Selected quad for the lemma: justice_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
justice_n	chief_a	king_n	year_n	2,677	5	4.7380	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43638	The test or tryal of the goodness & value of spiritual-courts in two queries: I. Whether the statute of I Edw. 6.2. be in force (against them) at this day, obliging them to summon and cite the Kings subjects (not in their own names and styles, as now they do, but) in the name and stile of the Kings Majesty (as in the Kings Courts Temporal) and under the seal of the Kings arms? II. Whether any of the cannon-law, or how much of the cannon-law is (at this day) the law of England, in Courts Christian? Highly necessary to be perused by all those that have been, or may be cited to appear at Doctors Commons. By Edm. Hickeringill.	Hickeringill, Edmund, 1631-1708.	1683 (1683)	Wing H1829; ESTC R216804	57,574	47

our Lives if that Branch of that Statute be in force In the Interim God keep me out of the enemies clutches though For I think I know sufficiently what Ecclesiastical Clemency is if they get a man at their mercy women and timerous men are said to be most cruel when they get a man down they never think themselves safe till he be made sure for ever rising up again but if they had not run to Westminster-Hall cry'd out there for help against me I could have dealt well enough with them till they had been Tyred nay They knew it as well But no more of that at present for their business was never so fully and compleatly done as now Take my word for it CHAP. III. THe Branch of the said Statute 1 Edw. 6. 2. now to be considered is this verbatim BE it therefore further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid That all Summons and Citations or other Process Ecclesiastical in all Suits and Causes of Instance vetwixt Party and Party and all Causes of Correction and all Causes of Bastardy or Bigamy or Inquiry de Jure Patronatus Probates of Testaments and Commissions of Administrations of Persons deceased and all Acquitcances of and upon accounts made by the Erecutors Administrators or Collectors of Goods of any dead person be from the first day of July next following made in the name and with the style of the King as it is in Writs Original or Iudicial at the Common-Law And that the Teste thereof be in the name of the Arch-bishop or Bishop or other having Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction who hath the commission and grant of the Authority Ecclesiastical immediately from the Kings Highness And that his Commissary Official or Substitute exercising Iurisdiction under him shall put his name in the Citation or Process after the Teste Furthermore be it Enacted by the Authority aforesaid that all manner of Person or Persons who have the exercise of the Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction shall have from the first day of July before expressed in the Seals of Office The Kings Highness Arms decently set with certain characters under the Arms for the knowedge of the Diocess and shall use no other Seal of Iurisdiction 〈◊〉 wherein his Ma●esties Arms be ing●●●en upon pain that if any person shall use Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction after the day before expressed in this Realm of England Wales ●● other his Dominions or Territories And not send or make out the citation or process in the Kings name or use any Seal of Iurisdiction other than before Limited That every such Offender shall in●●●● and run in the Kings Majesties Displeasure and Indignation and suffer Imprisonment at his Highnesses will and pleasure Now what is there in all this that should make a man loth to act in the Name and Style and Seal of the Kings Majesty and not in the old method when a Priest was the head of the Church if there were not something in the hollow of his Heart They do not pretend as aforesaid that their Spiritual-Courts are named in God's Word if therefore they be the Kings-Courts what in the name of goodness makes them unwilling that their Processes Citations and Summons Ecclesiastical should not as other Writs Original or Judicial in the Kings Common-Law Courts run in the Name and Style and Arms of the Kings Majesty Edward 6. was the first Protestant-King since the Reformation For though King Henry 8 as I said Reform'd the lustful Monasteries yet he neither reform'd his own life thereby nor his Popish opinions But his Son was likely to be a happy Instrument of good to this Nation Whatever Doctor Heylin the darling Advocate of some Bishops have had the Confidence to Print to the contrary who in the Epistle before his pretended History of the Reformation expresly affirms That he cannot reckon the death of King Edward the Sixth for an Infelicity to the Church of England How Sir was it not an Infelicity to the Church to lose such a King To have the hopes of a glorious Reformation ●●pt in the very Bud To have a fearful deluge of Blood and Idolatry rush in upon us by a Popish Successor But what will not the Craftsmen of Ephesus say when they fancy their Shrines in hazzard And how ready alas are such as think Lordships and vast Revenues and dominering power the Churches only Felicit●●s to Reproach and Scandalize even in Sacred Princes the clearest Innocence and the most solid Piety and the brightest Zeal But God he thanked this Censure of Noble King Edward of Blessed Memory is but one Doctor 's opinion and I know not an other honest Protestant at home or abroad that will subscribe to it The very first Statute that the Parliament made as I said before in this good Kings Reign was this that we are now considering except one onely concerning the Blessed Sacrament and receiving it in both kindes with which they as piously begun and their next work was this Regulation of Spiritual-Courts For it seems very absurd that if the Ecclesiastical-Courts be the Kings-Courts and not the Prelates-Courts which they dare not in plain words deny That the Writs thence Issuing should not be in the name and style of the King the Ecclesiastical-head as well as the Temporal Nevertheless never since King Edwards Reign could the Prelates be perswaded to act in the Kings-Name but in their own Every thing would gladly be Independent and Noun Substantives And like reeling ●●unkards scorn to be held up though they cannot stand by themselves And though this Statute was Rep●●●●d in the next Reign by a Popish Successor yet King James in his first Parliament In the first year of his Reign reviv'd this Statute by making void the Force of that Statute 1 Mar. 2. whi●● had long held it under Restraint and made it Motion-less But those band being Loosned by Repeal of 1 Mary 2. in and by vertue of the Statute prim Jacobi cap. 25. It was thought to be reviv'd by the two Lord Chief Justices at the first in the fourth year of King James But when the Lord Chief Baron and other Judges had consider'd the Prejudice that might redound to the Kings Subjects if some Diocesses had no Lawful Bishop and consequently all the Priests ordained by such Bishops at least as were made since the first of the King namely the three last years must be Illegal Priests and Illegal Bishops And many other Inconveniences must ensue if the 1 Edw. 6. 2. should be deemed to be in force to the great Scandal and Impeachment of his Majesties Justice which together with the great Influence the Bishops had at Court In the three last reigns together with the Terror of the High Commission Court The business was Hush't up pretending that it was repealed and bound down with a three fold Cord as Coke is pleased to phrase it 2 Instit. fol. 685. or three after Statutes viz. 1. first by 1 Mar. 2. Secondly by 1 and 2 Phil. and Mary 8. Thirdly By 1 Eliz.

For the true words are As any Arch-bishop or Bishop of this Realm without offending the Prerogative Royal of the Crown and the Laws and Customes of this Realm might at any time heretofore do Which clause by Cook wilfully or weakly omitted and left out quite alters the Case and gives the Arch-Bishops and Bishops no power to act do execute or Issue out any Processes Ecclesiastical as Popish Bishops used to do in their own Names and Styles sealed with their own Arms and not the Kings Armes because it is contrary to the Law and Statute of 1 Edw. 6. 2 And those Armes are usually Papa in Cathedra● as 〈…〉 of my Court in the Soken of Essex is the Mitred Pope sitting 〈…〉 Chair so that still I say The Kings Armes engraven in all Cour● 〈…〉 ● would be a good Recognition that all the Ecclesiastical Co 〈…〉 His and He Head of the Church as the Popes Picture of old ● Court-Seales with the two Cross-keys in his hand did seem 〈…〉 Popes Supremacy and Authority as chief head of their old 〈…〉 Ecclesiastical Courts 〈…〉 the second and third Ligaments or Cords said to bind the force of this Act namely 1 2 Phil. Mar. 8. 1 Eliz. 1. does not so much as touch upon 1 Edw. 6. 2. no not obliquely much less do they repeal it expresly and by name and least of all could it be any ways possible that the Legislators had the least thoughts to strike it dead by 1 2 Phil. Mar. 8. or 1 Eliz. 1. when they knew it was dead and buryed before by 1 Mar. 2. CHAP. V. THis Beloved Statute then is got loose from the pretended shackles that Phillip and Mary or Queen Elizabeth are said to design against it alas they could not possibly be so weak as to plant their Artillery against a thing that the Queen had struck dead whilst she was a maid a year before they had not the least thought of it I dare say for them Much less had Queen Elizabeth the least thoughts of destroying this Statute by any thing in 1 Eliz. 1. when they very well knew that it was dead or repealed by 1 Mar. 2. And though 1 Eliz. 1 does obliquely glance at it by making the old fashion of making Bishops Legal in a Protestant Church yet she does not empower by a revival of 25. Hen. 8. 20. any Arch-bishop or Bishop to transgress any Statute allready in force much less any Statute that should come to be in force after Queen Elizabeth was dead and buryed Which is the very case here For had Queen Elizabeth as Queen Mary or any other King or Queen by name expresly Repealed this Statute with which Cords Learned Coke makes such a Pother to no purpose yet by his own Arguments all his Pother is an idle Pother and nothing that King Phillip and Mary nor Queen Mary alone nor Queen Elizabeth alone nor all of them united can do is able to repeal 1. Edw. 6. 2. for ever For if an after-King and Parliament do but repeal their Repeal the Statute Repealed gets New Life and is born again as Coke infallibly proves and affirms in his discourse upon the Revival of this very Statute For he says that by the Repealing of a Repeal the first Act is Reviv'd which is most true for remoto Impedimento reviviscit Statutum And therefore the Force of this Statute about which Coke does so puzzle himself with this Three-fold Cord easily appears and Breaks loose from any Tye that 1 Mar. or 1 2 Phil. Mar. or Q. Eliz. could possibly shackle it and fetter it with which Shackles shall bind no longer then till they or some of the succeeding Kings and Parliament do unbind and take them off All which was soon done in the first of King James in his first Parliament Repealing by Name 1 Mar. 2. that by Name had Repealed this Royal Statute so advantagious to the Kings Supremacy and Prerogative Royal and also thereby through its Revival Virtually Repealing all Precedent Statutes whether of Phil. Mar. or Mary or Queen Elizabeth that went before it if contrary to it or in tanto For in Statute Law contrary to the Laws of Heraldry The Junior always takes place of the Senior But the Arch-bishops or Bishops ought to have used their own names Styles c. in their Processes whilst 1 Edw. 6. 2. stood repealed during the Reigns of the two Sisters Mary Elizabeth and no longer it seems then till Primo Jacobi It was revived The only difficulty that ever I could find that seem'd to question the force of this Statute of 1 Edw. 6. 2. Is its Repeal by 1 Mar. 2. which though its self be Repealed by 1 Jacobi yet the 1 Edw. 6. 2 being not revived by Name therefore some doubt its vigour though the Force it lay under be quite taken away Because say they It is not reviv'd in express words by 1 Jacobi But the Lord Coke makes no difficulty at all of that for he has these Words on this very occasion namely It was strongly urged and enforced c. that all their the Bishops Process and Proceedings being in their own Names Stiles and Seals where by the said Act they ought to have been in the Kings Name and under the Kings Seale were all unlawful and voyd Ay! And to prove that the said Act of Anno 1 Edw 6. was n●w in force They alleadged that this Act of 1 Edw. 6. was Repealed by the said Act of 1 Mar. above mentioned which Act of Repeal being Repealed by the said branch of Primo Regis Jacobi ●●nsequently the said Act of 1 Edw. 6. was thereby revived For when an Act of Repeal is Repealed The first Act that was Repealed is Revived A plain Case Remo●o Impedimento Reviviscit Statutum And herewith agreeth the Book Case in 15 Edw. 3. Tit. Petition Placit 2. And this is true and cannot be denyed Thus far Coke Why is it so Then truly I think 't is no great sin to be of my Lord Chief Justice Pembertons Opinion I mean whilst he was at the Bar urging the force Validity of this Statute in Mr. Wealds Case of Much-Waltham in Essex moving with Mr. Rotheram for a Prohibition against the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical mens Process against Mr. Wealds because their Process against him run in their own Names sealed with their own Seales and not the Kings-Arms But because Sir William Scrogs nestled and nestled and Scracht his Head Sir Francis Pemberton it seems easily perceived his Disease and therefore seemed to Compassionate the Lord Chief Justice Scrogs by saying My Lord I have urged the Statute of 1 Edw. 6. but I will not be warm upon it because I perceive your Lordship is not prepar'd at this time to give it an Answer or he used words to the like effect in Presence of above an hundred Witnesses The Truth is the time Sir Francis Pemberton urg'd this Statute was Parliament-time

Persecution are all short liv'd But I am sure some Ecclesiastical-men have not so much as the Letter of the Law to justify their Sell-Soul-Trade Oppressions Illegal Fees Vexations Symony and Extortions wherein they are far less justifyable than vile Bonner Oh! Does our Bibles teach us Symony or to take money for the Gifts of God that are not to be sold nor purchased with money Does Christ or his Apostles teach us to exercise Dominion like the Princes of the Gentiles and to Lord it over Gods Heritage Simon Magus attempted it but to cheapen and ask the Price of the Gift of God but did not actually sell it However we do not read that he intended to be twice paid But it is contrary to our Canonical-Oath and your own Canons to take or give money for Letters of Orders Sacraments Institutions B●ptings Marriages Burials c. and contrary to our Oath against Symony or selling or purchating Gods Gifts How are we 〈◊〉 What Oath have we sworn to keep There is yet one even most thumping Objection behind and unanswered which the Lord Coke seems to lay the greatest Stress upon and did most prevail with the Lord chief-Baron and others to get it hush't down and laid after the ●wo Lord Chief-Jus●●●●● could not deny but it begun to be reviv'd and walk again since 1 Jacobi To the great T●●rour of the ruling Priests Commissaries Officials Jaylors Registers and Summers for 〈◊〉 Trade seem'd to begin to fail but for one main Argument or Cord that seem'd to bind it down again viz. Object It would be great Scandal to the Kings Justice yea verily if there had been no Legal Priests and Bishops made for three long years together with other Inconveniences to boot if the Statute of 1 Edw. 6. 2. should be in force and therefore it must not it shall not it cannot be in force Answ This Objection is like the Rancounter of a ●●ayl there is no ward they think no fence against it and it is really so if the Law of England be Club-Law Object Was it a Scandal to have no Legal Bishops nor Legal Priests constituted for three long years how great then would the Scandal be for 70 long years say they Answ But My friends a Consumption or Gangrene is never the better but the worse more Inveterate more noysome more Dangerous and more difficulty cured by Continuance Did ever any man plead for the Expediency of an Vlcer because it was an old sore Is not the Continuance thereof the ready way to bring it to a Gangrene to the hazard of mortifying the part and threatning most formidably the Hazard of the Vitals and noble parts Never did Illegality or a Disease plead Seniority rationally for its Justification Is it a Scandal and attended with great Inconveniencies 'T is granted and it is too true What then What is to be done with it that is the next question and most necessary to be decided Is it a Scandal the more need there is of a speedy Removal of the Scandal such an old Scandal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Scandalum is a Greek word and it properly signifies a Threshold or stumbling block and Metaphorically all things that offend or lye in our way are called Scandals Now what shall we do with his block or Threshold or Scandal The Answer is most Easy Lay the block or the Threshold at the right Door whereto it belongs and appertains CHAP. IX DOes the Revival of this Statute put us again into the true Protestant dress does it take away the Conge Deslires and Elections thereupon which 1 Edw. 6. 2. says are in very deed no Elections but meer Colours Shadows and Pretences of Elections serving nevertheless to no Purpose and seeming also Derogatory and Prejudicial to the Kings Prerogative Royal c. Is the Kings Supremacy and Authority Ecclesiastical best asserted and avowed by his Name Stile and Armes in all Writs Original or Judicial in Ecclesiastical-Courts as well as they are in Temporal-Courts Then why should not Prelats and their Ecclesiastical Courts conform themselves and be as tender of the Kings Prerogative Supremacy and Authority in Ecclesiastical as well as Temporal Causes and Courts if they have not some Secret Reserve in the hollow of their Breasts why should they not be for the King as well in things that thwart as well as in things that make for their Interest if they be so Loyal in things that serve their own turnes Interest Power Grandeur and Dominion Is it a Scandal Remove it lay it at the doors it properly belongs unto If they be not Legally Constituted what then why then let them be Legally Constituted and if there be the more Vacancyes there will be the more first-fruits and Fees for Letters Patents They may the better afford it if they have had such stately Revenues so long illegally And what harm of all this Oh! say some A very great harm this would be a Confession of Guilt and a Confession of Sin and errour an old Sin an old Errour What then This is the first time that ever I heard that Confession of Sin was a Crime Oh but it argues such an Vniverssal Error why whoever said the Prelats are insallible in Spirituals much less Temporals we read of great Mischiess that have enshed by their buzzing at C●●●●ong agoe and busying themselves with Politicks It had been much better for them 〈◊〉 for Princes too that Bishops had kept themselves to their Bibles And neither 〈◊〉 the World would have been so plagu'd with their Heats which like fire out of the Hearth 〈◊〉 has sometimes Consumed then Warmed having done Mischief unspeakable but what good 〈◊〉 this only my own Observation I learnt it from no worse man than a Bishop nay an 〈…〉 I mean Matt. Parker Arch-bishop of Canterbury in good Queen Elizabeths days who in his 〈◊〉 Intitled Autiquitates Britannicae speaking of the times of K. R. 1 and the Pranks of Hubere 〈◊〉 Arch-bishop of Canterbury has these words Neque enim si verum Judicarc Volumus in Republica Christiana quicquam sani atque Integri Saculum illud tulit Fictaque et Adusnbrata Religionis specie Proposita totus Clerus in Sceleribus Muneribus honoribus et Rapinis Neglecto penitus Verbo impune Volutabat Hujus mali Origo ab hoc Prosluxit quod contra Orthodoxorum Patrum Decreta Clerus Nimium Mundanis se Negotiis Immiscuit Nor was there if we will Judge aright in that Age anything left sound or as it ought to be in the Christian Common-wealth for the whole Clergy under a feigned and outside form of Religion did with Impunity Wallow like Swine in Wickedness Briberies Honours and R●pines altogether neglecting the Word of God The Original of all which Mischiefs was this becauss the Clergy contrary to the Decrees of the Orthodox Fathers would needs be thrusting themselves into and intermedling with Worldly Affairs Then he goes on to shew a fearful Example of Gods Vengeance upon one of