Selected quad for the lemma: parliament_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
parliament_n	act_n	law_n	royal_a	3,099	5	7.8289	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54842	An impartial inquiry into the nature of sin in which are evidently proved its positive entity or being, the true original of its existence, the essentiall parts of its composition by reason, by authority divine, humane, antient, modern, Romane, Reformed, by the adversaries confessions and contradictions, by the judgement of experience and common sense partly extorted by Mr. Hickman's challenge, partly by the influence which his errour hath had on the lives of many, (especially on the practice of our last and worst times,) but chiefly intended as an amulet to prevent the like mischiefs to come : to which is added An appendix in vindication of Doctor Hammond, with the concurrence of Doctor Sanderson, Oxford visitors impleaded, the supreme authority asserted : together with diverse other subjects, whose heads are gathered in the contents : after all A postscript concerning some dealings of Mr. Baxter / by Thomas Pierce ...	Pierce, Thomas, 1622-1691.	1660 (1660)	Wing P2184; ESTC R80	247,562	303

Hypochondres as much as Fame hath affirmed it to have had dominion over his own I never was so inhumane as to upbraid my greatest enemy with any such bodily indisposition and have rather afforded my utmost help But since Mr. Hickman unprovoked could not abstain from objecting a sicknesse to me and such a sicknesse as I have ever by the blessing of God been exempted from it is his own fault onely though my misfortune that I am forced to expose him in this point also And for the future I do beseech him not to meddle in matters of which he hath not any knowledge nor to have so little mercy upon himself as to scourge his guilty self upon an innocent mans back but rather to conceal his great infirmities or onely reveal them to his Physician and apply himself to the means of cure I might in favour and mercy to him have prompted his Readers to believe that it was but his spleenative Conceit which made him say in his Epistle wherewith he dedicates his collection that the Doctrines printed before my birth were the meer chimaera's of my brain For which prodigious Adventure he is not capable of excuse unlesse his flatulent Hypocondres made him a kind of Pythagorean so as to fancy a transmigration of Calvin's soul into my body I am sure Pythagoras is reported to have thought himself to be Aethalides the son of Mercurie and that Aethalides being dead he became Euphorbus and that Euphorbus being departed he passed also into Hermotimus and that Hermotimus dying he lived in Pyrrhus the Fisherman And after Pyrrhus his decease he again survived in Pythagoras Sure 't were better for Mr. Hickman to think that my soul was once in Calvin or Zuinglius or Dr. Twisse then to call their writings the meer chimaera's of my brain or wilfully to deny what hath been read by thousands and may be seen in those Writers by all Mankind who can but read them The former I say were so much better then the later by how much better it is to be sick then sinfull And so 't were charity to imagine if that were possible to be done that this was one of Mr. Hickman's Hypochondriacal conceits § 76. It may be taken for one at least that he should charge me with Impudence against the Supreme Authority of the Nation p. 45. For if he deals syncerely as well as simply he hence inferr's the Oxford Visitors Mr. Cheynel and Mr. Wilkinson and such like things to have had the Supremacy in his opinion They alone being the men by whom I complaind I had been injur'd in their Transgressing the Prescriptions of those that sent them And loosers by a Proverb have still had liberty to complain I did but modestly hope Mr. Hickman would pay me my Arrears when again and again he tells his Readers I am impudent p. 45. and 47. so impudent I am as to own my Right though not so simple as to expect it And it is strange that Mr. Hickman should thus revile me for onely presuming to hope well of him or for refusing to dissemble what was so visibly my due So when the owner in the Parable sent for fruits of his Vineyard the Husbandmen abused his severall Messengers as well as sent them away empty I will not say of Mr. Hickman that he is impudent because his manners are none of mine but I must needs admire the strange nature of his modesty when he denyed a matter of Fact however attested by all mens eyes Sect. 77. If he means the two Houses by the Supreme Authority of the Nation as he seems to do pag. 47. he contradicts the fundamental Laws of the Land the Canons of the Church the Oathes of Allegeanc● and Supremacy and implicitely censures all the Members of the House of Commons by whom the Visitors were sent in the year 1648. as guilty of willful perjury when they took those oathes b●fore they sate or could sit as members in the House of Commons 1. The members of Parliament did even sw●ar in taking the Oath of Supremacy That the Kings Highn●ss is the onely Supreme Governour of this Realm and of all other his Dominions and Countreys as well in all Spiritual and Ecclesiasticall Things or Causes as Temporal 2. The King was ever acknowledged in the Prayers of the Clergie before their Se●mons to be the Supreme Head and Governour in all Causes and over all P●rsons Ecclesiasticall and Civill Nor may we think that the Clergie were either taught o● commanded to lye to God in their Publick prayers Nay 3. he was utt●rly testified and in conscience declared as well by the members of Parliament as by other subjects upon oath to be not onely the Supreme which shews that none can be above him but Solus Supremus Moderator as Dr. Sanderson observes the Sole and Onely Supreme Head and Governour which shews that none can be so besides him or that none can be equal to him 4. In the generall judgement of knowing men and of Dr. Sanderson in particular The Kings Supremacy is imported by the stile of Dread Soveraign and Soveraign Lord and that of Majesty expressions used by the two Houses of the late long Parliament in their h●mble Petitions and addresses unto the King nor need I here tell my Reader what an humble Petition is set to signifie and as well in the most solemn establishment of Laws as in actions and forms of Jurisdiction 5. Magna Charta was first granted in effect by King Iohn and confirmed with that Title by Henry the third of his mere free will and so the liberties of the subject cannot with reason be presumed to lessen the King of his Supremacie 6. Other Statutes which have the force of Acts of Parliament are known to be directed as private Writs with a Teste Meipso And the common stile of most others is found to run in this strain The King with the advice of the Lords at the humble Petition of the Commons wills this or that so the form of passing Bills is still observed to be this L● Ro● le veult The King will have it And s●it faict comme il est desiré Let it be done as it is desired plainly speaking by way of Grant to something sought or petitioned for From whence by some it hath been gathered that the R●ga●ion of Laws does rightly belong to the two Houses but the Legislation unto the King That their Act is Prepar●tive his onely Iussive 7. That Supremacy of Power which the Law hath invested the King withall is not onely over all particular persons but also over all states which all the subjects of this Realm and the Members of Parliament in particular are bound by oa●h both to acknowledge and to maintain And which they grant to be his Due when they desire him to protect them in their priviledges and call him alwayes in their Acts Their onely Soveraign Lord or their Royal Soveraign 8. The

as a secret not according to the vote of his guilty Brethren who never charged me with ought no not so much as a suspicion Much less did they dare to let me know my Accuser for fear I should prove him a false Accuser and spoil the trade they then were driving Much less yet would they indure that I should have the least tryall fair or foul because they were conscious of the nothing that they were abl● to say against me Their dealing with me in that affair puts me in mind of what I read in an English book There was nothing so common in those Times as a charge without a● Accuser a sentence without a Iudge and a condemnation without a hearing But I was condemned without a charge too And it seems by no Judge that will own the Judg●ment For § 85. Mr. Hickman is fain to say that I was turned out of my Fellowship not by the Visitors but by the Committee of Lords and Commons for non-submission to the Authority of Parliament in visiting the Vniversity p. 47. To which I answer 1. That my Answer to the Visitors was judged rational and modest by Doctor Reynolds who therefore told me it was impossible I should be banished onely for that but rather for being at least suspected to have written some Books but what books they were or why I was suspected the Author of them he either could not or woul● not tell me 2. Mr. Hickman layes the whole fault on the Lords and Commons which I ascribe unto the Visitors transgressing the Commission by which they sate For would the Lords and Commons undo an Orphan for being modest and conscientiously desirous to gain some time to the end he might not answer but upon due consideration This would justifie Philanglus in the book above mention'd when he said That many were outed their Free-holds Liberty and Livelyhoods before any examination much less conviction and that the order of a Committee was commonly made to controlle the fundamentall Lawes of the Land I rather think that the Visitors did return a false answer and so abused the Lords and Commons then that persons of so much honour would be the authors of such a fact as Doctor Reynolds although a Visitor so much abhorred and never would give his consent unto But Mr. Hickman doth acknowledge that the two Houses may do amiss for he dares not undertake in all things to acquit them p. 48. § 86. But why doth he call it the Authority of Parliament which he confesseth at other Times to be no more then two Houses A Parliament without a King much more against him is a contradiction in adjecto Well said Judge Ienkins The leggs Arms and Trunck of the body cannot be above the Head nor have life without it So that supposing the King to be but one of the 3. States of which a Parliament doth consist He is a part and that the highest But in truth saith the learned Judge The King is none of the three estates but above them all The three estates are the Lords Spiritual the Lords Temporal and the Commons And so Mr. Hickman is unexcusable in beheading the Parliament by excl●ding the King from his Royal Birthright § 87. Again Mr. Hickman proceeds to ask Is it not Impudence to say that the Visitors authorized by the two Houses under the broad Seal of England could not make me his legitimate successor p. 47. To which I answer 1. that the Visitors were never authorized by the two Houses to condemn me without some little hearing or to huddle up their sentence and Execution without Accuser or witness or accusation face to face 2. The two Houses could onely make an Ordinance not an Act of Parliament which is a Law as the Houses themselves have oft confessed And Laws are the things which bind the people Nay 3. If any statute shall be made against Magna Charta and so against Bishops provided for by Magna Charta and confirmed by thirty two Acts of Parliament or against any man's right without a triall according to Law It is by Law declared null 42. Ed. 3. ch 1. But it seems Mr. Hickman is like Oliver Cromwell whose foul-mouth'd by-word was wont to be Magna Charta Magna Farta Nay 4. It is resolved in Law Books that if an Act of Parliament referr to or confirm a thing which is not as for a man to be a Iudge or witness in his own case or a thing that is misrecited or repugnant or impossible to be performed there the common Law shall controll and adjudge such an Act to be meerly void Now we who were of the Dispersion through the Avarice and Revenge of the cruel Visitors did find those Visitors in very great part at once our Iudges our Iuries our Executioners and our Heirs Had they dealt sincerely with us and bid us plainly leave our Fellowships because they had Sons and Nephews or other good friends to be cared for as the Fox was syncere when he bid the Cock come down from the Tree alledging this reason that he was hungry I should not have used them as now I do though I use them better then they did me But their pretending to Reformation and Iustice too did make their sin exceeding sinfull 5. The Broad Seal which he speaks of is called by Judge Ienkins a Counterfeit Seal And the Counterfeiting of that he proves High Treason Last of all I will add that we were taught in our Catechism by our common mother the Church of England that we are bound by God in the fifth Commandment to honour and obey not the two Houses but the King not the two Houses and the King but the King and his ministers Saint Peter accordingly commanding us to Submit our selves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake instructs us to do it to the King as Supreme and unto Governours as sent by him Now were the Visitors really sent by him Or were they not flatly sent against Him Whether so or so Let it be judged by the Case of the University the most materiall part of which shall now become my next Section § 88. The onely question which is by these men propos'd to every single person in the University is Whether we will submit to their Visitation or to the power of Parliament as they call it in this Visitation That without the Personall Consent of the King to this Commission as far as it respects the University in General and us as members thereof we cannot now submit to any Visitation without incurring the guilt of manifold perjuries In reference to our Vniversity oathes we have long since given an Account by way of Plea to these men That our particular Locall or Collegiate Statutes which define us particular Visitors in our particular Colledges bind us under the same most evident perjury to submit to no other Visitation but that which the

Kings Prerogative as well as Magna Charta is proved by Iudge Ienkins to be a principall part of the common Law and Royal Government a Law fundamental Nay 9. It is proved by the same most learned and pious Iudge That the Supreme power even in time of Parliament was declared by both Houses to belong unto the King 10. The Kings Supremacy hath been proved by so many Arguments out of Bracton as may be seen in Dudley Diggs The Reasons of the Vniversity of Oxford Iudge Ienkins and the like that I shall onely translate some few short passages into English The King saith he hath power and Iurisdiction over all who are within his Kingdome and none but He. Every one is under the King and he under God onely He hath no Peer or equal with his Kingdome m●ch less is inferiour unto his subjects God alone is his superiour and to God alone is he accomptable In a word The things that concern Iurisdiction and Peace or are annexed to peace and Iustice do belong to none but to the Crown and the Kingly Dignity nor can they be separated from the Crown for as much as the Crown consisteth in them 11. The Kings supremacy is evinced from the Nature of all his subjects Tenures they holding their Lands of him in Fee Whi●h though it gives a perpe●ual Estate yet is it not absolute but conditionall as depending on the acknowledgement of superiority and as being forfeitable upon the non-performance of some duties on which supposition it still returns unto the King For the breach of Fidelity is loss of Fee In short it is agreed among the most learned in the Law ● That the King alone hath such a property in all his Lands as Lawyers are wont to call Ala●dium because he doth hold in his own full Right without any service or payment of Rent because from God onely 2. That subjects of all Degrees do hold their Lands ut Feuda in the nature of Fee which implyes Fealty to a Superiour 12. The Oath of Allegeance hath the force of another Oath of Supremacy For Legiancy is defined to be an obligation upon all subjects to take part with their Liege Lord against all men living to aid and assist him with their bodies and minds with their advise and power not to lift up their arms against him nor to support in any way those that oppose him Now as no Liege Lord can acknowledge any Superiour and though bound to some duties is not bound under pain of Forfeiture so subjects on the other side are Homines Ligii all Liege-men owing him Faith and Allegiance as their Superiour Which Faith if they violate He is enabled by the Law as being the Fountain of Iurisdiction saith Master Diggs to seiz upon their Goods and Lands and to destroy their persons too Whereas if He fail in the discharge of his duty he is not subject to any Forfeiture by any Law of the Land I could ever hear of and Mr. Diggs hath challenged all the world to name any Doctor Sanderson also affirmeth That if a King who is Supreme should do the things that are proposed 1 Sam. 8. and Rule as a Tyrant by no other Law then his own hearts lust he would yet be unaccountable on this side Heaven however liable to the wrath of the Soveraign Iudge of all the World For however such a Tyrant may abuse his power yet the power is His which he abuseth and who shall say unto the King what dost thou Eccles. 8.4 a Text produced by the late King of most blessed Memorie against his own most unnatural and Blood Triers 13. There is an antient Monument saith Mr. Diggs p. 83. which shews the manner of holding a Parliament before the conquest The King is the head the beginning and the end of the Parliament and so he hath not any equal in his Degree This I cite to anticipate Mr. Hi●kman's possible objection 14. The King by Law hath just power to pass acts of Parliament by his great Seal to grant out Commissions of Oyer and Terminer for the holding of Assisses to adjourn the Term to whatsoever place he pleaseth To make Iustices of Peace which wholly depends on his will and pleasure To pardon Delinquents and Malefactors a priviledge by law estated solely in the King To choose his Officers to protect all persons to coin money to make leagues with forrein Princes to dispose the Militia to call and dissolve Parliaments And to be in one word Le dernier Resort de la Iustice. 15. In the thirty seventh Article of the Church of England The King or Queen is declared to have the chief Power in this Realm of England c. to whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain And this called the Prerogative which hath alwayes been given to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself that they shall rule all Estates and all Degrees Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil sword the stubborn and evil Doers 16. And accordingly in the Canons by law established in the Church A Supreme Power is declared to be given by God in Scripture to the sacred order of Kings which is there also declared to be of Divine Right And that for any person or persons to set up maintain or avow in any their said Realms respectively under any pretence whatsoever any Independent co-active power either Papal or popular whether directly or indirectly is to undermine their great Royal office and cunningly to overthrow that most sacred ordinance which God himself hath established and so is treasonable against God as well as against the King This I earnestly recommend to Mr. Hickman his consideration and that which follows in the Canon viz. That for subjects to bear Arms against their Kings offensive or defensive upon any pretence whatsoever is at the least to resist the powers which are ordained of God And though they do not invade but onely resist 17. Saint Paul tells them plainly They shall receive to themselves damnation The most excellent Recognition which was made by both Houses in the first year of King Iames is so worthy to be written in Letters of Gold and so needfull to be rivetted in the hearts and memories of the people who desire to have a conscience void of offence towards God and men that I think I shall deserve many an honest man's thanks who hath either never known or hath forgot what once he knew by inserting some part upon this occasion The King is our onely rightfull and lawfull Leige Lord and Soveraign we do upon the knees of our heart adnize constant Faith Loyalty and Obedience to the King and his Royall Progeny in this high Court of Parliament where all the body of the Realm is either in Person or by representation we do acknowledge that the true and

sincere Religion of the Church is continued and established by the King And do recognize as we are bound by the law of God and man the Realm of England and the Imperiall Crown thereof doth belong to him by inherent birthright and lawfull and undoubted succession and submit our selves and our posterities for ever untill the last drop of bloud be spent to his rule and beseech the King to accept the same as the first fruits of our Loyalty and Faith to his Majesty and his posterity for ever and for that this Act is not compleat nor perfect without his Majesties assent the same is humbly desired This proves saith Judge Ienkins 1. That the Houses are not above the King 2. That Kings have not their titles to the Crown by the two Houses but 3. by inherent birth-right and 4. That there can be no Statute without his express assent and so 5. It destroyes the Chimaera of the Kings virtuall being in the Houses 18. The Kings Proclamations heretofore to severall purposes were of no less force then Acts of Parliament And the ground of it was that the supremitie of the Regal power is given by God And however that Act was indeed repealed by the meek concession of King Edward the sixth yet the Reason of the Repeal is recorded to have been this A willingness in the King to gratifie his people up●n trust that they would not abuse the same but rather be encouraged with more faithfulness and diligence to serve his Highness So when Charles the First passed a Bill for the continuance of the long Parliament indefinitely it was upon their promise that the gracious favour of his Majesty expressed in that Bill should not encourage them to do any thing which otherwise had not been sit to be done And so good is the Rule in the Civil Law Cessante causa cessat Lex That the Lords and Commons even of that very Parliament did d●clare it to hold good in Acts of Parliament 19. When 't was declared by all the Iudges and Sergeants of Law that it cannot be said the King doth wrong it was by a Periphrasis A Declaration of his Sup●emacy For the meaning of it must be say the greatest Lawyers That what the King doth in point of Jurisdiction he doth by his Iudges who are sworn to deal legally between the King and his people So as the Judges may be questioned for violation of Law but the King is unaccountable and on his person or power no Reflection is to be made § 78. Thus I have given such an account of the proper subject of Supremacy as my Notes of Observation suggest unto me at this time I gather'd my Notes more especially for my private use and information that I might know what Party I ought to own in these times of Triall and Temptation partly out of the Papers which passed betwixt the King and both Houses of Parliament partly from the writings of Mr. Prin Mr. Diggs Iudge Ienkins and Dr. Langbane partly out of the Book of Statutes though I have not time to consult them much Many more Arguments I could urge out of the works of Iudge Ienkins but that I find them too many to be transcribed in this Appendix and withall I consider that book is cheap and little and I hope easily to be had which makes me choose to referr my Readers to his whole Lex Terrae from page 8. to page 63. I have been so convinced by all put together which hath been said as I cannot but conclude with the most Learned and moderate Doctor Sanderson That at least amongst us here in England there can be nothing more certain or conspicuous unless we will not use our eyes but rather choose to be blind at noon by stoutly winking against the Sun then that the power of these Three Kingdoms doth onely belong to his Serene and Supreme Royall Majesty This is said by that great and judicious Casuist in his stating the obligation and efficient cause of humane Lawes After which if Mr. Hickman shall yet contend that the Oxford Visitors were commissioned by the Supreme Authority of the Nation though by the two Houses onely not onely without but against the pleasure of the King I will onely referr him to certain Notes on the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance in a late-Printed Book which is thus ●ntitled The Resurrection of Loyalty and Obedience out of the Grave of Rebellion § 80. But I printed saith Mr. Hickman as if I had right to two Fellowships and asks how else he is but one of my receivers p 46. To which I answer 1. That for any thing I know Mr. Hickman succeeded him that succeeded me And my words of him were these that for ought I know he may be in possession of mine own fellowship c. Or 2. If he did not succeed my successor but that his Robbery is immediate not once removed I will give him an Answer to chew upon out of the Digests When a number of men do jo●● their strength to steal a piece of Timber or any thing else which is anothers which none of them singly could have carried away Vlpian saith that each of them severally as well as all of them joyntly is lyable to an action for the double value of the thing And so when the right of a Society is invaded by a Society which was our case in Magd. Colledge when almost all were at once bereaved by men of violence all may require their right of all and every man from every man For every man by partnership is an Accessary to all that have done the wrong as well as principall in part and indefinitely and so responsible to all who receive the wrong or do require a reparation I could prove to Mr. Hickman that he is guilty of the Visitor's sin by accepting the spoils of their injustice But I am ready to pardon though not to dissemble my being injur'd § 81. I had but said by such a figure as is allowable in Scripture It seems the Visitors made him one of my Receivers and Vsu-fructuaries when taking my words by the wrong handle he pretends that His is the usus-fructus p. 46. But 1. he knows I there added That my legitimate Successor they could not make him which is a proof that what I spake was of what they did not ought to do And a Facto ad Ius no good Argument is to be drawn The Visitors made him my Receiver as they made their strength the law of justice Or as Lambert made Cromwell the Kings Receiver 'T is easie for one man to be m●de an other man's Receiver and yet by a Proverb to be as bad as the thief that made him The sons of violence and rapine made one another what they pleased as opportunity and power was in their hands So it was said by Doctor Heylin that Mr. Hickman had made a Book But he presently added As

openly in the Court well Iesuites and Priests they say you are none but you are their Brethren pag. 52. Loves Trial. Nor do I really think that Mr. Baxter is a Iesuite though I have proved him to be such according to the Logick in which he deals I also proved he was an * Heathen by an Argument ad hominem beyond exception of which 't is well he is so cunning as not to make the least mention § 21. He concludes his postscript as I shall mine with the odious part of the puritanism of his Life of which he saith he hears little from me but his own confessions and his possessing a sequestration for he was loath to call it another mans Living concerning which he answe●s nothing not any one word to all my Chapter but onely saith he might answer if the love of Mr. Dance restrained him not p. 329 In which parcell of Expressions there are observable particulars to which I shall return these following things 1. Though I insisted pretty largely on many points of his practical Puritanism as all will say who will but read my New Discoverer Discover'd and therefore this is one of his many falsehoods yet now I hope in this Postscript he will find a supply of my former mercifull defect at which he must not be angry because he hath made it thus needfull for me 2. The first and worst Puritanes at least in Christendome were the Followers of Marcus that monstrous Heretick And Mr. Baxter as neer as any hath written after that Copy Those Antient Haereticks made Accompt they were so pure and perfect and under such an Incapacity to fall from Grace and Gods favour that they might live in any course of the greatest sin without the least fear because without the least danger of being damn'd For by the Benefit of Redemption they had a priviledge of Impunity for all their sins which was not indulged to other Mortals And in the midst of all their villanies they were protected with such an Helmet as they had read of in Homers Iliads And by that as by a ●kreen they were made invisible to the Iudge Now whether Mr. Baxter does hope to hide himself from God as Pallas in Homer from the discovery of Mars or as Gyges went invisible by the priviledge of his Ring or is carried away by the vehement strength of his opinion That being once godly he must be alwayes unavoidably and though God cannot but see yet can he not punish his impieties with pains eternal whether he sticks to his famous Doctrine That a man must be a greater sinner then David was in his Murder and Adultery Peter in his perjury and denyal of Christ Lot in his Drunkenness and Incest and Solomon in his Idolatry before he can be said to be notoriously ungodly sure I am I have evinced he is as scandalous in his life as in his Doctrine Because I have proved the Kings Supremacie and that in respect of the two Houses even of that very Parliament under which Mr Bax●er doth seek for shelter And having proved him to have been a perfidious Rebell Reader 't is his own expression by having proved the very thing upon which he confesseth he must be such and gives the world leave to say He is worse then a Murderer an Adulterer a Drunkard and the like still I speak his own words I think I need not add more concerning his Puritanism of Life Before I leave this sub●ect which yet I will never leave finally whil●t Mr Baxter shall be so dareing as to continue a publick Advocate for the worst of Hypocrites whose Rebellions Murders Schism Sacrilege have evinced them to be such by many an ocular demonstration I will add the character which Salmasius hath given of our Puritanes who yet was a friend and Patron to them untill he was converted by seeing their usage of the King Belli isti sane Puritani sub Regno Elizabethae prodire è Tenebris ORCI Ecclesiam inde turbare primùm coeperunt persuadent sibi se posse cujuslibet sceleris es●e Affines tamen sanctitatem in medio sceleris Actu retinere In English thus Those goodly Puritanes did first come forth from the dark pit of Hell under the Reign of Queen Elizabeth And thence began to disturb the Church They persuade themselves that being once sanctified they may ingage in any villany and yet in the very act retain their sanctity 3. It were Puritanism enough if he had onely invaded his Neighbours goods and Intitled God's service to his Impiety If he shall say he is established by any Ordinance of the two Houses which without the King cannot possibly be a legal and Rightfull Parliament I shall first referr him for satisfaction to my whole Chapter upon the subject against which he hath not off●rd one word of Answer Next I shall tell him that the two Houses were bound to keep Magna Charta and not to break it And so they were told by his Sacred Majesty in his Printed Proclamation against the opp●ession of the Clergy by the Insurrection of Factious and Schismaticall persons into their cures c. wherein he said 1. That by the great Charter of England no Ecclesiastical Possession may be sequestred but by the Ordinary 2. That what ever was pretended men of learning and piety were dispossessed for their Loyalty 3. That he straitly charged and commanded all his subjects as well Ecclesiastical as Temporal not to presume to intermeddle in that affair notwithstanding any sequestration or pretended orders or ordinances or other command whatsoever of one or both Houses of Parliament 4. That if any should presume to transgress this command he did hereby declare them to infringe the good old Law of the Land and to assist a Rebellion against himself Let Mr. Baxter mark that and read the whole Proclamation to be seen in Bibliotheca Regia § 3. p. 324. 4. By saying he could say I know-not-what-of Master Dance if love did not restrain him he does maliciously imply that Mr. Dance is as scandalous as himself or at least somewhat near it Whether a drunkard or a swearer he leaves the Reader to suspect There is no worse slandering an Innocent man than by such a Paralypsis as here is used Was it not enough for Mr. Baxter to seize on his neighbours goods but he must slur his good name too 'T was ill done of Antinous to eat Vlysses his meat and to beat him too into the bargain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Mr. Baxter ought to chew upon Vlysses his Answer thereupon and if he can digest it 't will do him good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 22. I should here have concluded with Mr. Baxter but that in casting back my eye upon his p. 299. I find him railing at others somewhat more then at my self He saith