the Grounds of Christian Faith as to the Truth and Divine Authority of the Scriptures and the matters therein contained Quarto The Unreasonableness of Separation or an Impartial account of the History Nature and Pleas of the present Separation from the Communion of the Church of England to which several late Letters are annexed of eminent Protestant Divines abroad concerning the Nature of our Differences and the way to compose them Quarto A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome and the hazard of Salvation in the Communion of it in Answer to some Papers of a revolted Protestant wherein a particular account is given of the Fanaticism and Divisions of that Church Octavo An Answer to several late Treatises occasioned by a Book entituled A Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome and the hazard of Salvation in the Communion of it Part I. Octavo A Second Discourse in vindication of the Protestant Grounds of Faith against the pretence of Infallibility in the Roman Church in Answer to the Guide in Controversie by R. H. Protestancy without Principles and Reason and Religion or the certain Rule of Faith by E. W. with a particular enquiry into the Miracles of the Rom. Church Octa. An Answer to Mr. Cressy's Epistle apologetical to a Person of Honour touching his Vindication of Dr. Stillingfleet Octavo A Defence of the Discourse concerning the Idolatry practised in the Church of Rome in answer to a Book entituled Catholicks no Idolaters Octavo Several Conferences between a Romish Priest a Fanatick Chaplain and a Divine of the Church of England being a full Answer to the late Dialogues of T. G. Octavo The Grand Question concerning the Bishops Right to vote in Parliament in Cases Capital stated and argued from the Parliament Rolls and the History of former times with an Enquiry into their Peerage and the Three Estates in Parliament Octavo The Bishop of Worcester's Charge to the Clergy of his Diocese in his primary Visitation begun at Worcester Sept. 11. 1690. A Discourse concerning the Illegality of the Ecclesiastical Commission in Answer to the Vindication and Defence of it wherein the true notion of the Legal Supremacy is cleared and an Account is given of the Nature Original and Mischief of the Dispensing Power The Council of Trent Examin'd and Disprov'd by Catholick Tradition in the main points in Controversie between Us and the Church of Rome with a particular Account of the Times and Occasions of Introducing them Twenty Sermons preached upon several occasions not yet collected into a Volume Quarto 3. Inst. 156. Cr. Car. 361. 3. Inst. 153. Marg. F. 156. Hob. f. 167. Cr. Car. 361. Sylvestr v. Simon Sigon de Judic l. 2. c. 30. Quintil. l. 12. V. Ciceron â—ro Plancio Dion l. 36. Lamprid. in Alex. Sever. Arist. Pol. l. 2. c. 12. â— Inst. 24. b. 3. Inst. 156. Noy 25. C. de jurejur Present stat Lyndw. f. 56. 2. Inst. 361. Bract. l. 4. 341. Ext. de Jure Patron c. 22. Fleta l. 5. c. 14. Selden of Tythes c. 12. 389. Abridgment 2. 354. Ext. de Officio Jud. Ordin c. 4. Eugen. 2. in Synod Rom. c. 24. Leo 4. in Synod Rom. c. 25. ed. Holst Registr f. 42. Cust. Norm Art 69. pelm. Conil Matt. Paris A. D. 1239. p. 513. Innocent Epist l. 1. Selden of Tythes 361. â— 387. 83. 86. 38â— 2. Inst. 632. 5 R. 57. Anders 190. Leon. 3. 200. Novel 53. â—it 12. c. 2. 23. c. 18. Cap. l. 1. c. 84. l. 5. 98. Addit 4. 95. Ext. de Jure Patr. c. 29. Rebuff de Nomin n. 10. Fra. de Roye de Jure Patron Proleg c. 25. Hob. 154. De Roye de Jure Patr. p. 95. 145. Dr. Stud. c. 36. 125. Hob. 17. Brownl 21. 27. Dr. Stud. 124. Plowd Com. 498. b. 1. Inst. 341. Glanvil l. 13. c. 20. 1. Inst. 343. b. 2. Inst. 357. v. Flamin Paris de Resignat l. 7. c. 1. n. 9. Lyndw. f. 55. c. Ne lepra 6. de Appel c. Roman Lyndw. f. 54. 9 R. 41. De Testam v. Stat. v. Approbat 6. De Ossicio Vicarii c. 2. De Sequestr v. Officiales Bracton l. 5. c. 2. Fleta l. 6. c. 37. 1. Inst. 96. Cowel v. Ordin Cr. Car. 65. Noy 91. 152. Noy 157. â—wen 12. Yelvert 60 Mar. 765. Cr. 2. 63. 1. Inst. 344 1. Inst. 344. Registr 40. 3. â—ynd f. 64. 80 â—olls Abrid 356. â—oke 12. 41 〈◊〉 Eadm Hist. in Anselm p. 22. Rolls Abrid 2. 357. C. 16. Q. 2. c. â—ane Ext. de Donat c. Pastor Lyndw. f. 80 Cr. 2. 248. Cr. 2. 274. â—oy 2â— â— Car. 180. â—utton 110. â—nes 220. â—eble 2. 446. Cr. Car. 42â— Cr. Eliz. 789 C. 12. 100. Cr. 2. 385. Noy 25. Bulstrod 3. 90. Hob. 165. Wynch 63. Rep. Chancery 2. 399. 1. Inst. 17. b. Navarr Man c. 23. n. 109. 3. Inst. 156. 1. Inst. 11. 110. b. 115. b.
upon a Person to discharge such a Cure of whom at the same time he discovers such a mistrust as to need a Bond to make him do his Duty And if a Man makes no Conscience of his Duty without a Bond I doubt he will make very little with it If he could make him a good Man by his Bond it were of great Use but if he be not he may do the more Mischief by continuing in his Place by the Force of a Bond. So that I look on such Bonds as apt to raise Scruples in good Mens Minds and to do no good upon bad ones 2. That all wise and good Patrons will consider the general Mischief more than a particular Inconvenience And what greater Mischief can come to our Church than to have Bonds of Resignation brought into Request For besides corrupt Patrons as to Bargains what Advantage will corrupt Patrons as to Religion make of it who by that Means will be able to turn out the Incumbents upon Notice given when Opportunity serves them as is before observ'd in the Preface 2. Suppose it be a very equitable Case as for a Minor is a Bond of Resignation unlawfull I answer That there may be a Lawfull Trust in such a Case I do not question but whether the Person who takes this Trust can enter into a Bond and take the Oath I very much question upon the Reasons already mention'd For there may be a confidential Simony as the Casuists call it and the way to prevent it is say they That the Trust be sine pretii pacti modi vel conditionis interventu For the taking of a Bond argues a Mistrust and is therefore contrary to the Nature of a Trust. 3. Suppose the Bishop himself requires a Bond of Resignation as to a Prebend of his Church if the Prebendary quit the Diocese is such a Bond justifiable or not The Bishop is no doubt bound to take all possible care of the Good of his Diocese and to make his Preferments serviceable to that End But if a Man knows before-hand that without this Condition he cannot obtain it and with it he may he runs into a Snare by giving a Bond for that End and after taking the Oath against any Simoniacal Contract directly or indirectly I do think these Bonds of so bad a Nature and Tendency that I do wish that no Countenance or Incouragement be given to them especially by such whose Example may encourage others to do that for Bad Designs which they do for Good And Wise and Good Men will always shew the greatest Regard to that which serves the most Publick Interest and prevents the most growing Mischief 4. Suppose the Incumbent of a Living makes an Agreement with another Clergy man that he shall have a Lease of his Benefice from three Years to three Years upon which he takes a Summ of Money and gives a Bond of Resignation before Harvest and is to procure a Presentation from the Patron is this Simony or not by our Law Here the Patron is onely supposed barely to know and to consent which is hardly to be supposed in such kind of Cases and that the Terms are onely between the two Parties for I will not suppose the Bishop accessary to such Bargains the Question is Whether the Incumbent can with a safe Conscience part with his Benefice on such Terms and whether the other can give a valuable Consideration for his Interest in it if the Patron consents I answer That the Law is as express against corrupt Resignations as against corrupt Bargains for a Presentation onely the Penalty is not so great The Words of the Act are That if any Incumbent of any Benefice with Cure of Souls shall corruptly resign or exchange the same or corruptly take for or in respect of the Resigning or Exchanging of the same directly or indirectly any Pension or Summ of Money or Benefit whatsoever that then as well the Giver as the Taker c. shall lose double the Value of the Money so given and double the Value of one years Profit 31 Eliz. c. 6. It may possibly be said That this is a distinct Clause from the other and hath another kind of Penalty and so cannot reach Persons in point of Conscience as the other doth But this is a strange way of dealing with Laws For there is the same Penalty in the former Clause onely there is added a present Avoidence and a disability in Law supposing these two left out the one stands upon the same Foot with the other And I would know whether if these were gone they could not as well make a Bargain for a Presentation as for such a Resignation And is there nothing of Conscience or Honour or a Regard to the Dignity of the Sacred Function in the Case No Reverence to Laws made on purpose to deter Men from such fordid Practises Is a Benefice to be look'd on as a meer Livelyhood to be bought and sold as other Estates are Is there no Sense of any Spiritual Imployment going along with it No Regard to the Charge and Trust that attends it If nothing of a Spiritual Nature is to be consider'd in a Benefice then there can be no such thing as Simony and then their Hearts are at Ease and they may publish Papers for Presentations as well as for Resignation of Incumbents But I will not suppose such hard things of Persons who pretend to be in Holy Orders but this I must put them in mind of that there is an Oath to be taken and a very strict one against all Simoniacal Contracts either directly or indirectly And is wilfull Perjury a thing to be slighted by any especially by Churchmen and in order to a Cure of Souls I have already mention'd my Lord Coke's Saying That Simony is the more odious because it is ever accompanied with Perjury for the Presentee is sworn to commit no Simony and for this he referrs to Lyndwood And I have already shew'd how Simony is to be understood according to him If a solemn Oath comes to be slighted and made little or nothing of how can such Men pretend to Religion or Conscience But it may be said That Simony is to be determined by the Law and the Law makes a Bargain with the Patron to be Simony and not with the Incumbent I have said enough already to shew that the Statute doth not determine what Simony is but only inflicts a severe Penalty on some sorts of it and therefore it may be Simony although not expresly against the Words of the Law But the Words of the Law are express against corrupt Resignations and I would fain know whether a Resignation for Money be not a Corrupt Resignation And supposing the Patron innocent can any Man of common Sense or Honesty take the Oath who comes in upon such Terms that he hath made no Simoniacal Contract or Promise to any Person or Persons whatsoever concerning the procuring or obtaining the Rectory or Vicarage
c. Is not this Bargain in order to the Procuring or Obtaining the presentation Let it be with whom it will if it be for this End it is Simoniacal or else it will be hard to determine what Simony is And as to such kind of Bonds of Resignation between Parties without the Patron 's privity how can they signify any thing if the Bishop do not accept the Resignation which I have shewed before must be into his hands But these Men seem to set the Bishop quite aside or to suppose him very Weak and Inconsiderate All they look at is the Point of Law And they may say They have advised with Council and they have told them that there is nothing against Law in this Practise How not against Law Did they ask them whether this were not a Corrupt Resignation within the Statute No but whether it were Simony or not I hardly suppose any man that understands what Simony is by our Law would go so far but they might say it doth not void the Living nor bring a disability on the Person and so far they said as the Statute doth But is this all which Men of Conscience and who take the Care of Souls are to enquire after What! nothing but whether the Benefice will be void or not Or whether the King may Present or not Are these all the Considerations even of Clergymen in such cases Such kind of Practises which savour only of this world are those which give such Advantages against our Profession in such an Age of Infidelity as ours Do not you see say they that they mind nothing but their bare Interest as to this World and have no regard to Law or Conscience where they contradict it I am sensible how unreasonable it is to charge a Profession with the Faults of a Few and those in comparison I hope not considerable in it But we ought if possible to avoid any Scandal of this kind for it strikes at the whole Body of the Clergy of our Church and at Religion it self which if we have any our selves we shall be very tender of the Honour of Some men have a mighty Prejudice against any Churchmen medling in Secular Affairs although they be matters of Justice and Mercy which the Law of the Land calls them to but my great Prejudice is against such Churchmen who bring Secular ways of Trafficking into Church-matters as though nothing were really minded but buying and selling and getting gain Advancing of Trade is a Noble Design in a Nation and that which makes it considerable at Home and Abroad but God forbid that such a way of Trading should ever be brought into the Church or be suffer'd to go unpunished in it for it will certainly Ruine the best Church in the World by lessening the Reputation of Churchmen by taking off the good Affections of the People and making them to run into Factions and Infidelity There is certainly something more to be regarded in these things besides our own Interest there is that of Religion of our Church and of the Laws of the Land which ought to overrule it Suppose there were nothing but the bare Law in the case which expresly forbids all Corrupt Resignations is it not fit for those who are to Preach Obedience to Laws to observe them in what relates to themselves Ought they not to be Examples to others in every thing of good Report and to abstain from whatever tends to take off from the Influence of their Doctrine upon the People and nothing doth it more than when they are suspected to come among them by unlawful and indirect means I have taken the Liberty in this Discourse to speak my Mind freely about Matters which touch upon Law and Conscience the Duties of Patrons and Incumbents but I have done it without any other Design than of doing some Good or at least preventing some Mischief to the Church I live in and which I have a true and a just value for If I had not thought that this kind of Simoniacal Contracts were a great and growing Mischief and had not had too much Reason to think so I should have spared my Pains as others have done for I do not love to be uneasy to my self or others I know very well how ill such Discourses are apt to be taken by all that are concerned in them viz. Patrons Incumbents and all such Lawyers that go about to defend them But before I conclude this Discourse I must request some things of all these and then let them judge as they please so it be without Prejudice and Partiality 1. That Patrons would consider that the Right of Patronage is a Trust committed to them of which they must give an Account to God for there is an Obligation in Point of Conscience going along with it It is hard to believe what is commonly Reported how slight many great Patrons make of their Bestowing of Benefices by letting Servants make their best Advantage of them who scandalously expose the Livings and themselves and the Honour of those they depend upon If Servants deserve to be gratified for God's sake let it not be at the Price of Souls If there were no such thing as Religion but that the pretended Care of Souls is nothing but an Artificial way of Maintaining a Sert of Men to keep the People in a little better Order by telling them of Moral Duties and another World then there were some Colour for such an Affected Negligence in these Matters But I do not believe that any of these Persons can satisfy themselves in such Absurd and Unreasonable Imaginations against the Sense of all the Wiser and more Considerate part of Mankind But it cannot be denied that the Things which they are to Teach the People in point of Morality are very good things and necessary to be told them This is all I desire at present And is it of no Consequence what sort of Men those are who are entrusted with the Teaching People their Duties to God and Man If Religion were only to be regarded in point of Policy those must be far from Politicians who have no regard to the Qualifications of the Persons they put into such Places For Ignorant and Illiterate Men can never give them good Instructions Scandalous and Debauched Persons will certainly do abundance of Mischief making the People more loose and debauched than otherwise they would be Men of ill Principles will instill them into the Heads of the busy part of those they converse among and take upon them to guide and make them far more ungovernable than otherwise they would be I have no very great Opinion of the World as it is but I cannot but think that it would be yet much worse if an Ignorant Vicious Turbulent Seditious Clergy were put into all such Places as Patrons dispose of and they know not but they may be all such whom they Present if they take no more care about them but suffer their Servants to make
what Bargains they think fit who mind not the Men but the Advantage they are to get by them And there is a just Presumption that those are not very Deserving who are ready to drive such Bargains for themselves and such Men are not to be valued as Cattle in a Market by the Money they will yield 2. That Lawyers would not encourage their Clients in indirect methods of obtaining Presentations For here lies a great part of our present Mischief the Clergymen who want Benefices They say We are Ignorant of the Law but we go to those whose business it is to understand it and they tell us they have Cases and Precedents in their Books for such Bonds and they have been many times adjudged in the Courts of Law to be good and therefore why are we to blame if we submit to them But here lies the great Mistake the Point is really a Point of Conscience as to the Oath but the Question put to them can be only a Point of Law who are to give Judgment upon the Statute and according to the Rules of Judgment allowed in their Courts But I cannot but observe that there is no Precedent offer'd before 8 Iac. 1. and in the 15th was a contrary Judgment In the Beginning of Charles I. the former Judgment was affirmed and from hence it hath come to be such a prevailing Opinion I confess that I am not satisfied how far such Precedents or one or two Judicial Sentences make a thing to pass for Law nor whether the Authority of such a Sentence or the Reason is to give the Force of Law to it I observe that my Lord Coke when he speaks of the Laws of England he reckons up Common-Law Statute-Law Customs reasonable c. but he never mentions the Judgment of the Courts as any Part of our Law they being no more but a Declaratory Sentence of the Majority of the Judges when it may be the other differ upon better Reasons and when such Reasons come to be thought better by one more at another time then the contrary must pass for Law on the same grounds How often do we hear that the Judges were divided in their Opinions in point of Law How often that the greater number went one way but Law and Reason on the other Suppose a Lord Chief Justice of great Skill and Knowledge in the Law to be unequally yoked with others of far less Judgment how is it possible to prevent that Judgment shall not be given on the wrong side if the three happen to be of an Opinion against him or one be absent and two be against one In a late great Cause viz. of Commendam although three Judges concurred in Opinion and the General Practise was allowed to be of that side yet because one Judge differ'd from the rest his Authority was produced against the Sentence of the Court and for what Cause can this be but the Supposition that it is not the Sentence but the Reason which makes the Law My Lord Chief Justice Hales in a MS. Discourse of the History and Analysis of the Laws of England Chap. 4. makes three Constituents of the Common Law of England 1. The Common Usage and Custom 2. The Authority of Parliament 3. The Iudicial Decisions of Courts of Iustice but how Consonant to one another in the Series and Succession of Time This is spoken with great Judgment For no doubt a mighty Regard ought to be shewed to a Concurrent Sense of so many Persons of Ability in the Law in the different Times wherein such Matters have been before them and this is the highest Authority for expounding the Law but it cannot amount to the Making of a Law For as the same Excellent Person adds It is true the Decisions of Courts of Iustice although by the strength of the Law of this Kingdom they do bind as a Law between the Parties to it in that particular Case in Question till Reversed by Error or Attaint yet they do not make a Law for that only the King by the Assent of Parliament can do All that I aim at is not in the least to take off from the Authority and Reverence due to Judicial Decisions built upon a General Agreement from time to time or upon Evident Reason in point of Law but only that things should not be so positively asserted to be Law which are built only on a few Modern Precedents without any convincing Evidence Which I take to be the present Case 3. That the Clergy would mind their own Honour and Interest and that of the Church and Religion so much as not to Accept of Benefices upon such Ensnaring Terms as those of Bonds of Resignation If what I have said on this Argument be true I am sure they have all the Reason in the World to Refuse them when they know not what the Consequence of them may be and they do know what kind of Oath they are to take And no Man can honestly take an Oath that is not satisfied that such Bonds are no Simoniacal Contract in the Sense of that Law by which he is required to take the Oath Now the Oath is not imposed by the Courts of Common Law in pursuance of the Statute for then it were to be understood according to the Sense and Meaning of it but that very Statute leaves the Ecclesiastical Laws as they were by which Simony is of a larger Extent than it is understood at Common Law and by those Laws this Oath is required Therefore my Request is to all such Clergymen as are in danger of having such put upon them that they would study the Case and satisfy their Minds before they venture upon taking an Oath which may afterwards rob them of that Peace and Tranquillity of Mind which every Good man will Esteem above any Benefice in the World FINIS Page 73. lin 13. for Gays read Gayr Ibid. Marg. for Mar. read Moor. A Catalogue of Books published by the Right Reverend Father in God Edward Lord Bishop of Worcester and sold by Henry Mortlock at the Phoenix in St. Paul's Church-Yard A Rational account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion being a Vindication of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury's Relation of a Conference c. from the pretended Answer of T. C. wherein the true Grounds of Faith are cleared and the false discovered the Church of England vindicated from the imputation of Schism and the most important particular Controversies between us and those of the Church of Rome throughly examined the second Edition Folio Sermons preached upon several Occasions with a Discourse annexed concerning the true Reasons of the Sufferings of Christ wherein Crellius his Answer to Grotius is considered Folio Origines Britannicae or the Antiquities of the British Churches with a Preface concerning some pretended Antiquities relating to Britain in vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph Folio Irenicum A Weapon Salve for the Churches Wounds Quarto Origines Sacrae or a Rational Account of