Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	king_n	realm_n	statute_n	7,701	5	8.0873	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16615	A myld and iust defence of certeyne arguments, at the last session of Parliament directed to that most Honorable High Court, in behalfe of the ministers suspended and deprived &c: for not subscribing and conforming themselues etc Against an intemperat and vniust consideration of them by M. Gabril Powell. The chiefe and generall contents wherof are breefely layd downe immediatly after the epistle.	Bradshaw, William, 1571-1618.	1606 (1606)	STC 3522; ESTC S104633	109,347	172

for want of matter of justification or for want of the truth of unjust oppression I meane only by the Prelats but because they haue not been admitted to prosecute the iustice of the land nor to call in question the proceedings of their ordinaryes who haue been hitherto both Agents and Iudges both accusers and advocats in their owne cases against them And especially because upon pretense of a Canon lately made repugnant to the lawes statutes and customes of the Realme they be not suffered by the Archbishops Iudge ad quem to plead and to prosecute their appeales and to declare their innocency according to the auncient laudable and common usage and iustice of the land unto which grevance also many more exorbitant injustices by the Prelats heereafter mentioned may be added Let the answerer therfore vnderstand that som Ordinaryes in their publike senteÌ„ces The Bishop of Lincolne against the the Ministers of Leicestershire haue most uniustly charged some Ministers with denyall of the oth to the Kings supremacy which notwithstanding divers tymes before they had willingly sworne vnto and which at the very instance of pronouncyng the sentence they offred before their Ordinary to sweare unto agayne And not onely thus lesingly to make the Persons of the sayd Ministers more odious to our most Christian King his State and all his people in their publike sentences of deprivation have som Ordinaryes traduced the good name and estimation of the Ministers but also without any other speciall crime worthy deprivation meÌ„tioned in their sentences haue they stussed their sentences full only with generall wordes of generall crimes contrary to the right forme of judgment For by right forme of judgment the Ordinaryes ought not to haue impeached the Ministers because of generall crymes but they ought to haue sayd and put in certeyne in what thinges and in what manner the sayd ministers haue done any thing worthy punishment of deprivation An other grevance unjust oppression by the sayd Prelats of the sayd silenced ministers is that upon sentence of deprivation and appeales of the Ministers the Ordinaryes haue given notice to the Patron of the voydance of the Church and upon new presentation of the Patron haue not onely instituted new clarkes but also to avoyd the possession of the Minister deprived and appealing haue suggested and intimated by their certificatory writ under their publike seale unto the King into his Court of Chancery that the possession of the church was kept per vim laicam Old natura brevium fol 33. Que breife ne ser grant avant que levesque de tiel lieu eit certifie en le ChaÌ„cerie per soÌ„ breit de tiel resistance withall haue prayed the Kings writ de la vi laica removenda By vertue of which writ upon their suggestion intimation granted for without their suggestion and intimation it would not be granted the party appellant before the appeale finished hath ben removed out of his possession by the Shiriffe of the CouÌ„ty Notwithstanding in truth the Church parsonage or vicarage house had within the same no manner of vi laica at all but was onely quietly and peaceably possessed by the late derived spirituall person and his poore family And that this manner of a possession of a Church by a spirituall person and his family by the law of the Kingdome is not to be holden vis laica is playnly iustified by a late judgment given by the Kings Iustices touching the possession of the Church of Newton Valencoe in the Diocesse of Winton For where as a spirituall person possessed of the same Church by vertue of the Kings writ de vi laica removenda was removed out of his possession and another spirituall person put in possessioÌ„ of the same church the spirituall person dispossessed upon the matter heard and examined before the Kings Iustices that he was a mere spirituall person and that his Church was possessed onely by himselfe and his domestikes was by an other of the Kings writs restored into and possessed of the same Church and which Church unto this day he peaceably holdeth and injoyeth A 4 grevance of the silenced Ministers is that ther beyng a Canon made in the last Synod that no iudge ad quem shall grant any Inhibition to the judge a quo Bishop of Chichester Salisbury unlesse he first see the originall appeale sundry Ordinaryes upon appeales made before them haue taken order with their Registers and Notaryes not to deliver to the partyes appellant any noate or copy of any act or sentence made or given before them Where upon not onely the party appellant is wronged but the Notary also upon refusall of graÌ„ting to the party appellant demaunding and tendring to the Notary his fee a publike instrument of the publike Acts and Records of the Court cannot but incurre the infamy of corruption and perjury in as much as he beyng a publike Notary is sworne faithfully to execute the office of a publik Notary the execution of part of which office consisteth he being requyred thereunto in his testimony and delivery of the publike acts made in his presence A fith injustice or rather nullity is because sundry sentences of deprivation haue been given a Iudicibus non suis namely by such Ordinaryes whose power and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall at the time of giving their senteÌ„ces was suspended shut up and closed by the Archbishop of Canterburyes Commission and his Archiepiscopall visitation A 6 grevance or rather a nullity is because the whole power and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall touching causes criminall without exception or reservation of the examination and definition of the crimes of Ministers by sundry Diocesans under their seale at armes before that tyme was committed in solidum for terme of life yeares not expired unto their principall Commissaryes Officialls or vicars generall wherupon it consequently followeth the same Diocesans having no power by the Kinges Ecclesiasticall lawes to resume at their pleasure their sayd Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction that the sentences given by the sayde Diocesans in these cases are sentences voyd and of none effect in the law as being given a Iudicibus iurisdictione in ea parte carentibus A 7 grevance or rather nullity is that sentences haue been given nullo Iuris ordine servato but omni iuris ordine spreto et neglecto An 8 injustice is because some acts and sentences haue been made and given in some private chamber of some common Inne or Taverne and not in publico et competente foro in any publike or competent seate of Ecclesiasticall justice As M. Vinall and M. Warren in the Diocesse of Chichester were deprived in a common Taverne viz. at the signe of the Ounce and Ivy bush in Greensteed The 9 injustice is because some sentences given by some Ecclesiasticall judges for not use of rites and Ceremonyes or not observing of the booke of Common prayer haue not been given according to the tenor of and effect of the statute

England the same are to be iudged and determyned by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes etc. fol. 39 And againe obserue good reader sayth S. Edward Cooke seeyng that the determination of heresies etc. belongeth not to the Common law how necessary it was for administration of Iustice that his Maiesties progenitors Kings of this Realme did by publike authority authorize Ecclesiasticall Courts under theÌ„ to determyne those great and important causes etc. by the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes The jurisdiction therfore Courts and lawes Ecclesiasticall in the opinion of the Kings progenitors were thought held to be their own Kingly lawes Courts and jurisdiction The same is further proved by the sayd S. Edward Cooke fol. 9 by the president of Renulphus in discharging and exempting the Monastery and Abbot of Abinden from the jurisdiction of the Bishops and granting also to the saide Abbot Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction etc by the president of William the first fol 10. 11 who made inpropriatioÌ„ of Churches with cure to Ecclesiasticall persons etc. and by divers presidents of other Kings since the conquest That which in this parte of the answer is afterward added of the necessary restitution of the right of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to the Crowne is also confuted by the same S. Edward Cooke who plainely saith that though there had been no such law of restitution made yet it was resolved by all the Iudges that the Kings and Queenes of EnglaÌ„d for the tyme being by the auncient prerogatiue law of England may make such a Commision etc. And therfore by the auncient lawes of this Realme this kingdome of England is and absolute Empire and Monarchy consisting of one head which is the King and of a body politike c. Also that the Kingly head of this body politike is furnished with plenary power c. to render iustice and right to every part and member of this body Thus farre S. Edward Cooke From all which it followeth that the restitution of the auncient right howsoever lawfully made as being made by the whole body of the kingdome was notwithstaÌ„ding not necessarily made as though without it the King or Queene for the tyme being could not haue used their auncient right That which followeth in the 2. 3. and 4. branches of this 4 answer to the consequence of this 8 Argument doth not belong to the matter because it doth nothing justifie the proceedings of the Bishops or other Ecclesiasticall Iudges in depriving of the Ministers pleaded for in such manner and for such causes as for which they haue depriveded them The question is not whether jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall by the lawes of the land doth be long under the King unto the ordinaryes nor whether the Ordinaryes in the exercise of the Kings jurisdiction Ecclesiiasticall and Consistoriall trialls ought to proceed by vertue of Peeres etc but whether some Ordinaryes exercising the Kings Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction haue proceeded in their Ecclesiasticall Consistories against some Ministers without authority of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law therfore in that respect contrary to Magna Charta which requyreth nothing to be doone without the Kings law Further De jure Regis Ecclesi fol. 9 although we grant as S. Edw. Cooke instructeth us all lawes Ecclesiasticall derived from other which by and with a generall consent are approved and allowed here to be aptly and rightly called the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of England yet I deny that all lawes Ecclesiasticall derived by the Kings progenitors either before or since the Conquest from others are now in this age our Soveraigne Lord King Iames his Ecclesiasticall lawes and therefore howsoever many judiciall Acts of deprivation of Bishops Preists from their benefices c. according to the Ecclesiasticall law which is called ius Pontificium which was derived by the Kings Progenitors from the Bishops of Rome either before or since the Conquest unto Magna Charta and since that to the 25 of King Henry the eyght were never all held to be contrary but were ever all held to be agreable to the lawes of this kingdome yet notwithstanding I affirme that all Iudiciall Acts and sentences 25. Hen. 8 cap. 17 how many soever of deprivation of Ministers from their benefices had made and given by the Ecclesiasticall Iudges since the 25. of King Henry the 8. onely according or onely by force and vertue of the sayd ius Pontificium or Bishop of Rome his law the sentences given in the time of Queene Mary excepted are and ought to be holden not to be had made given by the lawes of this kingdome or by the Kings Ecclesiasticall law And why Even because the whole ius Pontificium or Bishop of Romes law was altogether excepting the tyme of Queene Mary abrogated adnulled and made voyd by an Act of Parlament and consequently is but a meere Alien Forraine and straunge law and no municipall law of England and therefore not the Kings Ecclesiasticall law Wherefore our Soveraigne Lord King Iames by this graunt of Magna Charta made by his progenitors beyng obliged to suffer no Free man of the Realme to be taken or imprisoned or disseissed of his Frrehold or liberties c. Nor to passe upon him nor condemne him but by lawfull judgment of his Peeres or by the law of the land We agayne assume from this statute of the great Charter that sundry sentences of deprivation of Ministers from their benefices for causes before specified are unlawfull because such Ministers haue been condemned and judgment hath been passed upon them without lawfull judgment of their Peeres or law Ecclesiasticall of the land For heere we must giue the answerer to witt by these words or law of the land that all the Kings lawes of what nature or quality soever whether Ecclesiasticall or temporall and not only the lawes temporall as he insinuateth are included As therefore no temporall Free man of the Realme may be condemned passed upon or disseissed of his liberty and freehold c. in a temporall cause and in a temporall Court without lawfull judgment of his Peeres or temporall law of the land Even so likewise no Ecclesiasticall person beyng a freeman of the Realme may be condemned passed upon or disseissed of his liberty or frehold but by lawfull Ecclesiasticall judgement according to the law Ecclesiasticall of the land And heereupon we graunt if the King haue any law Ecclesiasticall of the laÌ„d for the deprivation of a Minister from his liberty and frehold for not subscription perjurie contempt of Canonical so called obedience omission of Rites and Ceremonyes not precise observation of the booke of Common prayer c. Then we graunt that the Ordinaryes being the Kings Iudges Ecclesiasticall may rightly depriue a Minister from his benefice for these offences And yet still we deny and shall be able to mainteyne that sundry sentences of deprivation made and given by sundry Ordinaries against svndry Ministers be either unjust or unlawfull or no sentences at

whatsoever a man hath will he giue for himselfe and for his life but stretch out thy hand saith Sathan and touch his bones and his fleesh and see if he will not then blaspheme thee to thy face Secondly in respect of the feeblenes of the judgment and sentence that should be grounded upon the othe of such a party being even then at his convention aforehand defamed and of suspected faith or credit Bracton Agayne it is against the common law which constaÌ„tly holdeth that iudicium est in qualibet actione trinus actus trium personarum Iudicis actoris et rei Secundum quod large accipi possunt huiusmodi personae quod duce sunt ad minus inter quas vertatur contentio et tertia persona ad minus qui iudicet alioquin non erit iudicium cum istae personae sunt partes principales in iudicio sine quibus iudicium consistere non potest Britton And the renowned Prince King Edward the first saith by the penn of the learned Iudg Britton that no judgmeÌ„t may be of fewer then three persons that is to say a Iudge a plantiefe and a defendent and in case saith the King that we be a party we will that our Court shall be Iudge Then if the party convented be constrained to accuse himselfe he susteineth two of the said parties in judgmeÌ„t viz. actoris et rei which the law hateth or else the Ordinary or Iudge susteineth two of the sayde partyes in judgment that is both Iudge and Promoter which the law doth also abhorre Therfore true judgment cannot so consist If it be objected that common bruite and fame may lawfully stand in steead of an accuser and put a person coÌ„vented to purge himselfe therof and to deliver his knowledge also of others by oeth I answer that fame is tam ficti pravique tenax quam nuncia veri and ought to haue no credit untill it be presented in course of law or proved For the law is that the Iudge himselfe if he would of his owne knowledge affirme the party to be in famous is not to be received or beleeved For that the law will quod secundum acta et probata iusticia ministretur That which is often objected that private relation made unto the Iudge is sufficient to put the party conveÌ„ted to answer upon his oeth is answered before for that the parties in judgment must not be fayned persons but such as may stand upright in Court and answer the party convented his damages and costs if his prosecution be wrongfull otherwise a man may be greatly wronged his good name and fame unjustly brought into question put to great chardges without any recompence and malicious backbiting maintained and all by coloure of this proceeding which the common law hateth That which is objected that if this course should not be taken by proceeding by oth Ex officio mero vice would abound for that accusation is daungerous and odious is easily answered That the commoÌ„ law seeth this also and therefore hath ordeyned common enformers to proceed against such as private persons will not deale with by witnesses and such legall courses and allow them part of the penaltie for their labor and yet alloweth the party wroÌ„gfully accused his damages and costs if the accusation be wrongfull and injurious In so much as if the enformer will not or be not able to render it he shall receaue corporall punishment for his offence and for the redemption of the defendant credit and reputation The Statute law also is 9 H 3 c 29 that no fre man shal be apprehended or imprisoned or to be disseased of his free hold or liberties or free customes or to be outlawed or exiled or any wise distroyed nor we shall passe upon him nor deale with him but by lawfull judgment of his peeres or by the law of the land that is by presentment IndictmeÌ„t witnes verdict voluntary confession or process of utlary In so much as when the Popish Clergie would neverlesse be tampering with this oath ex officio as their practise was to be medling for the advancment of Antichrist in all States there was a writt of prohibition awarded as warrented formerly by the Common law to be directed to the Sheriff commaunding him that he shall not permit etc and thereupon an attachment against the Bishop if he disobey After this in the height of the Popes pride in the dayes of King Henrie the 4. who was willing to please him being a King in facto 2 H 4 c 15 but not de iure this oath crept in as a Canonicall sanction by the statute of 2. H. 4. But the iniquitie injustice and repugnancy thereof to the Common lawes statutes of the Realme appearing to the State 25 h. 8 c. 14 23 H 8 c 9 it was by K. H. 8. by the whole Parliament abrogated as injurious to the Crowne and utterly against the common justice of the kingdome and so it resteth coÌ„dempned to this day So that no Ordinary can practise it by any power under the Crowne Then it followeth that the use therof must needs be by colour of the Canon law which being in that poynt derogatory to the Crowne 25 h. 8. c. 19 repugnant to the law of this kingdome and abolished by Act of Parliament it consequently cannot be used but by a forreine power and theÌ„ it is premunire wager of law And to that which is alleaged by the Civilians that the Common law alloweth it in that which is termed the wager of law or doeing of his law it appeareth that they are therin utterly mistaken which may easily arise out of their ignorance therof First the wager of law is voluntary for he that offereth it may be tried per patriam at his election This is contrary viz. extorted and constreined 2 The wager of law commeth from the certeine knowledge of the deponent who best knoweth whither he ow the debt or not This is contrary most uncertaine what shal be demaunded or interrogated 3 Againe the wager of law maketh an end of the strife but this is contrary viz the beginning of strife for it is not finall but froÌ„ thence the Iudge gathereth the ground wherupon to proceed against the party convented 4 The wager of law is in case meere and onely civill for an honest man may be in debt but this othe is ministred in case meere criminall in which case the othe is so much the more odious to the Common law by how much it is an apparant occasion of perjury which carnall men will rather fall into then to subject themselues to corporall punishment or to lay open their owne turpitude or shaÌ„e Neither can this proceeding by othe ex officio be fouÌ„d in the Honorable Court of Starr chamber For although the courts of Starr chamber and Chauncery proceed not by Iury yet they obserue the due forme of justice Starr chamber and enforce no man to answer but where

Prelats against the said Ministers for not subscribyng observing the booke conformity etc to be with out law and a gainst law This one reason is from the late Bill of the Bishops presented to the Parliament for the establishing both of the booke of Common prayer and also of their Canons For if the said booke and Canons were already good in law what needed any new statute to establish them If they say that abundans cautela non nocet plentifull caution is not hurtfull they must also remember that they haue likewise learned frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora It is in vayne to doe that by many thinges which may be done by fewe Now to the Canons repugnant to the law We decree and appoynt saith the Synod that no iudge ad quem shall admitt or allow any his or their appeales speaking as they call them of obstinate and factious appellants unlesse he haue first seene the originall appeale But the King say I is a iudge ad quem Ergo the King saith this Synod may not admitt or allow any appeale etc. The liberty and franchise then of the Kings will and grace after this unwonted manner by a Synodall decree onely beyng thus blemished impeched and restrayned what dignity preheminence superiority or prerogatiue hath the Kings grace when the King himselfe is chardged not to grant any inhibition out of his Court of Chauncery but conditionally and upon an unlesse etc. And if by this Canon the Kings will and grace receiue let hinderance and prejudice what should we thinke but that this Canon also tendeth to the weakenyng of the Kings arme and power For how can his power be stroÌ„g and his arme able to help when his grace is bound and his will unable to will And then agayne if these two mayne pillars of his Majesties prerogatiue Royall namely his grace and his power be thus shaken by this Canon must it not necessarily follow that the Lords and Commons in Parliament are prejudiced therby For the rights prerogatiues of the Kings Crowne by the lawes of the Realme be not invested and appropried unto the Kings person onely in regard of his Majesties owne Royall estate but also for the good condition and preservation of his body Politicke which is the Common wealth Which body also for the just and necessary defence both of the head which is the King and of it selfe hath such a proper clayme and interest in and to the grace and power of the head as the lest jote of the power and grace of the head may not be blemished to the prejudice of the body without consent of the body viz of the Lords Commons in Parliament who are the very image and true representiue body of the Realme yea and thus much in effect haue the Kings progenitors and the Auncestors of our Nobles and CoÌ„mons agreed upon in Parliament when by their authority and consent it was forbidden that any thing should be attempted which should tend to the blemishyng of the Kings prerogatiue or to the prejudice of his Lords Commons And when also by common consent Acts Monuments 4 Ed. 3 pag 422. 424 it was enacted in effect that neither King Iohn nor any other King could bring his Realme and people in thraledome and subjection but by consent in Parliament Furthermore appeales beyng de iure naturali and introduced into judgement seats tam ob defensionem et presidiuÌ„ innocentiae quam ad deprimendam iniquitatem et corrigendam imperitiam iudicis as well for the defence and savegard of innocency as for the depressing of the iniquity and correcting the unskilfulnes of a Iudge as they haue been evermore allowed by the lawes custoÌ„es of the Realme so haue they been suffered as freely to be prosecuted as interposed For otherwise how should either innocency be protected or the injustice of a judge reformed in case an appeale being interposed might not be prosecuted frustra saith S. Edward Cooke expectatur eventus de jure Reg Eccles cuius effectus nullus sequitur And according unto this naturall equity hath it been specially provided by a Statute of the realme that the Kings subjects being greived should not only haue libertie to make but also to take haue use and prosecute all manner of appeales after such manner forme and condition as is limited for appeales to be had and prosecuted And for lacke of Iustice many Courts of the Archbishops of this Realme it is lawfull for the partie greived to appeale to the Kinges Majestie in his Court of Chauncery And upon every such appeale a Commission saith the Statute shal be directed under the great Seale to such persons as shal be named by the Kings Highnes to heare and definitivly determine such appeales with the causes and all circumstances It is therefore apparant that this Canon is contrary or repugnant to this Statute For this Canon and this statute thus repugnantly providing and working divers repugnant effects the statute simply admitting the use and prosecution of all manner of appeales the Canon not admittyng but conditionally the use and prosecution of some appeales can not stand together Agayne some inferiour Ordinaryes having libertie to take the bridle in their owne teeth to lay the reynes loose on their owne neckes may in tyme beyng proudly pampred wax wanton in their judgement seates when they shall stand in no awe of having the nullitie or injquity of their process and sentences weyed in the ballance of any superiour Iudge By reason whereof this Canon can not but proue exceeding onerovs to the subject For let a man or woman dwelling at Michaels Mount be but once judicially though perhaps wrongfully cited by the name of a factious or obstinat person coÌ„temner of ceremonyes and from such wrongfull citations let his or her appeale made to the Kings Majestie in his Court of Chauncery if it be froÌ„ the Archbishop or unto the Archbishop if it be from the Diocesan be never so just equal thereis no remedy in this case before his or hirs appeale be admitted or allowed but the same man or woman by the letter of this Canon must personally appeare in the Archbishops Consistory if the appeale be by the Archbishop and if the appeale be to the King in the Kings Court of Chauncery though the same should be at Barwicke Yea and though the party appellant be never so poore aged weake and impotent Nay not only personall appearaÌ„ce but personall subscription also by this Canon is requyred to the Kings Supremacie to the Articles of Religion to the booke of Homilies to the booke of Common prayer and to the booke of Consecrating Bishops be the party appellant never so simple a laborer or never so silly a spiÌ„ster The 37. Canon disauthoriseth every Minister by what authority so ever he be admitted to preach or to read a Lecture in any place within the Realme unlesse he be licenced either by the Archbishop

Pleas by the opinion of the whole beÌ„ch in Hylarie terme last when upon a writt of prohibition procured by certayne Parishioners in the Countie of Hertford the Iudges denyed a consultation to the Minister of the same Parish who had convented the Parishioners before the Ecclesiasticall Iudg for gaynsaying his election of the parish clearke which by vertue of this Canon he had declared in the Ecclesiasticall Court to belong unto himselfe a lone The 77. Canon entituled none to teach schole without licence is repugnant to a statute made the first Session of this Parliament in divers poyntse First the statute permitteth ascholemaster to teach in any publicke free graÌ„mer schole without any licence of the Bishop of the Diocess or Ordinary of the place but this Canon commaundeth that none teach publicke schole but such as shal be licensed by the one or by the other Secondly the statute permitteth any person in any Noble mans or Noble womans gentle mans or geÌ„tlewomaÌ„s house being not recusants to teach without any licence of etc but this Canon commaundeth that no man shal teach in privat house but by licence etc. Thirdly the statute permitteth not any person to be ascholemaster by any other licence theÌ„ by the Archbishop Bishop or guardian of the spiritualties But this Canon permitteth a scholemaster to teach if he be allowed by an Ordinarie of the place a lone Which many tymes and in many places is neither Archbishop nor Bishop nor guardian of the spiritualties Lastly this Canon commaundeth that none teach in publicke schole or private house unless he first subscribe to the first and third articles mencioned in the 36. Canon simply and to the two first clauses of the second article wheras the statute requyreth no manner of subscription at all All these things before written considered we may safly affirme concernyng many of the said late Canons that they be not to be put in execution within the Realme unless they shall be confirmed by Act of Parliament yea that we may also truely speake this in generalitie that eiall the Churcwardens and syde men throughout England sworne to present all offences committed against the said Canons must be falsely perjured or else that there is not one Minister which shall exercise his ministeriall functioÌ„ nor any one man or woman which shall usually come to common prayer and divine service but they must stand continually at the Ordinaries mercy for one offence or other For the thinges commaunded or forbidden beyng innumerable and impossible at all tymes to be kept into what a servitude these Canons haue brought both Ministers and people and what an excessiue chardg is layd up on the purse of every person be he bond or be he free be he yong or be he old for citations Excommunications absolutions and dimissions licences faculties and dispeÌ„sations Who havyng but halfe an eye seeth not Nay that many in many places haue already borne the Yoke and felt the burden of these Canons cannot be denyed Agayne howsoever at the petition of the Prelats his Majestie hath been pleased generally to allow ratifie and coÌ„firme the booke of Canons under the broad seale of England yet may no loyall and honest subject heereupon inferr that his Majestie intended by the generall wordes of his confirmation to authorize any perticular matter devised and decreed by the Synod contrary to the holy scriptures hurtfull to the rights prerogatives and dignities of his Highnes Crowne repugnant to any lawes statuts or customes of the Realme prejudiciall to his Lords commons in Parliament or onerous to his people The contents then of sondry the late Canons in as much as the same be contrary to the holy scriptures tend to the blemishing of the liberty and franchise of the Kings will grace power be coÌ„trariant or regugnant to the lawes statuts and customes of the Realme be prejudiciall to the Lords and Commons in Parliament without whose consent no new bindyng law ought to be made or be such as may become very onerous to the people it is a playne case that every of the Kings liege faithfull subjects ought to defend the Kings right Honor and dignity against all such Canons For heerby it seemeth that as all other the wisest and best Princes that ever haue been haue in some things at some tymes erred so we without offence I hope may say that the King also veritate tacita or falsitate exressa was unawares somewhat mistaken in his graunt In regard whereof such Canons by the lawes statuts and customes of his kingdome be meerely voyd and of none effect to all constructions purposes whereupon also that necessarily followeth that the same can receive no beyng by his Majesties confirmation Quod omnino non est confirmari non potest THE 9 ARGVMENT God hath promised to recompence the least kindnes shewed to his servants especially to the Ministers of the Gospell And the same God is not unrighteous to forget etc but faithfull and hath alwayes performed his promise as appeareth by divers examples Heb. 6 10 and 10.23 Ergo In this regard the High Court of Parliament ought the more to help and releeue the Ministers pleaded for and the people depending upon them Marginall notes G. Powel a Ministers are to be rewarded as they be such and in their office but not as they be Schismatikes and disturbers of the peace of the Church Thereis a secret contradiction in the first parte of this answer Reply For as a Mayor ovt of his office is no Mayor so a Minister out of his ministery is no Minister See the answerer at large Secondly Ministers violently thrust out without just cause are not to be blamed Touching disturbance we say that not we but the Prelats that plead for humane and Romish Ceremonyes much hurtfull and nothing profitable are they that trouble the Church For the Church would otherwise be quyet inough G. Powel b Arcadian wisdome The place Math. 11.11 is to be understood not in regard of the office but in respect of the cleare knowledg they should haue of Christ after his resurrection The first part of this note beyng but a scorne I leaue to scorners The other divinity of this note is very deepe and profound Reply How shall I sound the bottome of it Doth Christ speake of Iohn in respect of his knowledge or of his office Did the people goe out into the wildernes unto Iohn in respect of his knowledge or in respect of his office to be baptised of him Math. 3.6.7 Doth Christ also aske whether the knowledge Math 21.25 or the baptisme that is the ministery of Iohn were froÌ„ heaven or of men Heerby it is manifest that Christ compareth Iohn with the Prophets in respect of office not in respect of knowledge Therefore also in the same respect he compareth the least in the kingdom of heaven with him and preferreth the least Minister of the gospell for his ministeryes sake as

not Circumcising Cain and Abell did contrary to the law given for Circumcision to Abraham many yeares after Or whither Ishmael persecuted Isaack before Isack was borne Or whether stealing of horses an hundred yeares past were punishable with death before any law made for death in that behalfe One thing cannot be sayd contrary to an other that is not neyther ever was extant in rerum natura The Second part of this Quere whether since the granting of Magna Charta unto this age the judiciall acts of deprivation of Bishops etc were ever held to be contrary to the law of this kingdome and Magna Charta we shall answer if God permit more plentifully anone Quere 3 G. Powel 3 Quere Whether any Iudge of this Realme or any cheife officer lerned in the lawes be of opinion that such sentences of deprivation as haue lately passed in due forme in any Ecclesiasticall Court be contrary to any much lesse to many statuts Reply Though it were a sufficient answer to bid him goe looke and himselfe to aske the opinion of every judge learned officer yet will I not altogether yeld him so short and cutted an answer And though it be a principle in Philosophy that forma dat esse rei yet to the beyng of every thing there must be matter to which the forme giveth being And therefore in this case besides due forme there must be also due matter inserted in due sentences Wherupon I craue a resolute and direct answer whether by those words passed in due forme he meane passed for matter and forme in due forme Or whether he meane passed without due matter in due forme onely For if he meane by passed for matter and forme in due forme then is his question without question either a foolish question or no question at all For who would question whether any Iudge or learned officer could doubt that a sentence passed for matter and forme in due forme were a sentence contrary to any much lesse to many statuts As though there were any Statuts so ridiculous and absurd On the other side if he meane by passed in due forme only due forme without due matter then we answer that the same sentence may be unjust for want of due matter and yet be just by reason of due forme And so on the other parte we affirme that a sentence may be iust by reason of due matter and yet unjust by reason of an undue forme How many sentences therefore of deprivation soever as haue been lately given without due and just matter or without due and iust forme we answer so many not to haue passed in due matter and forme and so contrary to some lawes or statuts But were this question wholly graÌ„ted what ease and advantage can the opinion of any iudg or learned officer yeeld to those Iudiciall acts of deprivation wherupon the controversie is grounded which are not passed in any due forme of any law or Statute Ecclesiasticall whatsoever Furthermore touching this question if the Prelats did intend that all their senteÌ„ces should be according to law wherfore did they make a Canon against the ordinary prosecution of appeales Yea what needed such a Canon What benefite is there to any appellant by his appeale from a just sentence Or what danger to the Iudge a quo by such appeales The whole danger is to the appellant himselfe For the sentence beyng just he shall be sure to get nothing neither the Iudge a quo to lose any thing by the appeale G. Powel VVho having but halfe an eye doth not see but that by pleading Magna Charta cap. 29 they would not onely weaken but also subvert and utterly overthrow all jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall Doth every one that desireth limitation of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction Reply and laboreth to restrayne it from all communion of forreyne lawes seeke the subversion therof If also the lawes Ecclesiasticall be the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes and the jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall the Kings Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction then is this place of Magna Charta so farre from subverting the jurisdiction or law Ecclesiasticall as that by that place the same law and jurisdiction is up held and more throughly established That the law jurisdiction Ecclesiastical ever hath been and yet is accounted the Kings Ecclesiasticall law and juridiction shall be shewed anone G. Powel The sentences and graue determinations whereof that is of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction haue never yet in any age or Country been submitted to popular triall by the judgment of Peeres etc Reply All sent ces of Ecclesiasticall Courts are not so graue but that some are somtymes repealed by Higher courts and sometymes revoked by themselues Sometyme also they meddle with matters not belonging unto them and therfore by ordinary course of Commmon law they are prohibited to proceed Finally in some case the Bishop giveth not Institution to a benefice untill by a Iury of 12. men whereof 6. are to be of the Clergy and 6 of the Layity the controversie de iure patronatus be decided Yea sometyme the Bishop having instituted a clarke is forced by writ from the common law to admit of another clark presented by another Patrone and so to displace him whom before he had instituted G. Powel The place of Magna Charta cannot be understood of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction or the practise thereof especially if we consider the end why this law was made and the tyme when The Prelats should make sure worke indeed Reply if they could make that no lawes were against their power TheÌ„ might they take upon them without controlment what they would under coloure of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as indeed they doe now pretily beginne to doe G. Powel The end was that the Kings of this Realme might not challenge an infinit and absolute power as some Kings else where did and yet doe without judgment and lawfull proceedings to take away any mans liberty life Country goods or lands Then belike the Kings Majestie is restrayned by Magna Charta but the Prelacy is not Reply Is not this good stuffe The King shall weare the Crowne but the Prelats will beare the sword Whether now doe they that are falsely called Puritans or the Prelats most encroch upon the Royall authoritye G. Powel It was made at such time as the Kings thought Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction no more in right then in fact to belong to the Crowne Therfore the words haue no relation to Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction This is utterly false Reply yea the falshood therof is evident by the testimony of that worthy and renowned Lawyer S. Edward Cooke in the booke alleadged by the answerer For he sayth expresely that as in temporall causes the King by the mouth of Iudges in his Courts of Iustice doth iudge the same by the temporall lawes of England lib. de jure regis Eccle. fol 8 so in causes Ecclesiasticall etc. the connusance wherof doth not belong to the common lawes of

all for the reasons and causes before specified It is therefore erroniously alleadged that that which was done by jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall when Magna Charta was granted was not at that tyme taken to be done by the King or by his authority and that the lawes which Ecclesiasticall Iudges practised were not then held to be the lawes of the land or the Kings lawes For the Kings progenitors did both thinke and held that jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall did in right belong unto their Crowe and therefore in fact by right of their crownes did they both exercise and commaund to be exercised in their Kingly names their Kingly right authority and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall within their Realmes For how could those Kings haue commaunded and how could their subjectes haue obeyed if the Kings themselues had thought and held that the Ecelesiasticall courts lawes or jurisdiction were not in right no more then in fact at that tyme belonging unto the Crowne as the answerer vaynly and childishly fancyeth Which fancy also seemeth sufficieÌ„tly confuted by the very title of S. Edward Cooks booke de iure regis Ecclesiastico For how could the Kings before and after the Conquest unto Magna Charta have been justly intituled to Kingly right of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction if the Kings had no Kingly Ecclesiasticall right or jurisdiction at all G. Powel Breifely the lawfullnes of they deprivation of the refractary Ministers is a plaine case adjudged in open Court as appeareth in S. Edward Cookes Report part 5 in Cawdries case according to a Statute of I. Elizab. cap 2. c. It is a most playne and cleere case that neither the case of Cawdrie Reply is the case of sundry the late deprived Ministers nor that the case of sundry the late deprived Ministers is the case of Cawdrie Cawdrie was deprived not by his Ordinarie but by the Queenes Ecclesiasticall high Commissioners not for not subscribing to the 3 Articles not for the not use of rits and Ceremonyes not for the not exact S. Edward Cook de jure regis eccl Cawdries case fol. 3 and precise observation of the booke of Common prayer But as well for that he had preached against and depraved the said book as also for that he refused to celebrate divine service according to the sayd booke Agayne in his cause it being found before the High Commissioners that he had uttered verba convitiosa and contumeliosa convitious and contumelious words looke sent against Caw against the boke of Common prayer the case was not whither his fact were punishable by the Statute for of that no man then doubted but whether his depravation and preaching against the booke of Common prayer beyng the first offence committed by him against the Statute he was punishable by tenor of the statute for the same his first offence by depravatioÌ„ yea or no Lastly Cawdries offence was punishable as well before the Queenes Iustices by imprisonment and losse of one whole yeares profites of his spirituall promotions as by deprivation before his Ordinary None of all which things were within the coÌ„pass of sundry the late deprived Ministers For non of theÌ„ ever preached against the booke nor depraved the same They never refused to obserue the same booke according to the proeme of the booke tenor of the statute They were so farr from claymyng any immunitie from being depraved for their first offence as that they stood and yet doe stand upon their innocencyes not to haue committed any offence at all against the statute punishable with deprivation by the statute they alleadge that they were not punishable before the Kings Iustices by the statute for these facts which they were charged by their Ordinaries to haue committed against the statute and for which they were deprived Lastly some of them were deprived not for any fact done committed or perpetrated but for not promissing heereafter to obserue the whole booke And what an unconsiderate part therefore is it to avowe the lawfulnes of the deprivation of all the late silenced Ministers to be a playne case adjudged in open Court when neither their case nor any like case to som of theirs was ever yet brought or argued before the Kings Iustices in any of the Kings open courts at all Touching the statut alleadged 1. Elizabeth it helpeth nowhitt at all the late deprivations of sundry Ministers First because such Ministers as haue been deprived onely for not conformyng themselues to the use of the booke provided by the parishioners cannot truly be charged to haue refused the booke commaunded by the statute Because the same booke was never provided for them Secondly the statute punisheth not every refuser but wilfull and obstinate refusers They then that upon conscience onely of Gods word doe refuse to obserue al things conteyned in the booke cannot be iustly called obstinate refusers till their groundes out of the word be by the word removed Thirdly the statute requyreth some Act done committed or perpretrated against the Statut but some Ministers haue been deprived only for not promising c as before was sayd Fourthly the statute appoynteth the Ordinaries to proceed by inquisition accusation or information But many of us haue been deprived without any of these meanes and onely upon Proces Ex officio mero Heerby therfore appeareth how unjustly and directly contrary to the words of the statute you insert this Parenthesis which they may doe Ex officio as if they might by vertue of this Statute proceed Ex officio wheras the Statute expresly requyres inquisition accusation or information Is this good interpretation If you doe so interprete the scripture directly contrary to the wordes of scripture in the same place you make but mad interpretations Touching that which is objected against all hitherto spoken in the poynt of the law of the opinion of the Iudges to be against the same may it please the reader to remember the saying of an Honorable and most renowned Counseller in that behalfe viz. that in such cases and all other men are not so much to respect what judges speake standing bare headed 2 chro 19 6 as what they say sittyng upon the judgment seate representing the Kings person yea not executing the iudgment of man but of the Lord when all men stand bare headed before them Concernyng the oth Ex officio of the othe ex officio we affirme that the law of the land is against the exercise of the same oath by Ordinaries and other judges Ecclesiasticall The Common law of this kingdome which is grounded upon the law of God and of reason doth hate and abhorre it First in respect of the fraylty of man who for the safitie of his life libertie credit and good name will not spare to prophane even that which is most holy and by committing sinfull perjury hazard his soule which the subtle serpeÌ„t wel knew in generall though he were deceaved in the perticuler in that he sayd unto God concerning Iobskinne for skinne and

he hath a knowne accuser and perfect understanding of the cause or crime objected and therewithall is permitted to haue a copye of the bill of complaint or information and allowed more over both time convenient and councell learned well to consider advise of his oth answer and if his adversaryes complaint be either in sufficient in forme or such as the Court hath no jurisdiction to determine the defendant upon demurrer without othe is dismissed and that with costs And admtit the accusation be such as is every way aunswerable yet if the interrogatoryes ministred be impertinent to the matter of complaint the defendant without offence to the Court may refuse to make answer to the same Therefore no similitude or likenes between this oth used in these Honorable courts of Iustice that constreyned oath ex mero officio Iudicis 1 Since the former sort be orderly taken in courts of justice the other without all course of judgement 2 The one where the plantiff and matter of complaint are manifest the other where neither accuser nor matter of accusation doeth appeare unlesse the bare suspicion of the Iudge fame unproved or private insinuation may be allowed for competent persons in judgement against whom the party defendaÌ„t is deprived of all legall exceptioÌ„s is often after great trouble dismissed and though innocent yet dampnified and slaundered and without recompence there being no complanant found but the Iudge himselfe 3 The one made upon certaine knowledge and good advisment the other soddenly without all discretion uppon uncertaine demaunds 4 The one wisely restreined to certaine limits bouÌ„ds the other foolishly wandring at the doubtfull will of a sly and subtill opposer 5 Upon the one the deponent aunswereth to the accusation of his adversarye by the other he is compelled to be his owne accuser and condemner 6 The one requyreth an answer to matter in fact done either to the injury of some private person or hurt of the publicke state the other constreineth revealing of words deeds and thoughts though never offensiue to any That which is objected that the saide proceeding is warranted by the Canon law or Civill law is answered many wayes but breifely by the positiue law it selfe that banisheth all Canon Civill or other law or preheminence or power whatsoever which is contrary or repugnant to the common law of the land But this proceeding by the partyes owne othe ex officio mero is contrary and repugnant to the common law of the land Ergo Thus we see that this proceeding by oth ex officio was a meere straunger in England Conclusion and how it arrived heerein Anno 2. H 4. but yet as a masker disguised marching in the rowte of Cannonicall sanctions obscured from the veiw of the State under that name but after being discovered as an adder in the grass was damned and expelled by the Statute of 25. H. 8. as a traytor to the King and his lawes and hath no lawfull or warrantable interteynment by the statute of primo Elizab For that there by no jurisdiction excercised by the Bishop of Rome in this kingdome is annexed to the crowne but that which was then lawfully vsed and excercised within this kingdome Then for any Ordinary or Iudge Ecclesiasticall to enterteine it and use it in their courts proceedings is a high misprision against the King his Crowne and dignity and punishable by the Statute of the 16. yeere of K. R. 2. Now to passe from the oth ex officio to the Canons of the CanoÌ„s and yet not to deale with those that are of indifferent sorte but with those onely that are either contrary to Gods word or repugnant to the lawes of the land neither also to say all of these in this place that might be sayd but only for brevities sake to giue a tast and to poynt at some may it please the Christian reader yea the answerer himselfe yea all our adversaries in this cause that are not too much blinded with mallice to consider that all such Canons generally as pronounce a man ipso facto excommunicate for saying thus or thus against the Canons themselues against the Ceremonies against the booke of Common prayer and the strict observation thereof etc cannot be justified in this behalfe by the word of God For as to prevent an objection that might be made from the commaundement for reading of them publikly in Churches albeit the sacreed scriptures be dayly publikely read and preached yet many things are both wittingly and unwillingly spoken and actually committed against the sayd sacreed scriptures for which notwithstanding such persons are not presently to be held ipso facto excommunicate so certeinly except the authoritie of the Church be greater then the authority of God and the Canons of this last Synod more authenticall then the holy scriptures given by inspiration from God it must be acknowledged of these Canons and all other constitutions of the Church whatsoever that every word spoken or act committed against theÌ„ especially unwittingly is not so heavily to be punished Agayne wheras the sayd Canons doe forbid any man by speech so offending without publike revocation of his sayd pretended wicked error to be restored sith the sayd offence may be committed as well privatly as publikely and sith the Canons speake generally whosoever shall affirme etc without any exception of private affirmations how can the sayd Canons in this respect be warranted by the word of God 1 Tim 5.1 If all offences against Gods word at least of man against man be not publikely to be repreheÌ„ded much lesse are all affirmations in disgrace of any Ecclesiasticall coÌ„stitutions of men to be punished with publike pennance Furthermore whereas divers of the sayd Canons doe forbid many offenders by such affirmations to be restored by any other meanes then onely by the Archbishop sith the sayd offence may not onely be unwitting private but also by a poore ignorant man yea perhaps a lame impotent man dwelling also it may be an hundred myles or almost 200. myles from the Archbishop What equity is there that svch an offender should be debarred from all restoring by any other And so for want therof be deprived perhaps all his life from all publike communion with the Church and from all spirituall comfort for his soule therby Is this the mercy that is better then sacrifice And wherby we doe represent our heavenly Father The 13. Canon commaundeth the celebration of holy dayes as well as of the Lords day and that as equally agreyng to Gods holy will and pleasure I deny not but that as Gods word is to be preached at all tymes in season and out of season so it is also to be heard as oft as men haue opportunity but yet that the holy dayes now commaunded to be celebrated are as equally according to Gods holy will and pleasure as the Lords day especially so to be celebrated as they are injoyned with greater solemnities

or by the Bishop of the Diocess or by one of the two Universities under their hands and seale Let the King then under his broad seale graunt licence to any of his Chapleines to preach within his owne chapple this licenc by this Canon is of no value then the which what can be more derogatory to the Soveraigne dignity of the King in causes Ecclesiasticall Unto the mould of this Canon agreeth the 47. Canon before meÌ„tioÌ„ed which coÌ„cludeth that no Minister not liceÌ„sed a Preacher under the hand seale of the Bishop of the Diocess or Archbishop of the Province or under the seale of one of the Vniversities shall take upon him to expound in his owne cure any scripture or matter of doctrine but shall onely study to read playnely and aptly without glosing or addyng the Homilies already set forth or heerafter to be published by lawfull authority The King then by this Canon may not licence a Minister to preach or to expound any scripture no not in his own cure no though the ministers Cure be the Kings owne houshold or the houshould of the Prince or any other of the Kings children Nay by these two Canons and the Canon of subscription it is evident that the Prelats intended that every Scotish Minister havyng renounced the Hierachie and embraced the single forme of Goverment in Scotland should be barred from preaching at any time before the King in England unless he should subscribe to the Hierarchy of England For with out a licence may none preach and without subscription may none be licenced And not onely is this 47. Canon derogatorie to the Kings prerogatiue but it is also repugnant to other the Kings lawes and statuts For whereby that statute made against Lolardy and Heresie it was enacted that none should presume to Preach openly or privily without the licence of the Diocesan first requyred obtayned yet by the same Act Curats in their owne Churches and Parsons priviledged were excepted and by the Provinciall Constitutions confirmed and ratified by Parliament it is provided thus We establish that no secular or regular not authorised by written law or protected by speciall priviledg to preach the word of God may take upon him the preaching or exercise of the same word within any Church or without any Church unless first he present and submit himselfe to the examination of the Diocesan etc But concernyng aperpetuall Curate we understand such a one by law and right to be sent to the place and people of his Cure And that we may understand whom the Canon meaneth to be a perpetuall Curate the gloss sheweth us that a Bishop in his Diocess a Parson and Vicar in his Parish and every other Person intituled to any benefice whereunto apper teyneth cure of soules is to be understood to be a perpetuall Curate and that he may preach in his owne Cure without the Bishops licence Moreover by the booke of ordering Bishops Ministers and Deacons every one made a Minister promiseth that he will giue all faithfull diligence alwayes to minister the doctrine etc as the Lord hath commanded etc so that he will teach the people committed to his cure and chardg withall dilligence to keepe and obserue the same But how can a Minister instruct and teach the people committed to his chardge according to his publicke vowe if as it is sayd in this Canon he shall not take upon him to expound in his owne Cure any scripture or matter of doctrine at all but shall onely study to read plainely and aptly without glosing or adding the Homilies etc Lastly the wordes of the Bishops institution are these Teque rectorem eiusdem ac de et ineadem instituimus canonice et investimus cum suis iuribus et pertinentiis universis curamque et regimen animarum prochianorum ibidem in Domino coÌ„mittimus per-presentes And we speaking of a Clarke to be instituted into a benefice Canonically institute thee rector of the same Church and of Cure goverment by law ought to go together in a minister and in the same doe invest thee withall her rights appertinances and by these presents we in the Lord commit unto thee both the cure and goverment of the soules of the Parishioners in that place The Clearke then instituted into a benefice by these wordes of the Bishops institution by the booke of ordering of Bishops Ministers and Deacons and by the Provinciall Constitutions having not a private but a publicke office of cure and regiment of soules committed unto him how can it seeme reasonable that he should be countermanded by reason of a Provinciall decree not coÌ„firmed by Act of Parliament not to excercise the same his publicke office without a Bishops licence For what if the Bishops refuse to grant him a licence Or what if the Bishops and his officers see for graunting writing sealyng his licence be greater then the poore Minister is able to disburst is it reason that his chardg by this meaÌ„es should be left uninstructed Nay is it not as if a Sergiant at law called to the barr of the Common pleas by the Kings writ solemly created a Sergiant and publickly admitted to the same barr should afterward be forbidden by the cheife Iustice of that Court to pleade at that barr without licence otteyned under his hand and seale Or is it not as if a Doctor of Phisicke solemnely created in the Vniversity and publickly admited to practise artem medica should notwithstanding without a new faculty from the Doctor of the Chayre be inhibited to minister any Pill or Portion to any pacient The 53. Canon before also mentioned viz. against publicke opposition between preachers is not only repugnaÌ„t to the doctrine of (a) levit 5.1 2 Tim. 4.2 holy Scripture coÌ„trary to the practis of the (b) 2. Chron. 18.7 Ierem. 27.9 28 7 Acts 13.10 Galat. 2 11 Prophets Apostles but also crosseth the Ministers vow solemly made at his ordination Whos 's promise is that he wil be ready with all faithfull diligence to banish driue away all erroneous and strang doctrin contrary to Gods word and to use both publicke and private motions and exhortations as well to the sicke as to the whole within his cure But upon occasion given by any false Prophet publickly broaching false doctrine in a Ministers chardg how shall the Minister with all faithfull dilligence drive away the same false doctrine and publickely teach the truth if he may not teach admonish or exhort his people without a licence first obtayned from the Bishop of the Diocess For what if the Bishop be upon an embassadg in Denmarke Or what if the Bishop himself be of the same judgment with the false teacher The 91. Canon entituled Parish Clearks to be chosen by the Ministers is contrary and regugnant to the customes of the Realme in many Parishes of the Realme And in this regard this Canon hath been blowen to peeces at the barr of the Common

For these are the expresse words of the psalme which he applyeth to the Parliament for dealing in our behalfe so indeede accusing us as the principall offenders in those sinnes that are mencioned in that psalme but yet making the Parliament also accessary with us in them THE THIRD ARGVMENT It was a fault in Pharaoh his butler that he did no sooner remember to speake to Pharoah for the libertie of Ioseph and for his release from his affliction Gen. 40.14 23. Seeing Ioseph had interpreted his dreame of reconciliation to the grace of Pharaoh and to his former place of earthly honorable service in the house of Pharao Ergo The Parliament ought so to remember the interpretation of the mysteries of God his favor and heavenly kingdome by the ministers now silenced etc. That they doe what lawfully they may to release them of their troubles 1 Marginall notes G. Powel a This and most of the arguments following are grounded upon a false principle viz that the refractary Ministers quarrell against the Church of England is the ministery of the gospell the salvation of the people etc wheras indeed all the contention is about crosse surplice and some other indifferent Ceremonyes and actions in the Church And all these arguments doe specially make against them seeing they be onely disturbers of the sincere profession of the gospell and worke of the ministery yea seeing they forsake their calling and moue so great contention And agayne G. Powel b would God they were halfe so diligent in a good cause as they are importunat to sow schisme and sedition among brethren But they deserue small commendation etc. Reply One reply shall serue to both these notes Especially because as it is noted before all the answer is grounded upon a false principle that we are schismatiks etc. and so worthy of all that hath been done unto us To insist therefore upon this poynt I say first of all that this accusation of vs to be such is a most beggerly begging of the question most unjust untrue and uncharitable never yet proved neither able to be proved vntill they proue the matters in controversie to be meerely indifferent to such uses as whereto they are imployed urged by them yea good and laudable Ceremonies matters of decency and order in the Church yea that we also refuse to conforme our selues unto them more of stomacke then of conscience Much lesse can they justifie their proceedings against and punishing of us yea not onely of us but also of our people a thing most unrighteous and odious to God men in such manner as they haue done especially more for these things which themselues call indifferent small pettie accidentall circumstantiall then they doe other for things expresly forbidden by God himselfe a thousand tymes more offensiue to other and more reprochful and disgracefull to our Church profession and kingdom then these things Yea it is to be observed that notwithstanding all these proceedinges against us all our bookes written against the ceremonyes onely to shew the righteousnes of our cause and all their writtyngs against us none of them haue ever yet either in open consistory or in privat conference that I haue heard of or in publike writing made any one no not one demonstratiue reason necessarily concluding the lawfulnes and the good and necessary use of the things they so heavily impose vppon us Some indeed haue written against some of our arguments but no otherwise then the witt of man may cavill against any principle of religion though never so substantially proved by the best divine upon the earth But to returne to the poynt there is nothing in these two notes and in the rest of the booke objected against vs where with our auncients and betters Our betters heretofore charged as we are now haue not been charged in former tymes Elia was charged with troubling Israell 1 King 18.17 Michaiah might haue been charged with singularity and schisme for dissenting from all the 400 Prophets in Ahabs time 1 King 22. Ieremy was accused by the Preists and Prophets of his tyme to haue spoken against the state of the City and to be therefore worthy to dyc Ierem. 26.11 Amos was charged by Amazia the preist with such conspiracy against the King that the land was not able to beare all his words Amos 7.10 All the Iewes was generally accused by Haman to Ahashuerosh not to haue observed the Kings lawes Ester 3.8 Ezra and the Iewes with him were accused by Rehum Shimshay and other beyond the river to Artashasht the King as rebellious and wicked for building of Ierusalem Yea they were not only so accused for the time present but also for the time to come as we are afterward in the 16 Argument in the marginall note with r that if they were suffered to proceed in building of the City they would not pay toll nor tribute nor custome yea Ezra and his companions were not onely charged to be such but the whole City of Ierusalem for former tymes was also charged to haue been a rebellious noysom City vnto Kings and Provinces that the inhabitants therof had moved sedition of old time that for that cause that Citie had been destroyed Therefore also the sayd Rehum and Shimshay and their companions pretended regard of the Kings Honor in writing so against Ezra and the rest of the Iewes Ezra 4.12 etc. The enimyes of Daniell framed the like accusation of him to Darius Daniell 6. Our Saviour himselfe was blasphemed by the name of a seducer deceiver of the people Ioh. 7.12 Yea oft tymes as a blasphemer profaner of the Saboth a frend to publicans and sinners Paule was accused to haue taught men against the law and the Temple Acts 21.28 and to be a pestilent fellow a mover of sedicion Acts 24.5 yea to be an heretike verse 14. Such also haue been the accusations of all Martyrs by the common adversaries the Papistes It is therefore the more to be marveilled at that our Prelats professing and sometime preaching the gospell doe accuse vs in like manner Yea charge us to disturbe the sincere profession of the gospell and worke of the ministery and yet alleadge no reason heerof or at least no other reason then such as for which all or the most part of those before named were so charged as we haue heard For besides traditions of men antiquity not proved at least not true antiquity the commaundements of Princes procured by themselues uncharitably misinformyng such princes besids thes things I say what else haue they said doe they say or can they say The Ministers not yelding to conformitie are no schimatickes Doe we vary from the sincere doctrine of the scriptures Nay rather many of them doe much more swarue from the same especially sithens their late strong patronizing and urging of these things yea they haue fallen froÌ„ that that heertofore hath been constantly and generally held by our Church now

that Christ himselfe testified of her that he had not found so great faith in Israell Read the place Reply c Absurd The woman was such Absurd Our Saviour speaketh not that of that womaÌ„ Math 8 10 but of the Centurion Though the Notary were an Archbitshop yet I might intreat him better to read the place But Christ sayd Mat. 15.28 O woman great is thy faith What then Though as shee was elect she was also blessed yet as she was out of the visible Church the words of our Saviour might be spoken of her Neither doth the author say that she was a dogge but that she was litle better then a dogg in that respect that is as she was a Cananit none of the children of Israell Is ther no difference betwixt these words to say plainly that she was a dog Yet the words of our Saviour are playne It is not meete to take the childrens bread to cast it to dogs or whelps Therfore this note reproveth our Saviour Sophistrie and not the author of the Arguments The two next scoffing notes with d and e haue been often answered We leaue not our flockes in the playne field but are driven from them by force because we will not displease God to please the Prelats G. Powel f Onely Christ is the husband of his spouse Heere the supplicants blasphemously papize For I thinke they meane not this literally If they doe they are surely very honest men in the meane time Reply A man should first cast out the beame that is in his owne eye before he find fault with a mote in another mans eye Math 7 5 As Christ is the onely Archbishop of the Church so I acknowledg him also the onely husband of his spouse For the one title is as proper unto Christ as the other But heere the Notary falleth agayne over head and eares into the same sophistry that in the former note with c he did The author sayth that such Ministers had performed the duety as it were of husbands Sophistry the notary cryeth out blasphemy as if he had simply called them the husbands of the churches The author therfore did not blasphemously papize But let other take heed of like papizing that usurpe such names and authority as are proper onely to Christ and neither are nor can be maynteyned by any other Arguments then such as wherby the Papall dignity of the Antichrist of Rome is supported The latter part of the note is to lothsome for any Christian tongue to reade or chast eares to heare therfore I cast it out on the dunghill as vnworthy of any answer G. Powel g A lying hyperbole Then belike the Prophet Malachi Reply upon alleaging of whose words this note is grounded used a lying hyperbole Mala 2.13 14 God that putteth up all the teares of his children into his bottle knoweth and beholdeth this and will one day Rom 12 15 Iob. 30 25 Amos 6 6 wype a way these and all other teares from their eyes when they that in the meane time scorne such teares of the godly so farr are they from mournyng with them that mourne and being sory for the afflictions of Ioseph shall except they repent haue more then their bellye 's full of weeping and waylyng and gnashing of teeth G. Powel h If the refractary Ministers be so unkind and hard hearted that they will haue no pity upon them then may they be otherwise releeved well inough The Lord that searcheth the heartes of all men Reply knoweth the affections of some of the Ministers now deprived to be such towards their people that if they might stay with their people with comfortable conditions they had rather stay though their maintenance be but small then accept of a thowsand pound by the yeare else where with as good conditioÌ„s Therfore hardnes of heart is not to be objected vnto them Touching the rest of this note it is strange that in the question of depriving ignorant Ministers according to the law statute in that behalfe this hath ben the principall objection where or how wil you haue their places supplyed Much like to the question of the Disciples whence should we get so much bread in the wildernes as should suffice so great a multitude Now the question being of our deprivation against law and the paucity of sufficient Ministers being objected reply is made There is store the Churches may be releeved otherwise But let them be first releeved that haue ignorant Ministers not knowing the principles of religion themselues much lesse able to teach other Further answer to the 6. Argument G. Powel If such congregations doe so mourne then the more hard hearts haue those cruel tyrants rather then sheepherds that without pity desperatly forsake them for litle or no cause Reply The substance of these wordes being the same with the former note is answered before yet here I ad 1 that it is more cruelty for the Prelats for litle or no cause to depriue such Pastors 2 that this answerer seemeth still to account sinnyng against God to be litle or nothing 3. that a theefe by the like reason may complayne of the hardnes of his heart that had rather lose his Purse then haue his throate cut G. Powel Those Congregations may cease mournyng and comfort themselues because there is store inough of able Ministers and they shall haue those that will not run away from them Take away tautologyes and other superfluityes and this answere it selfe would scarse haue been an obular or two farthing pamphlet Reply The first part of this answer hath been removed before Those that will not runne away where are they to be found What net may one haue to ketch them what keepe to hold them For doe not the Formalists dayly run away from their people Doe they not take another lyving and keep the former also leaving one to some journyman fit for all companyes Yea both Master man oftentymes leave both flocks to the Wolfe yea I knowe some that for sake their owne charges and are curats else where under other And to whome doe some of them leaue their owne To one that all the week long goeth to hedging ditchyng throshyng and other day labor for his livyng who on the Lordes day is at Church with a white Surplice to read service In harvest also they take harvest worke as ordinarily as other harvest men I haue seene it not long since with my eyes Some also within a fortnight after they are possessed of a living of good worth let it out for divers yeares and so take their leaue of the people to serue a cure under another O miserable condition of such a people Whose heart melteth not to think of such wretched watchmen What liklyhod therfore is there that the Congregations deprived of their godly loving paynefull Pastors shall haue other as faithfull that will not run away from

and holdes of the Devill may be the truth in part but yet they being in the places alleaged called the charets and horsmen of Israel not of the Saints and most of the Israelits being then wicked and these titles being acknowledged of Elisha by a wicked King that respected not the gathering of the Saints but the outward defence of his kingdome by the prayers and preaching of Elisha it cannot be the whole truth That we are such sores as the answerer speaketh of is not proved Indeed some conformitans so account us because we rub their sores so much and desire so earnestly the healing of them that so their soules may be the better saved We are also eye-sores to them but sure I am that we are not so to the godly many of whose sores God hath cured by us and to whom our ministery hath been the savor of life unto life Other thinges in this argument haue received their reply THE 8 ARGVMENT The proceedings of the Bishops other Ecclesiasticall Iudges against the Ministers in silencing and depriving of them is against the law Ergo. This High Court of Parliament being the chiefest Court of iustice in all this kingdome ought to releeue them The marginall notes upon the 8 Argument The first 3 notes I passe by as note-les G. Powel d Object against these and you shall be answered How shall we be answered With words and raylings Reply as before not otherwise To the oth Ex Officio and to the Canons afterward G. Powel a These men would bring in all by popular triall Nay rather Reply would not the Prelats be glad to haue all persons and all causes subject to themselues But more to this afterward G. Powel b A sensles sentence How can a man in matters of eternall life be cast out of his freehold Reply A simple cavill from the misplacing of a comma The Notary might well haue perceived that these wordes in matters of eternall life were to be joyned with the words goyng before ambassadors of Iesus Christ not with the words following should be cast out of their freehold This I say he might well haue perceived because there had been no speech of our freehold of eternall life but only of this life G. Powel c The Ecclesiasticall judge may proceed Ex officio d directly against the statute 1 Elizab cap 2 Reply These two notes being in the margine contiguoe and touching one another I joyne together in my reply the rather because d the letter of the second note and the mention of the statute in the end of the sayd second note omitted they may both in better sense and truth be read thus togeather Ecclesiasticall Iudges may proceed ex officio directly against the statute For touching the former note with c let the best Civilian shew if he can by what other law the Ecclesiasticall judge may proceed ex officio then by the Canon law abolished by statute The second note with d shall be satisfied afterward The note with e of begging the question is now too stale G. Powel f As if God and his Sonne Christ Iesus were not president of the religious assembly already An unchristian suggestion Reply When the Prophet exhorteth the Church to open her dores for the King of glory to come in psal 24 7 9 Cant 5 2 did he signifie that the Church had not before interteyned the King of glory When Christ saith Open unto me my sister etc. doth he meaÌ„e that his sister had him not at all before Christ dayly knocketh by his word and Sacraments Revel 3.20 at the heartes of all the faithfull to be let in Are they therfore altogether without Christ Allthough therfore Christ be already president in the Parliament yet by the propounding of any good cause he desireth to be further interteyned amongst them This the author hath acknowledged by calling theÌ„ often a Christian assembly by commending their Christian zeale against the Papists etc. But this is the answerers sophistry before noted Sophistry to reason from the waÌ„t of a thing in part to the want thereof altogether Therefore this is an vnchristian and simple collection Further answer to the 8 Argument G. Powel I am constrayned to dance as the suppliants Pipe They lead and I followe Nay we haue piped unto you and yee haue not danced Reply We haue mourned unto you and yee haue not lamented Mat 11.19 Neither to evident Argumentes out of holy scripture will you submit your human ordinances or your selues neither by any gentle and humble petitions will yee Prelats come to any brotherly peace Mildnes doth as much provoke you as bitternes M. Nichols of Kent writyng most mildly and humbly was rewarded severely with suspension deprivation degradation Our most humble petition to the Convocation at the first Session of this Parliament received a most rough answer We seeke peace and when we speake thereof ye are bent to warre psal 120 7. Iob. 31 8. As though yee sate in heavenly places we haue been unto you more vile then the earth I complaiÌ„e not thus of all the Prelats I know that some are wiser milder kinder and more curteous theÌ„ other As the bramble tooke more upon it then the Oliue tree Iudg. 8.15 the vine or the fig tree so sometyme it is among Prelats G. Powel Hitherto they prayed your Honors but to speake for them etc. Now they urge you to determyne and actually to decree something in their behalfe We neither prayed nor urged any thing to be doone but with all humility and loyalty G. Powel hoping that his most excellent Majesty vpon the sight of the reasons why they had decreed or determined any thing so farre as they might among themselues would likewise in his Princely and christian regard haue vouchafed his Royall assent to their such decrees and determinations which although it haue not pleased his Highnes yet to doe yet we hope that heerafter upon further coÌ„sideration some other may find further grace with his Majestie in the like behalfe G. Powel To the consequence of the former Argument The consequence hath 2 parts whereof the first is granted but that the deprived and suspended ministers ought to be restored is denyed because they haue not justified their cause and declared that they are vnjustly oppressed nor can ever doe Reply Touching the former answer may it please the reader first to remember that all the authors speech of the proceedings of the Bishops against Ministers suspended etc is only to be understood of such Ministers as whom they suspend and depriue onely for such causes as are mentioned in the title of the Argumentes not of other whom they suspend or depriue for any just cause Now to proceede that such Ministers haue not yet in law whereof the present question is justified there cause and declared that they are unjustly oppressed nor can ever doe is not

of the first of our late Queene vpon inquisition information or accusation but only upon proces ex mero officio A thing if not directly yet by consequence repugnant to the sayd statute and therefore unwarrantable by the sayd statute And therefore it is to be noted that this marginall note the Ecclesiasticall judge may proceed ex officio in pag 37. and this pareÌ„thesis which they may doe ex officio inserted in the body of the statute pag 42. is but a begging of the question Certain Ministers in the Dioces of Oxford Lichfeld etc. An other injustice against some Ministers hath been coÌ„mitted by some ordinaries for that they haue deprived them for none other cause then only for not subscribing to the 3 articles mentioned in the 36. Canon And this wrong hath been openly in Parliament acknowledged to be a wrong by the Archbishop himselfe and by the Iudges and advocats of his owne Courts These and many such like thinges being thus may it not be truely sayd that the Ministers pleaded for are unjustly oppressed And being so oppressed and without releefe any other way haue they not just cause to supplicat to the High Court of Parliament And hath not the sayd High Court great reason yea is it not bound to finde remedy and to releeue them The answer concernyng the person of him who is sayd abundantly to haue proved the unlawfulnes of the proceedings against the deprived ministers that he is no iudge nor any good Civilian or common lawyer what reason haue you to be so resolut heerin He may be a judge a good Civilian or coÌ„mon lawyer for ought you knowe though you seeme never so doubtles therof But what is this answer to the poynt in question Seeing it mattereth not what the person of the probator be if his proofes be sufficient And yet how meane so ever you thinke him or his learning to be if he be the party whom I ayme at I shall doe no wrong as I suppose to the cheefest judge and best approved Civilian of the now Archbishop of Canterburyes courts if without flattering the party I shall affirme that he was a student and an advocate and a Iudge yea I may as I thinke say more a reader of and a director in the practise of the civill law about 30 yeares passed to soÌ„e that be now Doctors of the same law But to let the person and learnyng of the probator passe I resolutely and directly answer to the answerers 3. Queres the same being partly fraught with equivocations and partly childish and absurd that the one sorte can receaue no resolute answer before he haue resolved his intrinsecall and mentall sense and understanding and that the other without question is a question questionles His first Quere then being this namely Quere 1 whether the Church under Christian godly Magistrats hath any tribunall proper unto it selfe for the decyding of controversies and punishing of such persons as shall refuse the ordinances therof Unto this Quere when he shall distinguish and make his so many equivocations conteyned in the Quere prespicuous and playne Equivocations to the understanding of every simple playne meanyng man I shall God willing make him a simple playne resolute direct answer In the meane time let him understand first that we may justly doubt what he meaneth by the word Church and namely whether he meane the vniversall Church or a Nationall a Provinciall a DiocesaÌ„ an Archidiaconall a Decanall a Capitular or lastly a Parochiall Church For all men as usually and commonly we speake doe vnderstand that every of these Churches hath her proper name after which she is so called as namly the Church dispersed throughout the world is called the universall Church the Church within England is commonly called the Nationall Church of England the Church within the Province of Canterbury the Provinciall Church of Canterbury the Church of the Diocesse of London the Diocesan Church of London etc. And lastly the Church of great S. Ellens in London the Parochiall Church of S. Ellens in London And therefore I craue a resolute and direct answer of what onely persons you meane that the universall this Nationall Provinciall Diocesan Archidiaconall Decanall Capitular and Parochiall Church consisteth Who onely be the Christian godly Magistrats under whom every one of these Churches liveth Whether the same christian godly Magistrates may personally be present giue their expresse consents and haue their decisive voyces to in making all and every decrees of every of these Churches What is the tribunall proper to it selfe of every of these Churches What onely manner of controversies by every of these Churches may be decided What onely kind of ordinances every of these Churches may decree What only kind of subject and with what onely kind of punishment and none other every of these Churches may punish the refusers of every their ordinances Our second mayne scruple touching this first Quere ariseth from these words vnder Christian godly Magistrats For if by these words under Christian godly Magistrats he understand that every of these Churches livyng under the obeysance of such Magistrats hath a tribunall proper unto it selfe immediatly derived to the same by the holy law of God wholly secluded from the Christian godly Magistrats presence as was the Sanctuary divided from the Court and wherinto the christian godly Magistrats may no more at this day enter or no more giue their consents and decisiue voyces in making the ordinances therof then it was lawfull in times past for the Kings of Iuda to enter into the holy place and to burne incense at the Altar then must we frame him one kinde of reply but if he shall informe us his mentall vnderstanding to be thus namely that the Christian godly Magistrats haue none other power by law divine or human but only to assemble every of the sayd Churches to ratifie the ordinances of every of the sayd Churches or hath onely power to commaund the same ordinances to be put in execution under them then unto this answer we must shape him an other manner of reply Notwithstanding in the meaÌ„e tyme this he must understand generally that in right though not alwayes in possession practise the church beyng distinguished from the common wealth hath the same power under a Christian and under an Infidell Magistrat Quere 2 G. Powel 2 Quere Whether so many judiciall acts of deprivation of Bishops from their benefices since the conquest to the time of Magna Charta and since that to this age were ever held to be contrary to the lawes of this Kingdome To dance after your Pipe I will not say what a foolish and ridiculous question Reply but what an od tune is this For can a man dance after a pipe before the Pipe be striken up So could acts done before Magna Charta and other lawes since made be sayd to be contrary to them This is as much as one should aske whether Adam

more to be respected Marginall notes G. Powel a True if they continue diligent in their vocation But beyng meÌ„bers rent and cut from the body of the Church of God in this land they are unserviceable for the same What man Haue you unchristened us Are we now Heathen and infidells agayne It may be you will say we are worse Reply lib de Adiaphoris yea you haue already called us Apes Before also in a note we haue been secretly compared to swyne But how then doe you call us your brethren He is certaynly of a strange stocke that hath Schismatikes falss prophets heathens and infidells Apes and swyne to his brethren But it were good that some of the Prelats that made the Canons and doe execute the same did consider in what danger they are by the statute of Excommingment for making and executing Canons contrary to former laws and statuts of this kingdome Heere agayne behold the admirable efficacy of conformity as that wherein consisteth the life of the Church and wherby men are members yea Angels of the Church in England without which men are not so much as members thereof G. Powel b Are they faithfull that fall from their rule of obedience Reply So long as we keepe our selues to Gods word we fall not from our rule or obedience For we acknowledge no other rule or obedience Luther left the rules and obedience of Monks so many other left other rules of Popery Yet I hope you will not deny theÌ„ to haue been faithfull or call them schismatikes As for your rule and obedience of Conformity in some perticulars many of us haue not fallen from them First because we never yelded to them 2 Because to leaue Conformity is not to fall that is to goe downward but to arise that is to goe upward Bittter rootes spring up that is come out of the earth froÌ„ beneath Heb 12 15 prov 15 24 Iames 1.17 But the way of life is on high and every good and perfect gift commeth from aboue They that haue left conformity are more ashamed and greived for having been Conformable then for leavyng it though they pay sweetly for it Further answer to the 12. Argument G. Powel 1 Neither are the prayers of Schismatiks much to be regarded 2 Neither will the Honorable court of ParliameÌ„t altogether neglect the refractary ministers 3 Nether can the refractary ministers in charity but pray for the high court yea in case they did not satisfie their desire This answer consisteth of 3 parts according as I haue noted the same Concernyng the first Reply it is not much to be denyed if men be schismatikes indeed and not only in name Therefore touchyng that and the second neither the answerer nor all the Prelats in the world shall ever proue us schismatikes and refractaryes as they unjustly terme us For the third albeit the High Court of Parliament would doe nothing in our behalfe yet we will say with Samuell 1 Samuell 12 13 Genes 20 7 Ezra 6 10 God forbid that we should sinne against the Lord and cease praying for them Notwithstanding it cannot be denyed but that the more justice and kindnes we shall receiue from them or by them either at this Session or at any other heerafter the more we should be both bound and quickened to pray for them But the zeale of the Parliament in doeyng so much all ready for us as they haue doone is worthy our remeÌ„brance whilst we liue Though it haue not that successe presently that we haue desired yet we know not what it may haue in tyme upon further consideration thereof by his most excellent Majesty and by his wise and most Honorable Counsell No seed groweth presently yea the best seed lyeth longest in ground for the most part before it appeare especially before it yeeld fruit agayne That that is doone also shall be a good evidence for us and for the equity of our cause as also against the Prelats to all posteritie whatsoever reproches and other indignityes in the meane time we susteyne eyther by their speeches or by their vnjust writyng vpon record against us Contradiction or coÌ„trarietie But here is further to be noted the contradiction or at the least the contrariety of this answerer even in this very part of his answer For in the first parte therof he sayth the prayers of Schismatikes are not much to be regarded Where his meaning by comparyng these words with other his termes of being rent cut of froÌ„ the Church obstinat wilfull etc must needes be that our prayers are of no regard In the third parte notwithstanding he sayth that we ought to pray for the Parliament though they should doe nothing for us accordyng to our desire Ought we to doe that which is of no regard of no use of no benefite to no purpose math 12 23 Shall not we giue account of every idle word much more of every idle prayer Yea are not the prayers of all obstinat wilfull impudent schismaticall and seditious persons and of all lyers and false Prophets such as he hath often called vs to be abominatioÌ„ to the Lord prov 15 8 How then are we bound to pray for the Parliament or for any other Are we bound to doe that tnat is sinne and wherof we shall giue an account 2 If they had still made conscience of their duety in their Ministery Reply their prayers had been much more effectuall Behold what conscience these men make of subscription Cross surplice conformity G. Powel and other perticular obedience that make no conscience of preachyng yea not of commyng to their flockes once in a yeare yea some not once in 3. or 4. yeares Is it not strange also that surplice and cross should ad such efficacie to prayers How merry then would it be with England if all men in all places were forced to were a red blue greene white or yellow cross vpon their hats sleeues or brests etc And if every man woman and child might never pray privatly or publikely but in a surplice Further I pray God that such as make so light account of our prayers for them doe not by their hard dealyngs with us force us to cry for help from God against them and then feele the virtue and efficacy of our prayers in this behalfe to their greife For shall not God aveng his elect which cry day and night unto him Luc 10 7 yea though he suffer long for them I tell you he will aveng them quickly Let not this be lightly thought on In the meane tyme also how vilesoever our prayers are in their judgements yet let this answerer all other our greatest adversaryes understand that they are not so in the sense feeling of those mercyes that they doe dayly enjoye as well by our prayers as by their owne For our consciences bearing witnes our prayers are of faith and in truth loue we doubt

Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Text snippets containing the quad