dayes after certifie the same in writing to the Bishop of the Diocess If any such offendor after such submission shall afterwards relapse and obstinately refuse to repair to some Church or usuall place of Divine Service or shall be present at any such Conventicles c. under colour of exercise of Religion contrary to her Majesties Lawes That then every such offendor shall lose the benefit he might have had by virtue of his Submission If any person shall hereafter relieve maintain or keep in his house or otherwise any person which shall obstinately refuse to come to some Church or usuall place of Common-prayer or shall forbear the same by the space of a moneth that then every such person so offending after such notice given him by the Ordinary of the Diocesse or any Justice of Assize of the Circuit or any Justice of Peace of the County or any Minister Curate or Church-warden of the Parish where such person shall be shall forfeit to the Queen for every person so relieved after such notice forty pound for every moneth that he or they shall relieve c. any person so offending This Act shall in no wise extend to punish or impeach any person for relieving or keeping his Father Wife Mother Child Ward Brother or Sister or his Wives Father or Mother not having any certain place of habitation of their own or the Husbands or Wives of any of them or for relieving maintaining or keeping any such person as shall be committed by Authority to the custody of any by whom they shall be so relieved or maintained These two last clauses are repealed by the 3 Jac. 4. All duties forfeitures and payments due to the Queene by virtue of this Act or the Act of the 23 of Eliz. concerning Recusants may be recovered and levyed to her Majesties use by action of debt bill plaint information or otherwise in any of the Courts called the Kings bench Common-pleas or Exchequer in such sort as by the ordinary course of the Common-Law any other debt due by any person in any other Case might be recovered or levyed where no Essoin Protection or Wager of Law bee admitted The third part of the Penalties had or received by virtue of this Act shall be imployed and bestowed to such good and charitable uses in such manner and forme as is limited and appointed in the Statute made in the 29 Eliz. c. 6. concerning Recusants No popish Recusant or feme covert shall be compelled to abjure by this Act. Every person that should abjure by virtue of this Act and refuse being thereunto required as aforesaid shall forfeit to the Queene all his goods and chattels for ever and his Lands and Tenements during life the wife of any such offendor shall not lose her Dowre nor any corruption of blood shall grow or be by reason of any offence mentioned in this Act. Every Person above sixteene yeeres of age borne within any of the Stat. 35 Eliz. cap. 2. Queenes Dominions or made a Denizen being a popish Recusant and before the end of that Session of Parliament convicted for not repairing to some Church or usuall place uf Divine-service but forbearing the same contrary to the Lawes established and having a certain place of abode within the Realme shall within forty dayes next after the Session of Parliament if they be in the Realme and not restrained by imprisonment or by command of
forty pounds and for every yeere after the summe of sixtie pounds untill hee or shee shall receive the Sacrament as aforesaid and if he or she who hath received the Sacrament as aforesaid shall after offend in not receiving the Sacrament as aforesaid by the space of one whole yeere that then he shall forfeit for every such offence the summe of sixty pounds the one moity to the King the other to him who will sue for the same in any of the Courts of Record in Westminster or before any Justices of Assize or before Justices of Peace at their generall Quarter-Sessions by Action of Debt Bill Plaint or Information wherein no Essoyne Protection or Wager of Law shall be allowed The Churchwardens and Constables of every Towne Parish or Chappel for the time being or some one of them or if there be none then the chief Constables of the Hundred where such Town Parish or Chappell is or one of them as well in places exempt as not exempt shall once every yeere present the monthly absence from Church of all popish Recusants within such Townes and parishes and shall present the names of every of the children of the said Recusants being above the age of nine yeeres and as neere as they can the age of the said children as also the names of the Servants of the said Recusants at the next generall or quarter-Sessions of that shire limit division or liberty All such Presentments shall bee Recorded in the said Sessions by the Clerke of the Peace or Towne-clarke for the time being without any Fee and for default of every such Presentment the said Churchwardens Constables or High-constables shall forfeit twenty shillings and for default of recording such presentment without a Fee the Clerke of the Peace or Town-clerke shall forfeit 40. s. Every Presenement made by any Churchwarden constable or High-constable as aforesaid whereby any Recusant shall happen to be convicted shall be rewarded by having 40. s. to be levyed out of such Recusants goods and estate in such manner as by the more part of the Justices shall be ordered by warrant under their hands and seales The Justices of Assiize and Justices of Quarter-sessions have power to heare and determine of all Recusants as well for not receiving the Sacrament as for not coming to Church and have also power to make Proclamation that the body of every such offendor shall be rendred to the Sheriff of the county or the Baylif or keeper of the Goale of the liberty before the next Assizes Generall or Quarter-sessions and if then the offendor shall not make his appearance upon Record that every such default shall be deemed as a sufficient conviction by verdict of 12 men This Statute recites the penalties imposed by the 29 Eliz. 6. upon a Recusant convict and that every conviction shall be certified into the Exchequer as is in the statute of 23 El. 1. concerning Recusants monethly forfeitures yet by this statute the King may refuse the 20 l. a moneth and take the 2 parts of the Recusants lands yet the King shall not take into his two parts the Mansion house nor shall demise nor lease over the 2 third parts or any part thereof to any Recusant nor to the use of any Recusant and whosoever shall take any lease of the King of such lands shall give such security as the Court of Exchequer shall allow not to suffer any waste to be committed upon the Premisses For the better tryall how the Kings subjects stand affected in point of loyalty and due Obedience it is Enacted That after the end of the session of Parliament any Bishop of the Diocesse or any two Justices of peace whereof one of the Quorum within the jurisdiction of their sessions may require any person of the age of 18 yeeres or above being or which shall bee convict or indicted for any Recusancy except noblemen and noble women for not repairing to Divine service according to law or have not received the Sacrament twice within the yeere next past or any person passing through the County or Liberty and unknowne except as is before excepted that being examined by them upon oath shall confesse or not deny himself to be a Recusant or shall confesse or not deny that he hath not taken the Sacrament twice within the yeere to take this Oath hereafter upon the holy Evangelists which said Bishop or two Justices shall certifie in writing subscribed with his or their hands at the next generall or Quarter-sessions the Christian name Sirname and place of abode of every person which shall take the said Oath which Certificate shall be there Recorded and kept among Records of the said sessions If any person other then noblemen and noble women shall refuse to answere upon Oath to such Bishop or Justices of Peace or take the said Oath duely tendred then the said Bishops or Justices of Peace shall commit the same person to the common Goale without Baile or Mainprize untill the next Assizes or quarter Sessions where the said Oath shall be againe tendred unto them by the Justices of Affize or Justices of Peace or the greater part of them and if such person shall then refuse to take the Oath he shall incur the penalty of a praemunire except women Covert who upon refusall shall only be committed to the common Goale there to remain without bail or mainprize untill they take the said Oath The Tenour of the Oath I A. B Doe truly and sincerely acknowledg professe testify and declare in my Conscience before God and the World that our Soveraign Lord King James is lawfull and rightfull King of this Realm and of all other his Majesties Dominions and Countries and that the Pope neither of himselfe nor by any Authority of the Church or See of Rome or by any other meanes with any other hath any power or authority to depose the King or to dispose of any of his Majesties Kingdomes or Dominions or to authorize any forreigne Prince to invade or annoy him or his Countries or to discharge any of his subjects of their Allegiance and Obedience to his Majesty or to give licence or leave to any of them to beare Arms or raise tumults or to offer any violence or hurt to his Majesties Royall Person State or Government or to any of his Majesties Subjects within his Majesties Dominions Also I sweare from my heart that notwithstanding any Declaration or Sentence of Excommunication or Deprivation made or granted or to be made or granted by the Pope or his Successors or by any authority derived or pretended to be derived from him or his See against the said King his Heires and Suceessors or any absolution of the said Subjects from their obedience I will beare faith and true Allegiance to his Majesty his Heirs and Successors and him and them will defend to the uttermost of my power against all conspiracies and attempts whatsoever which shall be made against his or their Persons their Crowne and Dignity
shall retain in service see or livery any person which shall forbear to goe to some usuall place of Divine service by the space of a moneth shall forfeit for every such moneth he knowing the same the summe of ten pounds This Act shall not extend to punish any person for maintaining relieving or harbouring his Father or Mother wanting without fraud any other habitation or sufficient maintenance or the ward of any person committed by authority to the custody of any by whom they shall be so relieved maintained or kept The Sheriff or other Officer upon lawfull Writ Warrant or Processe to him awarded to take or apprehend any Popish Recusant standing excommunicated for recusancy may break open the house where any such person excommunicated shal be or raise the power of the County for apprehending such person Every offence committed against this Act may be heard and determined before the Justices of the Kings Bench and Justices of Assize And all offences other than Treason shall be enquired heard and determined before the Justices of Peace in their next Generall and Quarter-sessions No attainder of Felony by this Act shall extend to forfeiture of Dower or corruption of blood The Defendant in any action commenced or brought against him by virtue of any thing in this Act may plead to the generall Issue by an Evidence that shall prove his doings or proceedings warrantable by this Law This Act nor any thing contained therein is said not to extend to take away or abridge any authority or jurisdiction of Ecclesiasticall censures No person shall be charged in any penalty by force of this Act which shall happen for the wifes offence in not receiving the Sacrament during her Marriage nor any woman shall be charged with any penalty for not receiving during Marriage In all cases where the Bishop or Justices of Peace by virtue of this Act may take of any Subject not a Nobleman this oath above mentioned The Lords of the Privie Councell or any 6 of them where of the Lord Chancellor Lord Treasurer or principle Secretary to be one have authority to require the same at any time of any Noble-man or Noble-woman being above the age of 18. years and if such Noble-man or Noble-woman other then the woman married refuse the same they shall incurre the penalty of a Premunire Where any person shall pass out of the Cinque-Ports or any member thereof to any parts beyond the seas to serve any foreign Prince State or Potentate the Lord Warden of the Cinque-Ports for the time being or any person by him appointed have power to take bond and minister this oath to such passengers If any man discover any Recusant or other person which shall entertain or Stat. Annn. 3 Jac. cap. 5. relieve any Jesuit Seminary or Popish Priest or shall discover any Mass to have been said and the persons which were present and the Priest or any that were present within three daies shall not only be freed from any penalty but shall have the third part of the forfeiture of all such summes of money goods and chattels which shall be forfeited for such offence if the forfeiture exceed not 150 l. if it doth exceed 150 l. then the discoverer to have 50 l. and the discoverer after conviction of the offendor shall have a certificate from the Judges or Justices of Peace before whom such conviction shall happen to be directed to the Sheriffe or other Officer that shall seize the goods commanding him to pay the same accordingly No Popish Recusant shall come into the house where the King or the Heir apparent shall be unlesse commanded by the King or by Warrant from the Lords of the privy Councell upon penalty of one hundred pound the one moity to the King the other to the discoverer who will sue for the same in any Court of Record where no Essoine Protection or Law Gager shall be allowed All convicted Popish Recusants dwelling in London or within five miles within three moneths after the Session of Parliament shall depart out of it and not dwell within ten miles and deliver up their names to the Lord Major if they dwell in London and if such Recusant shall dwell within ten miles of London to deliver up his name to the next Justice of Peace within fourty dayes after the Session of Parliament upon the penalty of one hundred pounds the one halfe to the King the other to him who will sue as aforesaid All Recusants which shall dwell or remain in London or within ten miles thereof shall within ten dayes after indictment or conviction depart out of the said compass and deliver up their names to the Lord Mayor In case the said Recusant shall dwell in any County within ten miles of London then within ten daies after conviction or indictment shall give up his name to the next Justice of peace the person offending shall forfeit one hundred pounds the one halfe to the King the other to the Informer as aforesaid Tradesmen Recusants who have no other habitation may continue within London and the compass of ten miles This Act repeals that branch of the 35 Eliz. cap. 2. touching licence of Recusants to remove or pass above five miles from their place of abode The King or three or more of the Privy Councell under their hands may licence a Recusant to travell out of the compass of five miles So may four Justices of Peace of the County with the privity of the Bishop of the Diocesse in writing or of the Lieutenant or any of the Deputy Lieutenants the party taking his corporall oath that he truly informes them of the cause of his journey and making no causless stayes No convict Recusant shall practise the Common Law as a Councellor Clerk Atturney or Solicitor nor shall practice the Civill Law as Advocate or Proctor nor practise Physick nor be an Apothecary nor shall be Judge Minister Clerk or Steward of any Court nor keep any Court nor shall be Register or Town-clerk or other Minister or Officer in any Court nor shall bear Office as Captain Lieutenant Corporall Sergeant Auncient-bearer or other Office in Camp Troop Band or Company of Souldiers nor bear any office in any Ship Castle or Fortresse of the Kings upon penalty of one hundred pounds to be forfeited as aforesaid No popish Recusant convict or having a Wife convict shall bear any publick office in the Common-wealth Every married woman being a Recusant convict her husband not being convict shall forfeit 2. third parts of her Joynture and Dower during her life and be made uncapable of being Executrix or Administratrix to her husband Every Popish Recusant convict shall be deemed as a person excommunicated so long as he continues not conformable and not come to Divine service and receive the Sacrament and take the oath appointed by this Parliament in the first chap. Yet such Recusant may sue for such of his Lands Tenements c. and for the profits thereof which are not
therefore in all men and therefore in all sorts of men As if any man promises another that he will do or give him such a thing although it be to his hinderance he wilfully breaks his promise I say this is a sin of injustice in the promiser for he abuses and falsifies the Law of Nature which obliges every man to the performance of his promise to his hinderance to whom he made his promise And though this be the Law of Nature which does onely oblige in Conscience yet is such a promiser an unjust man nor does he deserve to be trusted as a friend or honest man But this must always be understood of private men and they not pre-engaged Annot. before for the first promise is to be performed Neither must the performance of a private mans promise be to the hurt or damage of another man for by the Law of Nature he was obliged to hurt no man and to give to every man his due before he made such promise A publick person promises to another to do or give him such a thing which will be prejudicial to his trust I say he ought not to perform it for he was obliged to perform his trust before he made such promise What then does preengagement the not injuring of another or publick employment free men and let them loose from all Law of God and Nature I answer nothing less for they sin not less then private freemen in not performing their promise but commit a greater sin in breaking their first promise and betraying their publick trust c. then if they should perform their promise So that in promising they sin but in the performance they commit a greater sin 5. A King promiseth he will not hurt any of his Subjects in their persons How Kings promises are to be interpreted and performed or estates without due Process and after judgment given according to the known Laws He being a King was obliged as King to do to the best of his power all things in order to the good and preservation of his subjects in general and therefore is obliged to this latter promise onely as it is consistent with his former He ought onely to protect his subjects in particular as it does relate to the good and benefit of his subjects in general I say therefore notwithstanding any such subsequent promise is not any King obliged to it but may in case of publick necessity govern by Martial Law and destroy any particular Subjects estate rather then enemies or seditious men should make advantage thereof to the endangering of the publick Nor is this any new thing but always was in all species of Governments since the World began nor does any King sin in making such promise for he may justly do it and thereby secure the mindes of his Subjects who would otherwise be in a continual diffidence nor does he sin in not performing this promise when it becomes inconsistble with the publick good for no King can possibly foresee all the publick necessities and dangers which may happen 6. No mans being greater or lesser does free him from his duty which Injustice in Princes he owes to the Laws of God all men being alike as compared to God Kings therefore being so are not disobliged to the Laws of God and Nature It was therefore a sin of injustice in Ahab to take the possession of Naboth's Vineyard the property and inheritance of the Israelites being given by God and unalienable by the Children of Israel I say this was a sin of injustice in Ahab for his being a King did not free him from Gods Laws but did without any publick necessity abuse the power and command which God had given him as King to the damage and hurt of Naboth and his posterity Davids putting Uriah to death and Ahabs consenting to Naboth's death although after his death were sins of injustice for they were entrusted by God to be Kings for the good of their Subjects Whereas they did abuse and falsifie their trust to the highest wrong of others whom they ought to have protected Princes are Gods Ministers for their Subjects good 7. Man being a reasonable and sociable Creature which being inconsistible Rom 13. 4. Kings by right command next after God with community and parity and mankinde being onely conservable in Society that is in the mutual commanding and obeying of different parties And as God by highest right ought in all things to be obeyed so Kings ought to be obeyed next after God in all things For every Soul ought to be subject to the higher powers for there are no powers but of God and the powers that be are ordained of God And through me Kings reign Rom. 13. 1. Prov. 8. 15. and Princes make just Laws All things therefore which Princes command where God hath not left necessary Laws for the good and governing of their Subjects which he was onely pleased to do to his peculiar people the Israelites are therefore just because they command them they commanding nothing repugnant to the Laws of God 8. A Prince commands a Judge to execute the known Laws uprightly Injustice in Subjects he becomes corrupt and sells or otherwise purloyns judgment I say this is a sin of injustice in the Judge for he abuses the command of his Prince who by right might command him to the damage of another against whom false judgment is given It is an act of injustice in all Subjects in general to abuse the trust committed to them by their Soveraigns for he by right may command and entrust them nor can they abuse their trust but it must be to the damage of the Prince or some other But besides express Obedience of Subjects to their Soveraigns when they are particularly entrusted by them there is a general and implied Obedience which Subjects ow to their Soveraigns and the Laws of their Countrey as Subjects whether they be employed in any place of trust or not For subjection being in the predicament of Relation does imply a right of command and no man can be subject where there is nothing to which he is subject It is therefore a sin of injustice in any Subject to pretend or abuse any of his Countries Laws to the hurt or damage of another 9. Since therefore Kings by highest right next after God may command Highest injustice in Subjects then by consequence is that the highest sin of injustice next after Luciferian pride of Creatures making themselves equal or superior to their Creator for Subjects to tread under foot all Sacred and Civil Laws to make themselves superior to their Soveraigns to whom by all Divine and Humane Laws they ow their obedience to the ruine and destruction of so many thousands of innocent men women and children and families of all sorts which must necessarily come to pass in the attaining their ends And that Subjects do abuse all Humane Laws in pretending them to the advancing of themselves above