some mens Minds are involv'd in they can no more alter their beliefs about Transubstantiation then they can transubstantiate themselves into other Creatures and are under a Moral incapacity of preventing another incurred by Law. And therefore as it would be Injustice in a Judge to Punish a man for the Errors of the mind that he knoweth not to be voluntary and for a man 's not putting himself into a Capacity to serve the King by the Professing of the truth in Problematical Points when the King of Kings hath by the not sufficient promulgating of such truth to his understanding render'd him innocent in his disbelief thereof and so long morally uncapable to profess it so by one man's after another appearing thus unable to qualifie himself to serve the King he may be totally unserved I have often heard you complain of the narrow Idea's of the King's Supremacy in some of the Non-Conformists but if you will read the Protestation of the King's Supremacy made by the Nâ—…n-conforming Ministers and Printed A D. 1605. you will find that they have there given in sufficient caution for tâ—…eir Principles not allowing any of the King's Subjects being disabled from serving him For they having said in § 1. We hold and maintain the same Authority and Supremâ—…cy in all Causes and over all Persons Civil and Ecclesiastical granted by Statute to Queen Elizabeth and expressed and declared in the Book of Advertisements and Injunctions and in Mr. Bilson against the Iesuites to be due in full and ample manner without any limitation or qualification to the King and his Heirs and Successors for ever they add in § 2. We are so far from judging the said Supâ—…emacy to be unlawful that we are persâ—… aded that the King should sin highly against God if he should not assume the same to himself and that the Churches within his Dominions should sin damnably if they should deny to yield the same to him yea tho the STATUTES of the Kingdom should deâ—…y it to him And they tell you in Sect. 6. that the height of the King 's Royal Dignity consists in his Supremacy It is thus likewise a kind of familiar or Vulgar Error among Protestants to think that in the â—…ncient times this Fundamental Assertory part of your Oath tâ—…at the King is the only Supreme Governor of this Râ—…alm was not allow'd Long before the Rescript of the University of Oxford to Henry the 8th A. 1534. mention'd that he was next under God their happy and Supreme Moderator and Governor and on which being brought into the Parliament House an Act passed whereby the King was declared Supreme Head and Governor of the Church and long before it was declared by the Parliament 16. R. 2. c. 5. that the Crown â—…t England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in no earthly subjection but immediately subject to God in all things touching the Regality of the same Crown and to none other and long before Bracton's writing in the Reign of H. 3. Omnis quidem sub Rege ipse sub nullo sed tantum sub Deo and ipse autem Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo. c. you will find if you look into Coke's 4th Instit. c. 74. that in the Law before the Conquest the style runs Rex autem quia Uicarius summâ—… Regis est ad hoc est constitutus ut Regnum terâ—…enum populum Domini super omnia sanctam veneretuâ—… Ecclesiam ejus regat c. and where he tells you of the style of King Edwin in his Charters viz. of Angâ—…orum Rex totius Britannicae telâ—…uris Gubeâ—…nator Rector And he there refers likewise to several Grants made by Abâ—…ots and Priors to King E. 4. wherein they style him by these very words Supremus Dominus noster But that he might perimere litem as to the point of the ancientness of the King's Supremacy he there referreth to the judgment of Parliament declared in the Statute of 24 o. H. 8. c. 12. viz. That by divers authentick Histories and Chronicles it is manifestly declared and expressed that this Realm of England is an Empire and so hath been accepted in the World governâ—…d by one Supreme Head and King c. unto whom a Body-Politick compact of all sorts and degrees of People divided in terms and by names of Spiritualty and Temporalty been bounden and owen to beat next unto God a natural and humble Obedience c. And here I am led to tell you that as it is on this Foundation of the King 's being the Supreme Governor and Ruler of all sorts and degrees of men thus anciently acknowledged by our Roman Catholick forefathers that the Regal Power of Dispensing with the Laws that were Penal by Incapacity and particularly in order to the Crown 's being enabled to command the Obedience and Service of all Estates and Degrees of men was built so it is on the same that the Usurpations of the Papal Dispensative Power of that kind were opposed I shall before we part give you instances hereof A. I thank you but shall here tell you that the Expression you used just now about the King being disabled by his Subjects being so hath overcast my thoughts with some kind of horror B. I cannot help it but if you will have me speak with the frankness of a Philosopher concerning the Nature of things the disabling of the Subjects must have that effect in Nature and of the disabling of their Country too And I think too you gave me a hint for some such thought at our last meeting If you do but consider the Services done to Monarchs by that abject Nation of the Iews and who by Tacitus were call'd the Vilissima pars servientium and how in our Saviour's time they were serviceable to the Roman Empire in the Collection of the Customs and how much they have been since and still are useful to the Grand Signior and to many Christian Princes by gathering in their Imposts you will easily imagine the loss that would redound to Princes by Religionary Heterodoxy disabling any to serve them It is but natural to men of the most inquisitive and penetrating thoughts to differ from many Points of Theology receiv'd by Princes and their People and since such heterodoxy doth difficult their access to Preferment it is but Natural to them by their working Thoughts and Industry to arrive at the excelling the duller Orthodox in whatever course of life they take and by that means to try to push on their way into their Prince's favour and consequently to have very sharp regrets against any Methods that would incapacitate them for it And as if this Civil Death were to Men of great Thoughts the terrible of terribles and what as hindring them from serving their Prince and Country were like Burying them alive I shall shew you how a Man of great Abilities and who had made a great Figure in the Church
reason that lyes in this Assertory part of the Oath that so many Writers of the Common Law have founded their Assertion of the King's Power oâ—… Commanding the Service of all his Subjects as essential to the keeping up the Monarchy or the Rule of all Estates committed to him by God that I lately spoke of and inseparable from it noâ—… alienable by any Humane Laws It is the Supreme Power of our Princes as Governors of the Realm that hath always entitled them to Press men for the Service of the Crown by Land or Sea and to recall both Soldiers and Mariners from the Service of Foreign Princes upon emergent Occasions to serve their natural Liege Lord. And the Book writ by a Learned Common Lawyer against the Exclusion call'd A Letter from a Gentleman of Quality in the Country c. and Printed A. 1679. and so deservedly extoll'd by the Iudicious loyal tells you in p. 7. and 8. that If it should be enacted by Parliament that No man should honour the King or love his Parents or Children c. such an Act would be ipso facto void because contrary to the express Divine Command c. The Statute of 23 H. 6. c. 8. and several other Statutes Enact that no Man shall be Sheriff of any County above one year and that any Patent of the King to any Person for a longer term tho with an express Clause of Non-obstante shall be void and of none Effect and the Patentee perpetually disabled to bear the Office. And yet notwithstanding it is Resolv'd by all the Iudges of England that these Acts of Parliament are void and that the King may by Non-obstante Constitute a Sheriff for Years Life or Inheritance And what is the Reason which the Iudges give of this Resolution Why because say they in express words this Act of Parliament cannot bar the King of the Service of his Subject which the immutable Law of Nature doth give to him For Obedience and Ligeance of the Subject add they is due to the Soveraign by the Law of Nature See 2 Hen. 7. 6. v. Calvin's Case 14. a. in Coke's 7th Rep. We know that by the Statute of 4 o. H. 4. c. 5. 't is ordain'd That every Sheriff of England shall abide in proper Person within his Bailywick for the time that he shall be such Officer But this Act hath never been construed to hinder the King as Supreme Governor and Ruler of all Persons in the Realm from Commanding any Sheriffs to serve him elsewhere during their Shrievalties nor on such case to oblige the Sheriffs in Conscience to observe the Statute by such Personal residence Baker in the reign of King Charles the first tells us of an Information A. 1629. in the Star-chamber against Mr. Long for that he being high Sheriff of the County of Wilts had the Charge and Custody thereof committed to him and had taken his Oath according to the Law to abide within his Bailys-wick all the time of his Sheriff-wick and his Trust and Employment requiring his personal attendance therein did contrary thereto suffer himself to be chosen a Citizen for the City of Bath to serve in the last Parliament and did attend at Westminster in Parliament WITHOUT HIS MAIESTIES LICENCE he being Sheriff at that time and that for the foremention'd Offences and Breach of his Oath and neglect of his Trust and Contempt of his Majesty the Decree was That he should be Committed to the Tower during his Majesties Pleasure and pay a Fine of 2000 Marks to the King. Hereby you see that his Majesties LICENCE or Dispensing with that Statute had indemnify'd him from it in the Court of Law and that the potestas Superioris being necessarily imply'd in a promissory Oath the King as supreme Governour of all Persons in his Realms commanding or allowing such Officers service to the publick elsewhere had secured him in either forum The known Custom of the Speaker of the House of Commons DISABLING himself when presented to the King but of entring on his Charge on the King's approbation and pleasure signify'd according to that saying of Cuâ—… me posse negem quod tu posse putes may pass for some representation to our thoughts of Disability to serve the publick then evaporating when the King as Governor of the Realm doth give the Subject a Call so to do You may find this practice of the Speaker's disabling himself set down in Coke 4. Inst. c. 1. And I shall here by the way take notice that he there likewise mentions it that one of the Principal ends of Calling of Parliaments is for the redress of the Mischiefs and Grievances that dayly happen And he had there before said Now forasmuch as divers Laws and Statutes have been enacted and provided for these ends aforesaid and that divers Mischiefs in particular and divers Grievances in general concerning the Honour and Safety of the King the State and Defence of the Kingdom and of the Church of England might be prevented an excellent Law was made Anno 36. E. 3. which being applied to the said Writs of Parliament doth in few and effectual words set down the true subject of a Parliament in these words For the maintenance of the said Articles and Statutes and redress of divers Mischiefs and Grievances which daily happen a Parliament shall be holden every year as another time was Ordain'd by a Statute Before the Conquest Parliaments were to be holden twice every year c. But accordingly as my Lord Coke there takes notice of the style of the Statute of 36. E. 3. viz. to the Honour of God and of holy Church and quietness of the People and according to the style of the Statute of 10. E. 3. Because our Sovereign Lord the King Edw. 3. which Soverainly desireth the maintenance of the Peace and Safeguard of his People c. hath Ordain'd c. for the Quietness and Peace of his People c. and suitably to the style of the Statute of 14 o E. 3. 1. To the honour of God c. The King for Peace and Quietness of his People as well great as small doth Grant and Establish the things under-written c. and to that of 20. E. 3. and for this Cause desiring as much for the Pleasure of God and Ease and Quietness of our Subjects and according to that style in the Register Nos oppressiones duritias damna excessus praedicta gravamina volentes relinquere impunita volentesque salvationi QUIETI populi nostri in hac parte prospicere ut tenemut c. and according to the Trust committed to Princes by God to endeavour that their Subjects may under them lead QUIET and Peaceable lives in all Godliness and Honesty and which is the great Fundamental reason of the Moral Obligation of Princes to relax the Summum jus of their Laws by sometimes DISPENSING therein since we may easily imagine by our thinking of a late Conjuncture how possible it was that the
and State resented it in the Conjuncture of A. 1640. I mean Archbishop Williams who in his famous Speech in Parliament that year against the Bill that afterward passed into a Law to Disable Persons in Holy Orders from exercising any Temporal Jurisdiction doth thereupon represent it that under a CAIN ' s mark an eternal kind of disability or incapacity is laid on them from enjoying hereafter any of those Rights Favours or Charters of former Princes and which is the heaviest Point of all without killing of Abel or any Crime laid to their charge more then that in the beginning of the Bill 't is said roundly and in the style of Lacedaemon that they ought not to intermeddle c. And what his thoughts were of the Injustice of such incapacity put on the Clergy and of the odiousness of that Punishment of incapacity appears by what he afterward saith viz. I come to the 4th part of this Bill which is the manner of the inhibition every way heavy in the Penalty heavier a great deal in the incapacity In the weighing the Penalty will you consider the small wyers that is poor Causes that are to induce the same and then the heavy load that hangs upon these wyers It is thus If a Natural Subject of England interessed in the Magna Charta and Petition of Right as well as any other yet being a Person in Holy Orders shall happen unfortunately to Vote in Parliament to obey his Prince by way of Councel or by way of a Commissioner be required thereunto then is he presently to lose and forfeit for his first offence all his Means and Livelyhood c. This Peradventure may move others most but it doth not me It is not the Penalty but the Incapacity aâ—…d as the Philosophers would call it the Natural impotency imposed by this Bill on men in holy Orders to SERVE the KING or the STATE in this kind be they otherwise never so able or never so willing or never so vertuous which makes me draw a kind of Timanthe ' s veil over this Point and leave it without any amplification at all to your Lordships wise and inward Thoughts and Considerations But if with so much thunder of Passion as well as lightning of reason that learned Speech from the Bishops Bench did so much resent the punishing the Clergy with disability to execute secular Offices and to have the honour of serving their Prince and Country therein and for the imposing of which disability that known place of Scripture 2 Tim. 2. 4. No man that wars entangles himself with the Affairs of this life was alledged in the House as thus disabling them by the Law Divine and as to which the Bishop in his Speech gives a learned Answer we may well imagine how Lay-men of good Births and Educations and whose Diligence employ'd in Courts and Cities and Camps abroad may have qualify'd them here to stand before Kings must necessarily aggravate in their thoughts the dishonour of incapacity to serve their Prince in secular Employments A. Was that Speech of the Archbishop ever printed B. You will find it in the Apology for the Bishops to sit and Vote in Parliament printed in London A. 1661. And he hath in that Speech some other Expressions which corroborate that obvious natural notion of the King and Kingdom being disabled by disabling of Clergy-men from secular Employments For having reflected on the Bill for disabling them from sitting in the Star-chamber and at the Council-table sitting in Commissions of the Peace and other Commâ—…ssions of secular Affairs he afterward saith But my noble Lords this is the Case Our King hath by the Statute restored to him the Headship of the Church of England And by the word of God he is custos utriusque tabulae And will your Lordships allow this ecclesiastical Head no ecclesiastical Senses No Ecclesiastical Persons to be censulted with at all No not in any Circumstances of time and place If Cramner had been thus dealt with in the Minority of our young Jâ—…sias King Edward the 6th what had become of that great work of our Reformation in this flourishing Church of England A. The truth is it being a kind of a Rule that all Men of Parts who have been liberally educated and even those excelling in mechanical professions do naturally desire to serve the King and standing before Kings having been annext in Scripture as a reward to diligence in ones calling a Mark of disability put on Lay-men to serve their Prince cannot but tempt them to passion on that account more then it ought to have troubled the Bishop when he call'd it a Caiâ—…'s Mark in regard you have mention'd it that Clergy-men to some did seem by the Law-Divine disabled from secular Employments B. According to the Opinion of Iudge Vaughan in his Reports who in Hill and Good 's Case there makes a lawful Canon to be the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament and whatever is the Law is as much the Law as any thing else that is so for what is Law doth not suscipere magis aut minus they were by the Canon Law disabled from intermedling in secular Affairs And according to his description of malum prohibitum in Thomas Sorreâ—…'s case p. 358. you may say they were by the Statute so disabled from intermedling For he there saith malum prohibitum is that which is prohibited per le statute Per le statute is not intended only an Act of Parliament but any obliging Law or Constitution as appears by the Case for it is said the King may dispense with a Bastard to take Holy Orders or with a Clerk to have two Benefices with Cure which were mala prohibita by the Canon-Law and by the Council of Lateran not by Act of Parliament The Lateran Council his Lordship there means is that held under Alexander the 3d A. 1180 and which Council hath it in these words viz. neque servi neque spurii sunt ordinandi And uni plura ecclesiastica beneficia non sunt committenda And therefore the Bishop in that Speech saith That this Doctrine of debarring Persons in Holy Orders from secular Employments is the Doctrine of the Popish Church and first brought into this Kingdom by the Popâ—…s of Rome and Lanfrank Anselm Stephen Langthon and Othobone and with an intent to withdraw the Clergy from tâ—…eir receiving Obligations from either King or Lords and make them wholly dependants on the Popacy But Bishop Iewel tells us in his Apology p. 122. that Veteres Canones Apostolorum illum Episcopum qui simul Civilem magistratum ecclesiasticam functionem obire velit jubent ab officio summoveri A. Yet notwithstanding their being disabled by the antient Canons and the Nemo militans c. 2 Tim. 2. as often alledged against them by the Canons and Canonists I think they were frequently employ'd by our Princes in the greatest Offices of the State. B. They were so and the
the Statute of 37 o. H. 8. beforemention'd that speaks of Bishops Vicars-General useth only the Style of Vicegerent for Cromwel's Office. And I have observ'd in his Injunctions to the Clergy that he styles himself Lord Privy Seal Uice-gerent to King Henry the 8th for all his Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical within this Realm c. But the word Vicar being perhaps by the envy of the Monks put on him and his Office in common Discourse the word Vicar in the Proper signification of it signifying a Servant to a Servant according to that in Martial Esse sat est servum jam nolo Vicarius esse the Archbishop speaking Cum vulgo might then call him the King 's Vicar-general and so others since I should before have mention'd what he saith p. 323. speaking of Cromwel Inter hunc Cranmerum summam necessitudinem Evangelium conciliavit ut dum ille Experientiâ hic Doctrinâ câ—…nctos anteâ—…elleret tum utrique Regi intimi chari essent Ex horum Consilio impiis atque odiosis Papoe Wolsoei Cardinalis Actis summum supplicium exitium Romanoe Curioe divinitùs paratum est A. You have enough minded me of the King 's dispensing with the disabiity incurr'd by the Canons both in the C se of Cromwel a Lay-man intermedling in Ecclesiastical Matters and of Câ—…anmer a Clergyman intermedling in secular proving so necessary to the Reformation and accordingly as Queen Elizabeth's dispensing with disability proved so to the Establishment of the present Hierarchy of the Church of England And I shall most seriously consider what the Act of the 37th of H. the 8th hath in such plain and liquid terms declared of the Power given to the King by Scripture and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to exercise Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction however incapacitated so to do by lawful Canons and Constitutions and which were by that Eminent Iustitiary you mention'd held Equivalent to Acts of Parliament and shall grant that iâ—… never so many Acts of Parliament had attempted to deprive the King of a Power inherent in him by Scripture such attempt would be nugatory and the fremuerunt gentes against it would be but the Peoples imagining a vain thing And I shall consider it how far by clear and necessary Consequences and no wire-drawn ones it follows from what is declared by this Act of Parliament as to the King 's being authorized by Scripture to choose some sorts of Officers to serve the Crown in Church and State that he is so authorized to choose others in like manner as you mention'd it to me declared by the Scotch Act of Parliament that the King by virtue of the Royal Power he holds from God All-mighty is to have the SOLE choice and appointment of the Officers of the State c. But I Pray do not many other Acts of Parliament in Harry the 8ths time whereby the Royal Prerogative is so much advanced and particularly that of the 25th of Harry the 8th that sets up the Dispensative Power seem to make it depend on Statute-Law And may it not seem to be more than a flaw in the Diamond of Prerogative and a great depretiating of it in cutting it out as it were into four by making its Establishment depend on the King and three Estates B. I shall therefore here once for all tell you that the occasion of so many mens mistake in thinking so many of those Acts of Parliament in Harry the 8th's time prejudicial to Prerogative as seeming to found it on Statute-Law is their not considering that such Statutes were but declaratory of old Laws and not introductive of new ones My Lord Primate Bramhal in his Schism guarded p. 155. saith I profess clearly I do not see what advantage Henry the 8th could make of his own Laws which he might not have made of the ancient Laws except only a gawdy Title of Head of the English Church which survived him not long and the Tenths and first-fruits of the Clergy c. But you may as fully take notice how Harry the 8th throughout his great Declarative Laws so often declares in effect his Regal Power to be given him by God. My Lord Coke in his Caudry's Case instanceth in the famous Statute of 24 o H. 8. c. 12. and calls it declaratory of the ancient Law and you see how it is declared there That the King is by the goodness of God furnish'd with Prerogative c. And the Statute of 37 o H. 8. begins as I shew'd you with the three Estates DECLARING That the King's Majesty is and hath always justly been Supreme Head in the Earth of the Church of England by the Word of God. You know too how the style runs in another of his Acts of Parliament viz. The Bishop of Rome and See Apostolick contrary to the great and inviolable Grants of Iurisdictions by God immediately to Emperors Kings and Princes c. And thus tho there are various Statutes in his Reign and particularly that of the 25th year of his Reign c. 19. by which it was Enacted That the King's Highness shall have Power and Authority to nominate and assign at his pleasure Two and thirty persons whereof Sixteen to be of the Clergy and Sixteen of the Temporalty of the Upper and Nether House of the Parliament to view search and examine the Canous Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial and that such of them as the King's Highness and the said Two and thirty or the Major part of them shall deém and adjudge worthy to be continued kept and obey'd shall beÌ„ from henceforth kept obey'd and executed within this Realm so that the Kings most Royal assent under his Great Seal be first had to the same c. and tho according to the ancient usage of the Realm as well as to those Canons Lay-men were not only incapacitated to make Ecclesiastical Constitutions and Canons but Kings Bishops or Noblemen who believed that the Decrees of the Bishops of Rome may be violated or shall suffer them so to be are in the Canon Law anathematized yet as this enacting Clause was made on the Clergy's Petition to the King as the Preamble of the Act mentions that those Constitutions and Canons may be committed to the Examination and Iudgment of his Highness and of Two and Thirty persons of the King's Subjects whereof sixteen were to be of the Upper and Nether House of the Parliament of the Temporalty and all the said Two and thirty persons to be chosen and appointed by the King's Majesty c. and be empower'd to do what I mention'd out of the enacting Clause and whereby the King alone was in effect both according to the Clergy's Petition and the enacting Clause vested with the jus vitoe necis of the Canons so in a Memorable Epistle of Harry the 8th Printed before the Reformatio legum Ecclesiasticarum and intended as a draught for a Publication or Promulgation of the King 's new Ecclesiastical Laws after the draught of
Rights and Privileges united and annexâ—…d to the Imperial Crown of this Realm you are to defend that great Royal Power of Pardoning and which our Ancestors in Harry the 8th's time thought so essential to Publick Justice And therefore you will still do well to remember that your sworn defence and assistance of all the Privileges and Preheminences of the Crown doth more particularly bind you in the Case of these fundamental ones to put no hardship on our Princes nor yet to use any softness of Allurements to tempt them to renounce them The Countryman who being by his Physician prescribed some Grains of Laudanum and desiring a greater quantity of the Apothecary and saying Shall I have no more for my Money and whereby he would have been Poyson'd was not less Sagacious then such Senators who by Subsidies would engage any Prince to part with so much of his Prerogative as would destroy the Body politick Alas as for several uncontroverted Rights of the Crown of an inferiour Nature as our Princes have been ready enough in all Ages to part with them for the good of their People and their own promoted thereby and have had grateful returns from their Parliaments by Subsidies on such an account so none need fear but that in all future times succeeding Monarchs will that way be as indulgent as the former ones were and that as Solomon saith the King himself is served by the Field and the Plough having here variously supported the Throne and particularly by the robust Infantry it hath yielded to serve the Crown in Arms the keeping up of the Spirits of our Yeomen and likewise of those who Plough'd the Sea by the Liberty our Laws allow'd them and the Crowns being no gravamen to the Body of the People and only to the Royal Heads that wore it was and will be always necessary in order to the keeping up the being of the Nation There is therefore scope and encouragement enough in England for a man who is a Candidate for a Patriot's place to carry it by being a Consessor of unmercenary Loyalty and arriving at honour or the consentiens laus bonorum by being a Loyal Patriot and there is as good popular air for any one to feed on who will assert the just Liberties and Privileges of the English Subjects as any Greece or Rome afforded and there was no need for any one to move for a Statue for the Hero who promoted that old act against old Concealments in King Iames the First 's time or the late one for the Habeas Corpus for such an one must find his Monument in the Hearts of all the Subjects of England Nor was there ever Prince more Cordially and Passionately concern'd for the Liberties of the People of England then the Royal Martyr and who fell reverâ as their Martyr according to his words on the Scaffold and where he said If I would have given way to an Arbitrary Power to have all Laws changed according to the Power of the Sword I needed not to have come here His style could not there recede from that of his Printed Declarations and in one of which for Example that in 41. he thus mentions his hopes viz. That God will yet make us a great and a glorious King over a free and a happy People A. If you had not thus coupled the LOYAL Man and the PATRIOT together in your Discourse I should have ask'd you whether you would have Men throw up the many good Laws that the Parliament of 40 obtain'd for the ease of the People by partly importuning the King B. I assure you I shall never give you or any one else cause to think that I have not a high value for some of those Laws and do now shew you my value of them by telling you that I do not look on them as the off-spring of any factious importunity but as the just and natural issue of the goodness of our Prince and you will find they were so if you consult the Declaration I last cited and where his never to be forgotten words are viz. That as We have not refused to pass any Bill presented to Us by Our Parliament for redress of those Grievances mentioned in the Remonstrance so We have not had a greater Motive for the passing those Laws then Our own resolution grounded upon our Observation and understanding the State of Our Kingdom to have freed Our Subjects for the future from those Pressures which were grievous to them if those Laws had not been propounded which therefore We shall as inviolably maintain as We look to have Our own Rights preserved c. And in his Declaration of August 12. 1642. he saith Would men enjoy the Laws they were born to the Liberty and Property which makes the Subjection of this Nation famous and honourable with all Neighbouring Kingdoms We have done Our part to make a Wall of Brass for the perpetual defence of them while these ill Men usurp a Power to undermine that Wall and to shake Foundations which cannot be pulled down but to the Confusion of Law Liberty Property and the very life and being of Our Subjects A. You have named then two fundamental Privileges or Rights of the Crown which by the Oath of Supremacy we are bound always to assist and defend And I am to tell you frankly and without going to hide my Transgression as did Adam that though I have often and in several Capacities took that Oath yet on the very day I last took it and while the very echo of those words so help me God was audible in the air of my mind and before the Ink was quite dry that recorded my Oath I without considering that as 't is the Privilege of our Prince that his Heirs by the Right of the Crown should succeed him so it is the great Privilege of those Heirs to succeed I was yet so far from assisting and defending that Privilege that I immediately endeavoured to subvert the same and tho my Prince's Mind was notify'd to me for my not so doing Nay further to make you my Confessor I was so far gone in a Lethargick carelessness of my Oath that when I saw the excluding the title of the Lawful Successor was not likely to pass into a Law I was tempted to endeavour by Expedients as if I had took an Oath and no Oath to make him a King and no King. And God having given me space to repent of my past incogitancy in relation to that Oath it being now brought before me in the Course of Providence to assist and defend another of the Preheminences which my Prince tells me is granted and belonging to the Crown and which you have mention'd as his Prerogative above the ordinary Course of the Law in the Right of his Crown and that he first made use of an emergent Necessity I will through the Divine assistance use all the means I can both of serious sedate and unprejudicate Consideration and of the
metaphysical universale however they may â—…ansie it to be a real being but what I know cannot exist a part from the particular Rights and Privileges belonging to the Crown being assisted and defended and from a serious endeavour to understand the truth about their belonging to it And my solicitousness to find out which in the shortest way possible and particularly as to the Privilege of discharging incapacity or disability incurr'd by Act of Parliament as I told you at our last meeting engaged me to divert you out of the course of your method and whereupon you told me you would refer my thoughts to the Assertory part of the Oath B. Well what ever damps I may see on English Mens loyalty or degeneracy from its nature by the arts of faction a while perverting them not to assist and defend this or that Privilege of the Crown I shall never despair of their coming again to themselves and that tho as in a vessel of Water and Oyl while any one is shaking it the Water may over-top the Oyl so likewise in their minds while shaken and stirred by Demagogues the Oyl of the Lord 's anointed is not there uppermost yet that through its own nature and through the English good nature and their natural addiction to Religion it will in time naturally appear to be so And now to go on without further prefacing on either side what if I should tell you that it imports you to consider that in in the Assertory part of the Oath of Supremacy you have declared and asserted that authority as due to the King that was challenged and used by king Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th that is that the King under God hath the Soveraignty and Rule over all manner of Persons born within these his Realms of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so ever so as no other foreign Power shall or ought to have any superiority over them A. I would then tell you that you have mentioned some things to be in this Oath that I remember not to be there B. I grant that I mention'd to you somethings that are not express'd in the Oath and in the form of it as it is administred and was enacted 1 Eliz. c. 1. and by which Act the refusers of such Oath are punish'd with DISABILITY to bear Office. But in the same year in which that Act pass'd Queen Elizabeth in an ADMONITION annext to her Injunctions thought fit to exercise her Royal authority of the Interpretation or Declaration of the sense of that Oath enjoyn'd by Act of Parliament and in that Admonition you will find those words that you remember not in the Oath you took as likewise her ACQUITTAL of all Persons from all manner of Penalties and consequently of disability who took the Oath according to the sense of it publish'd in her Interpretation And if you consult the Act you will see that the disabilities inflicted in the Act on the refusers of the Oath are various And thus then you see that as soon as you have done taking the Oath you are immediately call'd on by your Conscience to defend the Privilege and preeminence of your Prince viz. of interpreting his Laws and of discharging the disabilities thereby inflicted A. I now remember that I have read that Admonition of the Queens but I account Proclamations Injunctions and Admonitions of Princes to be but temporary Laws and that therefore this Interpretation of the Queen's and her discharging of Disabilities expired with her Reign B. To obviate such thought I shall tell you that in the Act of the 5th of Queen Elizabeth c. 1. and by which the Refusal of the Oath of Supremacy is punish'd more severely then by the before-mention'd disability viz. by Proemunire for the first Refusal and by making it Treason for some Persons to refuse it a second time but Penalties that none ever doubted but the Crown might by its Pardon discharge there is a Proviso that the Oath viz. of Supremacy expressed in the said Act made in the said first year shall be takeu and expounded in such form as is set forth in an Admonition annexd to the Queens Majesties Injunctions Publish'd in the first year of her Reign that is to say to confess and acknowledge in her Majesty her Heirs and Successors none other Authority then was challenged and lately used by the Noble King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth as in the said Admonition may more plainly appear And this too lets you see that the Parliament by thus referring to the Queen's Admonition did approve of her Power therein exercised and of her having acquitted her Subjects from the Punishment of disability A. I must then I see fairly grant you that by that Parliament's having thus perpetuated the interpretation of the Oath of Supremacy contain'd in Queen Elizabeth ' s Admonition I am bound in Conscience to take it in that sense and am perjured if I do not so keep that Oath and must likewise grant that you have shewn how auspicious that Oath by the Queens interpreting the same and the Parliament about five years after approving that Interpretation was to the Assertion of such her Power and that if any taker of the Oath should gain-say such Power you have prepared such a Confutation in the case as was used to the old Philosopher who disputed against Motion and whom his Adversary confuted by removing him from his place But as you are a fair arguer I am to take leave to tell you That that Parliament tho they approved the Queen's Admonition in general did not particularly shew their Approbation of the Queen's Power of dispensing with the Penalties that she exercised in that Admonition B. They did sufficiently shew their Approbation of the whole and therefore you need not question their approving of its parts But because you seem to lay some stress on that Parliament's not expresly approving in terminis the Queen 's Power of discharging the Penalties and one of which by the Act of 1 o Elizabethoe was disability I shall tell you that whereas Queen Elizabeth had thought it expedient for the Supporting of the Consecration of the Bishops of the Church of England to dispense with whatever might cause Disability according to her Supream Authority by her Letters Patents the very same Parliament at their next Session did 8 o Elizabethoe c. 1. in terminis terminantibus declare their Approbations of the Queens dispensing with disability by those Letters Patents for it having been in that Statute mention'd that for the avoiding of all Ambiguities and Questions that might be objected against the lawful Confirmations investings and Consecrations of the said Archbishops and Bishops her Highness in her Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England c. hath used and put in her said Letters Patents divers other general words and Sentences whereby her Highness by her Supreme Power and Authority hath DISPENS'D with all Causes or doubts of any Imperfection or DISABILITY
is free from Subjection to any mans Laws but only to such as have been devised made and obtained within this Realm for the Wealth of the same or to such other as by SUFFERANCE of your GRACE and your Progenitors the People of this your Realm have taken at their free liberty by their own Consent to be used among them and have bound themselves by long Use and Custom to the observance of the same not as to the observance of the Laws of any Foreign Prince Potentate or Prelate but as to the Customes and ancient Laws of this Realm originally establish d Laws of the same by the same Sufferance Consents and Custom and none otherwise it standeth therefore with natural equity and good reason that in all and every such Laws HUMANE made within this Realm or induced into this Realm by the said Sufferance Consents and Custom your Royal Majesty and your Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons c. have full Power and Authority not only to dispense but also to authorize some elect Person or Persons to dispense with those and all other humane Laws of this your Realm and with every one of them as the quality of the Persons and Matter shall require And the Act afterward mentions the impoverishment of the People of this Realm by the Imposts for Papal Dispensations and refers twice to the Charges of the taxa Camerae calling them expresly in one place Impositions taken to the use of the Pope and his Chambers and in another the old Tax And at the removal of these intolerable Charges as they are call'd in that of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. or intolerable Exactions as they are call'd in the 25th of Henry the 8th that of the First of Elizabeth as I said had an eye in the revival of this of Henry the 8th and the Consideration of which Statute will be of importance to us as to that part of our Promissory Oath that refers to our defending the Iurisdictions c. united and annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that Statute of Henry the 8th having in its Prefatory part express'd the Pope's dispensing here to be in derogation of the King 's Imperial Crown and Authority Royal and there afterwards mentions how the Imperial Crown of this Realm suffer'd by those Papal Exactions And the Preface of the Statute of 1 o Eliz. refers in general to divers good Statutes made in Henry the 8th's time for the Restoring and uniting to the Imperial Crown of this Realm the Iurisdictions Authorities to the same of Right belonging and which ushers in the reference to the Statute of the 25th of Henry the 8th and then in the following Clause 't is said that for the repressing of the usurped Foreign Power and the restoring the Rights Iurisdictions and Preheminences belonging to the Imperial Crown of this Realm c. Thus then you see that I have fairly shew'd you out of this Statute of Queen Elizabeth where your Oath is situated that the Restoration of the Ancient Jurisdiction of the Crown in dispensing was restored to the Imperial Crown of this Realm the which the Pope had formerly usurped on in Matters both Ecclesiastical and Civil and which you are obliged to defend against any Papal or Popular Usurpations whatsoever I was enforced for your clearer understanding of this Statute to conduct you to the 25th of Henry the 8th and where you find several Expressions that make it the right of the Imperial Crown of this Realm to dispense with the disability or incapacity incurr'd by Law. You have there the word REHABILITATION and what is called there the Writ of Perinde valere which Blount tells you in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Dispensation granted to a Clerk who being defective in his title to a Benefice or other Ecclefiastical Function is de facto admitted to it And it takes Appellation from the words which make the faculty as Effectual to the party DISPENS'D WITH as if he had been actually CAPABLE of the thing for which he is dispens'd with at the time of his Admission A. 25. H. the 8th it is call'd a Writ You have in your Oath acknowledg'd the Crown of this Realm to be a Crown Imperial and if you had not by the Comparing the two Statutes together found that the Power of Rehabilitation of Persons disabled was restored and united to the Crown as what was anciently due to it and used by it yet on the Consideration of the Crown here being call'd Imperial and of its being a res judicata among all that write of the Power of such Crowns that a Dispensation with Persons in this kind is allow'd them as one of the jura Majestatis you ought by virtue of your Oath to be very careful how you deny this mark of Soveraignty to the Imperial Crown of this Realm which you see wants none of the other I think I have now let you see that I have here put no forced or wyre-drawn Consequences on you and would hate to do any thing of that Nature in common Discourse and about a common or trivial matter and much more in the concern of an Oath You know I have often prais'd that Letter in D'Ossal where he reflects on some Men thus viz. Le sont gens d'esprit de scavoir de labeur qui â—…ont forgè mais de fort maâ—…vaise foy ne faiÌ„sans Conscience n' ayans honte de traitter un cas de Conscience si important a la Religion Catholique a toute la Chrestiente en chichaneurs sophistes But further yet to let you see that in minding you in point of Conscience and by virtue of this your Oath duly to prop up the Regal Power of Dispensing with Incapacity I put no wyre-drawn Consequences upon you and do with the simplicity that becomes a Christian speak to you ex animo I shall again give you the Iudgment of Parliament in the Case and to that end shall first direct you to the Statute of 37 o. H. 8. c. 17. that begins In most humble wise shew and declare to your Highness your most faithful humble and obedient Subjects that where your most Royal Majesty is and hath always justly been by THE WORD OF God supreme head in the Earth of the Church of England and hath full Power and Authority to correct punish and repress all manner of Heresies Errors Uices c. and to exercise all other manner of Iurisdictions commonly call'd Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction nevertheless the Bishop of Rome and his adherents minding utterly as much as in him lay to abolish obscure and delete such Power given by God to the Princes of the Earth whereby they might gather and get to themselves the Government and Rule of the World have in their Councils and Synods Provincial made divers Ordinances and Constitutions that no LAY or Married man should or might exercise any Iurisdiction Ecclesiastical nor should be any Iudge or Register in any Court
commonly call'd Ecclesiastical Court c. as by the said Councils and Constitutions Provincial appeareth which standing and remaining in their effect not abolish'd by your Grace's Laws did sound to appear to make greatly for the said usurp'd Power of the Bishop of Rome and to be directly repugnant to your Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church and Prerogative royal your GRACE being a LAY-MAN and albeit the said Decrees Ordinances and Constitutions by a Statute made in the 25th year of your Reign be utterly abolish'd c. But forasmuch as your Majesty is the only and undoubted Supreme Head of the Church of England and also of Ireland to whom BY HOLY SCRIPTURE all Authority and Power is wholly given to hear and determine all manner of Causes Ecclesiastical and to correct Uice and Sin whatsoever and TO ALL SUCH PERSONS AS YOUR MAIESTY SHALL APPOINT THEREUNED that in Consideration thereof as well for the Instruction of Ignorant Persons c. and setting forth of your Prerogative Royal and Supremacy It may therefore please your Highness that it may be Ordain'd and Enacted that all and singular Persons as well LAY as those that be now Married or hereafter shall be Married c. which shall be made ordain'd constituted and deputed to be any Chancellor Uicar General c. Scribe or Register by your Majesty or any of your Heirs and Successors or by any Archbishop Bishop c. may lawfully execute and execute all manner of Iurisdiction commonly call'd Ecclesiastical c. Here you see the enacting clause founded on the previous solemn acknowledgment of the King's supremacy and on his having the power given him not by Parliaments or People but by SCRIPTURE to appoint such to be ecclesiastical Judges who were by Custom and by the Laws of Councils and Provincial Synods formerly equivalent to Acts of Parliament incapacitated so to be And from whence it is consequently apparent that no positive humane Laws whatsoever inflictive of Penal incapacity could against the Right inherent in him by the positive Law of God oblige him not to dispense with the others by his supreme Power when he found it necessary so to do For 't is on all hands confessedly true that Parliaments can no more then the Bishop of Rome delete such Power as is given by God to the Princes of the Earth A. But because a Parliament declared that such a supreme Power is given by the Scripture to Princes you know it doth not follow that it is so And moreover you know that was a Popish Parliament that so declared it B. But I likewise know that as 't is in my Lord Chief Iustice Vaughan ' s Reports in Hill and Good ' s Case that if a Marriage be declared by Act of Parliament to be against Gods Law we must admit it to be so for by a Law that is an Act of Parliament it is so declared so that Act of Parliament having declared it that by Holy Scripture all Authority and Power is wholly given to the King and to all such Persons as he shall appoint to hear and determine c. tho such Persons were by a lawful Canon incapacitated so to do a Canon that that Iudge in the words immediately following the other makes to be the Law of the Kingdom as well as an Act of Parliament we must admit such Power and Authority inherent in the King's Supremacy by the Word of God thus to supersede incapacity And whether the incapacitating Canons were lawful ones or no it is not tanti to enquire since as we know a Power inherent in Kings by the Word of God cannot be either by lawful Canon or Act of Parliament taken away and much more ought such Power to be construed and admitted as inherent in him by the Scripture while the Act of Parliament continues in being But I shall yet bring the acknowledgment of your Prince's Supremacy in this point as thus founded on Scripture closâ—…r to your Conscience by letting you see that you have not only the Judgment of a Popish Parliament in the Case but of that very Statute of Queen Elizabeth that enjoyns your Oath of Supremacy for it revives that Statute oâ—… Harry the 8th and all and every branches and Articles in it as you will find it in your Statute-book A. You have mention'd one thing in that Statute of Harry the 8th that doth a little startle me and that is that he and the three Estates apply'd there the design of keeping up those Canons of Councils and provincial Constitutions that incapacitated LAYMEN as level'd at the exclusion of the King himself not only from his Prerogative but from being in a capacity to exercise ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as supreme head of the Church as I find by those remarkable words YOUR GRACE BEING A LAY-MAN B. You do well to take notice of that and are therefore not to wonder at it if you should hear your Prince who was a Dissenter to the Church of England and others concern'd for him to have apprehensions of what prejudice might be meant him by some subtle Projectors of Laws to incapacitate all Papists and Presbyterians from acting in any Office in Church or State however many loyal Persons might be far from intending such prejudice thereby his Grace being a Papist or Presbyterian A. I must confess that if the Kings Power of commanding the Services of all his Subjects be inherent in him by the Word of God and as such declared by Parliament any Mens endeavours to take away that Power may well be imputed to great incogitancy B. You say right and I was hence induced to wonder that after the Act and Acknowledgment of his Majesty's Prerogative in the Choice of his Officers of State-Councellors and Iudges had thus passed in the first Parliament of Scotland in the late King's reign viz. The Estates of Parliament considering the great Obligations that lie upon them from the Law of God the Law of Nations the Municipal Laws of the Land and their Oathes of Allegiance to maintain and defend the Soveraign Power and Authority of the King's Majesty and the sad Consequences that do accompany an encrochment upon or diminution thereof do therefore from their sense of humble duty declare that it is an inherent privilege of the Crown and an undoubted part of the Royal Prerogative of the Kings of this Kingdom to have the sole Choice and Appointment of the Officers of States and Privy Councellors and Nomination of the Lords of Session as in former times and that the King 's sacred Majesty and his Heirs and Successors are by virtue of that Royal Power which they hold from God Almighty over this Kingdom to have the full exercise of that Right c. any Men could by a following Act of Parliament there be incapacitated to serve their Prince in those Stations I shall here tell you that the incapacitating a few Papists or Quakers Presbyterians or Anabaptists to serve their Prince may to some seem materia
commanding Obedience to be given to the Word of God by reforming Religion according to his prescribed Will by assisting the Spiritual Power with the Temporal Sword by reforming Corruptions by procuring due Obedience to the Church by judging and cutting off all frivolous Questions and Schisms as Constantine did and finally by making decorum to be observ'd in every thing and establishing Orders to be observ'd in all indifferent things for that purpose is the ONLY intent of the Oath of Supremacy and whereby as he effectually confuted the Cardinal whose Letter charged the Oath of Supremacy as tending to this end That the Authority of the Head of the Church in England may be transferr'd from the Successor of St. Peter to the Successor of King Henry the 8th and to oppose the Primacy of the Apostolick See so at the end of his Book he shews that his design of Publishing the same was to satisfie all his good and natural Subjects and likewise Strangers about the things therein contain'd and whereby the King's Mind was publickly notify'd that in the right done to the Crown by the Oath of Supremaâ—…y as well as of Allegiance there was no wrong intended to St. Peter or his Successors A. I hope you have now put a Period to the History of the Dispensative Power of the Crown that was exercised in-the interpreting of any parts of the Oath of Supremacy or the 37th Article thereto relating You have named to me so many interpretations of the Oath that according to the wisdom of our State and the Lex Consuetudo Parliamenti making a Bill to be thrice read in each House of Parliament and then receiving the Royal Assent to be thought like Gold seven times purify'd may shew the interpretation of the Law to be so too But tho I will account any good Law to be more precious then Gold yet if like Gold it be too far extended by ductile interpretation it may be drawn to such a thinness as to lose all its weight and estimation and retain only a poor tincture and colour that will signifie little or nothing And as Pliny in his Panegyrick on Trajan said that by reason of the multitudes of sutes upon Penal Laws in Rome there was danger till Trajan's time ne Civitas fundata legibus legibus everteretur so a Law whose Obligatoriness is founded on interpretations may be endanger'd by the multitudes of them to be destroy'd and may like the Papal Laws of New Rome by the infinite interpretations of Casuists in the forum internum which is their Tribunal be brought to signifie nothing in either forum and to be only an Engine to make Perplexities You have given me here such a Genealogy of interpretations that according to the common Story of Arise Daughter c. one may say Arise Interpretation and go to thy Interpretation c. I shall therefore be glad now you have been so largely communicative of your thoughts to me about the assertory part of the Oath you will deal as frankly with me in acquainting me with what may in the Promissory part of the Oath be of importance for me to know in order to the better discharge of my Duty in the Case before me B. I shall therein be most ready to serve you when we meet next for the entire Consideration of what according to the Assertory part of the Oath you are obliged to do will I see be as great a load as both our patiences will at this time bear and therefore according to the Saying of Must is for the King I am to tell you that let our Kings make never so many interpretations one after another of this your Oath you must finding them all Consistent with one another consider them all with all due regarâ—… 〈◊〉 thank God and them when their Consciences being inclined to a tenderness for the doubting of yours they interpose their Dispensative Power of that kind And hereupon I shall tell you that in the year 1628. King Charles the First did cause the 39 Articles to be reprinted and with a Declaration before the same made by him as Supreme Governor of the Church within his Dominions that those Articles contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England and that if any Difference should arise about the external Policy concerning Injunctions Canons or other Constitutions whatsoever belonging to the Church of England the Clergy in their Convocation is to order and settle them c. he approving their said Ordinances c. that the Bishops and Clergy shall have licence under the Broad Seal to deliberate of and do all such things as being made plain by them and assented to him shall concern the setled Continuance of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England c. and then having respect to the Article wherein the Arminians and Antiarminians were concern'd 't is order'd that no man hereafter shall either Print or Preach to draw the Article aside any way c. But the first Canon that was afterward viz. A. 1640. made was that concerning the Regal Power which begins with taking notice that sundry Laws Ordinances and Constitutions had been formerly made for the acknowledgment and profession of the most lawful and independent Authority of our Dread Sovereign Lord the King over the state Ecclesiastical and Civil and then enjoyns them to be ALL carefully observ'd by all persons whom they Concern upon the Penalties in the said Laws and Constitutions express'd and then decrees that the Clergy shall read the following Explanation of the Regal Power and where the words A Supreme Power is given to this most excellent Order i. e. of Kings by God himself in the Scriptures which is that Kings should rule and Command in their several Dominions all persons of what Rank or Estate soever whether Ecclesiastical or Civil and that they should restrain and punish with the Temporal Sword all stubborn and wicked doers shew they had then the 37th of the 39 Articles in their eye and some other words viz. for any person or persons to set up maintain or avow respectively under any pretence whatsoever any independent Coactive Power either papal or popular c. is to undermine their great Royal Office shew they had an Eye on that 37th Article and on your Oath and where they did speak out that sense of the Clause The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction c. and of the words in the Oath that no foreign Prelate hath or ought to have any Iurisdiction c. that is that the Bishop of Rome had here no independent Coactive Iurisdiction the sense in which all considerate Persons who were Members of the Church of Rome in Harry the 8th's time and of the Church of England in Edward the 6th's time took the old Oath of Supremacy and the Members of the Church of England in Queen Elizabeth's time and ever since took the new one As for Non-conformists who think the Government of Bishops unlawful this Clause that no foreign
knew that if Papists had been Punish'd for their Religion in her Reign by Iudges and Iuries and Sheriffs that it was she had punish'd them And accordingly he in his Premonition to Christian Monarchs doth more regio and with a style of Majesty relating to his Executive Power thus tell them viz. And yet so far hath both my Heart and Government been from any bitterness as almost never one of those sharp Additions to former Laws hath ever yet been put in execution Well Sir In fine I leave it to you to consider on the whole matter how far the Contents of that Canon and particularly what is declared therein about the care of God's Church being so committed to Kings in the Scripture that they are commended when the Church keeps the right way and blamed when it runs amiss and therefore her Government belongs in chief to Kings c. do shew that Kings not only may but ought out of a regard to their own Souls to provide that where the safety of their Subjects Souls is concern'd their Dispensative Power by the interpretation of their Laws and the relaxation of their Rigour in particular Cases may be exerted I doubt not but you have observ'd many more Cases wherein the Royal Martyr to prevent imminent peril of Soul was put to it to exert such his Power A. I remember not to have read of more B. No If you had read the 39 Articles Printed in the Edition that I have done with his Declaration prefix'd thereunto you would find that there being a high ferment about the Arminian Controversie in the Church of England and the Arminian and Anti-Arminian Divines who both had subscribed the Articles appropriating the sense of them to both their Perswasions and too many drawing then the sense of them too much aside and all of them professing themselves bound in Conscience by the Laws that required their Subscription to the Articles and that their Subscription to them was to be taken in the Imposers sense and that as to the Article of the King 's being Supreme Governor of the Church of England it being supposed as the words in the Declaration are Some differences might arise concerning the External Polity Injunctions Canons or other Constitutions thereto belonging His Majesty by his Declaration again ratifying the Articles and particularly publishing that he was Supreme Governor of the Church of England did notify his Pleasure that as to any such Differences arising as aforesaid the Clergy in their Convocation should order and settle them he approving their Ordinances c. and to the end they might not trouble themselves or the Church by putting their own interpretations on the Articles he Requires their taking the Articles in the Literal and Grammatical sense and notifies that literal sense as restrain'd to the way of the general Expressions in the Articles and such as the Divines of the several Perswasions took as making for them so that now by His Majesty 's thus interpreting that sense they might warrantably continue so to do And according to what hath been said of Manna that it was that to every man's taste wherewith it was pleas'd most mens sense of the Articles might be so too by means of the declared Complaisance of His Majesty therewith A. One would then the less wonder at the Complaisance of the Clergy with that King's Power of Dispensing in his Laws by Interpreting or Declaring B. I could tell you of another passage in his Reign that will shew you how our Bishops made use of that Power as their Sheat Anchor to preserve the Hierarchy in the Storms it met with and how then the Bishops issuing out the Processes of their Ecclesiastical Courts in their own Names was by the Artifice of the Faction improved as an occasion of making a very great ferment in Church and State and such a one as nothing but the Royal Power of Interpretation or of declaring the Law could settle And therefore Archbishop Laud in his Epistle to the King before his famous Star-Chamber Speech did in the Name of the Church of England then think himself obliged to apply to the King in a most pathetical and solemn manner to exert that great Power in that Conjuncture viz. I do humbly in the Churches name desire of your Majesty that it may be resolv'd by all the Reverend Iudges of England and then Publish'd by your Majesty that our keeping Courts and issuing Process in our own Names and the like Exceptions formerly taken and now renew'd are not against the Laws of the Realm as 't is most certain they are not that so the Church Governors may go on cheerfully in their Duty and the Peoples minds be quieted by this assurance that neither the Law nor their liberty as Subjects is infringed thereby The many Pamphleteers of the Faction who attacqued the Hierarchy â—…eproached them with the Non-observance of Humane Laws and charged their Proceedings with Illegality because by the Statute of 1 o E. 6. c. 2. that required Processes Ecclesiastical to be in the King's name it was declar'd That the Bishops sending out their Process in their own Names was contrary to the Form and Order of the Summons and Process of the Common-Law used in this Realm And therefore as Heylin tells us in the Life of Archbishop Laud p. 321. in A. 1637. the King accordingly issued out his Proclamation declaring That the Bishops holding their Courts and issuing Process in their own Names were not against the Laws of the Realm and the Iudges Resolutions were therein notify'd to that purpose And upon all motions afterward for Prohibitions to the Ecclesiastical Court upon the pretence of their Processes not issuing out in the King's Name according to that Statute of E. the 6th the currant Law hath still been in Westminster-Hall for keeping up the sense of His Majesty declared in his Proclamation as to that Point According to the manner then of praising the Bridge we go over the Church of England having in Queen Elizabeth's time been preserv'd by the Regal Power of interpreting express'd in her Admonition and by the like Power in the time of King Charles the First and the salus animae having been at stake as to the Oath in her time and as to the avowed Principle of the Church of England about Humane Laws binding the Conscience in his time the use of that Dispensative Power being like a Bridge that kept them from falling into the Pit of Perdition deserv'd their Praise That eminent Divine Mr. Iohn Ley in his Learn'd Book call'd Defensive Doubts and Reasons for refusal of the Oath imposed by the Sixth Canon of the late Synod i. e. that in the year 1640. saith there p. 99. and 100 c. There are some of our Brethren who in good will to themselves and us have undertaken to expound the Oath so as that they and we without scruple may take it And we take kindly their good intention and in good will to them again
request them to consider that a Private Interpretation of a Publick Act can give no satisfaction unless it be either expresly or virtually allow'd by the highest Authority that doth impose it and then it is made Publick c. But the Authority of Interpretation of any doubt in such a Publick Act belongs properly not to private but publick Persons c. For private Men tho Learn'd if they take upon them the Interpretation of publick Dictates may be more like to light on mutual Contradictions of each other then on the true and proper Construction of the Text they interpret So did Vega and Soto Soto and Catherinus who wrote against each other contrary Comments on the Council of Trent In which respect it was a wise advice given to the Pope by the Bishop of Bestice viz. to appoint a Congregation for the expounding of the Councel and well follow'd by him when he forbade all sorts of Persons Clerks or Laicks being private Men to make any Commentaries Glosses Annotations or any Interpretation whatsoever on the Decrees of that Councel Dr. Burgesse indeed made an Interpretation of his own Subscription but there had been no validity in it as we conceive unless it had been allow'd by the Superior Powers And so it was for as he saith It was accepted by King James and the Archbishop of Canterbury affirm'd it to be the true sense and meaning of the Church of England He refers there to Dr. Burgesse in his Answer to a much applauded Pamphlet Praefat. p. 26. A. Your mentioning that of Dr. Burgesse his Interpretation of his Subscription minds me of what I have read at the end of his Book call'd No Sacrilege nor Sin to alienate or purchase Cathedral Lands viz. in his Postscript to Dr. Pearson and his No Necessity of Reformation of the Publick Doctrine of the Church of England Printed A. 1660. where he saith As touching the Regal Supremacy we own and will assert it as far as you do or dare Only we had reason to take notice of the improper Expression in the 37th Article that the Queen's Majesty hath the Supreme Power For if the Declaration father'd on the late King and prefix'd to the Articles had so much Power with his Printer that he durst not alter the word Queen into King even in the year 1642 and those Articles must be read Verbatim without Alteration or Explanation then we say again there is a Necessity of Reforming that Article in the expression of it and not to talk at random what was indeed the meaning unless we may have leave when we read it Regiâ declaratione non-obstante to declare the sense which the Declaration alloweth us not to do But the truth is that exception of the Doctor to the Articles may well pass for a Scruple or rather a Cavil and at this rate we should be put to it to say O King interpret for ever B. You say right Dr. Pierson in that Judicious Book of his call'd No Necessity of Reforming the Doctrine of the Church of England well observes that the 37th Article hath express reference to the Queen's Injunctions set forth in the year 1559. and those Injunctions take particular care that no other Duty Allegiance or Bond should be required to the Queen then was acknowledged to be due to the most noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the 8th her Majesty's Father or King Edward the 6th her Majesty's Brother The words of the Article declare that the Doctrine contained in it concerneth all the Kings as Kings The title in General is of the Civil Magistrates and the words run thus where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief Government we give not to our Princes c. shewing that what they gave to her they gave to all the Kings of England Which will appear more plainly out of the first Latine Copy Printed in the time of Queen Eliz. in the year 1563. read and approved by the Queen the words whereâ—…f are these Cum Regiae Majestati summam gubernationem tribuimus quibus titulis intelligimus animos quorundam Calumniatorum offendi non damus Regibus nostris aut verbi Dei aut Sacramentorum administrationem c. Being therefore the Article expresly mentioneth and concerneth the Kings of England as they are the Kings of England the mention of the Queen's Majesty in the Article can make the Doctrine no more doubtful then it doth our Allegiance in that Oath which was made 1 o Eliz. where the Heirs and Successors of the Queen are to appoint who shall accept the Oath the words of which are that the Queen's Highness is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm But I hope the Heirs and Successors of Queen Elizabeth did never appoint that Oath to be taken in the Name of the Queen's Highness but in their own It may be supposed that some such like Cavilling or Scrupling humour possess'd the fancies of some in the beginning of the Reign of King Iames the First and that some occasion was thereby given to that Prince in those his Canons expresly therein maintaining the 39 Articles and the Subscription thereunto and particularly in the 36th Canon there to enjoyn a Subscription to three Articles in such manner and sort as is there appointed and of which the first is That the King's Majesty under God is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other his Highness Dominions c. and that no foreign Prince Person Prelate HAUE or OUGHT to have any Iurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual c. and in which the words have or OUGHT to have might possibly be inserted out of a Royal Complaisance with the Desires of some Scruplers in whose behalf the Famous Dr. Rainolds moved the King at the Hampton-Court Conference that to the Position in the 37th Article viz. The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm of England might be added nor OUGHT to have but which motion the King then rejected as a thing superfluous and saying Habemus quod jure habemus You may find an Account of this twoâ—…old Subscription in Coke 4. Inst. c. 74. and where he saith Subscription required by the Clergy is twofold One by force both of an Act of Parliament CONFIRMING and Establishing the 39 Articles of Religion agreed upon at a Convocation of the Church of England and ratify'd by Queen Eliz. 13. Eliz. c. 12. Another by Canens made at a Convocation of the Church of England and ratify'd by King James A. I had thought you told me that the 39 Articles owed no Confirmation nor Authority to that Act of the 13th of Eliz. B. I did tell you so and do think that when my Lord Coke used the word Confirming he spake cum vulgo or as the word is taken minus propriè and as it is taken in declarative Acts of Parliament sometime to mean declared and as I and others may in Discourse sometimes use the word But speaking properly to