yet Joseph is not king Pharaoh keeps his throne and therein is he greater then Joseph who still is but Pharaohs deputy though Lord of all Egypt And though he be a father to Pharaoh yet is he still at his command Thus is it with the Parliament of England though they are put in highest trust by the King yet are they still at his disposing either to be adjourned prorogued or dissolved at his pleasure and are at his command in all things lawfull and honest To this great Councell we are no further to submit then in those things they are sent for by the King and so far forth as they have commission from him S. Peter saies the same Submit your selves unto THE KING AS SUPREME or unto Governors AS UNTO THEM THAT ARE SENT BY HIM by the King So far forth and in such things for which they are sent I owe them obedience but no further 9. How far forth the King is sworn to maintain the Laws of the Land and upon what grounds they may safely be repealed we have alreadie seen Now we are called upon to descend to the Rights of the Clergie whereof your resolution is this by way of consequence So the King by his Oath is bound to maintain THE RIGHTS OF THE CLERGIE while they continue such But blessed be God such they do continue the King therefore by Oath is bound to maintain them 10. But say you if any of their Rights be abrogated by just power he stands no longer ingaged to that particular Why I beseech you do you leave out something here that you held necessary for the abrogation of the Laws of the Land Before it was that the Laws might be abrogated by just power in a regular way But here you grant that the Rights of the Clergie may be abrogated by just power But what 's become of the regular way Was it forgotten or left out on set purpose Surely there is a my fiery in it for your argument ought to procede thus By what means the Laws of the Land may be abrogated by the same means may the Rights of the Clergie be abrogated But the Laws of the Land may be abrogated by just power in a regular way Ergo The Rights of the Clergie may be abrogated by just power in a regular way Thus the Syllogisme stands fair for the form and the Major or Minor Proposition must be denied by the respondent otherwise he is at a non-plus and convinced But your conclusion is So or Ergo the Rights of the Clergie may be abrogated by just power But this so is faultie and so is the Syllogisme because the minor terminus is maimed in the conclusion it comes not in whole as it should do The reason why is plain because you are not able to set down a regular way wherein or whereby those Rights you aim at may be abolished 11. And what wonder that you can finde no regular way for the Clergie and their rights since you have put them clean out of the regular the right way And when ye will find the regular way God knows for plain it is that ye are out of the way Ye wander this way and that way like men in a Maze or mis-led by an Ignis fatuus by Jack in a lantern No rule at all you have to be guided by but onely this that the Book of Common Prayers must down and Episcopacy shall not stand So farewell heavenly devotion and all true faith and farewell Church If this be not to be possessed with the spirit of giddinesse and impietie I know not what is 12. But I pray you give me leave before I passe further to tell you that Just power goes alwayes in a regular way And when it leaveth that way it ceaseth to be just unlesse inforced by such necessitie as cannot be provided for in a regular way That power onely is just which doth nothing wittingly but what is just and distributes to every man and societie their severall dues If it do otherwise we cannot call it just unlesse we desire to incur that sentence of the Almighty He that saith unto the wicked Thou art righteous him shall the people curse Nations shall abhor him 13. Well be it just or unjust be it never so much cursed at home or abhorred abroad you are resolved to justifie the Abrogation of the Rights of the Clergie What A Clergie-man and a Preacher of the Word of God and altogether for ruine and destruction Surely you are not a Preacher of that Word which S. Paul taught for he professeth that authoritie is given to men of our calling not for destruction but for edification Shew me one Preacher in the word of God besides Corah and his confederates that ever spake or wrot any thing against the Rights of the Clergie You cannot possibly unlesse you bring in Judas with his Ad quid finding fault with that cost which was bestowed upon our Saviours person Indeed no man so fit for your turn he robbed and betrayed the head and you the body But you know what censure is passed upon him for it This he said because he was a theife and did carrie the bag He did and you would It is private not publick interest that stirres up ambitious and greedy spirits against Christ and his Vicegerents I can shew you S. Paul magnifying his office and justifying the priviledges therof But you are none of S. Pauls followers Demetrius and Alexander silver-smiths and Copper-smiths are your good Masters and with them I leave you 14. But what are these Rights that you are so eagar to have abrogated Every subject in his severall place and degree hath right to his lands to his goods to his liberties and privileges and so hath every Clergie-man unlesse we of the Clergie be no longer subjects but slaves Would you have all these or onely some of these abolished A question it was at first but now I see what they are First Episcopacy 2ly The Clergies priviledges immunities 3ly the Bishops Ecclesiasticall or sole Jurisdiction in so large a circuit 4ly The Bishops great revenues Thus the Rights of the Clergie are precisely inventoried that so neither root nor branch may scape their fingers Episcopacy we have already taken into consideration now let us take a survey of the rest 15. But first let us observe the course you propose to strip us of these Rights Your method is subtil and your expressions at first view seeme moderate you put us in equall balance with the rest of our fellow-subjects Thus you argue It is not unlawfull to abrogate ANY of the Laws of the Land It is not therefore unlawfull to abrogate ANY of the Rights of the Clergie Thus far your argument seemes to proceed fairely But how comes it to passe that out of this Any of the Kingdome you conclude against All the Rights of the Clergie For what have
publick good Is the Ministery Lawfull or no Was it settled by Christ or no Your London Ministers have concluded for the Divine right of Ministers or Pastors and Teachers and I know you subscribe to their doctrine There may not then be any forfeiture of the Ministery since the Ordinance of Christ cannot be forfeited by the miscarriage of man that 's out of all peradventure Of priviledges perchance there may be a forfeiture where they prove prejudiciall to the publick good But if and where never prove any thing unlesse you can justifie that these priviledges have been prejudiciall to this Church and State 14. Our religious predecessors began the Great Charter with Concessimus Deo First of all we have granted to God and by this our present Charter have confirmed for us and for our heires for ever that the Church of England be free and that it have all her rights entire and her liberties unhurt William the Conqueror began his raign with confirming the liberties and priviledges of the Church And he gives this reason for it Quia per eam Rex regnum solidum habent subsistendi fundamentum because both King and Kingdome have by the Church a solid foundation for their subsistence Had that Prince been alwaies of the same mind he had never defiled his hands with sacriledge nor plunged himselfe and issue into so deepe a curse For after he began to ransake Churches to rifle Monasteries and to expose holy ground to wild beasts and Church-lands to his pleasure he and his became most unfortunate He rips up the bowels of the Church his mother and sucks her blood and the son of his loines rebels against him beats him and draws blood from him The Conqueror turns God out of his inheritance and his sonne Robert endeavours to do the same to him What afterwards befell him and all his issue I shall not need to relate Mr. Spelman hath lately saved me that labour to him I remit you In whose treatise you may briefly see the lamentable end of all that great Conquerors posterity To this I shall adde wish all my countrie men to observe that in the strictnesse of Reformation Episcopacy was continued as most usefull for the Church 15. But though Episcopacy have not been prejudiciall heretofore it is likely now to prove so For unlesse they degrade themselves unlesse they will patiently part with their wealth and honour and lay down their Miters the Crown is like to runne an hazard and the whole Land be brought to nothing but misery I am sorrie to read these lines from a professed Preacher of the Word of God for so you stile your self And yet I am glad you deale so fairely with us as to give us notice what hath been the cause of your factious preaching the Countries and Citys tumults and this detestable and deplorable rebellion 1 The Bishops great wealth 2 their honour and 3 their Miters these three 1 Their wealth they are already stripped of 2 Their honour lies in the duâ— and 3 their Miters have not been seen many a faire yeer unlesse it be upon their armes We know no more what a Miter is then a Bishop knows what great wealth is by speculation meerly Few of them have gained so much by the Church as their breeding cost their parents And yet the Clergie is the onely profession repined at 16. You should have done well mutatis mutandis to have directed this passage to the Parliament with this small alteration I hope you will not be so tenacious of that wealth and honour you have gained in these tumultuous times as to let the Crown run an hazard rather then lay down this usurped power and indanger the whole Land to be brought to nothing rather then your selves to moderation O that they would bow down their ears in time and embrace this counsell then might they yet heal the sores of this shaking Land and save their own souls But the blame and danger are layed upon those that least deserve it that stood in the gap as long as possibly they could to avert Schisme Heresie Blasphemie Atheisme Rebellion bloodshed All which since the Bishops have been stripped of their honour and power have overspread the face of this Land 17. Suppose the Bishops were faulty shall God be turned out of his possessions because his servants are to blame Mr. Selden can tell you of a Charter of King Edgar which will teach you to distinguish between God and man between Gods right and mans fault Inviolabilis stet Monasterei Winton libertas Although the Abbot or any of the Covent through the incitement of Satan fall into sin let the liberty of Winchester Monastery stand inviolable because GOD who POSSESSETH the plentifull munificence of this privilege as also the place with the whole family of Monks and all the lands belonging to that holy Monastery NEVER COMMITTED SIN neither will in future times commit any Let therefore this LIBERTY or privilege be ETERNALL because GOD THE POSSESSOR OF THIS LIBERTY is eternall The same say all good men for though the Bishop be faulty God is not cannot be The possessions therefore and rights of the Church must stand inviolable The faults are the Bishops the lands are Gods Let not God suffer for the Bishops irregular behaviour Let the Bishop be deprived of his place and profits but not God of his lands Episcopatum ejus accipiat alter according to the Holy Ghosts prescription Let another a good man take his Bishoprick that Gods service may be duely celebrated his Name glorified and Christs flock faithfully provided for 18. But say we what can be said the Bishops are to blame and must be brought to moderation And how must this be done By being brought to just nothing For according to your doctrine Episcopy must be abrogated and their Lands alienated This we simple men take to be extirpation or annihilation But such discreet conscionable men as you are know it to be but moderation Should God return this moderation upon your heads the Presbyteriall Government would come to what it should be even to nothing 19. Well their wealth their honour and their miters are in fault and the Bishops must be corrected for not laying down all these at this blessed Parliaments feet to redeem the Kings Crown Good King he suffers for the Bishops obstinacy and they poore men have parted with all but what they may not part with namely their fidelitie to God and the King Have you not alreadie dis-roabed them of their honors Have you not plundred their houses and seized their Lands Have you not made them house-lesse harbourlesse not able to keep a servant What would you more But let me tell you your great Masters might have purchased better houses and lands at a cheaper rate This they will be sensible of when the accounts are cast up as well elsewhere as at London 20. The Bishops wealth honor and
take it well that you complain so much of one lay Chancelour in a Diocese and yet enthrall them to so many lay Elders Parochiall Classicall Provinciall and Nationall Say not that there be preaching Elders joyned with them least it be returned upon you that the lay Chancelour is but the Bishops Officer in such cases of Judicature as belong to his profession and to the Bishop he is accountable But you can endure no loy Judges over you on any hand And whereas you charge the lay Chancelorship with usuâ—pation contrary to Gods direction I am certain ye have made use of it against Gods direction For how many of you have been instituted into Benefices by lay Chancelours Quâ— jure comes not now to be scanned Thus ye can abuse them and yet use them But I shall turn you over to the Doctâ—rs of the Commons them it concerns they are well able to argue the case with you and to wash off these aspersions 18. Your first argument is I hope sufficiently confuted in the eye of indifferent and judicious men I shall not therefore any longer insist upon it but observe at how low a rate you value authority Nor Bishop nor King nor your Idolized Parliament shall be a Power but an usurpation against God and his Word if they deny you any priviledge indulged or debarre you any dutie which ye suppose to be injoyned you by the word If they sequester you from the Pulpit or from ruling in your congregations farewell my great Lords and Masters at Westminster And when they have sold the Bishops and Chapters lands they shall no longer be a Parliament but an Vsurpation because they have despoiled you of those lands which ye lay claim to and which they ought to have disposed of to supply you and your predicant brethren with such maintenance as your selves hold sufficient CHAP. IV. Whether the King may consent to the abrogation of Epiâ—copacy if so that calling be laâ—full 1. SAving your argument in the first place this is certain â—f Episcopacy be lawfull then the Kings Oath at Coronation was not as you would have it vinculum iniquitatis a bond of iniquitie And hereupon it follows quod non obligatur in contrarium that he is not bound to break this oath Take this by the way You must then seek some other way to cleere it to us that it is lawfull for his Majestie to wave this oath But your own conscience seemes to check you for your former resolution you therefore confesse that this way of invalidating the Kings is most satisfactory but to some 2. Surely if to some it be satisfactory those some are such that are either very weak or wilfully blinded with avarice Whose gaine is godlinesse But the end will prove thâ—t Godlinesse is prâ—fitable to all things That is as the Geneva Note hath it he that hath faith and a good conscience is promised to have all things necessâ—ry for this life and to injoy life everlasting This would be seriously layed to heart 3. But though your former argument seem satisfactory to some yet to some it will not hold namely to those that are not câ—nvinced of the UNLAWFULNESSE OF EPISCOPACY What so satisfactory and yet not hold Alas alas what creatures have you to deale with Pitie it is that you have to deale with learned and rationall men and not with Ignoramus and his Dull man What shall now become of your Case of Conscience Why It will cast the resolution of this doubt upon another question From one question to an other And what 's that The lawfulnesse of Episcopacy This is a large field that you are not acquainted with And yet to satisfie the conscience of your Reader you have already concluded that Episcâ—pacy is an usurpation against the word of Gâ—d and therefore sinfull and unlawfull How Conclude first that Episcopacy is unlawfull and then grant it to be lawfull But this is granted onely for argument sake That is because your argument is so loose that it proves just nothing againâ—â— Episcopacy For a firme demonstration admits of no contradiction it leaves no doubt behind 4. Well be it lawfull yet not withstanding that his Oâ—th thâ— King without impeaâ—hment may in this circumstance consent to the abâ—â—gâ—tion of Episcopacy What mean you by circumstance Is the Kings Oâ—â—h or Episcopacy or the abrâ—gaâ—iâ—n of Episcopacy but a circumstance A circumstance is that which is not substantiall or essentiall to the point in question but comes in upon the by at most for illustration The question is Whether the King notwithstanding his oath may consent with a safe conscience to the abrogation of Episcopacy All these then I take to be essentiall to the question unlesse a safe Conscience be with you and with your brethren but a circumstance And yet it is such an ingredient that a man may neither swear nor consent to nor act but what he may undertake with a safe conscience For if our heart if our conscience condemn us God is greater then our heart and knoweth all things His Majesty I make no question hath sadly thought on this 5. That he may abrogate that which is lawfull you say and we deny not since God hath given Kings a power nt onely over things indifferent but even in such things as are lawfull and honest and in their kind necessary for the preservation of a Common-wealth This is evident in Jonadab the sonne of Rechab who commanded his posterity that they should neither drink Wine nor build House nor sow seed nor plant Vineyard nor have any And yet as lawfull and necessary as these things were they obeyed their fathers voice God approves of their obedience and crowns it with a blessing And what a father is in his own familie that is a King at least within his own Dominions 6. But here the case is different for the question is concerning Christs own Ordinance and Institution which the King hath sworne to maintaine This then being lawfull and legally sworne the oath may not in any wise be dispenced with Nay if we say that the King or any authoritie upon earth may alter or abolish any one Ordinance of our Saviour we contradict our selves and complie with the Papists What reason bring we against the halfe Communion but Christs own institution who commanded it to be deliver'd and received in both kinds And Calvin deservedly reproves Bishop Cardiner for attributing this power to a King Now if Episcopacy be our Saviours institution then may no humane power root it up least they that do it be rooted out of the land of the living But that this very order which we now call Episcopacy is Christs own institution is already proved cap. 2. 6. 7 8. 7. Besides if this be the onely Order to which Christ hath given power to ordaine Presbyters and Deacons who shall confer these Orders when Bishops are taken away and utterly extinguished
keep it for him to his power and this Commander keeps this Towne till he have no more strength to hold it unlesse he force the Towns-men to armes against the priviledge which he hath sworne to maintaine Well what then If this Governour now surrender this Towne upon composition doth he violate his Oath Thus far Mr. Gerees question what think you of it What any man thinks is no matter Mr. Geree thinks none will affirme it And I think there be many that will affirme it and I am one of that number Good Lord to see how Mr. Geree and I differ in opinion His is but thought without proof but I shall give you reason for what I think and say 13. If this Casuist speake to purpose as he ought he speaks of a King of this Realme and no town within this Realme hath any such priviledge as not to bear armes against the Kings enemies or not to keep it for his Majestie to the utmost of their power The reasons are these First these are the Kings Dominions and Countries 2ly These Towns and Cities are part of these Dominions 3ly The inhabitants and Citizens thereof are his Majesties subjects 4ly All lands and tenements are holden either mediatly or immediatly of the King 5ly This Citie or Towne is the Kings otherwise how could he put a Commander into it and give him an Oath to keep it for him I speake of Towns within these his Majesties Dominions which in all writings are called the Kings Cities Counties and Towns 6ly It cannot be imagined that the Kings of this Realme would grant any priviledge destructive or dangerous to their owne safety And we must take notice that All Liberties at the first were derived from the Crown Adde hereunto the severall Acts of Parliament wherein the Peers and Comminalty confesse themselves to be bound and make faithfull promise to aide their Soveraigne at all seasons as also to assist and defned his or their rights and titles to the utmost of their power and therein to spend their bodies lands and goods against ALL PERSONS whatsoever But new Lords new Laws and these Statutes are out of date 14. By this time I hope you see that no towns-men have any such privilege as to refuse to bear arms in the Kings behalf But they are bound by their allegiance and the Laws of this Land to keep those Towns for his Majestie to defend them with all their might against his foes If then the inhabitants shall be backward the Commander ought to force them to armes and if he do it not he violates his Oath and the Towns-men their fidelity And now you may tell your freind that helped you to this supposition that he is no skilfull Apprentice at Law If then the Kings case be such in this particular his Highnesse may not recede from his Oath nor do any thing contrary thereto 15. Though this may seeme reasonable to sober men yet the onely objection as you conceive which lyeth against this is that though it be not in the Kings power to uphold them yet it is in his power not to consent to their fall Though this be not the onely yet is it a just objection or rather a resolution which being rightly harkned to will preserve the King from sin in this particular For how ever you are so uncivill with his Majestie as to call it peremtorinesse in him to deny assent to the fall or abolition of Episcopacy yet such as are learned to sobriety know this to be Christian prudence and true fortitude not to fear them that can imprison him that can rob him of this earthly Crowne and slay his body but to stand in aw of him that can slay the soul that can deprive him of his heavenly Crown and cast him into the infernall pit Oh 't is a fearfull thing to fall into the hands of the living God we are not therefore to be threatned or frighted into sin These things you can presse violently in the Pulpit but now you are beside both Pulpit and text beside modesty and truth It is Justice Religion and courage not peremtorinesse to deny the least assent to sin That it is sin to yeeld to or confirme the abolition of Episcopacy is already manifested C. 4. 6. Since it is to destroy an Ordinance of Christ which cannot be done without sin 16. However then he may indanger his own Crown not save their Mitres yet he shall be sure by denying assent to save his own soul for without consent no sin and without sinne no damnation A woman ravished is free from fornication because she assents not but is really enforced and yet he that commits that sin upon her must die for it This is the Kings case right if he yeeld not this is a rape upon his power no sin in his person since no assent Hence is it that Idolatry and Oppression in Scripture are charged upon Kings because their assent makes a Law Without the Kings affirmative every Ordinance imposed upon the people is not Law but Tyranny since it is not legall but arbitrary Our brethren of Scotland say as much Take their words There can be no Law made and have the force of a Law without the King Declaration of the Kingdom of Scotland p. 19. 17. That it is in his Majesties power or not in his power to deny assent to the abolition of Bishops is most certainly true But we must learn of you to distinguish between a naturall and a morall sense and then we shall find both true that he can and he cannot deny consent In a naturall sense he may but in a morall sense he may not In a naturall sense he may because the will cannot be inforced In a morall sense it is not in his power because he cannot now deny consent without sinne So it is and it is not in his power or rather as S. Austine speaks In potestate est quod in voluntate esse non debet That is in our power which ought not to be in our will The King then hath it in his power to yeeld or not to yeeld because he may do which he pleaseth The book of God stands by and adviseth him to do that which is right in the sight of God proposing blessings if he do so and menacing curses if he shall do any thing contrary to Gods revealed will And all this while it doth but instruct perswade him to do what he ought and may when he will This then being in the Kings power he must take heed he incline not to sin 18. I cannot but resolve that to forsake the naturall sense if good is to be unnaturall To renounce the morall sense is against good manners and the morall Law If therefore both senses may be kept we are to preserve them both safe With confidence therefore I speake it that it is not onely in his power but it is his
and power If then it be not lawfull for the King neither is it Lawfull for his great Councell to take away the legall rights of others against Law And therefore not the legall Rights of Bishops Deanes and Chapters or any other of the Clergie For by the Laws of the Land we have as firme an interest and as true a freehold in those possessions wherein to we are admitted or inducted as any other of his Majesties subjects have in theirs Boast not of your power power must attend upon Justice not go before it nor over-rule it Iâ— Justice take place it is a judiciall a just power but if power over sway Justice the Government proves tyrannicall 23. As for the power of making Laws we must know that by the Common Law which is guided by the light of nature and the word of God that power is acknowledged to be in the King Who is legâ—â—us superior as Fitz harbert speaks above the Law But the Soveraignes of this Realme to reitifie the tender care they have of their peoples welfare and the desire they have to injoy their love have so far condescended in the Stature Law that they will not henceforth do so without the advice assent of the Houses This is not to give them a Supremacie but to admit them to advice This is the way to win the most refractary to submit to those Laws whereto they have given consent either in person or by proxy Besides what is concluded on with good advice by Common consent and hath the opprobation of diverse wise learned and religious persons gives better satisfaction to all in generall then what is done by one alone be it never so well done And yet to this day the power of ordeining establishing and enacting Laws is reserved wholly to the Crowne Most of these Statute Laws are as so many Royall legacies bequeathed to this Nation by the severall Soveraignes and Fathers of this Countrey Not a Liberty or priviledge not any Land or tenement but is originally derived from the Crowne Such hath been the goodnesse and bounty of our Princes to us their unworthy subjects All we have is from them and now we take all from them Is this gratitude We serve God and the King alike we are resolved to seize upon all that is called sacred And I have learned that not onely the Kings house but his very lands are called in Law Patrimonium sacrum the holy Patrimony Is not this that sacra fames that sacred hunger which is so greedy of all that is called sacred 24. Brand not us poore Clergie-men with foule and fained aspersions delude not the People with false forged suggestions Whose legall priviledges or rights have we invaded or sought after When did we ever desire or perswade his Majestie to do the least injurie to people or Parliament Your own conscience clears us in the generall And your own profession is that you cannot but have a better conceit of the major part of the Clergie at this time that they will not be so tenacious of their wealth and honour as tâ— let the Crowne run an hazard If then we will and have parted with that which is justly ours rather then in the least manner we would prejudice the king or wrong our own consciences certainly we cannot perswade the king to make any ingagement to us against the Laws and legall rights of others If any particular person have offended in this kind we make no Apologie for him upon just proofe let him have a legall censure This Kingdom cannot but take notice that we have been so far from incroaching upon others that we have parted with uâ— own rights though not with Gods We have deserted all we had to preserve a good conscience This is truly cedere jure suo to part with our own that we may not faile that trust which is committed to us We justifie Gods right and lose our own 25. We confesse that the king is bound to maintain the legall priviledges of people and Parliament but not so as to destroy Gods rights or the priviledges of his Ministers That be farre from him Suum cuique the true Princely justice is to be just to God and man to give God what is his and impartially to his subjects what is theirs as also what truly belongs to them in their severall places and professions His Majestie knows full well that the liberties of the Subject the priviledges of Parliament and rights of the Clergie have long consisted and prospered together Take away the Vine and the Elme will beare no fruit take away the Elme and the Vine will fall to the ground and be trod to durt 26. That the King hath been alwaies ready to confirme needfull not wanton not malicious not destructive Bills cannot be denyed by any of his impartiall conscionable subjects The quarrell raised against him is because he will not suffer Gods inheritance and the Churches patrimony to be devoured because he will not endure Gods service and all Religion to be trampled on because he end eavours to releive his poore people the Clergie against whatsoever greivance they suffer or threatned to be enforced upon them The same favour he alwaies hath and is at this time forward to afford to all his good people and loyall subjects Yea even to those that are neither good nor loyall 27. But before I take my leave of your Case of Conscience I shall resolve you what a pious designe you have ventered on and what a rock you have run your self upon You will I hope like the better of it because it comes from that Law you most delight in The Statute saith when a man secular or Religious slayeth his Prelate to whom he OWETH FAITH AND OBEDIENCE it is Treason If then it be Treason to slay the Prelate what sin is it to murder Prelacy certainly by how much the sin is greater to destroy the species all mankind then one particular man by so much is the Treason more heinous more abominable to kill Episcopacy then any one Bishop whatsoever And yet this you have endeavoured to the utmost of your power For this I shall leave you to the Law and to those whom the King shall send for the punishment of evill doers Pray we therefore for the safety of our Soveraigne and that he may with speed be restored to his throne for these times have made us sensible with Rabbi Chanina that were it not for fear of him alter alterum vivus devoraret one would devoure another quicke 28. Thus I think by this time I may safely conclude that it is sufficiently cleared that neither as a king nor as a Christian may his Majestie in Justice or conscience ingage himselfe or yeeld consent either to the extirpation of Episcopacy out of this Church of England or to the abrogation of the just priviledges of his Clergie or to the
good King ought to be a Protector and Defender of the Bishops and Churches under his Government Rex With a willing and devout heart I promise and grant my part and that I will preserve and maintain to you and the Churches committed to your charge all Canonicall priviledges and due Law and Justice and that I will be your Protector and Defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in his Kingdome by right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under his Government Then the King ariseth and is led to the Communion Table where he makes a solemne Oath in sight of all the â—â—opâ—e to observe the premises and laying his hand on the Booke saith The Oath The Things that I have before promised I shall perform and keep so p 〈…〉 me God and the Contents of this Book The Contents CHAP. I. VVHether the King may lawfully consent to the abrogation of Episcopacy 1. CHAP. II. Whether the Kings Oath taken at his Coronation be an unlawfull Oath 4. CHAP. III. Whether Prelacy in the Church of England were an usurpation 9. CHAP. IV. Whether the King may consent to the abrogation of Episcopacy if so that calling be lawfull 18. CHAP. V. Whether ye have not bound your selves by your Solemne League and Covenant to maintaine Episcopacy 22. CHAP. VI. Whether the King without impeachment to his Oath at Coronation may consent to the abrogation of Episcopacy 31 CHAP. VII Whether the King may desert Episcopacy without perjury 37. CHAP. VIII Whether the Kings Oath to the Clergie be injurious to his other subjects and inconsistent with his Oath to the people 41. CHAP. IX How far forth and wherein the Clergie is subject to a Parliament and to what Parliament 52 CHAP. X. Whether it be lawfull for the King to abrogate the Rights of the Clergie 60. CHAP. XI Whether the Clergie and Laity be two distinct bodies or one body Politicke That Church-men in all ages had some singular priviledges allowed them 69. CHAP. XII Whether to sit and Vote in Parliament be incongruous to the calling of Bishops 78. CHAP. XIII Certaine light and scandalous speeches concerning Prince Preist tenderly touched 87. CHAP. XIV Whether the Lands of the Church may be forfeited by the misdemeanour of the Clergie 93. CHAP. XV. Whether it be lawfull to take away the Bishops Lands and to confer them upon the Presbytery 104. CHAP. XVI How far forth the King ought to protect the Church Bishops 114 CHAP. XVII Whether there be two Supremacies in this Kingdome 127 Mr. GEREES Case of Conscience SIFTED CHAP. I. Whether the King may lawfully consent to the abrogation of Episcopacy 1. I Find a Case of Conscience proposed by Mr. Geree and this it is Whether the King considering his O that Coronation to protect the Clergie and their Priviledges can salvâ conscientiâ consent to the abrogation of Episcopacy But why I pray you is the question proposed here when you have determined it before For doth not your Title page speak thus In this Case of Conscience it is cleared that the King may without impeachment to his Oath touching the Clergie at Coronation consent to the Abrogation of Episcopacy Thus you have full magisterially determined before the question be so much as proposed Is this the fashion first to resolve and then to argue the case This may be the course of Hereticks it is otherwise with good Catholicks But you are resolved to maintain that a Christian may swear and forswear without the least prejudice to his soul 2. And your practice is accordingly witnesse the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy which you with your great Masters have taken more then once And those of your perswasion have taken up Arms against their Soveraign Lord without impeachment to their Oath of Allegiance and maintain that The Parliament is subordinate to no power under Heaven without any breach of the Oath of Supremacie And your self like a good Preacher of Gods Word have taken the Oath of Canonicall obedience to the Bishop and yet endeavour the abrogation of Episcopacy and the extirpation of that Order from whence you had your Orders and without which you could have had no Orders 3. Me thinks the Smectymnuans should not endure this Proposition since with them a Bishop and a Presbyter are one and the same Thus while you endeavour to ruinate Episcopacy you subvert the Presbytery according to their tenets I wonder much how your case hath passed so long unsifted and uncensured by the Divine Masters of your learned Assembly 4. But I shall take it for your best advantage as it is distinguished or as we say a distinct order from Presbytery I shall also take into consideration the severall motives which you produce for the Abrogation of Episcopacy 5. Whereof your first is this that there is no hope of the Kings or Kingdoms safetie without an union between our King and Parliament I must confesse with anguish of spirit as matters have been handled the King and Kingdom are driven into a great streight and an Vnion between our King and your Parliament hath been prayed for and sought for by all commendable or tolerable means The hope left us is onely in our God and Saviour whose custome it is to scatter the proud in the imagination of their hearts to pull down the mighty from their throne and to exalt the humble and meek Thus can he shew strength with his arm and do great things for us And this I hope in his due time he will do and reduce this Kingdom from irreligion and sacriledge and not cast off the innocent with the prophane blasphemers Oh that we might begge that blessing from Heaven to see a Parliament rightly regulated religiously minded and with-out any by ends of their own men of courage fearing God men dealing truly hating covetousnesse Such as will not be led by a multitude to do evil or to subvert the truth I am certain we should then have an Union a blessed Vnion between King and Parliament 6. But by you it seems that there is now no probable or possible means of reconciliation left in mans judgement unlesse the King yeeld to the extirpation of Episcopacy You should have added unlesse he lay down his Lands Royalties and just Prerogatives at his Subjects feet unlesse he abandon the wife of his bosome and become a stranger to the Children of his loins unlesse he sacrifice his friends to the malice of his foes and the ruine of whole families to their avarice unlesse he cast off the Service of God that most excellent form of Common Prayer and give up the houses and lands of God and all that is accounted holy to satiate their sacrilegious appetite 7. But in sober sadnesse do you beleeve that the Abrogation of Episcopacy is that they yawn at You are mistaken good brother the Episcopall houses and lands as also what ever belongs to Deans and
the Nobility and Clergie and a multitude of his leige people And shall not all these oblige him so much the more to be tender of this Oath Zanchius tels us that it is a more grievous sin to offend against a publick solemne oath then against one made in private What may we then think of an oath taken with such high Solemnity 8. This Oath was voluntarily freely taken without compulsion or perswasion so no excuse that way Indeed it was taken in truth in judgement and in righteousnesse In truth his sacred Majesty resolving truly to keep it In Judgement judiciously upon mature deliberation and in righteousnesse intending that every branch of this Oath should be justly and righteously observed in all his Courts of Justice How then can he infringe this Oath 9. He made this promissâ—ry Oath to a great body of this His Kingdome the whole Clergie of this Land and those not the meanest of his Subjects And not onely so but to holy Church his mother and to God the Father of us all How can he then disclaime this Oath which so obligeth his conscience before God that â—ad he bound himself by such a tye to high-way robbers or to his professed â—nemies he had been bound by the Law both of Nations and Christianity strictly to haue observed it without fraud or coven Talke not of a dispensation Nor life nor death nor principalities nor powers whether civill or spirituall can possibly discharge him of this oath no more then they can me of my oath of Allegiance And yet it is a point of your Religion to perswade to perjurie as if it would ease your consciences to have millions concurre with you in the same perfidiousnesse and end 10. Is perjurie a sin or no sin If it be a sin and an heinous sin how then can I commit this great wickednesse and sin against God Is it no sin If you be of that mind speake out shew your self in your true colours What Religion are you of I know not well little use hath your conscience made of Religion in this case Your eye is wholly upon the Parliament and the present necessity those members have wrought our good King and this whole Nation Necessity hath so far prevailed with you as rather to be forsworne then to forgo your present maintenance But our most gracious Soveraigne whom God ever blesse hath wholly fixed his heart upon God and his Word wherein we are charged not to sweare falsely by the name of the Lord no nor to forsweare our selves but to performe our oaths unto the Lord. Marke though the oath be made to the servant it must be performed unto the Lord because the caution is given to the servant in the Lords behalfe yea upon the Lords credit for by his name and upon his book we sweare to do it And if we do it not the Lord will not hold us guiltlesse Minus dicitur plus intelligitur by this one word much may be understood For the Lord will come against us in Judgement and call us to an account for our oaths Oaths therefore must be avoided lest we fall into condemnation For perjurie is a foule a dangerous a damnable sin Odious it is to God because it defiles his most holy name For this very sinne the land mournes I beseech God it become not disolate Sure I am a curse will enter into his house that sweareth falsely it will settle there till it have consumed the timber and stones thereof Or as the wise man hath it his house shall be full of calamities and the plague shall never depart from it Let Zedekiah be our evidence He took the Oath of Allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar but slighted it and rebelled against that his Soveraign Lord who had so highly honoured him and trusted him with a Kingdom But what became of him The Caldees came besieged Jerusalem conquer'd it took Zedekiah prisoner and slew his sons before his eyes This done they put out his eyes and in fetters carried him captive to Babylon Here was an end of the Kings of that Land descended from the Tribe of Judah Are not here the timber and stones of his house his strong men and the sons of his loins utterly consumed 11. Think not to excuse your selves or any other by some later Covenant this will not serve the turn Was the first sworn in truth and judgement and righteousnesse or was it not Doth it truly and justly agree with the Word of God at least not contradict it If so thou art bound in justice to observe it lest judgement fall upon thee For this is a true rule if Zanchius mis-guide us not Posteriores promissiones etiam juramento firmatae nihil de prioribus detrahere aut imminuere possunt Later aths cannot possibly make the former of no or lesse validitie Why then do you perswade the King to break his oath He that enticeth a man to perjurie under pretence of pietie and Religion what doth he else but affirm that some perjuries are lawfull Which is as much to say as some sins are lawfull Which is naught else but to conclude that some things are just which are unjust I appeal to men of understanding whether this proposition savours of pietie or discretion Think not then to ensnare prudent and conscientious men with such frivolous and senslesse pretences which favour strongly of absurditie if not of Atheisme CHAP. VIII Whether the King may desert Episcopacy without perjury 1. GIve me leave to passe over a few pages and to take that into consideration which follows next in reason though not according to your method We are now fallen upon a strange question too high to be proposed by any Subject But you have enforced me to make that a question which is harsh to loyall ears lest I may seem to avoid your subtill and sawcie cavils as unanswerable For do not you say that your second Antâ—gonist plainly â—ffiâ—ms that the King cannot desert Episcopacy without flat perjury His words are far more mannerly but I am bound to trace your steps and shall with Gods assistance manifest that His Majestie without violation to his Oath and to Religion may not desert Episcopacy and leave it naked to the subtill fox or the mercilesse swine 2. First according to your own confession his sacred Majestie hath sworn to almighty God in his holy place before a solemn Assembly to protect the Bishops and their priviledges to his power as every GOOD KING in his Kingdom IN RIGHT OUGHT to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under their Government 1. Good Kings protect Bishops and good they are in doing so there is no evill then in protecting Bishops 2. They ought to do it it is therefore their duty and to fail of this their duty when they may choose is sin 3. In right they ought to do it they do wrong therefore if they do it not
tangunt prosint nemini praesertim notabile afferant nâ—cumentum That they may be commodious for those whom they concerne and yet not be evidently injurious to others From these or the like grounds I find it resolved by the Sages of this Kingdom that the King may grant priviledges to any Corporation so they be not prejudiciall to some other of his Subjects 5. But wherein is the Kings Oath to the Clergie inconsistent with his Oath to the people Because his Majestie hath first say you taken an oath for the protection of the people in THEIR LAWS and liberties Their Laws The peoples Laws Who made them makers or Masters of the Laws Do the people use to make Laws in a Monarchie Behold all are Law-makers Who then shall obey None but the Clergie Thus the Clergie must obey the people and if obey then please For whom we obey them we must please And yet there is much danger in pleasing the people For If I should please men that is the common people I were not the servant of Christ The plain truth is the Laws are the Kings Laws so we call them and so they are and his subjects must observe them Otherwise he beareth not the sword in vaine The Liberties indeed are the peoples granted and confirmed unto them by the Soveraignes of this Realme But wherein will the latter Oath be a present breach of the former and so unlawfull One would think here were some great wrong offered to the people as if some immunities or means were taken from them and transferred upon the Clergie by this Oath But when all comes to all it is no more then this that One of the priviledges of the people is that the Peers and Commons in Parliament have power with the consent of the King to alter what ever in any particular estate is inconvenient to the whole I had thought that this priviledge you speake of had not been a priviledge of the people but of the Parliament that is of the Peers and Commons representees of the people met in a lawfull and free Parliament with the Kings consent Not of the representees of the people alone But you would faine incense the people a new against us under a pretence that all is for their good and for the maintenance of their priviledges because they are represented by the House of Commons Whereas the truth is you endeavour to devolve al upon that House for the erection of Pâ—ssbytery That so both Church and State may be Democraticall both settled under a popular government 6. Let us take a view of this passage and see what truth is in it One of the priviledges of the people is say you that the Peers and Commons in Parliament HAVE POWER TO ALTER what-ever is inconvenient How the Lords will take this I know not though of late they have been so passive Can they endure that their power should be onely derivative and that from the people Your words are plain one of the priviledges of the people is that the peers have power As if the Lords had no power in Parliament but what issued from the peoples priviledges Why then are they called Peers when they are not so much as Peers to the people but their substitutes if not servants Surely you lay the Lords very lowe And if it be one of the peoples priviledges that the Lords have power then is it also one of their priviledges that the Lords have no power that the people may take it from them when they please Cuius est instituere ejus est destituere they that can give power can also take it away if they see good This of late hath been usually vaunted against the House of Commons and you say as much to the House of Peers Whereas the peoples priviledges are but severall grants of the Kings of this Land proceeding meerly from their grace and favour Alas the people hath not so much as a vote in the Election of Peers neither have they liberty to choose Members for the house of Commons no not so much as to meet for any such purpose untill they be summoned by the Kings Writ So the peoples priviledges depends upon the Kings summons no such priviledge till then 7. And whereas you say that the Peers and Commons have power to alter what-ever is inconvenient You are much mistaken When by the Kings summons they are met in Parliament they have power to treat and consult upon alterations as also to present them to his Majestie and to petition for such alterations where they see just cause But they have no power to alter that is in the King or else why do they Petition him so to this day to make such changes good as they contrive Hoc est testimonium regiae potestatis vbique obstinentis principatum This a full testimonie of the Kings power in all causes and over all persons that the Lords Commons Assembled in Parliament are faine to Petition for his Royall consent and confirmation before they can induce an alteration The truth is the Power of making laws is in him that gives life to the Law that enacts it to be a Law not in them that advise it or Petition for it Where the word of a King is there is power it is his word Le Roy Le Vâ—lt that makes it a Law then t is a Law and not before No power makes it a Law but his For he doth whatsoever pleaseth him When it pleaseth him not when it pleaseth them many times therefore he rejects Bills agreed by both houses with his Roy ne veult the King will not have them to be Lawes The reason is given by that renowned Justice Jenkins because the Law makes the King the onely Judge of the Bills proposed I counsell thee therefore to keep the Kings commandment or to take heed to the mouth of the King and that in regard of the Oath of God That is saith the Geneva Note that thou obey the King and keep the Oath that thou hast made for the same cause This is agreeable to Scripture And the wisest of this Kingdome not long since acknowledged that without the Royall consent a Law can neither be complete nor perfect nor remaine to posterity A Law it is not it binds not till the King speak the word Yea the Kingdom of Scotland hath declared that the power of making Laws is as essentiall to Kings as to govern by Law and sway the Scepter Declar. of the Kingdome of Scotland p. 34. 8. But if this be the peoples priviledge that the Peers and Commons in Parliament have power WITH THE CONSENT OF THE KING to alter what is inconvenient Whose priviledge is it I pray you for the Lords and Commons without the Kings consent to make alterations and abrogations with root and branch This is no priviledge of the people nor yet of the Houses Because as Justice Jenkins observes it is against
Rights of the Clergie As if this were a sound and unanswerable argument It is lawfull for the King to abrogate the Rights of the Clergy Ergo It is lawfull for him to abrogate Episcopacy It is for all the world as if one should say It is lawfull for the King to take away the Rights of Lawyers Ergo he may also take away Judicature Yet all men would say that this were flat tyrannie since without Judicature no man can compasse or enjoy his own with peace 2. But I shall return your argument so upon you as shall concern you more neerly It is lawfull for the King to abrogate the Rights of the Clergie it is therefore lawfull for him to abrogate Presbytery How like you this Is it not your own argument changing terme Episcopacy into Presbytery Ye have strooke out the former set up the latter in the place of Episcopacy And your scholers by the same argument may live to root up thut too if any lands be annexed to this great Diana of Geneva Thus you have made a rod to scourge your selves with 3. But you will say that though it be legall for the King to take away the Rights yet he may not destroy the Order And why so Because the Rights are granted by man but the Order was settled by God And what God hath ordained is not lawfull for man to abrogate I must return you the same answer since t is sufficiently justified C. 4. 5. That the Order of Episcopacy is the immediate institution of our B. Saviour and Ministeriall root from whence all Orders spring Though then this be the usuall way of cleering this your assertion and you conceive it to be a sound resolution yet learned men see that you have said just nothing unlesse you confesse that the Order of Presbyter may likewise be exâ—iâ—pated by Royall authority 4. But return we to the Rights of the Clergie and take notice upon what grounds you suppose it lawfull for the King to abrogate those Rights which he hath vowed so solemnly to maintain The King say you is sworne to maintaine the Laws of the Land in force at his Coronation Yet it is not unlawfull for him after to abrogate any of them upon the motion or with the consent of his Parliament I am glad that you acknowledge it to be the Kings Prerogative to maintaine the Laws of the Land and that it is not unlawfull for him to abrogate any of them with the consent of his Parliament If he be bound by Oath either he hath power to maintain these Laws or not If he hath not power it is a senselesse Oath If he hath power where is it What is become of it Hath he resigned it We know the contrary Hath he forfeited it To whom To his subjects He can no more forfeit his Regall power to his subjects then a father the right of fatherhood to his children He is no more a King upon condition then a father is a father upon condition His power he hath not from the people but from God Per me Reges regnant by me Kings reign saith God And I hope God speaks no untruth His substitute the King is for He sits on Gods not on the peoples throne and King he is for the Lord in his stead 5. If you object misdemeanours or bearing armes against His Parliament your self say that He is sworne to maintain the Laws of the Land The Laws Liberties and Properties were all at stake they were trampled upon by his faithlesse but potent Subjects This enforced him to take up that sword which he ought not to beare in vaine but to execute wrath as the Minister of God upon them that do evill upon such as plunder his good subjects and turn them out of house and home For the King is made by God the Supreme Governor for the punishment of evill doers as also for the praise of those that do well But suppose the King were a tyrant as bad as bad may be yet we ought from our hearts to give him all due honour so Beza and not to rob him of his just power If he sin it is against God onely and to him onely he must account not to his Subjects 6. Well bound he is by Oath to maintain the Laws while they are Laws As yet then the rights of the Church are safe and the King is bound to maintain them But how long are these Laws in force Till they are abrogated BY JUST POWER IN A REGULAR WAY They are your own words and we subscribe them But the just power is in His Majestie by your own confession both to maintain and to abrogate Laws And the regular way say you is at the motion or with the consent of HIS PARLIAMENT But with all our loyall Predecessors we say at the petition or humble suit not at the motion of His Parliament And His it is his they are all though Members of Parliament since the Parliament is His. They are not then a Parliament of themselves at their own choice or disposing nor yet without him His they are I am sure they should be so I would to God they were so The King is the fountain of honour and power within his own Dominions And who may say unto him What doest thou Why doest thou honour this man and not that Why doest thou call a Parliament at this time and not at that Impius est qui Regi dixerit inique agis He is impious that saith unto the King thou dealest unjustly or unequally So the Fathers read that place No obbraiding no controulling of a King He can do no wrong So the Law 7. His the Kings they are when they are met and set in Parliament His great Councell Magnum Concilium Regis His Houses His Parliament And therefore called so that they may Parlar la ment speak their minds freely for the generall good Him they may entreat not controul advise not command perswade not enforce Suppose the King grants them power and authoritie he grants them none either over or against himself this he cannot do This were to set the Members above the Head and to make his Subjects superior to himself This were to despoil himself of the power of the Sword But this he may not do since God hath made him supreme and given him the charge of the Sword And His Majestie may not invert that order which God hath set neither may he repeal Gods ordinance or make it void God hath laid the charge upon him and he cannot with a safe conscience decline it or neglect it 8. Observe I beseech you though Pharaoh set Joseph over his house and over his people to rule and arm them at his pleasure though Joseph were so made Ruler over all the land of Egypt yet without him no man might lift up his hand or foot within that land
the Clergie besides their Orders priviledges and immunities besides their Jurisdiction and revenues And yet all all these you expose to the mercie of a Parliament But in good sooth do you think that if it be lawfull for a Parliament to alter or abolish any particular Laws of the Land that therefore it is lawfull to take away all that the Clergie have or should have Indeed this is something answerable to the proceedings of these times It would sound very harsh if it were thus resolved It is lawfull for King and Parliament to abrogate any of the Laws of the Land It is therefore lawfull for them to abolish all the Laws of the Land And yet this is your manner of arguing As if a particular included the generall as if any were equivalent to all Which is apparently false for universals are of a far larger extent then these individua vaga uncertain notions Though all comprehend any yet any comprehends not all For lawfull it is not to subvert the fundamentall Laws therefore not all This were to raze the foundation of the Kingdome Were this justified of any particular Corporation or body politick besides the Clergie it would not be indured Oh how would the Citizens of London storme if we should conclude thus It is lawfull to take away any of the Laws of the Land and therefore it is lawfull to take away all the Rights of the City of London Yet let wise men judge if this be not your argument right But the Clergie is become the asse of the times it must bear all or sink under the burden 16. But you say that this is to be done by just power in a regular way Well and good But can that be a just power which deals unjustly For Justice gives to every man his own according to Gods Command Render to every man his due The Law of God we confesse to be the Supreme Law Whatever then is done against the Law of God cannot be just Yea though it be done by a Law no Act can justifie it since a Law contrary to Gods Word is no sooner made then void I speak to Christians But with you the Law shall be valid though injurious To the injuriousnesse of this Law I shall submit because a subject but never acknowledge any validitie therein because a Christian 17. By a just power we see this cannot be done how then shall it be done in a regular way A regular way as you conceive you have set down wherein any Law of the Land may be abrogated And that is upon the motion or with the consent of the Parliament How comes this to passe Because the Parliament consists of the head and the representative body of the whole Kingdome And who are these First the King who is the head 2ly the Lords spirituall and temporall and 3ly the Commons But the Parliament is maimed of late 1. The House of Commons represents the greivances of the Countrey 2. The House of Lords advise his Majestie with their counsell and propose for the common good what they conceive meet 3. It is in the Kings power to assent to these proposals or to disassent to make them Statutes or no Statutes And that the Crown may receive no detriment the King hath the Judges of the Land his Councell and other Officers of State present to prevent such mischiefes The Lords take care of their Lands and honors that they be not damnified by any new Law The Knights and Burgesses by the severall Counties and Corporations are intrusted with such things as concern their generall or particular good And all are to take care for the good of the Church the common mother of us al. In these things every man doth or ought to provide that all things be so done for the Common good that if it be possible nothing be done to the prejudice of any 18. And reason for it for as by one Spirit we are all baptised into one body spirituall or mysticall so by the goodnesse of God we all are under one King incorporated into one body politick But the body is not one member but many Indeed if it were all one member where were the body And God hath so tempered this body together that every member hath need one of another and those which seem to be most feeble are necessary All this was done by the great wisedome of God that there might be no divisions or distractions in the body but that the members should have the same care one for another Thus God hath knit us together with the bonds of a mitie and necessity that we might love one another sincerely But Charity is so farre from doing wrong that she seeketh not her own Which is thus to be understood according to S. Austins expression Quia communia propriis non propria communibus anteponit Because Charity prefers the Common good before her own private interest and not her own private interest before the Common good Where this love is ther 's the Common-wealth But what state is that Kingdom in where they that are intrusted by the publick seeke their own and indeavour with might and maine to make that theirs which is none of theirs Where under pretence of the Common good they ingrosse all into their own clutches Is not this the crying sinne the grand Monopolie of these times 19. The regular way to abrogate any of the Rights of the Clergie or Laity is at their own motion or consent made and delivered by their representatives in Parliament or Convocation Henry VIII with Cromwell and the rest of his blessed Councel after banishment of the Popes power knew not which way to make a title to Monasteries with their lands and goods but onely by grant and surrender of the Abbots With them therefore he labours by his great and active servant Cromwell who prevailes with some by promises and large annuities with other by violence and the sword as is manifested by Master Spelman in the Preface to his ever honoured fathers book De non temerandis Ecclesiis The Statute therefore 31. Hen. VIII C. 13. tells us that These Grants Surrenders c. were made FREELY VOLUNTARILY AND WITHOUT COMPULSION to the King his Heires and Successors What ever the truth be this was the onely legall pretence they could devise And this is the onely course you can take to make a plea in Law to the Church-lands You are faine therefore at last to perswade the Clergies consent p. 5. But of that in due place 20. In the mean space thus much by the way Either we are subjects or no subjects If we are subjects then ought we to have the liberties and priviledges of subjects whereof this is one that not so much as a Subsidie or a little Ship-mony be taken from any one of us without our assent yeelded either by ourselves or by such as we put in trust And this present Parliament
hath often protested before God and the world that the Rights and Liberties of Subjects they do and will defend with their lives and fortunes Why then are our Rights and Liberties so strook at and exposed to contempt and sale Are we no subjects Surely we were borne so How then did we forfeit our birth-right By taking Orders Then is it better to be Mr. Gerees groom then himself And it may be this is the reason why so many step up into the Pulpit without Orders lest perchance they lose their birth-right 21. It may be you will say that we were not born Priests or Clergie-men You say right neither is any man born a Lawyer a Goldsmith or a Draper And yet when any of our brethren undertake these professions they enjoy the Rights and Liberties they were born to with some additions And why not we And yet we poore Clergie-men are the onely free-born Subjects that are out-lawed as it were and cast forth as dung upon the face of the earth Surely it is better to be a Parliamentarians foot-boy then a Steward of the mysteries of Christ And yet such we are Little do these men consider that all Subjects are born alike capable of these Rights if so they be fit to take Orders The wrong therefore is done alike to all free-born Subjects perchance to Mr. Speakers grandchild Since then the Kings Oath as you confesse is against acting or suffering a tyrannous invasion on Laws and Rights it must necessarily follow that as he may not act so he may not suffer any such tyranny to be used Hitherto he hath withstood these temptations and God I hope will ever deliver him from them and from the hands of his enemies Even so Amen Lord Jesu CHAP. XI Whether the Clergie and Laitie be two distinct Bodies or one Body Politick That Church-men in all ages had some singular priviledges allowed them 1. THat with some colour you may perswade the people that it is lawfull not onely to clip the wings but to pick the carkasse and to grate the very bones of the Clergie you tell them that this Oath was so framed when the Clergie of England was a distinct Society or Corporation from the people of England When was this Oath I beseech you framed You should have done well to have pointed out the time and not tell us that this distinction is a branch of Popery But this is the fashion of such as you are when you intend to disgrace alter or destroy any thing that concerns the Church then presently 't is Popery Thus you cast a mist before the peoples eyes that loath Popery and yet know not what Popery is 2. But this His Majesties Oath is grounded upon the Word of God who hath made promise to his Church spread among the Gentiles that Kings shall be her nursing fathers and Queens her nursing mothers When therefore Christian Kings are inthroned they take a most solemn Oath not onely to administer true justice to the people but that they will also maintain the Rights and priviledges of the Church and Clergie as by right they ought to do The reason is because there are so many envious mischievous eyes upon the Church because the Edomites and Ishmaelites the Moabites and Hagarens have cast their heads together with one consent and conspired to take her houses and lands into possession Gods Word prevails with few the Kings sword therefore must stand between the Church and such sacrilegious spirits 3. If they fail in this duty then will the Lord enter into judgement with the Ancients of the people and the Princes thereof What for this cause Yes for this very cause For ye have eaten up the vineyard the spoil of the poore is in your houses Is this any thing to the Church Yes marrie is it the Geneva Note tels you so Meaning saith the Note that the Rulers and Governors had DESTROYED HIS CHURCH and not preserved it ACCORDING TO THEIR DUTY Those who are guilty of this mischief let them beware His Majesties comfort is that he hath withstood these impious designes according to his duty For whosoever shall gather himself IN THEE AGAINST THEE shall fall Meaning the DOMESTICALL ENEMIES OF THE CHURCH as are the HYPOCRITES Dear brother take heed to your feet and remember that it is a dreadfull thing to FALL into the hands of the everliving God But view we your reason 4. The Clergie and Laitie say you were distinct bodies but this distinction is taken away and Laity and Clergie are now one body Politick One body Politick Are we so Whence is it then that the Bishops are thrust out of the House of Peers and that none of us may vote or sit in the House of Commons Are we of the same body and yet have no priviledges with the body In at subjection out at immunities In at taxes out at privileges This is one of those even Ordinances which your blessed Covenant hath hatched Of the same body we are under the same power subject to the same Laws and yet not capable of the same privileges Is this equalitie Scoggins doal right some all and some never a whit 5. Neither do we say that we are a severall or distinct body but we are a severall state or Corporation in the same body One body but severall members in and of the same body In Ecclesiasticall persons of this Kingdom are commonly three qualities or conditions one is naturall the other two are accidentall 1. Englishmen and denisons of this kingdom we are by birth 2. Vniversitie men by matriculation and education and 3. Clergie men by Ordination By the first we have an interest in the privileges of the kingdom By the second we have an interest in the immunities of the Universitie By the third we have an interest in the Rights of the Church The later privileges do not annihilate that right or claim which we have by birth Neither cease we to be the Kings Subjects because Clergie men In taking Orders we put not off Allegeance we rather confirm and inlarge it For a shame it is for us to teach others what we do not our selves And our duty it is to put every man in minde to be subject to principalities and powers and to obey Magistrates 6. That there are severall relations in us of the Clergie and that we have severall privileges by these relations will appear evidently in S. Paul who was an Israelite by blood a Roman by freedom but an Apostle by Ordination By his Orders he lost none of his former privileges but acquired new whereto he had no right as Israelite or Romane Yet as occasion serves he stands upon his privileges as a Romane and both the Centurion and the Commander in chief were afraid to offend against that law or privilege But we with blâ—shlesse foreheads trample upon Gods Laws and the privileges of his nearest servants
But though S. Paul stand upon his privileges and e magnifie his office yet f he acknowledgeth himself to be Cesars subject and that at his tribunall HE OUGHT TO BE JUDGED 7. Our Saviour himself had severall Relations he was the Son of David and the Lord of David the Son of David according to his humanitie but the Lord of David in his Deitie As Lord of all he receives tithes and sacrifices h as a Subject he payes tribute to Cesar and when an arraigned person i he acknowledgeth Judge Pilate to have power against him Besides this he is a King a Priest and a Prophet a King to command a Priest to offer sacrifice and a Prophet to foretell what he sees meet Nay there is hardly a Citizen of London but hath a treble relation to severall privileges 1. to the generall Rights as he is a free denison of this Nation 2. to others as he is Citizen of London and to a third sort as he is free of this or that Company And shall the meanest Freeman enjoy his severall Rights when the Ministers and Stewards of God are cut out of all Are we dealt with as the Dispensers of Gods high and saving mysteries Nay are we so well dealt with as the lowest members of this Nation Is not this the way to lead in Jeroboams Priests to fill the Pulpits with the scum of the people and to bring the Priesthood into utter contempt O all ye that passe by the way behold and consider if ever the like shame befell any Nationall Church that is threatened to ours at this day But thus it comes to passe when there is no King in the Israel of God 8. If this distinction between Clergie and Laity be a branch of Popery how comes it to passe that those great Reformers and zealous enemies to Popery suffered the Clergie to continue a distinct Province of themselves and that they did not with Popery quite extinguish this distinction Why doth Q. Elizabeth call them a great State of this Kingdome if they be no State at all Why did King Edward VI. that vertuous Lady Queene Elizabeth and wise King Iames summon the Bishops to convene in Convocation as a distinct society and to vote in the House of Peers as Lords spirituall plainly by title distinguished from the Lords temporall Vndoubtedly say you all priviledges of the Clergie that are or were contrariant to the Laws of the Land were abolisht in the reign of Henry the eight They were so It follows therefore undoubtedly that these priviledges which were continued through so many Princes raigns that were enemies to Popery were neither Popish nor contrariant to the Laws of the Land And yet some of those times were not over favourable to the Clergie 9. That we are a distinct society or Corporation from the people is evident by the Coronation Oath by Magna Charta by severall Acts of Parliament and by Scripture itself The Coronation Oath observes the distinction of Clergie and People and assures us that they shall be distinctly preserved Magna Charta does the like and the Acts of Parliament distinguish the Kings subjects into Clergie and Laity allotting to each their severall priviledges allowing the people to take many courses which the Clergie may not This distinction is approved by Scripture where the Lord takes the Levites from among the children of Israel S. Paul assures us that Every High Preist is TAKEN FROM AMONG MEN. And the Scholiast tels us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is there taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if the Apostle had said he is set apart from men from the Common people This exemption or distinction which you are pleased to call a branch of Popery or of Antichristian usurpation is here justified by Gods owne word And Josephus that was well skilled in Moses writings and Judaicall Antiquities testifies that Moses did seperate the tribe of Levi from the communitie of the people He might have said that God himself did it for the text saith plainly that THE LORD SEPERATED THE TRIBE OF LEVI to beare the Arke of the Covenant to stand before the Lord to administer unto him and to blesse in his name From that time forward they were not numbred amongst the rest of the people the Lords they were and the rest of the tribes were strangers to their office The very light of nature taught the heathen to distinguish between Preist and people and to allow them distinct priviledges And the light of Scripture taught Christians to do the like hence is it that not onely in the Canons of the Church but also in the Imperiall constitutions this distinction between the Clergie and Laity is most frequent and familiar Otherwise what strange confusion must necessarily have overspread the face of the Church if this distinction had not been religiously preserved What diverse would not see these times have enforced us to feele 10. And yet for all this we say not that we are exempt from secular power neither set we up two Supremacies This will prove to be your Popish or Anarchicall doctrine yours I say that would so fain cast this aspersion upon us For do not you tell us that ther 's a Supremacie in the King and a Supremacie in the Parliament Are not here two Supremacies set up by you that so you may make the Parliament Law-lesse and subject to no power We detest and have abjured the Popes Supremacie and not onely that but all other Supremacies besides the Kings within these his Majesties Dominions and Countries For we have sworne that King Charles is THE ONELY SUPREME GOVERNOR of all his Realms over all persons in all causes But you induce the peoples Supremacie Wheras we know no Coordination but a Subordination of all persons severally and jointly to his Majestie and to his Majestie onely within all his Dominions 11. We protest before God and the world sincerely and from the heart that the King is major singulis major universis greater then any and greater then all the Members of his Dominions whether in or out of Parliament and that he is homo a Deo secundus solo Deo minor second to God and lesse then God onely To this our best Lawyers bear Testimonie even that the King is Superior to all and Inferior to none And our Acts of Parliament say the same Thus much in substance we have sworne and we unfainedly beleeve that all the world cannot absolve us of this Oath As therefore we hitherto have done so shall we still by Gods grace bear faith and true Allegiance to his Majestie his heirs and successors though it be to the hazard of our liberty of our estates and lives Yea we acknowledge our selves obliged to the Laws of the Land in all those things which concern the right and peaceable administration of the State To the King we pay first fruits and
tenths which Lay Impropriators are seldome charged with To the King we grant and pay subsidies after an higher rate then any of the Laity by many degrees Where then are the two Supremacies which we erect 12. 'T is true indeed that For deciding of controversies and for distribution of Justice within this Realm there be TWO DISTINCT JURISDICTIONS the one ECCLESIASTICALL limited to certain spirituall and particular cases The Court wherin these causes are handled is called Forum Ecclesiasticum the Ecclesiasticall Court The other is SECULAR and generall for that it is guided by the Common and generall Law of the Realme Now this is a maxime affirmed by the Master of the Law that The Law doth appoint every thing to be done by those unto whose office it properly appertaineth But unto the Ecclesiasticall Court diverse causes are committed jure Apostolico by the Apostolicall Law Such are those that are commended by S. Paul to Timothy the Bishop of the Ephesians and to Titus the Bishop of the Cretians First to receive an accusation against a Presbyter and the manner how 2ly to rebuke him if occasion require 3ly If any Presbyter preach unsound doctrine the Bishop is to withdraw himself from him that is to excommunicate him 4ly In the same manner he is to use blasphemers disobedient and unholy persons false accusers trucebreakers Traitors and the like 5ly The Bishop is to reject that is to excommunicate all Hereticks after the first and second admonition 13. These things the Ordinary or Bishop ought to do De droit of Right as Sir Edward Coke speaks that is to say he ought to do it by the Ecclesiasticall Law IN THE RIGHT OF HIS OFFICE These censures belong not to secular Courts they are derived from our Saviours Preistly power aud may not be denounced by any that is not a Preist at least And a Maxime it is of the Common Law saith that famous Lawyer that where the right is spirituall and the remedy therefore ONELY BY THE ECCLESIASTICALL LAW the câ—nusans thereof doth appertain to the Ecclesiasticall Court But A BIHOP is regularly THE KINGS IMMEDIATE OFFICER to the Kings Court of Justice in causes Ecclesiasticall Therefore not a company of Presbyters no rule for that And this is it that wrings and vexes you so sorely For your a me is to share the Bishops Lands and Jurisdiction among you of the Presbyteriall faction This your vast covetousnesse ambition have of late cost the Church full deere and have been a maine cause of these divisions and combustions By these means you have made a forcible entrie upon Nabaoths Vineyard It were well Ahab and Jezabel would beware in time However wise men consider that every one that steps up to the Bar is not fit to be a Judge nor every one that layes about him in the Pulpit meet to be a Bishop 14. Besides in those Epistles this power is committed to single Governors to Timothy alone and to Titus alone But Timothy and Titus were Bishops strictly and properly so called that is they were of an higher order then Presbyters even of the same with the Apostles Hence is that of S. Cyprian Ecclesia super EPISCOPOS constituitur omnis actus Ecclesiae PER EOSDEM PRAEPOSITOS gubernatur The Church is settled upon BISHOPS and every Act of the Church is ruled BY THE SAME GOVERNORS By Bishops not by Presbyters Now the word of God is norma sui obliqui the rule whereby we must be regulated from which if we depart we fall foule or runne awry Since then the Church is settled upon Bishops it is not safe for any King or State to displace them lest they unsettle themselves and their posterity They that have endeavoured to set the Church upon Presbyters have incurred such dangers as they wot not of For if we beleive S. Cyprian they offend God they are unmindfull of the Gospel they affront the perpetuall practise of the Church they neglect the judgment to come and endanger the souls of their brethren whom Christ dyed for Neither is this the opinion of S. Cyprian onely Ignatius speaks as much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As many as are Christs cleave fast to the Bishop But these that forsake him and hold communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the accursed shall be cut off with them This is Ignatius genuine resolution attested by Vedelâ—us from Geneva and if true a most dreadfull sentence for those that endeavour the extirpation of Episcopacy 15. As for the Priviledges of the Clergie which you are so earnest to ruinate I shall manifest that they have footing in the Law of Nature in the Law of Moses and in the Gospel In the Law of Nature Abraham give tithes to the Preist of the most high God The Preists in Egypt had lands belonging to them as also portions of the Kings free bountie And the same Law of Nature taught Pharoah and Joseph not to alienate either the Preists lands or other their maintenance in time of extremest famine By the light of Nature Aâ—taxerxes King of Perfia decreed that it should not be lawfull for any man to lay toll tribute or custome upon any Preist Levite Singer Porter or other Minister of the house of God And King Alexander sonne of Antiochus Epiphanes made Jonathan the High Preist a Duke and Governor of a Province He commanded him also to be clothed in purple and caused him to sit by or with his own Royall Person He sent also to the same High Preist a Buckle or collar of Gold to weare even such as were in use with the Princes of the blood And by Proclamation he commanded that no man should molest the High Preist or prefer complaint against him And can it be denied that Melchisedec Preist of the most high God was King of Salem and made so by God himself 16. In the Law the Lord made Aaron more honourable and gave him an heritage He divided unto him the first fruits of the increase and to him especially he appointed bread in abundance For him he ordained glorious and beautifull garments He beautified Aaron with comely ornaments and clothed him with a robe of glory Upon his head he set a miter and a crown of pure gold upon the miter wherein was ingraved Holinesse And this if I mistake not is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Philo tels us was set upon the Preists head and is the cheife ornament of the Eastern Kings The reason he gives for it is this because while the Preist is discharging his dutie he is more eminent then any person whatsoever even then Kings But I rather conceive it was because at that time he represented or prefigured the Royall Preisthood of our Saviour 17. For the Gospel we have prophecies in what state and honor
I will not say that you are Hereticks in this and in other your new-forged doctrines invented to subvert Monarchy and Episcopacy But I shall tell you S. Austins opinion and so leave you to the opinion of the world He in my conceit is an heretick saith that Father who FOR ANY TEMPORALL COMMODITIE and chiefly FOR HIS OWN GLORY AND PREFERMENT doth either raise or follow false and new opinions And are not pelf honour and preferment the cause of all these fidings and seditions in Church and State If these times speak it not I am deceived As for your opinions it hath been sufficiently manifested that they are both false and new 9. Be your opinions what they will their immunities and rights must down or you will fail in a Dilemma The Clergie say you either hold their rights and immunities by Law or otherwise This is not to be denied But what follows upon this If by Law then the Parliament which hath power to ALTER ALL LAWS hath power to alter such Laws as give them their immunities and those Laws altered the immunitie ceaseth and so the Kings ingagement in that particular If not by Law it is but an usurpation You say it and we grant it For truth it is that we claim no rights and immunities but what the ancient and Christian Laws of this Realm have confirmed unto us by Act of Parliament 10. You say that the Parliament hath power to alter all Laws What if a man should say that this assertion is not true I conceive it were no blasphemie Indeed it is a blasphemous position to broach the contrary None but an Atheist dares justifie that the Parliament or any mortall Soveraigntie hath power to alter either the Law of God or the Law of Nature And yet these are Laws And who but an enemy to his Countrey and a friend to confusion dares affirm that the Parliament hath power to alter the Monarchicall or fundamentall Laws of this Kingdom I am sure Justice Jenkins resolves that by the Law of the Land a Parliament cannot alter any morall Law 11. Give me leave to propose your own Argument in terminis in behalf of the City of London The Citizens of London either hold their rights and immunities by law or otherwise If by law then the Parliament which hath power to alter all Laws hath power to alter such Laws as give them their immunities and those Laws altered the immunity ceaseth If their immunitie be not by Law it is an usurpation without just title which upon discovery is null How like you this my rich Masters of London Hath not Mr. Geree set you in the sleep way to ruine But ye may perchance have a confidence that the Parliament will not serve you so Be of that minde still The power it seems is in their hands how they will use it towards you I cannot say How they have used it towards us and towards our good Soveraign ye know And can ye look to fare better Remember what our Saviour saith The servant is no greater then his Master If they have persecuted me they will also persecute you As they have used your Lord and King they will use you The courtesie ye are like to find is that which Vlysses had from Polyphemus to be their last breakfast 12. Well upon the alteration of the Law the immunitie ceaseth and so the Kings ingagement in that particular An Ordinance of Parliament hath absolved many a subject from his Oath of Allegeance and now we shall have a Law to absolve the King from his Oath of protection But I am sure no Law can absolve him from a duty inherent to his Crown And such is the duty of protecting his Subjects from oppression and the Church from sacriledge You cannot therefore possibly absolve him from this ingagement Besides it was never conceived that an Ordinance was of sufficient force to alter a Law The Kings ingagement therefore stands as yet in this particular 13. But suppose there were such a Law as you-speak of could it be just I have learned from your London Ministers that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Law is so called in Greek from rendering to every person what is just meet equall In very deed as the great Lawyers speak Jus idem est quod justum aequum The Law is nothing else but that which is just and right If it be otherwise it is not jus but injuria an injurie but no right You are pleased to acknowledge our privileges to be our rights How then can they be taken from us without injuriâ—â— And it is not lawfull with the supreme Judge for any Prince or Court to deal injuriously with the meanest that are subject to them Justice it is to give to every man his own Injustice then it must needs be to spoil any man of that which is his either by the Laws of God or man Suppose us to be in equall balance with our fellow Subjects and that we have no other right to our lands and privileges but by the Laws of the Realm what reason can be given why we should not peaceably enjoy what is ours by the Law of the Land as well as the rest of our fellow Subjects We have the same right and why not the same protection CHAP. XIV Whether the Lands of the Church may be forfeited by the misdemeanour of the Clergie 1. VVE shall have reason to work us out of our rights and Law to turn us out of the Kings protection But such reason and Law as may with much ease and more equitie be returned upon your selves Your reason is this because these rights were indulged to the Clergie for the personall worth of present incumbents If therefore their successors forfeit them by their ill demeanour these rights may be taken from them This is easily resolved not so easily proved For the truth is these rights were not given to particular persons but to a succession of Bishops and Priests and other Officers for Gods service Or rather these lands and privileges were given to God and the Church for the maintenance of these offices My unworthinesse makes not the office the worse neither can my wickednesse make a forfeiture of Gods inheritance I may with Abiathar justly be deprived of my place and the benefits thereof but the place and the rights thereof fall not into a Premunire a good man even Zadok succeeds this traitor Abiathar and enjoyes not onely the office but all the profits that belonged thereto This was Solomons justice he knew how to distinguish between the faultie Priest and the faultlesse office But you are a rooter if a twig be in fault up with bâ—aiâ—h and root This is your justice But it is far from the juâ— Judge of all the world to root up the righteous with the wicked And surely we ought to endeavour to be righteous and just as our heavenly Father is just 2. Have you
a desire to know what true justice is It is that Quam uniformen ac simplicem proposuit omnibus Deus not what we fancie but what to all men God hath proposed uniform and alike plain and simple such as can admit of no cavill or misconstruction Where this true justice is wanting there can be no Law no right For that which is done by right is done by Law And that which is contrary to right is contrary to Law Nothing can be according to Law but what is according to justice For justice is that which gives lifâ— being to a Law And to say that this or that is an unjust Law is a flat contradiction since it is jus à justicia Law hath the Latin denomination from justice and the Greek from rendering to every man what is just and meet And the Latin word Jus signifies both Law and Right An unjust Statute therfore there may be an unjust Law there cannot be Nâ—n enim jura dicenda suâ—t vel putanda iniqua hominum constituta for the unjust Constitutions of men are not to be called â—r esteemed Laws And they that frame unjust Decrees are not Princes but tyrants neither are their Subjects Free-men but slaves Neither can the State they live in be called a Common-wealth since as Scipio Africanus observes and S. Austin approves Respuplica and res populi the Common-weal and the weal of the people are one and the same And then is it truly a Common-weal Cum benè ac justè geritur when it is fairly and justly governed either by one King or by a few Noblemen or by all the people But where the Government is unjust there 's no Common-wealth It is S. Austins Vbi justicia non est non est Respublica Take away justice and farewell Republick For how can that be for the generall good of all where justice is not equally distributed to all of whatsoever profession 3. But there 's a great deal of difference say you betweene an ingagement made to persons on valuable consideration and that which is made gratis to an office or society subservient to publike good So much difference indeed there is that the setling of land upon a corporation is more firme then any entaile upon a familie because persons dye but Corporations live If gratis make the difference in your opinion it makes none in Law For that land â—â— as much mine which is conferred upon me by deed of gift as that which is conveyed to me by purchase What difference I pray you between lands purchased by the society of Goldsmiths and such as are freely given to that Company Are not the later as much theirs as the purchased lands Are they not alike settled by the same Law justified alike by the same Law And of this very sort is this ingagement to the English Clergie And never a whit the worse for that For of this sort is that magnificent maintenance which was settled upon the tribe of Levi by God himself all given gratis And of this sort are the ingagements made to them by Darius King of Persia And yet whosoever shall ALTER this word let the timber be pulled down from his house and being set up let him be hanged theron And for this let his house be made a dunghill And the God that hath caused his Name to dwell there destroy all KINGS and people that shall put their hand to ALTER and to destroy this house of God Of this sort also were the silver and gold which were freely offered by King Artaxerxes and his Counsellers by the Preists and people to the God of Israel for the house of God Of this sort also was the relaxation of all toll tribute custome to the Preists and Levites a free gift And yet Whosoever will not do the LAW OF GOD AND OF THE KING in these things let judgement be speedily executed upon him whether it be 1 unto death or 2 to banishment or 3 to confiscation of goods or 4 to imprisonment And was not this priviledge granted for the grace and favour that Shesbazzar and Ezra found in the eyes of those Kings Or if you will for their personall worth And yet this grant is called not onely the Law of the King but the Law of God and delivered so to posterity by Ezra aready scribe in the Law of Moses and the penman of God 4. Suppose we also that these rights were indulged for the personall worth of the present incumbents may they therfore be alienated because some succeeding officers demean themselves amisse So say you but you are wide of the marke These lands and immunities were not made to any particular persons but to the office or society or to God for their use What is given to a person for life goes not to the Office but dyes with the person But what is settled upon an Office lives with the Office And I have manifested that Episcopacy is a living Office an Office that must last while Christ hath a Church on earth Persons may forfeit their place and the benefits arising from thence to their incumbency but the Office if necessary must continue Judas by transgression fell from his Office but the Office fell not with him no another a Saint may and must take his Bishopship or Apostleship and the Rights that belong thereto 5. However then some such favours may be granted to an Office with relation to the personall worth of the present incumbent yet being given to promote the usefulnesse of the Office it shall be no movable it is fixed as the Lawyers speak to the freehold and shall abide till the Office be found uselesse and therefore abolisht But till then it is injustice to alter or alienate those rights without which the usefulnesse of that Office cannot be so well promoted Injustice it is to take that away which you never gave and is so usefull for the Office let the Officers fault be what it will It is wild work to punish the Office for the person This is none of Gods course o The sons of Eli were as bad as bad might be God destroyeth them but not the Office neither yet doth he fleece it But before I passe further I must make this observation The quarrell you picke with the Clergie to rob them of their lands and priviledges will suite with any society or Corporation If it shall please your great Masters to say that the Drapers or Grocers or that great Corporation of London have so demeaned themselves that they have forfeited their lands and immunities up they go they shall be in the same state with us They that uphold their power by the sword do usually what they list not what they ought If Parliaments might utterly be abolished for misdemeanour and miscarriage I presume this Iland should never see another Parliament 6. You speake largely of the Parliaments
miters were your aim these you have preached for these you have fought for what would you more All these your Masters have and the Crown to boot and yet not quiet Indeed all these thus gained will not afford a quiet conscience That there may be some shew of legality the King must get the CLERGIES CONSENT and the Bishops must lay down their Miters And then 't will passe for currant that these Acts were passed by their own consent and so no wrong done Volenti non fit injuria True it is undone they are without consent but if they consent they undo themselves and wrong their souls And a madnesse it were to be chronicled if I should cut mine own throat to save my enemie the labour How then can I give away Gods inheritance to the Edomites Ishmalites lest perchance they enter forcibly upon it And yet the Bishops are much to blame if they will not do this if not the Crown will run an hazard and the whole Land be brought to ruine 21. What is to be done in this case Surely if the Bishops knew themselves guilty of the difference betweene the King and his subjects God forbid but they should be willing to part with all they may lawfully part with and be earnest with Jonah that they might be cast into the sea to allay this dangerous storme if that would do it But what is Gods and the Churches they cannot give away or alienate No no saith S. Ambrose I cannot deliver up that which I have received to preserve not to betray The Lands of the Church they may take if they please Imperatori non dono sed non nego I give them not to the Emperour but I deny them not I withstand him not I use no violence What I do is for the Emperours good quia nec mihi expediret tradere necilli accipere because it would be neither safe for me to give them up nor for him to receive them What beseemes a free Preist I advise freely si vult sibi esse consultum recedat à Christi injuriâ If he desire to prosper let him forbear to wrong Christ Observe what belongs to the Church is Christs not the Bishops If any part of it be diminished the wrong is done to God and not to man Ananias layed down his possession at the Apostles feet but kept back part of the price Here was wrong done But to whom think you Not to the Apostles no he lyed not unto men but unto God he couzen'd God and not man This was the moderation of S. Peter and S. Ambrose and we may not be drawn from this moderation Advise your great Masters to embrace so much moderation as to wrong no man but to give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs unto God Till then however they may seem to prosper they will never be secure CHAP. XV. Whether it be lawfull to take away the Bishops lands and to confer them upon the Presbytery 1. THe Church at this present is much like her Saviour hanging between two theeves but in so much the worse case because neither of these are for our Saviour One the Independent is wholly for stripping the Church of all settled maintenance With him the Minister is to rely meerly upon the peoples benevolence And reason good for he is no longer a Minister then it pleaseth that Congregation But the other the Presbyterian is like the chough in the fable that would faine prank up himself with other birds feathers The Bishops lands and revenues must be diverted divided to maintaine Parochiall Pastors so you call them Sacriledge you condemne but theft you like well of so you and your fellow Presbyterians may be gainers Quocunque modo rem is profitable doctrine so you may have it you care not how you come by it nor who smarts for it The man of Jerusalem fel into such hands 2. Prelacy must be abolisht that 's agreed upon So far you go with your Parliament but you are against seizing of the Prelates revenues to private or civill interest That is as I conceive to any particular mans use or for the service of the State as ye call it I am just of your mind and resolve with you that this kind of impropriation could want neither staine nor guilt Such was that in the dayes of K. Henry the eight which was deservedly cried out of all the Christian world over But cry out you and your Mr. Beza with your Stentorian voices upon this detestable sacriledge your good Masters are resolved upon the question and have exposed the Bishops lands to sale So they may have these revenues to dispose of they will venter stain guilt and curse too say what ye can 3. I must confesse you would faine set a faire glosse upon this detestable act You would have those large revenues as you are pleased to call them to be passed over from the Fathers of the Church to the sons of the Church from the Bishops to Parochiall Pastors or Presbyters I call these parochiall Pastors sons of the Church because though they be called Fathers in respect of their Parishioners yet are they but sons in respect of Bishops from whom they have their orders and by whom as Ministers they are begotten For Presbyters have not power to ordain a Deacon much lesse to ordain a Presbyter as hath been already manifested shall be more fully if God give me life and leave to examine the Divine Right of Church Government 4. But since these revenues must be diverted or passed over from the Fathers to the sons to supply them with sufficient maintenance who shall make the conveiance And when the conveiance is drawn with all the skill that may be it is nothing worth till the proprietary the true owner give his consent and confirme it Desire you to know who is the true owner Look upon God he hath accepted them and taken possession of them his they are by deed of gift The Charters usually run thus Concessi offero confirmavi DEO Ecclesiae I grant offer or confirme TO GOD and the Church such and such Lands Mannors or messuages When they are thus offered God accepts of the gift and sets this stamp upon them They offered them before the Lord THEREFORE THEY ARE HALLOWED And again Nothing devoted or separated from the common use that a man shall devote unto the Lord whether it be man or beast or LAND OF HIS INHERITANCE MAY BE SOLD OR REDEEMED every devoted thing is MOST HOLY UNTO THE LORD When it is once seperated from common use it may no more return to common use since as your Geneva Note tells us It is dedicated to the Lord WITH A CURSE To HIM that doth turn it to his private use And of this curse they have been sensible that have turned it to such use Observable therefore it is
Bishops And in both ye lay the whole work upon the Presbytery as if they were the men that could discharge all sacred and Ministerial duties No such matter the contrary is manifested Can any man imagine that a common souldier or an ordinary marriner doth performe the cheife work in an army or ship because they take the greater toile to the outward eye No no it is the Pilot in a Ship the Colonel in a Regiment the Admirall in a Navy and the Generall in an Army that discharge the cheife duties Without these there would be wise worke by Sea or Land Evâ—ry one that can pull a gable or manage an oare is not fit to be a Pilot. Every man that can and dare fight and charge with courage is not fit to be a Commander But the Church is both a ship and an armie And I dare say that every one that can talke lavishly or make a rhetoricall flourish in the Pulpit is not fit to be a Bishop or Governour in the Church of Christ And yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this cause left I thee in Creet that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting ordain Presbyters in every City These are the duties of a Bishop without which the Church will suddenly be out of frame and crumble into nothing 16. In a ship or regiment no man comes to sit at the stern no man attempts the cheife command the first day if he do both ship and regiment suffer for it No they are trained up in their severall professions and by degrees they rise till they come to the highest Thus was it in the ancient and thus is it in the present Church If any be suddenly raised to a Bishoprick it is seldom for the good of that Diocese 17. But you and your fellow Presbyters want congruous and sufficient maintenance down therefore must the Bishops and their Revenues must be divided amongst such good Pastors as you are The Levellers doctrine right the Nobility and Gentrey have too much the godly of the land to little all therefore must be shared that Jack and Tom may have a congrurus maintenance If the great men of the Land will not yeeld to this the Parliament shall be garbled the Nobility and Gentry shall be turned aside and then look for a new Covenant and a fresh extirpation Dukes descend from profane Esau Marquesses Earles Vicounts c. are but heathenish titles invented by the children of darknesse and the children of light defie them What Are we not all Adams sons Are we not brethren in Christ Is it not fit that we should all have share and share like as had the children of Israel in the land of promise As long as the Church onely was strook at it was well liked of but now patience perforce we must be leveled both in Church and State We shall find that there is such a sympathy between them in all Christian Common-wealths that they stand and fall swimme and sink together 18. What talke we of Levelling That is enough to destroy the State and face of a Kingdome But in your project there will be no danger How No danger No danger say you of sacriledge No danger in the subversion of the Church Surely this must be ruine to Episcopacy and consequently to the Church For no Bishop no Church Ecclesia enim super Episcopos constituitur for the Church is founded and settled upon Bishops So S. Cyprian Think not that we exclude Christ Christ it is that layd the foundation and settled the Church so And it is not for man to unsettle it or to lay another a new foundation For other foundation can no man lay then that is layed by Jesus Christ But we are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets And Bishops and Apostles are of the same order they are one and the same Apostolos id est Episcopos Praepositos Dominus elegit So S. Cyprian the Lord made choice of APOSTLES THAT IS OF BISHOPS Prelates When therefore our Saviour founded the Church upon the Apostles he founded it upon Bishops Who dare then after this foundation He that endeavours it doth not build but destroy the Church 19. Is there no danger of sacriledge in robbing father and mother The Bishop your father and the Church your mother For as in the Church you were born anew of water and the Holy Ghost so if you be a Presbyter as a Presbyter you have your being from a Bishop or else you have no such being But you return that ye rob not the Church for you intend that these revenues shall be settled upon Church-men that is upon Presbyters Suppose you rob but one but your Father the sacriledge is detestable For doth not the Lord say Who so robbeth his father or mother and saith it is no transgression the same is the companion of a murtherer But to make the sacriledge more odious I shall manifest that ye have not onely robbed your Father but your Mother also The Bishop your father is the husband to his particular Church If then you rob him of his meanes who will succeed in his roome and become an husband to that Church For though there be a thousand Presbyters in a Diocese yet if she be without a Bishop that Church is a widow So that great Councell of Chalcedon Thus ye rob the Bishop of his means that Church of her husband And wile a widow she can bring forth but a bastard brood Consider that 20. Upon these motives I must tell you that if his Majestie shall gratifie either the Parliament or the Assembly in the abolition of Episcopacy and in sacrificing the Church-lands to your or their sacrilegious avarice it will be such a work for which following generations shall have just cause to pitie lament him that so good a man should either be cheated or enforced into so foule a sin His children and the whole Kingdome would rue it and the generations to come unlesse the world turn Presbyterian will speak of Him as of King Henry the eight with this difference that King Henry wilfully plunged himself into this sin and King Charles was driven into it by an Atheisticall and bloody faction But I am confident his Majestie is seasoned with better principles he knows it was no excuse for Saul to confesse that he had sinned because he was afraid of the people and obeyed their voice not Gods directions This King knew Gods Word rejected it God therefore rejected him from being King and his seed from the throne A lamentable case to be frighted by a multitude out of Gods favour and the Crowne But I hope you have no Saul in hand Our good Kings Crowne you may cause to totter but not his resolution Ye may and have robbed him of his Prerogatives revenues and liberty but you cannot imprison or force his conscience that will injoy her ancient priviledges freedome
and these disasters shall end in a Crowne of glory His memory shall be honoured in our Annals and his posterity flourish in these thrones Amen Amen CHAP. XVI How far forth the King ought to protect the Church and Bishops 1. IT is confessed to my hand that the King is ingaged to his power to protect the Bishops and their priviledges as every good King ought in right to protect defend the Bishops Churches under their Government Reason requires no more and Religion requires so much For by that God whom we serve Kings are made Guardians and nursing fathers to the Church and by the same God this ingagement is put upon them Not by man not by the Author as you seem to intimate nor yet by the Bishops One of the Bishops indeed in the behalfe of his brethren and the whole Clergie humbly beseecheth his Majestie to protect and defend to them and to the Churches committed to their charge all Canonicall priviledges and due Law and Justice The King with a willing and devout heart premiseth to be their protector and Defender to his power by the assistance of God And afterwards at the Communion table he makes a solemne Oath upon Gods own book to observe the Premises This ingagement then is not put upon the King but with a willing heart he takes it upon himselfe acknowledging that he ought to do so if he be a good King Yea saith Sir Edward Coke the King is bound and sworn to the observation and keeping of Magna Charta His Majestie then is but intreated to do what he is sworne and bound to do And since sworne and bound he may not with a safe conscience give them up to the wild boares of the forrest to root up the plants or suffer the wild beasts of the field to devour this Vine which the Lords right hand hath planted 2. That the King is bound no further to exercise his power in the protection of the Church then he can do it without sinning against God is most undoubtedly true and it were not the part of a Christian to desire more For we know that the King receives his power from God which is to be used not against but for God Not to protect the Church to his power is to break his Oath it is to desert that trust which God hath committed to his charge and is not this to sin against God In the discharge of this dutie he is so far from being injurious to the rest of his people that if he should forbear it it would prove the greatest mischeife that can be imagined to his people and to their posterity in their soules in their estates and a perpetuall infamie to this Nation I need not prove it now it is already done Cap. 8. Sect 10. 11. c. 3. That his sacred Majestie hath interposed his Authority for the Bishops put forth all the power he hath to preserve them is that which vexeth your confederacy And yet you cannot deny but that every good King is bound in right to do so What we ought to do is our bounden duty and what we do in right is justly done Oh that this had been done in the right time Indeed he is not onely bound but he finds it more then necessary to protect and preserve them for in protecting them he protects himself his throne and his posterity Alas he was strook at thorough the Bishops sides His wise Father descried this long since No Bishop no King What the Father spake his Sonne our good King hath found true by woefull experience His Crowne hath sunke with their Miters 4. Well by your own confession what our gracious King hath done is right and what good Kings are bound to do to the extent of their power Thus our good King is justified by his enemies as our Saviour was by Judas If his Majestie have endeavoured to do that which is right what are they that have hindered him from doing it Have not they done wrong How can they excuse themselves before God or man that have so manacled our betrayed Soveraigne that he cannot do what good Kings are bound in right to do Is this to be good Is this to be just Then have all the Saints of God been utterly deceived 5. If after all this He must perforce let the Bishops fall you and your Schisme have much to answer for that have driven him to this necessity You seem to pitie his good subjects who with their blood have endeavoured to support Episcopacy Their swords were not drawn to maintaine this Government or the Religion established they never learned to fight for Religion What they did was done in submission to his Majesties just commands and to manifest their allegiance But if these be good that have indangered their lives to uphold Bishops what are they I beseech you that have spent their blaod to root them out Surely in justifying the former Mr. Geree hath condemned the latter and when the waspes find it he must look to his eares 6. I must confesse it is an hard case for one man to ingage his life for the maintenance of other mens privileges But who did so Not a man ingaged himself but the Kings command the Oath of Allegiance and the Laws of the Land ingaged every good Subject to assist his Soveraign to the utmost The King according to his Oath endeavoured to maintain the Laws of the Land to protect the Members of both Houses driven from Parliament to support the Bishops and to suppresse those seditious and sacrilegious persons which plotted and covenanted the ruine of Religion root and branch Though much the greatest part of the Nobility Gentrie and learned in the Law were deservedly moved to see Majestie dethroned and blasphemed Religion spurned at and vilified the Fathers of the Church scandalized and persecuted the Laws of the Kingdom and liberties of the Subject sleighted and trampled on yet not a man of these took up the Sword till he was commanded by him to whom the Laws of the Land and the Word of God have committed the power of the Sword This may not be called backwardnesse or unwillingnesse but pious discretion which ever waits upon the Soveraigns call When therefore His Majesty had set up his Standard I may truly say the governors of our Israel offered themselves WILLINGLY among the people they did the King service to the utmost Had there not been a back-doore to let in a forrein Nation to divide the Kings forces had not some of the Nobles of Judah conspired with Tobiah held intelligence with him and acquainted him with Nehemiahs secrets there never had been so many Thanksgiving dayes nor so much boasting that God prospered the cause God suffered David his own chosen servant his anointed and a man after his own heart to be hunted as a Partrige upon the mountains to be frighted from his throne and to live like a
forlorn man and yet in his good time he restored him to his Scepter in peace and subdued the people to him 7. And whereas you term them others privileges as if they concerned no man but the Clergie I dare boldly say they concern every man as he is a member of this Church and Realm If we have sown unto you spirituall things is it a great matter if we reap your carnall things And if we reap not your carnall things how shall we sowe unto you spirituall things This is worthy of consideration unlesse you have layed aside all care of the soul Have we some privileges that the Laity have not They are not ours alone they are every mans that enters into Orders And Orders are indifferently proposed to all of all families whatsoever so they be sufficiently qualified High and lowe noble and ignoble have reaped the benefit of these privileges I have known some of high birth in Orders and some of good rank that have taken Sanctuary under a Priests coat And we read of a young man of the tribe of Judah of the most remarkable family that was glad to turn Priest and to serve by the yeer for ten shekels of silver a double suit of apparell and his victuals If then our Calling suffer all families suffer in it and with it 8. But what if the Laws of the Land what if Magna Charta do oblige all men to stand up for the due observation of these privileges If so then must every man readily acknowledge that all good Subjects are bound to obey His Majestie when he commands that which the Law requires View we then the words of that Great and justly magnified Charter which are these Reserving to all Arch-bishops Bishops Earls Barons and all persons as well Spirituall as Temporall all their liberties and free customes which they have had in times past And all these customes and liberties aforesaid which we have granted to be holden within this our Realm as much as appertaineth to us and our Heirs we shall observe And ALL MEN of this our Realm as well SPIRITUALL AS TEMPORALL as much as in them is SHALL likewise OBSERVE THE SAME AGAINST ALL PERSONS Mark that are we not all both spirituall and temporall bound to maintain each others privileges as much as in us lies 9. I know you will return that Abbots and Priors are provided for by the same Law and yet they have since been taken away by Act of Parliament I confesse it but I shall desire you to observe in the first place how they prospered that were the contrivers and procurers of that Act. 2ly I cannot but take notice that you with your Master Beza call that dissoâ—ution detestandum sacrilegium detestable sacrilege and such as was cried out of all the Christian world over It is not therefore to be drawn into president 3ly consider I pray you that they who did so are stiled Enemies of our Soveraign Lord the King and his Realm 4ly that great Councell of Chalcedon consisting of above 600. Bishops resolves that no Monastery consecrated with the Bishops liking may be turned to a secular dwelling And those that suffer any such thing are lyable to the Canonicall censures 5ly you will I hope make a difference between our Saviours institution and mans invention Bishops are of our Saviours own institution but Abbots and Priors are titles and orders of mans invention And yet hospitalitie and alms and other works of charity for which these fraternities were erected failed much with them How those means were imployed I shall not enquire but I am certain that good and pious men have wished that the abuses had been pruned off and that the lands had been disposed of according to the Doners intentions This indeed had been pietie not sacrilege 10. How oft have the Kings of this Realm ingaged themselves to observe Magna Charta and to maintain the rights and liberties of the Church Are not these the words of the Statute We take the Prelates and Clergie with their possessions goods and chattels INTO OUR SPECIALL PROTECTION AND DEFENCE The Princes of this Land have bound themselves strictly to keep this Great Charter and have provided that if any other shall do or procure to be done any thing contrary to this Charter it is to be accounted void as soon as procured Take the words of the Charter We have granted unto them the Spirituall and Temporal persons of this Realm on the other part that neither we nor our Heirs shall procure or do any thing whereby the liberties in this Charter shall be infringed or broken But suppose they shall make any such grant through ignorance wilfulnesse or evill counsell shall it be of force The Law saith no. For it follows immediately And if any thing be procured BY ANY PERSON contrary to the premisses it shall be holden OF NO FORCE NE EFFECT You and your great contrivers what have ye laboured for all this while What have ye fought for what have ye shed so much blood for For wind nothing but wind For all the Westminster Orders and Ordinances contrary to this Charter shall be holden of no force ne effect You had best then keepe your paper for a more necessary use 11. And yet you tell his Majestie that it is not equall to ingage the lives of some to uphold the honour of others Is it equall then I beseech you to ingage the lives of some to destroy the honour and estate of others All this while you have been on the destructive part all for rooting up what the Lords right hand hath planted and for alienating the Lords inheritance And that ye might effect what ye have subtilly projected ye have ingaged the lives of many who were very unwilling to uphold the honour of some at Westminster that had overlashed ran themselves upon dreadfull rocks I would to God the Commons of this Kingdome would lay it to heart how cruell ye have been to many thousands to be indulgent to a few to uphold the honour of a few Consider how many thousands in England and Ireland have been plundered sequestred imprisoned maimed and murdered because they would not submit to the illegall unjust and irreligious decrees of the men at Westminster A compleat Mercurius Rusticus will make after ages stand amazed and their hearts bleed within them to consider that such a Nation as this so blessed with peace and plentie should be so miserably deluded as to undoe themselves willfully and sheath their swords into one anothers bowels to save a Lord and five Members from tryall by Law 12. That you may perswade us some way or other that the King ought to give up the Bishops and their lands since he hath hitherto protected them to the utmost of his power you argue by supposition Suppose say you a King put a Commander into a City and give him an Oath to maintaine the priviledges of it and
dutie to be Master of his negative voice and to deny consent If he deny consent he does his dutie observes his Oath If he yeeld assent he breaks his oath and failes of his dutie And this will prove no lesse then sin I have already demonstrated that Episcopacy is agreable to the word of God and that it is the Institution of Christ himself It is sinne therefore to abolish it or to consent to the abolishing thereof You neither have nor can justifie the contrary out of holy writ or from the ancient and Apostolike Church And yet the Observations upon the Ordinance for Ordination have been extant in Print above these three years But you and your Assembly Rabbines take no notice of it because you have not what to say against it 19. But though you have neither Scripture Councels nor Fathers for the abolishing of Episcopacy yet you have reason grounded upon policy to worke his Miajestie to yeeld to this abolition For say you he cannot now deny consent without sin It seemes then he might without sin deny consent heretofore but not now And why not now as well as heretofore Because say you if he consent not there will evidently continue such distraction and confusion as is most repugnant to the weale of his people which he is bound by the Rule of Government and his Oath to provide for Thus sin shall vary at your pleasure sin it shall be now that was none heretofore That shall be sin in King Charles which was vertue and piety in Queen Elizabeth and all their religious ancesters 20. Where no Law is there is no transgression Before then you prove it to be a sin you must prove it to be against some Law either of God or man Not against the Law of God that 's already proved Not against the Law of man since no man can sin against that Law to which he is not subject The Laws are the Kings he gives Laws to his subjects not his subjects to him and we know no Law of his against Bishops Indeed the Laws of this Land are so far from the extirpation of Bishops that the fundament all Law of this Kingdom approves of them They then that are enemies to Bishops are enemies to the fundamentall Law of this Kingdom And what is fundamentall is in and of the foundation If then a Law be made to extirpate Bishops it grates upon the foundation it is against the fundamentall Law of this Realme it contradicts that Law of Laws the word of God Besides we are assured by that learned in the Law Justice Jenkins that it is against the Kings Oath and the Oaths of the Houses to alter the Government for Religion But an alteration of this Government must necessarily follow upon the abolition of Episcopacy Yea with Bishops not onely the Church and Religion will be ruined but the very Government and Laws of the Kingdom will be so confounded that the learned in the Law will not know where to find Law They must burn their old books and begin the world upon the new model All this will amount to no small sin it will be to the shame of this Land to the ruine of those two noble professions Divinity and Law and to the common misery of the people 21. These reasons premised I shall justly return your own words upon your self in this manner It is not in the Kings power to consent to the abolition of Episcopacy because he cannot now yeeld consent without sin For if he consent there will evidently follow such distraction and confusion as is most repugnant to the weal of his people which he is bound by the Rule of Government and his Oath to provide for I say so and true it is because it is evident to every discerning eye that there are as many and those more considerable that are cordially for Episcopacy and Common Prayer as are against them Indeed they are not so factious so mutinous and bloody as the other What multitudes are there in this Kingdom that mourn and grieve to see Religion so opprest so trampled on and almost breathing out her last In truth it is palpable that these seditious and irreligious courses have ingendred and propagated and will continue such distraction and confusion in Church and State as is most repugnant not onely to the present but to the eternall wedl and salvation of his people both which he is bound to provide for but more especially for the later 22. And whereas you say Such distraction and confusion will continue unlesse Episcopacy be abolished if seems you are resolved to continue these distractions But God knows and your words testifie that it is not the calling or the office of a Bishop that is offensive it is their honour and their wealth which you aim at these with their revenues must be shared amongst you of the Presbyterian faction and then all shall be well Till then we must look for nothing but fire and sword Hence it evidently appears that neither Episcopacy nor the Kings dissent but your ambition and avarice have been the true cause of these distractions and combustions Such a sedition as this there was in the time of Moses about the Priesthood because every man might not sacrifice as when and where he pleased Because Corah might not wear a Miter and go into the most holy place as well as Aaron And yet who dares say that the Priestood was the cause of those uproars 23. That insurrection was against Moses and Aaron against Prince and Priest but against the Prince for the Priests sake because the Prince would not endure that every one should meddle with the Priests office or strip him of his means and honour That conspiracie was linsie-woolsie loomed up of Clergie and Laitie Korah the son of Levi was the ring-leader and with him two hundreth and fiftie of his own Tribe To these were joyned Dathan and Abiram great Princes and men of renown such as were eminent in blood and of the tribe of Reuben And was not the crie the same then that is now Moses and Aaron Prince and Priest ye take too much upon you seeing all the congregation is holy every one of them and the Lord is among them Wherfore then lift ye your selves above the congregation of the Lord The Prince and Priest did but their duty and yet are obbraided with pride God raised them to their places and they are charged to raise themselves But Moses justly retorts upon them what they had falsly cast upon him Ye take too much upon you ye sons of Levi. What Is it not enough for you that God hath separated you from the multitude that he hath taken you neer himself to do the service of the Lords tabernacle but you must have the Priests office But you must be offering incense as well as the High Priest The Priest of the second Order would needs be equall
lesse then God onely That he is in the power or under the Command of God onely from whom he is the second and after whom he is the first Optatus saies as much Super Imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit Imperatorem There is none above the Emperor but God alone who made him Emperor And what the Emperor was in the Empire the same is the King of England within his own Dominions For the Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been in subjection to no Realm but IMMEDIATELY SUBJECT TO GOD AND TO NONE OTHER Hence is it called an Empire and the Imperiall Crown of this Realm 7. The Greeke Commentators are so full for obedience to Kings that they will not yeeld that an Apostle may be freed from this subjection This doctrine S. Paul justifies I stand saith he at Caesars Judgment seat WHERE I OUGHT TO BE JUDGED And after this appeal he resolves that no man not the President himself may judge him or deliver him to be judged by any other Nay after this the President himself might not release him So King Agrippa Had not this man appealed to Caesar he might have been set at liberty Are not these strong evidences of the Kings Supremacy That learned Grotius gives a sure rule whereby to know on whom the Supremacy is settled That saith he is the Supreme civill power cujus actus alterius juri non subsunt whose actions are not subject to any other mans censure or Law But such is the King Qui sub nullo alio sed sub solo Deo agit who lives in subjection to none but to God onely For who may say unto him what doest thou When therefore David had sinned he cries out unto the Lord In te solum peccavi against thee onely have I sinned thou onely canst call me to account Hence is that resolution of all the learned of this Church in the time of King Henry VIII among whom were Bishop Carnmer and Bishop Latymer Although Princes do otherwise then they ought to do yet God hath assigned NO JUDGES OVER THEM in this world but will have the judgement of them reserved to himself And the judgement of the great Lawyers in France is this Rex solus THE KING ONELY IS THE SUPREME LORD of all the Subjects aswell Lay as Ecclesiasticall within his own Dominions All other men live under judgment cum deliquerint peccant Deo peccant legibus mundi and when they offend they sinne against God and against the Laws of the Land 8. But I know you relye more upon the Laws of this Land then upon the Laws of God and upon our Lawyers rather then the Fathers and out best Divines I shall therefore transgresse my profession shew you what their opinion is This Realme say the Statutes is an Empire whereof the KING IS THE SUPREME HEAD and consisteth of the Spiritualty and Temporaâ—ty OVER WHICH THE KING HATH WHOLE POWER AND JURISDICTION Are you of this Realm or are you not Iâ—â—on be then are you either of the spiritualty or temporaâ—ty And if of either then wholly under the Kings power The whole power is his Why seek you to rob him of it Of this Realme the King not the Parliament is the Supreme head One head not two He that makes two Supremacies makes a Bul and he that seâ—â— two heads upon one body frames a monster 9. Indeed they are so far from having any Supremacy that they are Subjects as well in as out of Parliament When King Edward the Confessor had all the Earles and Barons of the Kingdome assembled in Parliament he cals them all his leige men My Lords you that are MY LEIGE MEN. Perchance you may say the King calls them so but that makes them not so You shall therefore have their own acknowledgement in Parliament thus We your most loving faithfull and obedient SUBJECTS REPRESENTING THE THREE ESTATES OF YOUR REALME of England Thus the whole Parliament united into one body False therefore is that proposition that the King is Major singulis sed minor universis greater then any and lesse then all the Inhabitants of this Realme For here the representative body of the three Estates of this Kingdome assembled in Parliament in their highest capacitie acknowledge themselves to be the Queens Subjects and her most obedient Subjects because to her they thus assembled did justly owe both subjection and obedience which none that are supreme can owe. And these are due to his Majestie à singulis ab universis from one and all from every one singly and from all joyntly 10. Secondly when they are assembled in Parliament they Petition as well as out of Parliament This is evident by the Acts themselves wherein we read that our Soveraigne Lord the King by the assent aforesaid and at the PRAIER OF HIS COMMONS The same words are repeated 2 Hen. 5. c. 6 9. And in Queen Elizabeths time the Parliament humble themselves in this manner That it MAY PLEASE YOUR HIGHNESSE that it may be enacted c. I might come down lower but I shall satisfie my selfe with Sir Edward Cokes report who assures us that in ancient times all Acts of Parliament were IN FORME OF PETITIONS Mr. Geree himselfe acknowledgeth they should be so now The King saith he may passe a Bill for the abolition of Episcopacy when HIS HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT think it convenient and PETITION FOR IT Either then the Houses have no Supremacy oâ— else they humble themselves too low when they Petition His Majestie But this Supremacy of Parliament is one of the new lights that were lately wafted into this Land in a Scottish Cookboate 11. Thirdly what Supremacy can there be in those that may not lawfully convene or consult till the King summon them and must dissolve and depart when the King command The Writ it self runs thus prelatis Magnatibus nostris QUOS VOCARI FECIMUS To the Prelates and our Nobles WHOM WE HAVE CAUSED TO BE CALLED And Sir Robert Cotton out of Elie Register tels us that Parliaments were assembled at first as now Edicto Principis not at their own but at the Kings pleasure And Sir Edward Coke assures me that None can begin continue or dissolve the Parliament but BY THE KINGS AUTHORITY And let me tell you that if his Majestie shall withdraw himself from Parliament it is not for your great Masters to inforce him to return but to pray his presence and to inform his Majestie that if he forbear his presence among them fourty dayes that then by an ancient Statute they may return absque domigerio Regis to their severall homes This is all they ought or may do 12. Fourthly whereas according to your words the Parliament is to regulate all other Courts the Court of Parliament is to be regulated by the
Supremacy Not in this kingdom it must be looked for some where else 17. Secondly Ea quae sunt Jurisdictionis pacis ad nullum pertinent nisi ad regiam dignitatem Those things which concerne Jurisdiction and Peace belong to none but onely to the Royall dignity The same he affirmes of restraint and punishment These then belong not to the Parliament since that cannot chalenge Royall dignity Where then is their Supreme power All power almost consists in Jurisdiction ordering of Peace and punishing offenders And all these are flowers of the Crown Yea the power of the Militia of eoyning of mony of making Leagues with forreigne Princes the power of pardoning of making of Officers c. All Kings had them the said Powers have no beginning If then all these and many more are peculiar to Soveraignty what is left for the Parliament Why surely if you will to be the Kings Supreme or chief Councell and his capitall Court This they are and this is an high honour to them being rightly used 18. Thirdly Omnis sub Rege ipse sub nullo Every one is under the King but the king is under none but God onely The Supremacy then must needs be in the king who is superior to all but the God of heaven And over the Supreme there can be no earthly superior To admit a comparative above the superlative in the same kinde is a solecisme not onely in Grammar but in reason and Religion Yet though no superior there may perchance be an equall to this supreme There may so but not within his own Dominions Rex enim non habet parem in regno suo The King saith the Statute hath no Peer in his Land And if Justice Jenkins may be heard he tels us that the Houses in Parliament confesse the King to be above the representative Body of the Realm They are not therefore his equals and so have no Supremacy When I can be perswaded that any or all the Members of the Body are equall to the Head then I shall be apt to beleeve that there may be two Supremacies in a Kingdom But I am confident that a wife may as safely admit of two husbands as a Kingdom of two Supremes For the king is Sponsus Regni that Husband who by a Ring is espoused to this Realm at his Coronation But a Ring is superstitious and husbands are grown out of date The onely thing in request is liberty to take or leave what and whom we please 19. But the Parliament is the supreme Court by which all other Courts are to be regulated what say we to that This I say that the Parliament is Curia capitalis the supreme Court of this Kingdom and yet his Court it is whose Courts the rest are It is therefore called Curia Regis and Magnum Concilium Regis The kings Court the kings great Councell yea and the kings Parliament Sir Rob. Cotton justifies it from the Parliament Rowles Henry IV. began his first Parliament Novemb. 1. The King began his second Parliament Jan. 20. And of Henry VII thus It is no doubt but he would have been found as frequent in HIS GREAT COUNCELL OF PARLIAMENT as he was in the Starre-Chamber And this very Parliament how oft have they called themselves The kings great Councell They are so and they are no more But why am I so carefull to heap up instances Your self call it His the Kings Parliament p. 2. and His Houses of Parliament p. 8. 20. If then in your sense we take the Houses without the King there is no Supremacy in them either severally or joyntly since they are but Subjects and the representative body of Subjects And under this consideration they cannot regulate other Courts unlesse the king give them power to do so But take the Houses with the king and then it is most true that there is a Supremacy in the Parliament and that it hath power to regulate all other Courts But this Supremacy it hath by and from the king and from no other We therefore professe with that learned Mr of the Law that the Parliament is the HIGHEST AND MOST HONORABLE AND ABSOLUTE COURT of Justice of England CONSISTING OF THE KING the Lords of Parliament and the Commons The Lords are here divided into two sorts viz. SPIRITUALL AND TEMPORALL When such an Assembly meets and each House and the Members thereof keep themselves within their proper limits I dare be bold to say that this Court is assembled as it ought for provision for support of the State in men and money and well ordering of the Church and Common-wealth and determining of such causes which ordinary Courts nesciebant judicare were not skilfull to determine These are the causes of such Assemblies 21. But truly when they are thus assembled I do not conceive that they have power to make or disanull all Laws at pleasure but upon just and necessary occasion For there is great danger in altering Laws without urgent cause Innovation in government makes an alteration in State sudden alterations are not for the safety either of bodies naturall or bodies politicke Observe what the mirror of his time K. Iames speaks We are not ignorant of the inconveniences that do arise in Government by admitting Innovasion in things once settled by mature deliberation And how necessary it is to use constancy in the upholding of the publik determinations of State For that such is the unquietnesse and unstedfastnesse of some dispositions affecting every yeer new formes of things as if they should be followed in their unconstancy WOULD MAKE ALL ACTIONS OF STATE RIDICULOUS and contemptible Whereas the STEDFAST MAINTAINING OF THINGS BY GOOD ADVICE ESTABLISHED IS THE WEALE OF ALL COMMON-WEALTHS There is often danger seldom pleasure in the change of Laws Truly since the Laws-have been neglected and varietie of Ordinances have supplied their roome We have been fed with the bread of tears we have had plentiousnesse of tears to drinke We are become a very striffe unto our neighbours and our enemies laugh us to scorne 22. That the King in Parliament doth usually make or alter Laws as the necessity of the times and common good of his Subjects require is no rare thing Yet this ought to be done with much care and deliberation that so nothing be enacted which may be justly greivous or destructive to his leige people Sithence according to your determination He cannot lawfully make any ingagement to any against the Laws and LEGALL RIGHTS of others Your reason is because that were not Cedere jure suo sed alieno a parting with his own but with other mens rights The same reason will hold against the Parliament Suppose we should grant what we may not that the King and Parliament are equals it follows necessarily that whatsoever is unlawfull for one is unlawfull for any other of the same ranke
alienation of their Lands Since by your confession he cannot lawfully make any ingagement to any against the Laws and legall rights of others And the King is so just that he will never do what he cannot lawfully do Observe the plagues of such men as are never touched with the miseries of others They commonly fall under the same judgment which others unpittied have tasted before D. Corn. Burges Fire of the Sanct. p. 50. 51. FINIS Errata PAg. 6. l. 34 Melsalinus r. Messalinus p. 20. l. 34. Cardiner r. Gardiner P. 21. l. 33. let r. set p. 30. l. 21. perpetull r perpetuall p. 31. l 29. cut off r. cast off p. 33. l. 20 teneatur r. tenetur Ib. l. 23 possit r. posse Ib. in marg l 12 quisquis r. quisque p. 34 l. 12. are you of r. you are of Ib l. 16. Nation r. Nation into Ib l. 3â— disolate r. desolate p. 35 l 29. VIII r. VII p 38 l o Rives r River p. 44. l. 7 depends r. depend Ib. l. 17. obstinentis r. obtinentis p. 51 in marg l. 13 concessimo r. concessimus p 53. l. nlt. distructive r. destructive p. 54. l. 10. not upon r. not set upon p 55 l. 25. abolishet r. abolished p. 50. l 2. Overnor r. Governor p. 60 l. 21. changing terme r. changing the terme Ib l 32. 1. and the Ministerial p. 6â— l. 2. yet r. that p. 83 l ult ttle r. little p 84 l. 34. distroied r destroyed p. â—â—0 l. penult regular r. regulate p. 111. l. 18. the Justice r. the Justices p. 113 l. 17. after r. alter p 116. in marg l. 24. other r. others a I. D. P. 4. Psal 39. 4. c 2 Sam 1â— 9. d Psaâ— 89. 50. e 1. Reg. 2. 44. 45. f The fire of the Sanctuary p. 22â— g Ib. p. 272. h Nathan Ward p. â—lt i Aâ— 8. 23. k Ib v. 21. l Ib. v. 23. m Ib v. 22. Episcopus a I. G. p. 1. b Mr. Challenorâ— Speech c I G p. 1. d S. Luk. 1 51. 52. e Iâ— v. 49. 31. f Ex. 18. 21. g Ex. 23. 2. h That such an union is â—â—nâ—â—pâ—â—siâ—iâ—e â—â—pâ—â—siâ—iâ—e 〈…〉 the King condescend in the point of Episcopacy l. G. p. 1. i For the King to condescend renitente conscientiâ though it might gratifie us it would be sinfull to himself I. G. p. 1. k I. G. p. 1. l The oath taken at the Kings Coronation hath been prest by some learned Pens with that probability c. I. G. p. 1. m Neither have they that I know received anâ— satisfactory answer in Print I G p. 1. n It may â—e a work worthy some pains to resolve this case and clear your objâ—ctions that while they stand unanswered cast an ill reflect on both upon the King in condescending to abrogate Episcopacy and the Parliament in pressing him to it I. G p. 1. o The bond of the Kâ—ngs Oath may be taken off two waies Either by clearing the unlawfulnesse of it I. G. p. 1. p Though it be granted that Episcopacy is lawfull yet notwithstanding that his Oath the King without impeachment may consent to the abrogation of Episcopacy I G. p. 2. a It was vinculum iniquitatis and so void the fiâ—st day for qui jurat in iniquum obligatur in contrarium â— G p. 1. b I. G. p. 1. c I. G p. 1. d 1 S Pet. 2. 13 14. e I. G. p. 9. f Solemn League and Covenant â— G. p. 1. h Ier. 11. 19. i S. Pet 2. 25. * As Scripture is the Rule of Church Government so Christ is the sole root and fountain whâ—nce it originally flows I. D. p. 50 k Ambr. de dignit Sacerd c. 5. l Hieron in Mat. 10. 8. m Genâ—ad apud Balsam p. 1085. n S Ioh 20. 21. o Hilar in Mat. can 10 p Cyril in Io. l. 12 c. 55. q Hieron iâ— Gal. 1. â—9 r Calvin in 1 Cor 4. 9. Å¿ Wal Messal p. 41. t Theo in Phi. lip 11. k Ignat ad Eph. l Theodoret in 1 Tim. 3 1. m Walo Messal p â—0 43. n Iâ— p. 53. o Timothâ—m Apostoli munere officio functus est Ib p 42. 52. p Ib. p. 47 50. 244. q Smect Answ to the Remonst p. 21. 26. r Epaphroditus by S â—auâ—â—â— â—â— called the Apostle of the Pâ—â—lippians bâ—causâ— hâ— had sent him to the Philippians to confirm their Church and therein to ordain them â—resbyters and Bishops Walo Messal p. 58. Å¿ Tit. 1. â— t Ephes 4 11. 1 Cor. 12 28. x S. Luk. 22 19. 1 Cor. 11. 24 25. y â— Joh. 6. 53. z Ordinance for Ordinat p 2. a Ib. p 13. b I. G. p. 1. c Psal 89 50. d S. Jude v. 3 e I. G p 1. f I. G p 1. g I G. p 2. h I. â— â— â— i Ordinance for Ordinat p 2. k I. G. p. 2. l Rom. 13. 1. m Thou couldst have no power at all agâ—â—nst me except it were given thee from above S. Jo. 19. 11. n Ier. 20. 2. o Ier. 19. 14. p Prov. 8. 15. q Ier. 26. 23. r Ier. 32. 3. Å¿ 1 Reg. 2. 27. 31. t Ib. v. 26. u 1 Tim. 1. 20. x Gal 1. 9. y 2 Tim. 3 2. c. z I. G. p. 1. a Ib b Act 1. 22. c Act 1. 20. d Presbyters are by Christs warrant in Scripture indued with power to rule in their own Congregations as well as to preach See 1 Tim. 3. 5 5. 21. Heb. 13. 17 1 Thes 5. 12. I G. p. 2. e 1 Tim. 3. 5. f 1 Tim. 3. 1. g Ib. v. 4. h I. D. p. 12â— i 1 Tim. 3 12 k 1 Tim. 5 2â— l Heb. 13. 17. m Ib n Câ—nt 6. 3. o Episcopus est presâ—ytâ—â—is prâ—positus Cypr ep 10 p 2 Cor â— 23. Philip. 2. 25 q 1 Tim 5. 22. Tit 1. 5. r 2 Tim. 3. 5. T it 2. 15. 3. 10. Å¿ 1 Tim 5. 19. t 1 Tim. 1. 3. u Tit. 1. 11. x Tit. 3. 9. y 1 Tim 6. 3. 5. z Beza Piscat in loc a Si qui cum EpiscoÌ„pâ— non sunt in Ecclesid non sunt Cypr. ep 69 n. 31. b 1 Thes 5. â—2 c Hilar. Dial. Rom. in loc apud Ambros d Theodoret in 1 â—heâ— 5. 12. e Calvin in loc f Caluin Iâ—stit â— â— c. 3. Sect. 15. g As Prelacy stood in â—nglâ—nd the Presbyters were â—xâ—â—â—â—ed from all socâ—â—tie in Rule I. G p. 2. h Which was much more preiudiciall to the dignity lioerty of the Ministery the Presbyters wâ—re subiected to a Lay Chancelor I. G. p. 2. i The Clergie their priviledgeâ— are subiect to the Parliament I. G. p. 7. k Greg Naz. orat 52. â— 15. l Anâ— was not here â—â—urpation against Gods direction I. G. p. 2. m I. G. p. 6. n Though this way oâ— iâ—validating the Kâ—â—gs oath be most satisfactory to some I. G. p. 2. o 1 Tim. 6. 5. p 1 Tim â— 8. q Gen. noâ—e