Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	king_n	law_n	parliament_n	7,328	5	6.6868	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46343	The judgment and doctrine of the Church of England concerning one special branch of the King's prerogative, viz. in dispencing with the penall laws / asserted by the most reverend father in God, the lords Arch-Bishops Bancroft, Laud and Usher, the right reverend fathers in God, the lords Bishops Sanderson and Cartwright, the reverend doctors, Sir Thomas Ridley L.L.D., Dr. Hevlin, Dr. Barrow, Dr. Sherlock master of the temple, Dr. Hicks, Dr. Nalson and Dr. Puller ; and by the anonymus, author of The harmony of divinity and law : together with the concurring resolutions of our reverend judges, as most consonant and agreeable thereunto ; in a letter from a gentleman of Oxford, to his friend at London.	Gentleman of Oxford.	1687 (1687)	Wing J1172; ESTC R1415	16,661	48

are powerfully restrained by shame from doing Evil to their Subjects Though they may be desirous for their honour to have the Times computed from their Conquests yet the same Principle of Honour will ordinarily make them ashamed to have them computed from their Massacres and Persecutions which will but get them the Surname of the Bloudy or the Tyrant unto the end of the World. Honour as Moralists observe is a Secondary or Civil Conscience And as for our Prince who was ever so exceeding tender of his Honour as He so just to all and hath He not promised to uphold and maintain this Church and her Legitimate Children He knows that ours is a Religion that hath alwayes asserted the Rights of the Crown with life and fortune and how chearfully the Members of it have spent their Blood and Treasure in his Own his late Majestie 's and his Father's Service and how they stand affected to his Prerogative And He is very well content we should be as faithful to God as we are to him as true to our Religion as to our King God preserve and prosper him for it Now since our own Religion as to the free exercise of it is thus Secured to us and seeing that by his Majesties Gracious Declaration he is willing that no man should be forced to his Religion or drove against his Conscience from the Religion he professeth and seeing it is manifestly necessary that as Sails so Laws are to be turned and as Occasion time and circumstance and reason of state shall direct either to be altered or revoked And if Acts of Parliament formerly made to try what good effects they could work in the state do apparently prove mischievous and ineffectual by their too great rigour and violence and by the Great Numbers of those that are of dissenting Judgments What dishonour can it be for the King to lay them asleep for a while to stay those passionate heats and fierce oppositions of such as seem adversaries to his Grace or for any Parliament to repeal them for the same Reasons non coercet sed provocat violentia For too heavy a hand upon those whom the Law casts down shews the will rather to oppress the Offender then to cure the offence 'T is the greatest honour to Kings that their mercy like that of the Almighty is more eminent than their Justice and that their Benches and Courts can witness more compassion than severity for He that sets open the Prison doors in so wise and gracious a manner meaneth not to conquer the Hearts and Consciences of his People by Torment but to winn them by mercy and sweetness Clemency is a virtue sometimes of as great policy as Piety because it begets Love and Love breeds Loyalty commands the very Soul and lays the Body at the Feet of the obliger Mercy kindles Fire and Zeal in the Hearts of Subjects Liberty of Conscience is a Natural Right and therefore our Saviour compelled none to receive his Doctrine but est Dominus non Cogens he is not a constraining Lord but committing his Liberty to the will said publickly to all if any man will come after me and to his Apostles Will ye also go away and his Disciples were not Commanders but Instructors and Teachers which was their Commission Compulsion and terrene Penalties are out of his Jurisdiction whose Kingdom was not of this World which he acknowledgeth not only in speech but in practise For when the Disciples would have commanded Fire from Heaven to have consumed the Samaritans he rebuked them and when he was apprehended by the Chief Priests and Elders he could have commanded Legions of Angels but would not It is Irreligion to take away the Liberty of Religion so Tertullian ad Irreligiosiatis Elogium concurrit this concurreth to the commendation of Irreligion to take away the liberty of Religion c. and therefore saith the Apostle we have not Dominion over Your Faith. Sir I cannot tell how well to shut up this Discourse without the words of that Learned and most Reverend Dr. Gerard Langbaine who was Provost of Queen's Colledge in Oxford so well known to all not only at home but abroad that the Famous Rhetorician Longinus could scarce speak any thing beyond the merit of so excellent a Person This Doctor in his Judicious Refutation of the Damnable League Covenant which was then so furiously contended for to be imposed upon the Consciences of those who expressed their Zeal to his Majesties righteous cause in which without all peradventure he spoke the inward Sentiments of all the Loyal Suffering Clergy of England doth there most admirably instruct us what a sandy Foundation that is which supports Persecution for Conscience sake His words follow Persecution in matters of meer Religion is a Course against the Nature of Religion it self for Faith the Soul of Religion is an inward Act of the Soul which all the Tyranny in the World that the malice of the Devil can invent or the wit of man can exercise can neither plant where it is not nor extirpate where it is It is the gift of God freely begotten in the Hearts of Men not by threats and Terrors not by Tortures and Massacres but by the quiet still voice of the word preached Suadenda non cogenda And therefore St. Paul though a Lawful Governour in the Church flatly disclaims any domineering Power over the Conscience As for the outward profession of Religion neither is that Subject to force and violence A man may confefs Christ and his Faith in him as freely in bonds as at Liberty as gloriously upon the Cross as upon the Throne Fear indeed may incline a weak Conscience to dissemble his Opinion but cannot constrain him to alter it Fire and Faggot are strong Arguments of a weak Cause undeniable Evidences of Cruelty in Those that use them but slender motives of Credibility to beget faith in those that suffer by them Lastly for the external free and publick practise of Religious Duties that I grant may be restrained by the outward violence of man but when it is so it is not required by God who never expects to reap what he did not fow In another place he says the most Antient Apologists for the Christian Faith use this as an Argument to prove the Religion of their Persecutors to be false and their own true That stood in need of humane force to maintain it but theirs stood by the sole Power of God. It is against sayes he a little further the Innate Principle of the Law of Nature Quod tibi fieri non vis alteri ne feceris Those who plead most for extirpation of Hereticks when it comes to be their own Turn to be under the Cross stand for Liberty of Conscience and declaim against Persecution for Religion as a thing utterly unlawful and surely if we will not suffer it from others we may not use it our selves Therefore as Dr Puller rightly sayes if

might conduce to the good of Church and State the care of which is incombent on him because the Prince is bound to use his Power and Authority to promote Gods Service the best way of doing which may be by framing Orders conducible thereunto And in another place he declares that it is a Priviledge of Soveraigns to grant Priviledges Exemptions Dispensations Thus sayes the Reverend Dr Sherlock Master of the Temple in a positive manner it does not become any man who can think three Consequences off to talk of the Authority of Laws in derogation to that Authority of the Soveraign Power The Soveraign Power made the Laws and can repeal them and dispence with them and make new Laws the only Power and Authority of the Laws is in the Power which can make and execute Laws Soveraign Power is inseperable from the Person of a Soveraign Prince I shall in the next place give you the words of the Ingenious and most painful Searcher into Truths John Nalson Dr. of Laws whose indefatigable Industry hath sufficiently appeared in those Volumes of Historical Collections he lived to see published to the World his words are These In the Kings Power it is to remit the Severities of the Penal Laws whereby he may manifest his Goodness and Clemency as well as his Greatness and Justice by graciously pardoning the Smaller Breaches of his Laws and the more Capital Offences which he might most justly punnish And who in the World can dispute this When as Dr. Hick's in his Jovian tells us for certain that upon whomsoever God is understood to bestow the Soveraign Authority he must also be understood to bestow upon him all the Jura Majestatis or essential Rights of Soveraignty according to that Maxime Qui dat esse dat et omnia pertinentia ad esse He that gives the Essence gives also the Properties belonging to the Essence And doth not all mankind consent in this that the King is the fountain of mercy as well as of Justice Surely then the Penal Laws especially those made meerly for diversity of Opinions in Religion which not to call them unchristian since our Saviour never offered any external force and Compulsion to make men obey his Laws as the Learned master of the Temple assures us but however are in themselves by experience proved very unreasonable ought at least to be Subject to the Goodness and Mercy of the Prince to dispence with them when He in his Wisdom shall judge it most necessary for the Good of his People in generall For as the Aegyptian Hieroglyphick for Government was an Eye in a Scepter So the chief Magistrate is like a watchman upon a Tower who is to look down and view the general state of his People and to conduct himself accordingly The Reverend Dr Puller in his most extraordinary Book concerning the Moderation os the Church of England saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moderation as it is now generally used is a word borrowed from the Law and is used by the Masters thereof to denote such a gentle and benign temper as disposeth those who have the Administration of the Laws which You see is the Imperial Soveraign who hath the Supream Jurisdiction over all others and Jurisdiction is defined by the Civilians to be Potestatem Juris dicendi a Power of giving Laws to others to remit of their Rigour where either first they press too hard upon particular persons or else secondly to supply the defects of the said Laws where they provide not sufficiently for particular cases in order thereunto squaring their Determination by the natural rules of Justice and goodness rather than by the Letter of the Law. And a little further the same Doctor goes on saying moderation in the Forensick sence wherein we take it is defined by Aristotle to be the Correction of the Laws wherein because of their Vniversality they are deficient From whence as it must be supposed to be confined to those to whom the Administration of the Laws is committed who Alone can have the Power of correcting them So nothing therefore will be further requisite to shew than that it disposeth them where the Laws press too hard upon particular persons to relax the Rigour of them as on the other side where they do not sufficiently provide for them to supply their defect All Laws we know are for the punishment of Evil Doers or for the praise of them that do well but it being impossible so to provide for the punishment of evil doers as not sometimes to bring even the Innocent within the compass of it because what generally considered ought to be lookt upon and censured as evil may yet upon sundry considerations and circumstances have nothing of evil in it or at least be worthy of pardon either the Innocent must suffer together with the nocent which so benign a vertue as that we treat of cannot allow or it must dispose those to whom the Administration of the Laws is committed to remit of their rigour in such particulars and exempt them from the undergoing of it it being in like manner impossible for Laws so to provide for the incouragement of those who deserve well as that sometime such may not be past over or neglected partly because all cases cannot be foreseen by the Law-giver and partly by reason of the shortness of his expressions either some who may deserve incouragement may be excluded from partaking of it which so benign a vertue as we speak of cannot casily permit or it must dispose those to whom the Administration of the Laws is committed to ampliate their favours and to take such within the compass of them Once again Equity and moderation saith He in the next page is the publick honesty of the Laws without which Justice often would be turned into Wormwood it contains the excellent Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mind and reason of the Law and is the most Sacred and venerable part of it As it is the honour and perfection of the Laws so it is the Sanctuary of such as happen to be oppressed by the Rigour of the Letter I will now Sir trouble you with but one instance more upon this Subject though I could multiply I am confident Authorities of this kind even beyond your patience and that is of One that will needs be Anonymus and therefore so he shall pass for me but his words are These It is the Prerogative of the King to dispence with many Acts of Parliament by a * Non-obstante or clause of notwithstanding especially such as bind him from any Prerogative that is solely and inseparably annexed to his Sacred Person and Royal Power And even to the Asterick * There is this marginal Note viz. 44. Eliz. in the house of Commons Sir George Moor said We know the Power of her Majesty cannot be restrained by any Act. Why therefore should we thus talk admit we should make the statute

THE JUDGMENT and DOCTRINE Of the Clergy of the Church of England CONCERNING One special Branch of the King's Prerogative Viz. In dispencing with the Penall Laws Asserted by The most Reverend Fathers in God The Lords Arch-Bishops Bancroft Laud and Vsher The Right Reverend Fathers in God The Lords Bishops Sanderson and Cartwright The Reverend Doctors Sir Thomas Ridley L. L. D. Dr Heylin Dr Barrow Dr Sherlock Master of the Temple Dr Hicks Dr Nalson and Dr Puller And by the ANONYMVS Author of the Harmony of Divinity and Law. Together with the Concurring Resolutions of our Reverend Judges as most Consonant and Agreeable thereunto In a Letter from a Gentleman of Oxford to his Friend at London Licenced the 2d of May 1687. Upon whomsoever God is understood to bestow the Soveraign Authority he must also be understood to bestow upon him all the Jura Majestatis or Essential Rights of Soveraignty according to that Maxim Qui dat esse dat omnia pertinentia ad esse He that gives the Essence gives also the Properties belonging to the Essence Jovian or an Answer to Julian the Apostate chap. 11. London Printed for J. H. and T. S. and are to be had at most Book-sellers in London and Westminster SIR IN one of the late Conferences you were pleased to have with me you seemed to be somewhat disatisfied upon the subject we were discoursing of which was whither the King had by Law such a Supream Power inherent in and inseparably annexed to his Crown as to Dispence with Penal Laws I remember I then told you we could not resolve our selves of this Great Point but by these two wayes 1. To see how far the Judgment of our Church-men appearing in their Doctrines which are for our Edification doth Warrant this Prerogative to be in the King. II. To see how far the Judges Resolutions in declaring their sence of the Law of the Land in this doubtful Question do agree with such their Judgments and Doctrines And as for the First Sir I doubt not but to make it clear past all peradventure that our Reverend Clergy of the Church of England have unanimously concurred in this Point of Doctrine that it doth inseparably belong to the Kingly office to dispence with Penal Laws when ever such a Supremacy of Power shall be thought necessary to be exerted for the safety of the King and the Good and Ease of his People in general And if I can prove this undeniably to You I hope then that this nice Scruple of yours which by the way I suppose you will allow me to call your tender Conscience will easily be removed and consequently then it may be presumed I shall have less difficulty to Satisfie You in the other Point that this sence of the Law of the Land in the point in Question is no other than what is exactly Correspondent with the Judgment and Doctrine of the Clergy of the Church of England To begin then The Reverend Dean of Worcester in his so deservedly applauded Answer to Julian the Apostate declares that the English Realm is a perfect soveraignty or Empire and that the King of England by the Imperial Laws of it is a Compleat Imperial and Independant Soveraign And he quotes Coke in Cawdrye's Case who saith that by the antient Laws of this Realm England is an absolute Empire and Monarchy and that the King is furnished with plenary and Entire Power Prerogative and Jurisdiction and is supream Governour over all persons within this Realm Now it would be a contradiction to call this an Imperial Crown to acknowledge the King for supream over all Persons and that he is furnished with Plenary and entire Power unless He have all Those Rights which are involved in the very Notion of his Imperial Soveraignty By the Rights of Soveraign saith He I understand Those Prerogatives and Preeminences of Power and Greatness which are involved in the Formal Conception of Soveraignty and are inseparably annexed to the Soveraign He hath no sharers or Co-partners in the Soveraignty None Co-ordinate with him in Government no Equal nor Superiour but only God to whom Alone He is subject All Power and Jurisdiction Spiritual and Temporal is derived and deducted from Him as supream Head of These Churches and Realms There are some Essential Rights of the Crown which the Subjects cannot obtain from their Soveraign by any Grant or prescription without destroying the essential and individual Rights of Monarchy These Rights called the Flowers of the Crown are Regalia Suprema or Summa Jura Imperij regno tuendo servientia inherent to his Royal Function and politick Capacity and serve for the strength and support thereof such are the Rights of making War and Peace of having the last Appeal unto him or his Great Council and supream Court and of making Leagues and of Dispensing with Penal Laws granting pardons and such like Now if the King hath a perfection and fulness of Imperial Power in him as Dr Hicks hath clearly made out and This Power of dispensing with Penal Laws be as it must be or nothing one of those Prerogatives and Pre-eminencies of power and Greatness which are involved in the Formal Conception of Soveraignty Then certainly it is very plain that This is an Essential Right inseparably annexed to our Imperial Soveraign and to go about to deprive him of such an inherent Right it would tend to the disinherison of the King and his Crown This Phrase he saith of the disinherison of the King and the Crown in other Acts of Parliament is called The Destruction of the King's Soveraignty his Crown his Regality and things that tend thereunto things that are openly against the King's Crown in Derogation of this Regality And Sir to convince You that the King hath this Perfection and fulness of Power more especially in matters of Religion in his sacred Person you may please to be informed that that Great Metropolitan of All England Arch-bishop Bancroft when Question was made of what matters the Ecclesiastical judges have cognisance either upon the exposition of the Statutes concerning Tythes or any other thing Ecclesiastical or upon the Statute 1 Eliz. concerning the High Commission or in any other case in which there is not express Authority in Law declared That the King himself may decide it in his Royal Person and that the Judges are but the Delegates of the King and that the King may take what causes he shall please to determine from the Determination of the Judges and may determine them himself And the Archbishop said that this was clear in Divinity that such Authority belongs to the King by the word of God in the Scripture So that Eminent Prelate For as it is well observed by that Learned Knight and Doctor in the Civil Law Sir Thomas Ridley His Majesty by communicating his Authority to the Judges to expound his Laws doth not thereby abdicate the same from himself but that he may

with a Non-obstante yet the Queen may grant a Patent with a Non-obstante to cross this Non-obstante I have done Sir now with our Reverend Prelates and Doctors of the Church of England as to this Particular and hope I have sufficiently proved to you that their Judgment and Doctrine doth clearly warrant this Great Prerogative of dispencing with Penal Laws to be in the King. Let us see in the next place what were the Reasons that induced the Reverend Judges in Westminster Hall who the Law sayes are the Expositors of Acts of Parliament and are likewise Custodes jurati ss Praerogativae Regiae so openly and solemnly after mature deliberation to declare their Resolutions in this Point for the King. The Reasons that perswaded them were These that follow viz. I. That the Kings of England are Soveraign Princes II. That the Laws of England are the King's Laws III. That therefore it is an Incident Inseparable Prerogative in the Kings of England as in all other Soveraign Princes to dispence with Penal Laws in particular cases and upon particular necessary Reasons IV. That of these Reasons and these Necessities the King himself is the sole Judge And then which is Consequent upon all V. That this is not a Trust invested in or granted to the King by the People but is the antient Remain of the Soveraign Power and Prerogative of the Kings of England which never yet was taken from them nor can be Now Sir if such hath been the Doctrine of our most Eminent Clergy of the Church of England and in it they have delivered to us nothing but the words of Truth in Righteousness that the King by his Imperial Soveraignty when he shall see the Necessity of the State to require it of which he is the only Judge may dispence with Penal Laws How can you or any man who is a sincere lover of the Church of England be dissatisfied with the Resolution of our Reverend Judges in this matter seeing the Reasons they went upon were only such as were exactly correspondent with the avowed Doctrines before recited and that by this Declaration of theirs the Law of the Kingdom of England concerning this soveraign Power in the Crown is no more than what was before publickly asserted to be the Divinity of the Kingdom Besides Lex vigilat pro Rege saith the Law and the Judges are sworn to maintain all the Kings Prerogatives which are part of the Law of England and comprehended within the same therefore it is said that Imperij Majestas est Tutelae Salus the Dignity of the Prince is the Peoples Security The Kings Prerogative and Priviledges are incident to his Crown and He need not prescribe in any Prerogative for it is as ancient as his Crown is and is not only the Law of the Exchequer but the Law of the Land as that which is his by the ancient Laws of the Land. Wherefore the Judges of the Courts of Westminster are to judge in matters of Prerogative by this Rule that whatsoever may be for the Benefit and Profit of the King shall be taken most largely for him whatever may be against him and for his disprofit shall be taken strictly and it is the Duty of every Judge of all Courts High and Low to take great care to preserve the Kings Right and for that purpose to take every thing at the best for him And Sir unto the Judges the People are bound lastly and finally to submit themselves for matter of Law according to the opinion of the Learned Author of the Royallists Defence But I remember likewise you seemed to startle at the thoughts of this Power and were afraid if at any time the King should think it necessary and convenient to exert it and to grant a general Liberty of Conscience that the Church of England would be extreamly shaken in her security What strange Jealousies and Suspitions some weak men may have I suppose it will not be here worth while to consider but certainly our Great Supporters of the Ark of God can never allow themselves in so feminine a passion They know they have an infinitely wise God and a most Gracious King to trust to this hath been their Doctrine and ought we not to practice it They say 1. They have the Care and Providence of God for their Security who is King of Kings Lord of Lords and the only Ruler of Princes and that the Hearts of Kings are in his Rule and Governance and He doth dispose and turn them as seemeth best to his godly Wisdom according to what Solomon said and perhaps upon his own experience That the Kings Heart is in the hand of the Lord as the Rivers of Water he turneth it whithersoever he will. SO THAT THEY HAVE ALL THE SECURITY THAT ANY PEOPLE IN THE WORLD EVER HAD HAVE OR OUGHT TO HAVE Besides 2. They have a most Gracious King to trust to For 1. They have his Royal Word that he will protect and maintain the Church of England in the free exercise of her Religion as by Law established and can she ever be trusted in safer Hands than his He hath done more than ever any of us durst ever venture to look for to give us Confidence in him enough to puzzle our Understandings as well as our Gratitude And how can he give us better security than he has done Shall we suspect him without cause or remain dissatisfied when he hath given us the best security that our Cause admits of To suspect our Prince where we cannot help our selves is of all fears the most unreasonable 2. Again We have the Conscience of the Prince for our security who hath all the moral Obligations and the fear of God to keep him from oppressing us so long as we keep our selves within the Conscience of the Duty which we owe unto him The Common Principles of Humanity Justice and Equity are engraven by the Finger of God upon the Minds of Kings as well as upon other Mens and they cannot do wrong upon any particular Person much less to great numbers of their Subjects without undergoing the same uneasie remorse that other men do when they injure one another This hath been found by sad experience in Pagan Princes And if Conscience be a restraining Principle in Heathen Princes if they cannot without such Soul torments pervert Justice and violate their Oathes and the Laws it must needs much more be a powerful Principle of Restraint to Christian Kings who are taught to know that they are Gods Ministers and that he will call them to a severe Account for oppressing his People over whom he set them And shall not the fear of God's Anger and Judgments keep the Soveraign from injuring of them 3. But further still As the Church of England hath the Prince's Conscience for her Security so she hath his honour too For Princes like other men are tender of their Honour and good Name and