Praesidem te nacti Mores integerrimo cultu refingere ardemus Leges ipsas sanare limam expolire qud sumus formandi omnia denique conari ut prudentissimae vestrae Praefecturae obsequium geramus excultissimum Hortatu molli nos adhuc duxit Clementia vestra parituro simillimus imperasti Lora jam accipe quibus impellas Vltrò compegimus jugum quod pronis Cervicibus annectas vestrisque manibus recepta jura obsequendi praestituent affectum libertatem ex onere ferent Vestrum itaque Patrocinium implorant unà nobiscum Statuta quae olim congesta intra manus Cancellarii Pole tantum consenuerunt suisque funeribus jam revirescentia Praesulatum vestrum 〈◊〉 sunt visa ut Gratiam pondus authenticum à Te accipiant vestrum annexum Diploma Statutis ipsis valentiùs nos componant Quibus ad umbilicum perductis si manum ultimam adjicias obsignando non Chartis 〈◊〉 Sigillum quà m Animo nostro insiges Beneficium Dat. in Domo Congregationis 12 Cal. Sept. Amplitudini vestrae supplex Acad. Oxon. Honoratissime 〈◊〉 LIteras adhuc quod recordari non parùm juvat rogante Calamo conscriptas misimus nullas adeo praepropera votis obvia semper fuit Humanitas vestra ut Academia Clientis negotio defuncta solo beneficiorum argumento laboraverit Ex omni parte Teipsum 〈◊〉 magnificum Antistitem attestatus es in omni genere vestra erga nos claruit indulgentia indigenti Academiae te Benefactorem experti sumus periclitanti Advocatum utpote qui meritissimum vestrum Vicecancellarium in jus discrimen vocatum non modo incolumem securum praestitisti sed etiam potiorem Chartaeque victrici interpretatione illustrem Cui quidem pro Humanitate suâ candidiori fortasse quà m oportebat Chartae interpreti venia habenda fuit maxima Quid enim verisimilius fuit quà m quòd illic delitescerit hujusmodi Privieglium Caelestium tranquillitas orbium non statim in ventos tempestates desinit quae adjacet regio aliquomodo caelestis est pluviasque tonitrua ruptisque nubibus emicantem fulguris stricturam ex intervallo despicit ità profecto aequissimum fuit ut Academia nostra illud Coeli emblema sua privilegia immunitates ad finitimos transmitteret tam sacra 〈◊〉 ut otium suum libertatem etiam jumentis impertiret Quod quidem privilegium utcunque antehac in gratiam honestatem Academiae minimè sancitum fuit nihilominus nunc demum summâ vestrâ prudentiâ authoritate confirmatum accepimus Tuum est meherclè quod Domini commune cum Bobus suis jugum non subeunt quòd adobeunda Reipublicae munia non stimulis urgentur eadem necessitate agitantur aurigae quâ jumenta Itaque non est ut fugendis Reipub. negotiis ingemiscant Operarii quod eorum Sarracae ut Bootae plaustrum pigro nolenti gradu procedant sed laeto alacri Quippè quòd solet esse maximo vehiculis gravamini Tuo Patrocinio sublevatur convectandi necessitas Adeo hoc insigne Privilegium consecuti sumus ut emancipato vehiculi usu Principi nostro Reique publicae non morigeri sed benefici habeamur in gloria 〈◊〉 cedat parere Has Gratias solenni formula charactere Amplitudini Tuae consecravimus hoc exploratum habentes fore ut expeditius ita sincerius 〈◊〉 magnificentiâ dignius Gratiarum genus agnoscere quà m rependere Beneficium Dat. in Domo Congregationis 12. Cal. Septemb. 1633. Amplitudini vestrae devinctissima Acad. Oxon. Reverendissime Cancellarie ACcepimus Membranam vestrâ Prudentiâ cogitatam gratiâ imimpetratam nobis autem vix desideratam quidem Itaque rursus agnoscimus affectus viri plusque Sympathiam Quis enim non suspiceret alternis malo vehementiùs laborantem quis non miraretur Medicum magis affectum morbi aestimatione quam aegrotantem dolore Hujusmodi tamen experimentum in Te Reverendissime Praesul comptum habemus Fateri cogimur vestram erga nos solicitudinem curam nostro sensu acriorem esse Academiae inopiam Tibi clariùs certiùs innotescere quà m patientibus Ante Chartam à Te impetratam Pecunia aliis Regina nostris ne Ancillae quidem officia praestitit Aurum abiit in contemptum stercoris jacuitque magis sepultum in Academico AErario quà m in Fodina Passi sumus prodigium Midae contrarium Aurum inter manus adulterium evasit quod defoecatissimum fuit tactu nostro pulchritudinem suam naturae precium amisit Hoe nobis quidem ingens magnificum indulgentissimo autem vestrae Prudentiae oculo parum videbatur Quemadmodum enim rei ita dignitatis nostrae Curam egisti Non satis esse Academiae existimabas praediis annuisque Redditibus foras ditescere nisi habitâ etiam pulchritudinis honestatis ratione domi floreret Magalia Collegiis admota aegrè tuleris iniquissimum enim videbatur ut mendicantium querelis adderetur Societatis fastidium iisque qui tantum auribus debent nec oculis parcerent ulterius progrederis Nostrûm adeo Studiosus es ut dignatus sis obicibus quoque viarum moris prospexisse omnem angulum velis verè Academicum ipsas Plateas Scholarum elegantiam induere Quod solum restat candidissimo vestro imperio ceriè morem quas possumus gratias praestabimus Angiportus dilatabimus transeuntes praeclusura impedimenta amovebimas viasque quantum in nobis est sternemus decoras latas quo nihil majus polliceri audemus vestrae quoque amplitudinis capaces Dat in Domo Con. gregationis 14. Cal. April Gratiae Amplitudini vestrae devinctissima Academia Oxon. TO all Christian People to whom these presents shall come William by God's Providence Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Primate of all England and Metropolitan Chancellour of the University of Oxon. sendeth greeting in our Lord God everlasting Whereas by the Customs Liberties and Privileges of this University of Oxon. by Kings and Queens of this Realm of England granted and by Acts of Parliament confirmed unto the said University amongst other noble Privileges and Favours the Clerkship of the Market within the said University and the allowing approving and correcting of Weights and Measures and the well ordering and governing the sd Market for the benefit of the sd University and the Buyers and Sellers therein is granted and confirmed to the Chancellour Masters and Scholars of the said University of Oxon. and the Execution thereof to the Chancellour or his Deputy the Vice-Chancellour of of the said University for the time being And whereas we find that heretosore in our Predecessors times there hath been a publick Officer by them assigned and appointed to look to the cleansing and keeping sweet the Market Place and to take the just and due Toll for the Measuring of Corn and Grain and to keep true and equal Bushels Pecks and Half-Pecks that there be no fraud committed between the
1. But the Rule drawn down to particulars is from the the commended Practice of the Kings of Juda under the Law Now if these can give us no Rule then we have none at all brought down to particulars wherein that Power consists And here this Lord being a known Separatist from the Church of England as appears most manifestly by another Speech of his Lordship 's in Parliament and printed with this separates I doubt from her Doctrine too and will not could he speak out with safety allow Kings any Power at all in Church Affairs more than to be the Executioners to see the Orders of their Assemblyes executed in such things as they need the Civil Sword And therefore he doth wisely in his generation to say That the things which were before can give no Rule in this The other is that there is of late a Name of Scorn fastned upon the Brethren of the Separation and they are commonly called Round-heads from their Fashion of cutting close and rounding of their Hair A Fashion used in Paganism in the times of their Mournings and sad occurrences as these seem to do puting on in outward shew at least a sowr Look and a more severe Carriage than other Men. This Fashion of Rounding the Head God himself forbids his People to practise the more to withdraw from the Superstitions of the Gentiles Ye shall not round the Corners of your Heads Lev. 19. 27. This express Text of Scripture troubled the Brownists and the rest extreamly and therefore this Lord being a great favourer of theirs if not one himself hath thought upon this way to ease their minds and his own For 't is no matter for this Text nor for their resembling Heathen Idolaters they may round their Heads safely since those things which were before can give no Rule in this And I do not doubt but that if this World go on the dear Sisters of these Rattle-heads will no longer keep silence in their Churches or Conventicles since the Apostle surely is deceived where he saith that Women are not permitted to speak in the Churches because they are to be under Obedience as also saith the Law 1 Cor. 14. For the Law and those things which were before can give no Rule in this and therefore they shall not need to go as high as Adam to answer this They shall not need in this nor we in that of Episcopacy go so high as Adam But yet we may if we will for so high the Apostle goes in this place And I thank this Lord for that Liberty if he means so well that though we need not go so high yet we may if we list And this is most certain that any State Christian may receive all or as much of the Judicial Law of Moses as they please and find fit for them and as much of the Ceremonial as detracts not from Christ come in the Flesh. And since all Law is a Rule this could not be done if those Laws being before could be no Rule to us This is proof enough as I conceive that these things which were before can give a Rule to us now under the Gospel My Lord thinks not so for this Reason Because they are of another Nature Secondly therefore the Reason comes to be examined Wherein I shall weigh two things First Whether the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Christ are things of another Nature and how far And Secondly Whether this be universally true that among things of another Nature one cannot give a Rule to another 1. For the first I shall easily acknowledge a great deal of difference between the Law and the Gospel They differ in the Strictness of the Covenant made under either They differ in the Sacraments and Sacramentals used in either They differ in the Extent and Continuance of either They differ in the Way and Power of justifying a Sinner and perhaps in more things than these And in these things in which they thus differ and qua as they so differ the Law can give no Rule to Christians but whether these differences do make the Law and the Gospel things of quite another Nature which are the words here used I cannot but doubt a little First because more or less strictness doth not vary the Covenant in Nature though it doth in Grace for Magis Minus non variant speciem More or Less in any thing does not make a specifical Difference and therefore not in Nature And use of different Sacraments do not make things to be of another Nature where Res Sacramenti the Substance of the Sacrament is one and the same And so 't is here For one and the same Christ is the Substance of Circumcision and the Pascal Lamb as well as of Baptism and the Eucharist For our Fathers under the Law did all cat the same spiritual meat and did all drink of the same spiritual drink for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them And that Rock was Christ 1 Cor. 10. 3 4. And much less can Extent or Continuance vary Nature Not Extent for Fire contained in a Chimny and spread miserably over a City is one and the same in Nature Not Continuance for then a Father and his Son should not be of the same Nature if the one live longer than the other And as for the way and Power of Justification they difference the Law and the Gospel not so much in their Nature as in their Relation to Christ who alone is our Justification 1 Cor. 1. 30. and was theirs also who lived under the Law for both they and we were and are justified by the same Faith in the same Christ. And this seems to me very plain in Scripture For to this day saith the Apostle the Vail remains upon the Jews in the reading of the Old Testament which Vail is done away in Christ but we all with open Face behold as in a glass the Glory of the Lord 2 Cor. 3. 14 18. So one and the same Christ is in the Old Testament as well as in the New Not so plainly but there though under a Vail Now a Vail on and a Vail off a dimmer and a clearer sight in and by the one than by the other do in no case make the things of another Nature Again We find it expresly written Gal. 3. 24. That the Law was our School-master to bring us to Christ that we might be justified by Faith Our School-master therefore it must needs be able to give Rules unto us or else it can never teach us And the Rules it gives are very good too or else they can never bring us unto Christ that we may be justified by Faith which to do St. Paul here tells us is the End of the Law 's Instruction And this Instruction it could not so fully give if this School-master were so of another Nature as that it could not give us a Rule in this Besides the Type and the Antitype the Shadow and the Substance
Inconvenience by Bishops sitting in the House of Parliament is no less prejudicial to the Kingdom Where first I observe that this Lord accounts the Pope's ruling in this Kingdom but a matter of inconvenience for so his words imply For that must be one Inconvenience if the Bishops voting be the other and I am sure the Laws both of this Church and State make it far worse than an Incovenience Had I said thus much I had been a Papist out of Question Secondly I 'll appeal to any prudent and moderate Protestant in the Christian World whether he can possibly think that the Bishops having Votes in the Parliaments of England can possibly be as great or no less an Inconvenience than the Pope's Supremacy here And I believe this Lord when he thinks better of it will wish these words unsaid Well! but what then is this inconvenience that is so great Why my Lord tells us 't is because they have such an absolute dependency upon the King that they sit not there as free-Men Where first 't is strange to me and my Reason that any dependency on the King be it never so absolute can be possibly so great an Inconvenience to the King as that upon an Independent foreign Power is the King being sworn to the Laws but the Pope being free and as he challenges not only independent from but superiour to both King and Laws Secondly I conceive the Bishops dependency is no more absolute upon the King than is the dependence of other Honourable Members of that House and that the Bishops sit there as absolute free-men as any others not excepting his Lordship And of this Belief I must be till the contrary shall be proved which his Lordship goes thus about to do That which is requisite to Freedom is to be void of Hopes and Fears he that can lay down these is a Free-man and will be so in this House But for the Bishops as the case stands with them it is not likely they will lay aside their Hopes greater Bishopricks being still in expectancy and for their Fears they cannot lay them down since their Places and Seats in Parliament are not invested in them by Blood and so hereditary but by annexation of a Barony to their Office and depending upon that Office so that they may be 〈◊〉 of their Office and thereby of their Places at the King's pleasure My Lord's Philosophy is good enough for to be void of Hopes and Fears is very requisite to Freedom and he that can lay these down is a Free-man or may be if he will But whether he will be so in that great House I cannot so well tell For though no Man can be free that is full charg'd with Hopes or Fears yet there are some other things which collaterally work upon Men and consequently take off their Freedom almost as much as Hopes and Fears can do Such are Consanguinity Affinity especially if the Wife bears any sway private Friendship and above all Faction And therefore though I cannot think that every Man will be a Free-man in that House that is void of Hopes and Fears yet I believe he may if he will Now I conceive that in all these collateral Stiflings of a Man's Freedom the Lay Lords are by far less free than the Bishops are Again for the main bars of Freedom Hopes and Fears into which all the rest do some way or other fall I do not yet see but that Bishops even as the case stands with them may be as free and I hope are in their Voting as Temporal Lords For their Hopes this Lord tells us 't is not likely they will lay them aside greater Bishopricks being still in expectancy Truly I do not know why a deserving Bishop may not in due time hope for a better Bishoprick and yet retain that Freedom which becomes him in Parliament as well as any Noble-man may be Noble and Free in that great Court and yet have moderated Hopes of being called to some great Office or to the Council-table or some honourable and profitable Embassage or some Knighthood of the Garter of all or some of which there is still expectancy Lay your Hand on your Heart my Lord and examine your self As for Fears his Lordship tells us roundly the Bishops cannot lay them down Cannot Are all the Bishops such poor Spirits But why can they not Why because their Places in Parliament are not hereditary but by annexation of a Barony to their Office and depending upon it so that they may be deprived of their Office and thereby of their Place at the King's pleasure First I believe the Bishops gave their Votes in Parliament as freely to their Conscience and Judgment as this Lord or any other Secondly If any of them for Fear or any other motive have given their Votes unworthily I doubt not but many Honourable Lords have at some time or other forgot themselves and born the Bishops company though in this I commend neither Thirdly I know some Bishops who had rather lose not their Baronies only but their Bishopricks also than Vote so unworthily as this Lord would make the World believe they have done Lastly it is true their Seat in Parliament depends on their Barony their Barony on their Office and if they be deprived of their Office both Barony and Seat in Parliament are gone But I hope my Lord will not say we live under a Tyrant and then I will say Bishops are not deprivable of their Office and consequently not of the rest at the Kings Pleasure But this Lord proceeds into a farther Amplification And to whet his inveterate Malice against the King says as follows Nay They do not so much as sit here dum bene se gesserint as the Judges now by your Lordships Petition to the King have their Places granted them but at Will and Pleasure and therefore as they were all excluded by Edward the First as long as he pleased and Laws made excluso Clero so may they be by any King at his Pleasure in like manner They must needs therefore be in an absolute dependency upon the Crown and thereby at Devotion for their Votes which how prejudicial it hath been and will be to this House I need not say If I could wonder at any thing which this Lord doth or says in such Arguments as these when his Heart is up against the Clergy I should wonder at this For if he will not suppose the King's Government to be Tyrannical the Bishops have their Places during Life and cannot justly be put out of them unless their Miscarriage be such as shall merit a Deprivation And therefore by this Lord 's good leave they have as good a Tenure as the Judges is of a Quamdiu bene se gesserint And this they have without their Lordships Petition to the King as his Lordship tells us was fain to be made for the Judges thereby galling the King for giving some Patents to the Judges during Pleasure which as
Academiis possunt determinare omnes Controversias etiam sepositis Episcopis Upon an occasion of mentioning the absolute Decree he brake into a great and long Discourse that his Mouth was shut by Authority else he would maintain that Truth contra omnes qui sunt in Vivis which fetcht a great Hum from the Country Ministers that were there c. These particulars by the Command of his Majesty I sent to Dr. Prideaux and received from him this answer following and his Protestation under his hand Ecclesia authoritatem habet in fidei Controversiis determinandis Ecclesia authoritatem habet interpretandi Sacras Scripturas Ecclesia potestatem habet decernendi Ritus Ceremonias These Questions I approved when they were brought unto me and wished the Beadle that brought them to convey them to the Congregation to be allowed according to Custom conceiving them to be especially bent according to the meaning of the Article cited against Papal Vsurpations and Puritancial Innovations which I detest as much as any man Whereby it appears what I positively hold concerning the authority of the Church in all the proposed Particulars namely that which that 20th Article prescribeth and not otherwise Certain passages that came from Dr. Prideaux in the discussing of the Questions at Oxford Ecclesia est mera Chimaera Ecclesia nihil docet nec determinat Controversiae omnes melius ad Academiam referri possunt quà m ad Ecclesiam Docti homines in Academiis possunt determinare omnes Controversias etiam sepositis Episcopis The passages therefore imperfectly catched at by the Informer were no Positions of mine For I detest them as they are laid for impious and ridiculous But Oppositions according to my place proposed for the further clearing of the truth to which the Respondent was to give satisfaction And the General Protestation I hope takes off all that can be laid against me in the particulars Notwithstanding to touch on each of them as they are laid To the First I never said the Church was Mera Chimaera as it is or hath a Being and ought to be believed But as the Respondent by his Answer made it In which I conceived him to swerve from the Article whence his Questions were taken To the Second my Argument was to this purpose Omnis actio ést Suppositorum vel Singularium Ergo 〈◊〉 in abstracto nil docet aut determinat sed per hos aut illos Episcopos Pastores Doctores As Homo non disputat sed Petrus Johannes c. The third and fourth may be well put together My Prosecution was That the Universities are eminent Parts and Seminaries of the Church and had sitter opportunity to discuss Controversies than divers other Assemblies Not by any means to determine them but to prepare them for the determination of Ecclesiastical Assemblies of Synods Councils Bishops that have Superiour Authority wherein they might do Service to the Church and those Superiours not prescribing any thing unto them As the debating of a thing by a learned Counsellour makes the easier Passage for the Benches Sentence And this was urged only as Commodum not as Necessarium The QUEEN's ALMONER present I am told no. For he departed as they say that were in the Seat with him being tyred as it should seem by the tedious Preface of the Respondent before the Disputations began But be it so or otherwise to what purpose this is interposed I know not Upon an occasion of mentioning the absolute Decree he brake into a great and long Discourse that his Mouth was shut by Authority else he would maintain the truth contra omnes qui sunt in vivis which fetcht a great Hum from the Country Ministers that were there c. This Argument was unexpectly cast in by Mr. Smith of St. John's but bent as I took it against somewhat I have written in that behalf which the Respondent not endeavouring to clear I was put upon it to shew in what sense I took absolutum Decretum Which indeed I said I was ready to maintain against any as my Predecessors in that place had done This was not in a long Discourse as it is suggested but in as short a Solution as is usually brought in Schools to a Doubt on the bye And from this I took off the Opponents farther proceeding in Obedience to Authority Whereupon if a Hum succeeded it was more than I used to take notice of It might be as well of dislike as approbation and of other Auditors as soon as Country Ministers A Hiss I am sure was given before when the Respondent excluded the King and Parliament from being parts of the Church But I remember whose practice it is to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had rather bear and forbear and end with this PROTESTATION THAT as I believe the Catholick Church in my Creed so I Reverence this Church of England wherein I have had my Baptism and whole Breeding as a most eminent Member of it To the Doctrine and Discipline of this Church have I hitherto often subscribed and by God's Grace constantly adhered and resolve by the same assistance according to my ability under his Majesty's Protection faithfully to maintain against Papists Puritans or any other that shall oppose it The Prelacy of our Reverend Bishops in it I have ever defended in my Place to be jure Divino which I dare say has been more often and with greater pains taking than most of those have done who have receiv'd greater Encouragement from their Lordships I desire nothing but the continuance of my vocation in a peaceable Course that after all my pains in the place of his Majesty's Professor almost for these 18 years together my Sons especially be not countenanced in my declining Age to vilify and vex me So shall I spend the remainder of my time in hearty Prayer for his Majesty my only Master and Patron for the Reverend Bishops the State and all his Majesty's Subjects and Affairs and continue my utmost Endeavours to do all faithful Service to the Church wherein I live To whose Authority I ever have and do hereby submit my self and Studies to be according to Gods word directed or corrected J. Prideaux Reverendissime Cancellarie INdefesso Prudentiae oculo quo nos gubernas Parendi has leges explora quas tandem Detersas pulvere simplicitate verborum Rescriptas à Clausularum antithesi Purgatas biennique opere recusas coarctavimus in sanam Epitomen ut imperandi 〈◊〉 negotium Tibi molliamus obtemperandi Methodus patescat nobis peccandi venia tollatur Latuerunt diu Statuta ex Vetustatis situ plus satis veneranda non memoriae sed Scriniorum Sarcina in quorum fragmenta dubia texturam inaequalem toto Codice dissita capita sensûs dissoni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jurati omnes tantum ut Perjuri evaderent 〈◊〉 pacis licentiam quis non arripiat quando inter se pugnant Decreta quae prohibent At
should please God to make me able to do it I pray do this with as much convenient speed as you can and privately without noise So to God's Blessing and Protection c. Lambeth F. omnium Sanctorum 1639. W. Cant. THE University of Oxford in the time of King Edw. III. had the sole keeping of the Assize of Bread and Drink in Oxford and the Government and Correction of all manner of Victuallers and Victualling and Tippling-Houses there This Power continued in the University for about 200 Years without Interruption until the Statute of 5 6 Edw. 6. which gave power to two Justices of Peace in every Shire or City to License Ale-Houses and ordained That none should keep any Ale-House but such as should be so Licensed By colour of this Statute in regard there was therein no express saving of the Privileges of the University the Mayor and Aldermen of Oxford being Justices there have Licensed Ale-Houses The Chancellor of the University and his Vice-Chancellor Commissary and Deputy at the time of the making of the said Statutes were Justices of Peace within the City And the Privileges of both Universities were afterwards in 13 Eliz. confirmed by Act of Parliament and in all Acts of Parliament since made touching Ale-Houses the Correction and Punishment of all Ale-House-keepers and Tipplers in Ale-Houses in the University is reserved solely to the Governor of the University The University of Cambridge in the Fifth Year of King Richard II. had their Privileges by Parliament granted to them such as the University of Oxford had and no other Yet when the Officers of the Town in the Sixth Year of Queen Elizabeth attempted to License Ale-House they were restrain'd by the Queen's Letter and that University hath ever since quietly enjoy'd the Privileges of the sole Licensing of Ale-Houses In the Book of Directions touching Ale-Houses set forth 1608. His late Majesty declared that the Officers of both Universities should have the Power of Licensing and ordering of Ale-Houses and not the Officers or Justices of the Town And His Majesty in his Charter of Confirmation of the Liberties of the University of Oxford in the Eleventh Year of his Reign hath been graciously pleased to grant that no License shall be made to any Victualler or Ale-House-keeper without the special assent of the Chancellor There are now 300 Ale-Houses Licensed in Oxford which occasion great Disorder in the University It is therefore most humbly desired on the behalf of the said University That his Majesty would be pleased by his gracious Letters to be directed to the Mayor and Commonalty of Oxford to command them not to intermeddle in the Licensing of any Person to keep Ale-House or Tap-House within the Jurisdiction or Liberty of the said University or City of Oxford TRusty and Well-beloved we Greet you well We are informed that our University of Oxford had heretofore the Government Correction of all manner of Ale-House-keepers Ale-Houses and Tippling-Houses within the Liberties thereof And we were graciously pleased lately by our Letters Patents to grant to our said University That no Ale-Houses without the special consent of the Chancellor or Vice-Chancellor should be Licensed there It seems strange to us which we hear that there should be now Three hundred Ale-Houses in Oxford And we believe they would not have risen to that number had the power of Licensing them rested only with the Vice-Chancellor and other Governors of our said University as it doth in our University of Cambridge We do therefore charge and require you as you tender our Pleasure and mean to enjoy the Liberties which you use under our Favour and Goodness that you henceforth meddle not in the Licensing of any Person to keep Ale-Houses Tap-Houses or Victualling-Houses within the Jurisdiction or Liberty of the said University and City of Oxford but that you leave the same to the Vice-Chancellor and other Justices of Peace there who are Members of the said University Given at Westminster the 27th of October 1639. To our Trusty and Well-beloved the Mayor Bailiffs and Commonalty of our City of Oxford I sent away these Letters to the Vice-Chancellor upon Friday November 8th W. Cant. UPON pretence that it was not in me alone to absolve the Chandlers on Monday last I brought them to the Meeting of the Heads Where having in the first Place pleaded Ignorance in excuse of their Contumacy they then confessed openly That it belonged to the Vice-Chancellor to regulate them in their Trade and humbly besought me to raise their Price This done I dismissed them caused the Register to make an Act of what had passed and four days after viz. on the first of November granted their Request so that I hope the University's Right in this particular is now settled for ever hereafter Novemb. 4. 1639. A. Frewen I Am informed by Mr. Lenthall That for the Physick-Garden the Earl of Danby intends to put his Heir the Vice-Chancellor the Dean of Christ-Church and the President of St. Mary Magdalen-College in trust to see his promised 100 l. per Annum for ever hereafter imployed as he shall direct A. Frewen To this my Answer was as followeth I Like the Earl of Danby's Business worse and worse and the joining of his Heir to those Heads you mention worst of all For if he may not ever do and have what he list you shall have greater Imputations of Ingratitude thrown upon you than the thing is worth And now I begin to believe you will have nothing settled till his Death Lambeth Novemb. 7. 1639. W. Cant. EVery Body speaks well of the Examinations And tho' I would not put any such Burthen upon the Heads of Houses yet you should do very well if you could handsomly insinuate it to them what an Advance it would be to the University in that Business if now and then at their leisure some one or other of them would come thither and sit with the Vice-Chancellor and Proctors to hear the Examinations But this I leave free to you and them Lambeth November 7. 1639. W. Cant. AT this time the Vice-Chancellor sent me word that after they had visited Sir Thomas Bodley's great Library they went to see my Books and Coins and that having compared them with their Catalogue they found all well and safe But yet the Library-keepers had a great charge given them to look carefully to them being they stood unchained and the place where they stand almost hourly frequented by Strangers who come to see them Novemb. 11. 1639. A. Frewen My Answer to this was as followeth SIR I Thank you heartily for your Care of my Books And I beseech you that the Library-keeper may be very watchful to look to them since they stand unchain'd And I would to God the Place in the Library for them were once ready that they might be set up safe and and chained as the other Books are and yet then if there be not care
would have suffered him to take that place upon him so contrary to the command of Christ and the Practice of the Apostles if it had been so indeed Or would they have suffer'd their Preachers which then attended their Commissioners at London not only to meddle with but to preach so much temporal Stuff as little belonged to the Purity of the Gospel had they been of this Lord's Opinion Surely I cannot think it But let the Bishops do but half so much yea though they be commanded to do that which these Men assume to themselves and 't is a venture but it shall prove Treason against the Fundamental Laws of the Kingdom and an endeavouring to bring in an Arbitrary Government Well! I 'll tell you a Tale. There 's a Minister at this day in London of great Note among the Faction well esteem'd by this Lord and others of this Outcry against the Bishops Votes in Parliament and their meddling in Civil Affairs this Man I 'll spare his Name being pressed by a Friend of his how he came to be so eager against the Church of which and her Government he had ever heretofore been an Upholder and had Subscribed unto it made this Answer Thou art a Fool thou knowest not what it is to be the Head of a Party This Man is one of the great Masters of the present Reformation and do you not think it far more inconsistent with his Ministerial Function to be in the Head of a turbulent Faction to say the least of them than for a Bishop to meddle in Civil Affairs Yet such is the Religion of our Times But 't is no matter for all this his Lordship hath yet more to say against the Ambition of the Prelates For Their Ambition and intermeddling with Secular Affairs and State Business hath been the cause of shedding more Christian Blood than any thing else in the Christian World and this no Man can deny that is versed in History This is the same over and over again saving that the Expression contains in it a vast Untruth For they that are versed in History must needs say 't is a loud one that Bishops meddling in Temporal Affairs hath been the cause of shedding more Christian Blood than any thing else in the Christian World What a happiness hath this Lord that his pale Meagerness cannot blush at such thing as this Yea but he will prove it here at home in this Kingdom For says he We need not go out of our own Kingdom for Examples of their Insolency and Cruelty When they had a dependency upon the Pope and any footing thereby out of the Land there were never any that carryed themselves with so much Scorn and Insolency towards the Princes of this Kingdom as they have done Two of them the Bishop that last spake hath named but instances of many more may be given whereof there would be no end 'T is true indeed we need not go out of our own Kingdom for Examples of their Insolency and Cruelty For in so many Ages 't is no wonder in any Kingdom to find some bad Examples be it of Insolency Cruelty or what you will Especially in the midst of so much Prosperity as accompanied Clergy-Men in those times But 't is true too that there are far more Examples of their Piety and Charity would this Lord be pleased to remember the one with the other As for their bad Examples his Lordship gives a Reason why not all but some of them carryed themselves with so much Scorn and Insolency towards their Princes even with almost as much as this Lord and his Faction carry themselves at this day towards their mild and gracious King And the Reason is a true one it was their dependency upon the Pope and their footing which thereby they had to subsist out of the Land which may and I hope will be a sufficient warning to his Majesty and his Successours never to let in again a foreign Supream Power into any of his Dominions For 't is to have one State within yet not dependent upon the other which can never be with Safety or Quiet in any Kingdom And I would have the World consider a little with what Insolency and perhaps Disallegiance this Lord and his Round-head Crew would use their Kings if they had but half so strong a foreign dependance as the Bishops then had that dare use the most gracious of Kings as they do this present day Two of these Insolent ones this Lord says the Bishop that last spake named Lincoln stands in the Margin by which it appears that Dr. John Williams then Bishop of Lincoln and since Arch-Bishop of York was the Man that named two but because this Lord names them not I know not who they are and therefore can say nothing for or against them but leave them to that Lord which censured them As for that which follows that the instances of many more may be given whereof there would be no end This is a piece of this Lord 's loud Rhetorick which can have no Truth in it especially relating as it doth to this Kingdom only But whereas this Lord said immediately before that their meddling in State business hath been the cause of shedding more Christian Blood than any thing else in the Christian World and in the very next words falls upon the proof of it in this Kingdom I must put him in mind that one Parliament in England namely that which most irreligiously and trayterously deposed Richard II. was the cause of the effusion of more Christian Blood amongst us than all the Bishops that ever were in this Kingdom For that base and unjust Parliament was the cause of all the Civil Wars those Bloody Wars which began in the Heir's time after the Usurpation of Henry IV. and ceased not till there were slain of the Royal Blood and of Nobles and the common People a Numberless Number And I heartily beg it of God that no disloyal Parliament may ever bring this Kingdom into the like distress For our Neighbours are far stronger now than they were then and what desolation it might bring upon us God in Heaven knows So this Lord may see if he will what a Parliament it self being misgoverned may do But will his Lordship think it Reason to condemn all Parliaments because this and some few more have done what they should not do as he here deals by Bishops Sure he would not But having done with the Bishops dependency on the Pope he goes on and tells us farther that Although the Pope be cast off yet now there is another Inconvenience no less prejudicial to the Kingdom by their sitting in this House and that is they have such an absolute dependency upon the King that they sit not there as free Men. I am heartily sorry to see this Lord thus far transported The Pope is indeed cast off from domineering over King Church and State But I am sorry to hear it from this Lord that this other
the Case stood with them whether he had Reason to do or not I will not dispute So that manifest it is that the Bishops do not hold their Bishopricks at the King's Will and Pleasure and consequently neither their Baronies nor their Places in Parliament And I would have my Lord consider whether all the Noblemen that sit in that House by Blood and Inheritance be not in the same Condition upon the matter with the Bishops For as Bishops may commit Crimes worthy Deprivation and so consequently lose their Votes in Parliament so are there some Crimes also which Noblemen may commit God preserve them from them which may consequently void all their Rights in Parliament yea and taint their Blood too And as for the Bishops Baronies they are not at the King's Will and Pleasure neither For they hold their Baronies from the Crown indeed but by so long Prescription as will preserve them from any Disseisure at Will and Pleasure of the King So if they merit not Deprivation by Law and Justice their Baronies are safe and that by as good Right and far antienter Descent than any the antientest Nobleman of England can plead for himself For Edward the First he was a brave Prince and is of glorious Memory and respected the Dutifulness of his Clergy very Royally As for the Acts of Parliament made in his Time and the Time of his Royal Successor Edward the Third I conceive nothing can be gathered out of the Titles or Prefaces of those Acts against either the Bishops presence at or their Voting to those Laws by any Prohibition of Exclusion of them by those famous Kings For though the Statute of Carlisle 35 Edw. I. not Printed be recited in the Statute 25 Edw. III. of Provisoes and says that by the Assent of the Earls Barons and other Nobles and all the Commonalty at their Instances and Requests in the said full Parliament it was ordained c. without any mention at all of the Prelates yet it is more than probable that the Prelates were Summoned to and present at these Parliaments For first it appears expresly that the Statute of the Staple 27 Edw. III. made in the same Parliament with the Statute of Provisoes that the Prelates were Assembled and Present there And I rather think that in all these Statutes of Provisoes being professedly made against the Liberty and Jurisdiction of the Pope in those Times challenged in this Kingdom to whose Power the Bishops were then Subject they voluntarily chose to be absent rather than endanger themselves to the Pope if they Voted for such Laws or offend the King and the State if they Voted against them But these Laws were not made excluso Clero and that as long as the King pleased as this Lord affirms and this is very plain in the Statute it self of 38 Edw. III. For in the last Chapter of that Statute though the Prelates be omitted in the Preamble yet there 't is expresly said That the King the Prelates the Dukes Earls and Barons c. So here was not exclusion of the Bishops by the King but their own voluntary Absence which made those kind of Laws pass without them As for the Parliament at Carlisle I conceive the Books are misprinted and a common Errour risen by it For that Parliament was held Anno 35 Edw. I. and was the first of Provisoes and as appears in the Records the Prelates were present But in 25 Edw. I. the Parliament was Summoned to London and the Bishops called to it And there was another Summons to Salisbury in the same Roll to which the Prelates were not called But this I conceive was a Summons of the King 's Great Council only and not of a Parliament the Commons not being called any more than the Prelates Nor were there any other Summons 25 Edw. I. but these two That which his Lordship infers upon this is that therefore the Bishops are in absolute dependency upon the Crown which is manifestly untrue since they cannot be outed at Will and Pleasure but for Demerit only and that may fall upon Temporal Lords as well as Bishops And therefore neither are they at Devotion for their Votes and therefore in true Construction no Prejudice can come by them to that Honourable House And I pray God their casting out be not more prejudicial both to State and Church than I am willing to forespeak After this his Lordship tells us what he hath done in this great Argument saying I have now shewed your Lordships how hurtful to themselves and others these things which the Bill would take away have been I will only Answer some Objections which I have met withal and then crave your Pardon for troubling you so long His Lordship tells us he hath shewed how hurtful these things are both to the Bishops and others which this Bill would hew down and out of his Zeal and Love to the Church he hath gone farther than any Man in this Argument yet I conceive he hath not shewed what he thinks he hath 'T is true he hath strongly laboured it but I hope it will appear he hath not master'd it I shall now see how he Answers such Objections as his Lordship says he hath met with And the First Objection is his Lordship says 1. That they have been very Antient. 2. That they are Established by Law 3. That it may be an Infringement to the House of Peers for the House of Commons to send up a Bill to take away some of their Members To these three the Answer will be easie I know not how easie the Answer will be but these must needs be hard Times for Bishops if neither Antiquity can fence them against Novelty nor Law defend them against Violence nor fear of weakning the House of Peers preserve them against the Eagerness of the House of Commons and that in the very House of Peers it self Let us see then and consider how easie the Answer will be to these and how sufficient also To the First Antiquity is no good Plea for that which is by Experience found hurtful the longer it hath done hurt the more cause there is now to remove it that it may do no more Besides other Irregularities are as antient which have been thought fit to be redressed and this is not so antient but that it may truly be said Non fuit sic ab initio This Answer may be easie enough but sure 't is not sufficient Nor do I wonder that Antiquity is no good Plea in this Lord's account for he is such an Enemy to it that he will have his very Religion new If any thing be antient it smells of Antichrist Yea but if it be found hurtful the longer it hath done hurt the more cause to remove it That 's true if it be hurtful in and of it self so is not this If it does hurt constantly or frequently else you must cast out the Lay Lords Votes too and his Lordship 's with the
rest For out of all doubt their Votes do hurt sometimes and it may be more often and more dangerously than the Bishops Votes And when this Lord shall be pleased to tell us what those other Irregularities are which are as antient and yet redressed I will consider of them and then either grant or deny In the mean time I think it hath been proved that it is no Irregularity for a Bishop that is called to it by Supreme Authority to give Counsel or otherwise to meddle in Civil Affairs so as it take him not quite off from his Calling And for his Lordship 's Close That this is not so antient but that it may be truly said Non fuit sic ab initio his Lordship is much deceived For that Speech of our Saviour's St. Matthew 19. 8. is spoken of Marriage which was instituted in Paradise and therefore ab initio from the beginning must there be taken from the Creation or from the Institution of Marriage soon after it But I hope his Lordship means it not so here to put it off that Bishops had not Votes in the Parliaments of England from the Creation For then no question but it may be truly said Non fuit sic ab initio But if his Lordship or any other will apply this Speech to any thing else which hath not its beginning so high he must then refer his Words and meaning to that time in which that thing he speaks of took its beginning as is this particular to the beginning of Parliaments in this Kingdom And then under Favour of this Lord the voting of Bishops in Parliament is so antient that it cannot be truly said Non fuit sic ab initio For so far as this Kingdom hath any Records to shew Clergy-Men both Bishops and Abbots had free and full Votes in Parliament so full as that in the first Parliament of which we have any certain Records which was in the Forty and ninth Year of Henry the Third there was Summoned by the King to Vote in Parliament One hundred and twenty Bishops Abbots and Priors and but Twenty three Lay-Lords Now there were but Twenty six Bishops in all and the Lords being multiplied to the unspeakable Prejudice of the Crown into above One hundred besides many of their young Sons called by Writ in their Father's Life-time have either found or made a troubled time to cast the Bishops and their Votes out of the House 2. To the Objection for being Established by Law his Lordship says The Law-makers have the same Power and the same Charge to alter old Laws inconvenient as to make new that are necessary The Law-makers have indeed the same Power in them and the same Charge upon them that their Predecessors in former Times had and there 's no question but old Laws may be Abrogated and new ones made But this Lord who seems to be well versed in the Rules and Laws of Government which the poor Bishops understand not cannot but know that it 's a dangerous thing to be often changing of the Laws especially such as have been antient and where the old is not inconvenient nor the new necessary which is the true State of this Business whatever this Lord thinks 3. And for the Third Objection the Privileges of the House this Lord says it can be no Breach of them For either Estate may propose to the other by way of Bill what they conceive to be for publick Good and they have Power respectively of accepting or refusing This is an easie Answer indeed and very true For either Estate in Parliament may propose to the other by way of Bill and they have Power respectively of accepting or refusing and there is no Breach of Privilege in all this But this easie Answer comes not home For how my Lord understands this Objection I know not it seems as if it did reach only to the external Breach of some Privilege but I conceive they which made the Objection meant much more As namely that by this Bill there was an aim in the Commons to weaken the Lords House and by making their Votes fewer to be the better able to work them to their own Ends in future Businesses So the Argument is of equal if not greater strength against the Lord's yielding to the Bill to the Iufringement of their own strength than to the Commons proposing it and there is no doubt but that the Commons might propose their Bill without Breach of Privilege but whether the Lords might grant it without impairing their own strength I leave the future Times which shall see the Success of this Act of Parliament to judge of the Wisdom of it which I shall not presume to do I thought his Lordship had now done but he tells us 4. There are two other Objections which may seem to have more force but they will receive satisfactory Answers The one is that if they may remove Bishops they may as well next time remove Barons and Earls This Lord confesses the two Arguments following are of more force but he says they will receive satisfactory Answers And it may be so But what Answers soever they may receive yet I doubt whether those which that Lord gives be such For to this of taking away of Barons and Earls next his Lordship Answers two things First he says The Reason is not the same the one sitting by an Honour invested in their Blood and Hereditary which though it be in the King alone to grant yet being once granted he cannot take away The other sitting by a Barony depending upon an Office which may be taken away for if they be deprived of their Office they sit not To this there have been enough said before yet that it may fully appear this Reason is not Satisfactory this Lord should do well to know or rather to remember for I think he knows it already that though these great Lords have and hold their Places in Parliament by Blood and Inheritance and the Bishops by Baronies depending upon their Office yet the King which gives alone can no more justly or lawfully alone away their Office without their Demerit and that in a legal way than he can take away Noblemens Honours And therefore for ought is yet said their Cases are not so much alike as his Lordship would have them seem In this indeed they differ somewhat that Bishops may be deprived upon more Crimes than those are for which Earls and Barons may lose their Honours but neither of them can be justly done by the King's Will and Pleasure only But Secondly for farther Answer this Lord tells us The Bishops sitting there is not so essential For Laws have been and may be made they being all excluded but it can never be shewed that ever there were Laws made by the King and them the Lords and Earls excluded This Reason is as little satisfactory to me as the former For certainly according to Law and Prescription of Hundreds of Years the Bishops sitting
Collect in the latter Editions of the Common Prayer-Book as well as in the Book for the Fast. And this was done according to the Course of the Church which ordinarily names none in the Prayer but the Right Line descending Yet this was not done till the King himself commanded it as I have to shew under his Majesty's Hand Secondly I beseech your Lordships to consider what must be the Consequence here The Queen of Bohemia and her Children are left out of the Collect therefore the Prelates intend to bring in Popery For that you know they say is the end of all these Innovations Now if this be the end and the Consequence truly the Libellers have done very dutifully to the King to poyson his People with this conceit that the Lady Elizabeth and her Children would keep Popery out of this Kingdom but the King and his Children will not And many as good Offices as these have they done the King quite thorow these Libels and quite thorow his Kingdoms For My part I honour the Queen of Bohemia and her Line as much as any Man whatsoever and shall be as ready to serve them but I know not how to depart from my Allegiance as I doubt these Men have done 7. The Seventh Innovation is That these words who art the Father of thine Elect and of their Seed are changed in the Preface of that Collect which is for the Prince and the King's Children And with a most spiteful inference that this was done by the Prelates to exclude the King's Children out of the number of God's Elect. And they call it an intolerable Impiety and horrid Treason To this I answer First That this Alteration was made in my Predecessor's time before I had any Authority to meddle with these things farther than I was called upon by him Secondly This is not therefore to lay any 〈◊〉 upon my Predecessor for he did in that but his Duty For his Majesty acknowledges it was done by his special Direction as having then no Children to pray for And Thirdly This Collect could not be very old for it had no being in the Common Prayer Book all Queen Elizabeth's time she having no Issue The Truth is it was made at the coming in of King James and must of necessity be changed over and over again pro ratione Temporum as Times and Persons vary And this is the Intolerable Impiety and horrid Treason they charge upon Vs. In this Method the Innovations are set down in the News from Ipswich But then in Mr. Burion's News from Friday-street called his Apology they are in another Order and more are added Therefore with your Lordship's leave I will not repeal any of these but go on to the rest which Mr. Burton adds 8. The eighth Innovation is That in the Epistle the Sunday before Easter we have put out In and made it At the Name of Jesus every knee shall bow which Alteration he saith is directly against the Act of Parliament Here give me leave to tell you 't is At the Name of Jesus in the late Learned Translation made in King James his time About which many Learned Men of best note in the Kingdom were imployed besides some Prelates But to this I Answer First 'T is true the Common Prayer Book was confirmed by Act of Parliament and so all things contained in it at the passing of that Act. But I hope if any thing were false Printed then the Parliament did not intend to pass those slips for current Secondly I am not of Opinion that if one word be put in for another so they bear both the same Sense that there is any great matter done against the Act of Parliament Thirdly This can make no Innovation For In the Name and At the Name of Jesus can make no Essential Difference here And Mr. Pryn whose Darling business it hath long been to cry down the Honour due to the Son of God at the mentioning of his saving Name Jesus knows the Grammar Rule well In a Place or at a Place c. Fourthly If there were any Errour in the change of In into At I do here solemnly protest to you I know not how it came For authority from the Prelates the Printers had none and such a word is easily changed in such a negligent Press as we have in England Or if any altered it purposely for ought I know they did it to gratifie the Preciser sort For therein they followed the Geneva Translation and Printed at Geneva 1557 where the words are At the Name of Jesus And that is 94 years ago and therefore no Innovation made by us Fifthly This I find in the Queen's Injunctions without either word In or At. Whensoever the Name of Jesus shall be in any Lesson Sermon or otherwise pronounced in the Church 't is injoyned that due Reverence be made of all Persons Young and Old with lowliness of Coursy and uncovering of the Heads of the Men-kind as thereunto doth necessarily belong and heretofore hath been accustomed So here 's necessity laid upon it and custom for it and both expressed by Authority in the very beginning of the Reformation and is therefore no Innovation now 9. The Ninth Innovation is That two places are changed in the Prayers set forth for the Fifth of November And ordered to be read they say by Act of Parliament The first place is ohanged thus from Root out that Babylomish and Antichristian Sect which say of 〈◊〉 c. Into this form of Words Root out that Babylonish and Antichristian Sect of them which say c. The second place went thus in the old Cut off these Workers of Iniquity whose Religion is Rebellion But in the Book Printed 1635 't is thus altered Cut 〈◊〉 those Workers of Iniquity who turn Religion into Rebellion c. To this I say First 'T is a notorious Vntruth that this Book was ordered to be Read by Act of Parliament The Act of Parliament indeed is Printed before it and therein is a Command for Prayers and Thanksgivings every Fifth of November but not one Word or Syllable for the Form of Prayer That 's left to the Church therefore here 's no Innovation against that Act of Parliament Secondly The Alteration first mentioned that is That Sect or That Sect of 〈◊〉 if of so small Consequence as 't is not worth the speaking of Besides if there be any thing of moment in it 't is answered in the next Thirdly Both for that and the second place which seems of more moment and so for the rest not only in that Book but that other also for His Majesty's Coronation His Majesty expresly commanded Me to make the Alterations and see them Printed And here are both the Books with His Majesty's Warrant to each of them So that herein I conceive I did not offend unless it were that I gave not these Men notice of it or asked them leave to obey the King Against this there can be