Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
king_n	abbot_n	bishop_n	duke_n	1,035	4	5.9562	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77858	An humble examination of a printed abstract of the answers to nine reasons of the House of Commons, against the votes of bishops in Parliament. Printed by order of a committee of the honourable House of Commons, now assembled in Parliament.	Burges, Cornelius, 1589?-1665.	1641 (1641)	Wing B5672; Thomason E164_14; ESTC R21636	38,831	83

yet both Church and Kingdome binde them to give themselves in all other particulars wholly to the Calling study and exercise of the Ministery which they have received in the Lord Collos 4 17 that they may fulfill it III. REAS. of the House of Commons BEcause Councels and Canons in severall ages do forbid them to meddle with Secular Affaires I. ANSVVER To this 3. Reason a five fold Answere is directed Councels and Canons against Bishops Votes in Parliament were never in use in this Kingdome and therefore they are abolished by the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. II. ANSVVER So are they by the same Statute because the Lords have declared that the Bishops vote hereby the Lawes and Statutes of this Realm and all Canons that crosse with those are there abolished III. ANSVVER So are they by the same Statute as thwarting the Kings Prerogative to call Bishops by summons to vote in Parliament IV. ANSVVER So are they by the Vote of the House of Commons 21. Maii 1641. because they are not confirmed by the Act of Parliament EXAMEN I put all these Answers together because they will not need distinct Examinations they being much what coincident at least in the maine scope which is to keepe this third Reason out of the Court as being no sufficient evidence in Law to eject the Defendants out of their holds in Parliament against some of their desires It is acknowledged that no Councels or Canons not confirmed by Parliament have here in England any power to bind the subjects either of the Clergie or of the Laitie as hath been clearly Resolved upon the Question this Parliament in both houses But whether the House of Commons referre to any Canons so confirmed I may not take upon mee to affirme or deny because they have beene pleased to forbeare to cite those to which they doe referre Nor can it bee I thinke denyed that any Canons were in use within forty yeares before the Statute of 25. Hen. 8.19 to which I conceive the Answerer hath relation against Bishops votes in Parliament and so Bishops bee shot free from such Canons if urged against them in that capacity as binding Lawes But what neede the Answerer to have taken all this paines of multiplying of Answeres to shew that no Councels or Canons not ratified by Parliaments bee binding to Bishops in this or any case whatsoever For where hath the House of Commons so urged them Surely not here They have not vouched them as Lawes to thrust the Bishops out of the House of Peeres as sitting there against the Lawes already in being but as rationall Arguments and prudentiall Grounds to induce the Parliament to use their Legislative power to abrogate the Lawes if any be for their sitting there seeing that many godly Bishops in former Ages have made divers religious and wholesome Constitutions and Provisions against such exorbitant usurpations of the Clergie For however those Canons bee not formally obligatory here yet are they really worthy the Consideration of those who have a power to reduce Bishops by a binding Law to that which heretofore so many learned and pious men of their owne Coat and Calling have pronounced and decreed to be just and necessarie Further than this the House of Commons bee not engaged And who knows not that the Bishops and their Officers have and still doe urge divers Canons of forraigne Councels and domestique too that never were confirmed by Parliament upon both Clergie and Laitie when such Canons make for the Bishops or their Officers And these must take effect like the Laws of the Medes and Persians And yet now when they see such Canons turned upon themselves although not as Lawes but as rationall arguments only how witty they be in putting off all by the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. which makes nothing at all against the House of Commons or this Reason produced by them And what offence or incongruity was it in the House of Commons to urge Canons and Councels against the Bishops in this particular when no Divine that ever complained of such usurpations of the Clergie hath held it incongruous to presse the very same against them I will not trouble my selfe or others with many instances that alone shall suffice which hath beene before * Exam. of the first Answe to the first Reason alledged out of Matthew Parker Archbishop of Canterburie That Prelate taxing the excessive exorbitances and scandalous courses of the Clergie in the reigne of Richard 1. was not affraid to give this as the chiefe if not the only reason of all that prodigious breaking out Quod contra Orthodoxorum Patrum decreta c. that contrary to the decrees of the Orthodoxe Fathers the Clergie did too much intermeddle in worldly businesses If then so great a Prelate did well in laying this home to the charge of the Clergie that their not regarding the Decrees and Canons of former Councels was the maine cause of all the evills committed by them it cannot unbecome the House of Commons assembled in Parliament and passing a Bill against Bishops Votes in Parliament to produce and use the Canons and Councels of Bishops themselves against such courses held on and maintained by our Bishops against the judgement and solemne determinations of their owne Predecessors in the Prelacy in all the Churches of Christ As for the Declaration of the Lords that the Bishops Vote in Parliament by the Lawes and Statutes of the Realme I meddle not with it because as I am ignorant of the Lawes and Statutes by which they vote so am I not acquainted with what the Lords have declared thereupon Only I have heard that divers Abbots voted as anciently in Parliament as Bishops yet are taken away Yea this Answerer hath informed mee Answer to Reason 7. that anciently the Bishops were assisted in Parliament with a double number of Mitred Abbots and Priors But Sir Edward Cooke could find no more in the Parliament Rolles but twenty seven Abbots and two Priors Commentary on Littleton Institutes Sec. 138. Nor doe I know the difference of the Tenures of the one or of the other or why in regard of originall right Bishops should rather vote in Parliament than Abbots and Priors so long as those Orders continued in being That great Master of Law before named tels us that both Abbots and Bishops were called to Parliament by the Kings Writ else they came not there Ibid. although they held of the King Per Baroniam Witnesse the Abbot of the Monasterie of Feversham founded by King Stephen who albeit hee held by Barony yet for that hee was not called by Writ hee never sate in Parliament And perhaps it is not simply a Barony that gives all the Bishops a right to fit there for I have read somewhere that all the Bishops of King Henry 8. his foundation have not Baronies annexed to them Yet they are called by Writ and vote as Peeres in Parliament But bee their right what it will I

forraigners The Bishops fretted but durst not complaine When the King saw their timorousnes and the whole Kingdome heightned up to such a degre of discontent that they threatned to cast off their obedience to the King if he tooke not order to case them The letters Articles are set downe at large in Math. Paris in Hen. 3. pag 927. c. edit Lond. Anno. 1571. a Parliament was called the King the Nobility Prelates Commons all complained of the unsupportablenesse of the burden drew up their greivances into seaven severall Articles foure letters were conceived and sent with these greivances to the Pope one from the Bishops a second from the Abbots a third from the Nobility and Commons and the fourth from the King himselfe but to little purpose The Pope still went on although sometimes more favourably and other times more violently as the times would suffer No marvell then if Bishops and Abbots in Parliament were so willing to be over-borne by the votes of the temporall Lords in passing the Statute of Provisors of benefices in 25. Edw. 3. and against suitors to the Popes Consistory and receiving of Citations from Rome in 38. Ed. 3 And against the farming of any Benefices enjoyed by Aliens by the Popes Collation or conveing of mony to them 3. Ric. 2 3. And against Going out of the Realme to procure a Benefice in this Realme in 12 Ric. 2.15 And for confirmation of the Statute de provisoribus among the Statutes called Other Statutes made at Westminster in 13. Ric. 2. ca. 2. The like may be said of the Statute of Provision in 2. Hen 4.4 of first fruites to Rome more than usuall 6 H. 4.1 Of moneys carryed to Rome and confirmation of all Statutes against Provisors c. 9. Hen. 4 8. To say nothing of that famous Statute in 26. Hen. 8.21 which gave the Pope a deeper wound than all the Acts that had been before Now alas poore Bishops that they were so over-voted that they could not hinder such Lawes as those made in their favour and for the rescuing of them from the Italian horse-leeches No doubt the Bishops laboured stoutly to withstand these Acts and therefore no marvaile that they be so carefully instanced in or pointed unto by the Answerer to shew how easily Bishops may bee over-voted in Parliament and how soon emergent exorbitancies of their Iurisdiction may be there curbed redressed Or rather indeed to shew how unable Bishops bee to withstand the passing of a bill which they desire with all their hearts may bee enacted or which they know the King wil have to be enacted But otherwise I cannot understand his reason in vouching of them unlesse he meant to make his Readers some mirth See now how hee winds up this long Answere ANSVVER So as this Argument doth not so much hurt the votes as it quells the courage of the Bishops who may justly feare by this and the next Argument that the taking away of their Votes is but a kind of fore-runner to the abolishing of their Iurisdiction EXAMEN Indeed if we take the scantling of the hurt done to their Votes by the instances produced in this Answer the hurt is so little that the adventure will not bee great if they meet with other Bills in Parliament of like nature wherin the Temporall Lords shall happen to over-vote them In those Statutes before mentioned I doe not finde the Clergy so much as named It is probable they durst not appeare for those Acts for feare of the Pope but rather suffered them to passe by the Temporall votes that they might the better excuse it at Rome and enjoy the benefit with more security at home when the Temporalty alone were so ready to doe it to their hands Iust so it was in Henry the thirds time when the Pope had compelled the Bishops to ratifie all the Grants of payments to Rome made by K. Iohn whereby the Bishops were so cast betweene the mil-stones as to be ready to be ground to powder yet durst not appeare against their oppressor they Good men were forced by the King and Parliament much against their wills Si placet to be rescued out of his hands without any labour of their owne when first the King professed se contra infirmos illos et timidos Episcopos pro Regni libertate staturum Antiq. Britan. in Bonif. nec censum deinceps ullum Romanae curiae praestiturum And afterward when the whole Parliament ordered the Bishops and Abbots to write to his Holinesse that which with all their hearts they would if they durst have done of themselves for obtaining ease of the burthens that lay upon them as hath been touched before So that now this Argument doth little quell their courage if they meet with no greater discouragements than by the answerer hath been set forth Rather the Answere teacheth them the way how to prevaile by being overcome and to bring about their owne ends and yet sit still or seeme to be the greatest opposers of that which in secret they most desire and underhand doe most labour for But truly it is to me no lesse than a riddle that there should be any just cause of feare unlesse unto them who are apt to feare wher no feare is that there is any thing in this Argument tending to the Abolishing of Episcopal Iurisdiction when the Reason expresly supposeth no more but a Bill to passe for the Regulation of their power upon any emergent inconvenience by it Verily there is more cause of feare on the other side that if the mention of a bill for regulating the power of Bishops shall be interpreted a plot to ruine their Iurisdiction which now is so exorbitant their Case comes very neere to that of old Rome Liv. Hist Dec. 1. which as Livy observes could noe longer stand under the vices committed in it nor endure the remedies applied to it 8. REASON of the House of Commons Because the whole number of them is interessed to maintaine the jurisdiction of Bishops which hath beene found so greivous to the three Kingdomes that Scotland hath utterly abolished it multitudes in England and Ireland have petitioned against it ANSVVER This Argument is not against the Votes of Bishops but against Episcopacy it selfe which must bee removed because Scotland hath done so and some in England and Ireland would have it so And yet peradventure ten times as great a somme as these desire the contrary Against this a 2 fold Answer is offered EXAMEN This Argument is expresly against their votes for maintaining their Iurisdiction to which by their Order they are all bound as all other societies bee to maintaine their Priviledges and it is not bent against Episcopacy it selfe And yet this suggestion is a witty invention both to winde out of the strength of this Reason and to cast a blurre upon it at the farewell The House of Commons could not but see even an impossibility of reforming by bill the

suppose the next thing too that Bishops are in the same manner there for their successors in the Land and Honour that pertaine to their places as the Earles and Barons are for their successors in their owne Lands and Honours For is there no difference betweene Successors that usually have no naturall legitimate relation to the present Bishops in any degree of consanguinity or affinity and those of Earles and Barons which are their proper heires at Law and may claime and must enjoy the same Honour which their Ancestors have held before them if not tainted in bloud No difference betweene those that can no more bee denyed place in Parliament without confusion of all than the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome and the government thereof can be turned up by the Roots and those who first crept in by favour to serve a Conquerors turne by taking off their dependance upon the Pope and fastening it upon himselfe and can derive no higher for sitting as now they doe in the House of Peeres than an Act of Parliament if so high and therefore by another Act of Parliament may be discharged Now where the difference of the Title is so great between a Bishop and an Earle or Temporall Baron both to their Lands and Honours and Votes in Parliament I much feare that the Nobility and Temporall Lords will hardly in their House allow this doctrine which yet is fitter for them to consider of than for me to confute and therefore I leave it only with this that if the Lords shall find cause to reject this position as heterodox and deny the Bishops to be in Parliament for their successors in Lands and Honours in the same manner or upon as good and immoveable title as the Nobility be for theirs then the Reason of the House of Commons doth stand yet good as to Earles and Barons and it is no way fit that Bishops should have the same Legislative power over the Honours inheritances persons and liberties of Earles and Barons as these have or ought to have over those of Bishops As for Bishops holding their Lands in Fee simple I can say little to it because my skill is very simple in Tenures Only I have beene told that Fee-simple Littletons Instit l. 1. c. 1. 5. 1. Cokus in Little ibid. Sect. 5. is called in Latine foedum simplex idem est quod haereditas legitima vel hareditas pura So that to speak properly Every man that hath a lawfull estate in Fee-simple hath it either by descent or purchase neither of which wayes for ought I know can the Bishop derive his Title But perhaps in some sense wherewith I am not acquainted the Bishops may bee said to hold in Fee-simple as the word may be taken in a larger and lesse proper acception Viz. Because he holdeth Lands in fee in right of his Church but this is not properly Fee-simple because he holds them not in his owne right and the right he hath in them dyes with him as to his heires But I have heard that ordinarily he that is seized of any Lands in Fee in right of his Church his tenure is either that which the Lawyers call Tenure per divine service when the Lands are given upon condition that the Donee performe some divine Service certaine expressed in the Gift or the Lands to revert or else it is * Littl. Institut li. 2. cap. 6. en Frank annoigne when Lands are freely given without any divine service certaine to be performed for them And further albeit the Bishops are usually said to hold of the King per Baroniam yet this haply may be meant rather of the Honour affixed to their place which works it up to a Dignitie than of the Lands pertaining to them which they also hold in Frank almoigne as well as the inferiour Clergy Sir Henry Spel. Not. in Concil v rolam sub Ossa Hereupon it is that in our Municipall Lawes our Bishops for that they enjoy their meanes and maintenance by the bounty and Almes of Kings are called Barones Regis Eleemosynarij The Kings Lords Almesmen or Barons of the Kings Almoignry as the Almesmen at WINDSOR are called The Kings poore Knights and the Reason is rendred out of Ranulphus de Glanvill that famous Iudge in Henry the second his time quia eorum Baroniae sunt de Eleemosyna Domini Regis Antecessorum ejus De Legib. Angl. l. 7. ca. 1. in Calic Because their BARONIES are of the Almes of the KING and his Ancestors Which being so my conceit is that what Reason so ever they have on their side yet at this time especially this free and high language that they holding their Lands in Fee-simple may with as good Reason Vote in the Honours inheritance persons and liberties of others as others may and doe in theirs might have well beene forborne without prejudice to their Cause For if Almesmen bee admitted to Vote in Parliament it will bee their wisedome I take it not to bee so much elated as to enter into termes of comparison with the highest not excepting their Benefactors or Founders themselves even in one of the highest points of honour and power 2. ANSWER to the fifth REASON Many Peeres have beene created for their lives only and the Earle of Surrey for the life of his Father who yet voted in this House EXAMEN But have any except Bishops beene created Peeres for life or otherwise that were not men of great estates and inheritance or at least of extraordinary birth and sufficiency Of such eminency were the Earles of Surrey But when you mention an Earle of Surrey whom do you meane Is it intended of the Noble Family of the Howards descended from the Mowbrayes If of these you will hardly finde any such that being an honour not so frequently communicated in former times Indeed I I find it mentioned that Iohn Lord Mowbray Sonne of Iohn Grand-child to Thomas Duke of Norfolke was by King Henry the sixth in the life time of his Father created Earle of Surrey and was after his Fathers death Duke of Norfolke but that he was a Peere of Parliament for or in the life of his Father I finde not And I have beene told by a Noble branch of that Renowned stemme and now a Peere that there was no Earle of Surrey made a Lord of Parliament upon such termes But whether so or so it matters not much this being but one single instance And how ever you may perhaps instance when you please in others not so highly descended who have had the honour to Vote as Peeres in Parliament yet they were such whose interests in the publike and share in posterity must needs weigh downe any of those that the House of Commons desire to have removed out of the Lords House For however diverse of them bee well lined with wealth yet the House of Commons are in Parliament to looke upon them as the Lawes doe to wit as upon Almesmen that are but